Green travel ideas from two environmentally conscious travelers

So, this month’s Travel & Leisure discusses the issue of whether it creates more greenhouse gases to drive, fly, or take a train. Their conclusion: train is by far the most eco-friendly solution and driving actually produces more emissions to travel the same distance than flying.

T&L’s data came from TerraPass, and without disputing their math (which isn’t laid out), I would say that there are a couple of factors left out of their analysis. For one, they ignore the NUMBER of people who will be driving versus flying. What I mean is that if you have a family of four, it is actually more efficient to drive to your destination than to fly. The reason is that the airplane emissions are on a per-person basis and calculated on plane capacity average plane fuel efficiency, etc.–whereas car emissions are for the vehicle and will not change much if you’re driving alone or if your traveling as a family.

Another factor that T&L conveniently ignores is the factor of fuel efficiency for different vehicles - from SUVs to sedans to hybrids. This obviously has an important effect on the desirability of flying versus driving.

We like to take a more nuanced approach, and so we’ve analyzed figures from the Department of the Environment in Britain which does a has done a more detailed job of comparing different modes of transportation, so we will use their figures and extrapolate from them.

The following are average figures for the amount of pounds of CO₂ per mile released into the atmosphere for each type of transportation:

Total Emissions Per Vehicle
SUV (15mpg) – 2.29 lbs/mi
Average Car (25 mpg) – 1.39 lbs/mi
Prius (55 mpg) - .61 lbs/mi
Motorcycle - .57 lbs/mi
RV – 4.58 lbs/mi

Total Emissions Per Person
Average Car/Single Driver – 1.39 lbs/mi
Average Car/Family of 4 - .34 lbs/mi
Train - .32 lbs/mi
Bus - .48 lbs/mi
Plane (250 mi trip) - .85 lbs/mi**
Plane (600 mi) - .69 lbs/mi**
Plane (3500 mi) - .56 lbs/mi**

Bottom Line:
If you have a choice of how to travel, buses and trains have the fewest carbon emissions. Planes and cars are less favorable options, and which one is more efficient depends on how many people you are traveling with and what car you would drive. A family of four would be better off driving than flying, whereas an individual might actually save emissions by flying.

**One other note: these emissions figures, which are taken from the UK’s DEFRA, do not take into account that emissions from planes have been shown to have a greater warming effect than emissions from land-based transportation. This further cements air travel as the most-polluting form of transport and means that ground transportation is nearly always preferable to flying.

The New Oxford American Dictionary’s word of the year for 2006 was “carbon-neutral,” which gives you some sense of the fad that is carbon offsets. With the success of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, there is a rising wave of guilt about the carbon dioxide that we each produce in the course of our daily lives, and carbon offsets gave us a way to erase that CO₂ along with the guilt. “Carbon-neutral” is just a cooler, sexier, trendier way of communicating the same “guilt-free” consumer mentality that American culture is known for – e.g. “fat-free,” “low-cal,” etc.Well, the truth is, carbon offsets like those that TerraPass sells are a lot more complicated than all that. The principle behind an offset is that to compensate for your own carbon dioxide emissions, you buy a share in a project that is actively reducing carbon emissions somewhere in the world – including renewable energy projects, reforestation schemes, bio fuel production, and anything else that might be a carbon sink or prevent carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere. We recognize the value of these carbon offsets while also acknowledging their limitations:

Carbon Offset Pros:

• In cases where emissions are inevitable, offsets provide a way to do something to remediate the effects.
• Offsets are a source of investment for renewable energy and other projects to mitigate climate change, therefore filling the void that some governments have left by not stepping in to regulate and/or limit carbon dioxide emissions.
• In many cases, offsets are a catalyst for change in the developing world, where renewable energy projects funded by the developed world could be the basis of a sustainable growth and development curve going forward.

Carbon Offset Cons:

• Buying offsets makes people feel that it’s okay to pollute if they simply compensate for their actions by buying credits.
• Offsets are unlikely to be as effective and permanent in removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as we are in emitting the carbon dioxide to begin with.
• The industry is almost completely unregulated and therefore largely not held accountable for the emissions promises it makes.

Our Bottom Line: Although we support the idea of purchasing offsets from a reputable company to mitigate inevitable carbon emissions, we think that the term “carbon-neutral” is misleading, because it lends too much credit to the effectiveness of the nascent carbon offset industry. It also takes attention away from non-global warming related environmental issues and what we can do individually to reduce our impact and need for offsets. Carbon offsets should be used in combination with the other environmentally responsible travel practices like selecting an environmentally-friendly hotel or choosing an environmentally-friendly destination, not as an indulgence that can be bought to pardon all of our environmental sins.

Before you start planning a trip, you need to decide where you’re going, and since your choice of destination (and corresponding travel to/from) is a huge determining factor in the environmental impact of your trip, keep the following factors in mind.

Consider Local Alternatives: Every mile you travel in a plane or car emits carbon dioxide into the air, which is just another factor you should consider when evaluating the cost of the trip. Think of your carbon emissions just like you would a high-priced airline ticket. An expensive ticket might not keep you from taking a trip you really want to take, but it will make you think twice about how much you really want to go. When traveling long distances where your carbon footprint is going to be significant, think about how important the long trip really is to you and your family, and if you think the trip is dispensable or it might be easier to stay local, then look into a destination closer to home that might be a good alternative. If you decide to reevaluate your destination, the resources at www.Kango.com can guide you to a nearby destination that meets the criteria for activities, lodging and anything else that you’re looking for.

Travel Longer and Reduce Your Carbon “Jet Lag”: Another way to look at the carbon emissions you’ll produce on your vacation is like jet lag. You probably wouldn’t want to travel all the way to New Zealand for a four-day vacation, because you’d spend most of your time in the plane and you would suffer from jet lag the rest of the trip. Well, carbon emissions follow a similar rule. When you’re traveling a long way for a short visit, you’re contributing a huge amount of carbon to the atmosphere for a relatively small benefit. So you should save that international trip for sometime when you and your family can get a longer time off from work and school. For short vacation windows of a week or less, think about less ambitious trips. Slowtrav.com is a good resource if you’re interested in this philosophy, which they call “slow travel.”

Reward Environmentally Forward Destinations: All destinations are not created equal. Some countries and regions have shown a lot more sustainable and environmental foresight than others. Why not make your choice of vacation destinations on that basis? For example, in the U.S., California is showing leadership on renewable energy and is increasing its renewable energy portfolio standards. Internationally, Costa Rica currently produces 96% of its electricity from renewable sources and aims to be carbon-neutral through reforestation programs by 2030. Iceland has set a goal of transitioning to a 100% hydrogen-based zero-carbon economy by 2050, powered by geothermal and hydroelectric sources. If you switch on a light bulb today in either Costa Rica or Iceland, you cause less environmental harm than if you were to do so at home in the United States, and you can take comfort that you are spending tourist dollars in a place that deserves to be rewarded for its environmental policies. Check out the results of the 2005 Environmental Sustainability Index to see how your dream destination country measures up on a range of environmental metrics. Finland is #1 out of 146 countries, and the U.S. ranks 45^th between Armenia and Myanmar. You can see the ranked list on Wikipedia or you can view the whole report at the official ESI site. National Geographic also rated 115 world destinations on their sustainability and stewardship and published the results in 2004. Another inspiring list of eco-friendly destinations can be found at the Independent Traveler website.

Make the Most of Your Trip: So you’ve decided on a destination. Your next step is to have fun. After you’ve bought your plane ticket and decided on offsets for your emissions, leave your guilt behind and enjoy your trip. Make the most environmentally-friendly decisions you can along the way (and you can see other sections of this guide for details), but don’t let anything get in the way of enjoying your vacation. After all, the two commandments of any environmentally conscious traveler should be to…

1) Reduce your environmental footprint as much as possible

2) Have the most enjoyable trip possible

And if I could sneak in a third commandment, it would be: gracefully share what you have learned with your friends so they can do more with less too!

So you’re planning a trip to Europe over the winter holidays, and you want to make sure you don’t have to cash out any of your 401K to do so (ouch!). Well, obviously a good idea might be to whip out an Excel spreadsheet and plan out a line item budget of your trip. Line items might include:

• Airfare
• Car Rental
• Accommodations
• Meals
• Entertainment
• Miscellaneous/Incidentals

Such an exercise is a great way to get you thinking about your budget and the costs that each part of your trip will incur. Of course, your travel won’t just incur monetary costs. There are environmental costs, as well, which aren’t necessarily factored into the prices you pay for your hotel stay, your meals, and your flight overseas. The line items for your environmental travel budget look like the following:

• Carbon dioxide emissions (from air travel, car travel, other transportation, and electricity use, see TerraPass for a breakdown of emissions)
• Other emissions from electricity generation and transportation (methane, sulfur dioxide, and particulates)
• Solid waste (including organic matter and recyclable materials)
• Water pollution (particularly if you travel to a developing world country, where your waste might end up in surface water)
• Deforestation (if the food you eat has been sourced from a farmer or rancher who practices slash-and-burn practices)

Unfortunately, we are so insulated from these costs that it’s difficult to assign them a value on our spreadsheet. Only with carbon emissions can we assign a real value and pay for those costs through a carbon offset program.

It’s these hidden environmental costs that inspired SimpleGreenChoices. As we continue on through the coming weeks and months, we will continue to show you many different ways that you can manage your environmental travel budget while still having the trip of a lifetime.

I’m an avid hiker, and one of my favorite organizations is Leave No Trace. It’s not so much what they do as an organization as who they are and the ethics they promote. For those of you who don’t know, Leave No Trace is a non-profit dedicated to low-impact outdoor recreation (see their blog here). In particular, they work very closely with the National Parks and National Forests to promote low-impact camping techniques. If you’ve done much hiking, chances are that you’ve probably heard one of the slogans associated with Leave No Trace, such as “Pack it in, pack it out”or “Take only photos, leave only footprints.”

The great thing about the idea of “Leave No Trace” is that the specific practices of low impact camping and hiking flow so obviously from their basic principles. The idea is to leave the wilderness the way you found it, and the ways you can do so are myriad, including packing out all of your trash, not feeding wild animals, etc.

(And just a sidenote on Leave No Trace: after reading LNT’s basic principles, you might think these are all no-brainers, but when I was up in the Sierra Nevada wilderness this summer, I witnessed some appalling behavior by fellow campers, including an unwelcome fireworks show - literally, fireworks! - at 10pm on the shores of Garnet Lake during a period of very high fire danger.)

I’ve been thinking about Leave No Trace a lot recently, because what we’re trying to do here at Simple Green Choices is quite closely related, actually. We’re taking this idea of minimum impact and applying it to ALL types of travel… all over the world. With that in mind, let me suggest the following six principles as the core of low-impact travel:

- Reduce Carbon Dioxide Emissions
- Minimize Waste and Recycle
- Help Protect and Preserve in Natural Areas
- Be Culturally Sensitive
- Respect Wildlife and Biodiversity
- Support Local and Environmentally Responsible Businesses

What do you think? Are we missing anything here? If so, post your comment here or e-mail us at simplegreenchoices@gmail.com.

At some point, we’ll address the carbon economics (and benefits) of driving versus flying. But for now, let’s assume you’ve chosen to fly—either because it’s convenient or because it’s the only way to get where you’re going. That shouldn’t be the end of your decision-making process. If you want to reduce your flights’ environmental impact, consider the following tips when booking:

Minimize connections: Most of the fuel used up during a flight is burned during takeoff and landing, so it stands to reason that the more connections you make, the more emissions will be produced on your behalf. Try to book a non-stop flight if possible, which will save you the hassle of layovers, as well.

Fly during the day: Studies have shown that the greenhouse effects of airplane emissions are twice as bad at night than during the day. Again, in this case, environmental concerns may overlap with convenience, since many people prefer to fly during the day anyway.

Offset your emissions: When you do fly, research carbon offset schemes and consider offsetting your plane’s emissions. It’s not a silver bullet, since the atmosphere would be better off if you didn’t fly at all, but it’s better than doing nothing.

Choose airlines based on their performance and environmental commitments: Use your purchasing power to show the airlines that their environmental policies matter to you. For example, Southwest Airlines is one of the few airlines that offers incentives for its flight attendants and cleaning crews to recycle cans and bottles. Continental Airlines was commended by Fortune magazine in 2007 for their energy-efficiency initiatives. In Britain, there is even more competition between airlines to be considered the “greenest.” Virgin Atlantic’s Chairman, Richard Branson, is famous for drumming up celebrity attention for climate change, and Virgin recently announced an upgrade in their fleet and a research program on biofuels for aviation. Easyjet, Ryanair, and British Airways have also been promoting their environmental initiatives

Fly in newer, larger, and more fuel-efficient planes: It’s almost an ironclad rule that newer planes are more fuel efficient. The new Boeing 787 Dreamliner promises to be an industry leader when it hits the market, but in the current fleet, the 777, 747-400, and A330 are the most fuel-efficient planes. Call and ask the airline what planes they have flying the route that you are booking.

Ask lots of questions – generate “consumer pressure”: The environmental issue that airlines are most concerned about is their profits. That is to say that if airlines start to worry about losing customers over their environmental inaction, they will act. As a consumer, you can make a real difference by asking questions of everyone at the airline to generate pressure that will resonate up to the boardroom. Ask whether they recycle, what their environmental policy is, and how fuel-efficient their planes are. And if you don’t get satisfactory answers, switch airlines.

For more tips: See Time Magazine and The Observer.

Now that Yen has explained a bit about the ground that we’re hoping to cover with SimpleGreenChoices.com, I want to start my own participation on this blog with an assumption that I think we all can agree on: our travel has a profound impact on our lives and the world around us.

Some of the impacts are overwhelmingly positive. We escape from the stress of our daily lives and get to experience a new place with fresh eyes or settle into the comfortable routine of an old familiar haunt. Sometimes we go to experience another culture or learn more about the natural world, or even to teach our kids about their world and expand their horizons. Our interactions with others from different cultures and places helps to foster cultural understanding and make the world a better place. And the dollars that we spend on our vacations can help to sustain local communities and protect the world’s most beautiful places. Travel even keeps our global economy running, accounting for $7 trillion in spending in 2007 alone and more than 10% of the world’s economy, according to the World Travel and Tourism Council.

But our travel can also have a negative impact. Car and plane emissions account for a disproportionate percentage of the global carbon dioxide emissions that are warming our planet (and potentially threatening the very destinations we travel to). Many people alter their habits and produce more waste on their vacation either because of the circumstances or out of a relaxation of their normal environmentally conscious habits. Although tourism development and growth can benefit communities and natural resources, it can also tax them. If development is not done in a sustainable way, the cultural and natural heritage of a magical place can be lost in all the bustle of tourists coming to see those very resources.

In other words, travel is a double-edged sword, and the amazing power of those $7 trillion spent by travelers every year hangs in the balance every time you and I are on the road spending them one by one (sometimes faster than we would like…).

As Yen said, our goal is to consolidate all the best and most useful knowledge on improving the environmental impact of travel to enable you to make smarter, more sustainable decisions every time you set foot outside your neighborhood.

But before we get into the details over the upcoming weeks and months, I think it’s worth us all stopping to consider our own travels up to this point. Is your net impact a positive one and why?