AGW impact of air travel

Geology, Geophysics, Oceanography, Meteorology etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#21  Postby felltoearth » Feb 02, 2019 9:21 pm

tuco wrote:We all have our reasons. Perhaps it sounds offensive that I do not care but why should I? I dunno how to measure them.

You claim my actions are harming you, yet you don’t know how to measure them. Honest question, how do you know my actions are harming you, then?
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 10861
Age: 51

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: AGW impact of air travel

#22  Postby The_Piper » Feb 02, 2019 9:27 pm

I'm contributing to the most carbon dioxide emitting activity of all, electricity. We should all turn off our computers and devices, if we care about the future habitability of Earth.

The changes need to come from the top down, whether anyone likes it or not.
"Tourists make their way thru the foothill landscapes as if blind to all their best beauty, and like children seek the emphasized mountains..." John Muir
Self Taken Pictures of Wildlife
Self Taken Pictures of Scenery
User avatar
The_Piper
 
Name: Fletch F. Fletch
Posts: 25558
Age: 44
Male

Country: Chainsaw Country
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#23  Postby Sendraks » Feb 02, 2019 9:54 pm

There's no arguing that airtravel is a major contributor to environmental pollution and ideally we should all try to keep it to a minimum. Which isn't hard for the most part because, really how often do most of us need to fly?

The exceptions are obviously for business, where it isn't always practical to do business remotely via VC or other tech. Sometimes you have to travel. I try to keep my London train travel to a minimum but, its not avoidable and sometimes I have to go. That's a reasonable journey though and whilst London and back makes for a long day, its bearable.

Whereas the sort of distances that need to be covered in the US and Canada, train travel simply isn't feasible without negatively impacting on the quality of life of an employee and also the productivity of the business. No one wants an employee to turn up shattered to an important meeting after an eight hour train journey or car ride. However, no environmentally responsible business would send their employees on long distance travel willy nilly. I certainly don't get the impression that Fellto is catching a plane for business every other day because, well, that would silly and not responsible behaviour by their employer.
"One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

"'Science doesn't know everything' - Well science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop" - Dara O'Brian
User avatar
Sendraks
 
Name: D-Money Jr
Posts: 15037
Age: 102
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#24  Postby Matt_B » Feb 02, 2019 10:13 pm

I'd think it fair to note that air travel is a major consumer of fossil fuels, and that - unlike fuel for most other forms of transport - there's very little tax on it. As such, it can be seen as something that is artificially cheap, which is in turn driving over-consumption to the detriment of the environment.

That's not to say that we should necessarily just attempt to fix the problem by driving the price up. While I'd think that I might consider taking the fourteen hour train journey from Sydney to Brisbane, if a flight were ten times the price rather than about the same, that's not an option for all destinations. There are communities that rely upon air transport that are neither particularly wealthy nor in the possession of alternatives. Certainly, here in Australia, only the major cities are served by rail; there are many outback towns where your choice is between flying for an hour or two or a three day trek across unsealed roads that can become impassable after rain.
User avatar
Matt_B
 
Posts: 4372
Male

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#25  Postby tuco » Feb 02, 2019 10:25 pm

felltoearth wrote:
tuco wrote:We all have our reasons. Perhaps it sounds offensive that I do not care but why should I? I dunno how to measure them.

You claim my actions are harming you, yet you don’t know how to measure them. Honest question, how do you know my actions are harming you, then?


No, I will highlight what I cannot measure in bold. Reasons. Pollution and consumption are more or less mesurable. You tell me that you run business and live in long distance land like I should care, for your reasons. I do not. I care about your ecological footprint because if everyone lived like you .. People have reasons for everything and nobody can measure them, thus they are irrelevant. What is relevant is a footprint, respectively something as measurable as reasons lets say future impact, as the topic title says.

Reasons for air travel thread .. full of cool stories.
tuco
 
Posts: 14453

Print view this post

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#26  Postby felltoearth » Feb 03, 2019 12:52 am

tuco wrote:
felltoearth wrote:
tuco wrote:We all have our reasons. Perhaps it sounds offensive that I do not care but why should I? I dunno how to measure them.

You claim my actions are harming you, yet you don’t know how to measure them. Honest question, how do you know my actions are harming you, then?


No, I will highlight what I cannot measure in bold. Reasons. Pollution and consumption are more or less mesurable. You tell me that you run business and live in long distance land like I should care, for your reasons. I do not. I care about your ecological footprint because if everyone lived like you .. People have reasons for everything and nobody can measure them, thus they are irrelevant. What is relevant is a footprint, respectively something as measurable as reasons lets say future impact, as the topic title says.

Reasons for air travel thread .. full of cool stories.


How do you know how I live. Have you, in fact measured it? Or are you making an assumption and an assertion? Cool story.
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 10861
Age: 51

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#27  Postby laklak » Feb 03, 2019 2:29 am

I have multiple diesels, and I'm not afraid to use them. However, I will happily eschew air travel AND my Detroits if y'all want to pitch in so I can buy a Nordhavn trawler. The 55 foot will do for trans Atlantic, but I'd prefer a 62. Think of the savings - no more air travel, and trading 2 large, old, smoky, leaky, noisy diesels for a much smaller, more efficient single engine (Ok there's a little 40 horse "get home" emergency engine that normally runs the generators, but running both of them is far cleaner than running one 2 stroke Detroit). You'll reduce my footprint by at least 70% and save untold polar bears, penguins, and ground apes, PLUS I'll put your name in the Book of Hero EcoWarriors.

If you care at ALL about the environment you'll contribute, heavily. Otherwise I'm firing those puppies up and rolling COAL, dudes. Get your gas masks and life rafts ready, I'm burning some dinosaur piss!
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 19003
Age: 65
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: AGW impact of air travel

#28  Postby Keep It Real » Feb 03, 2019 6:06 am

I think we can guess what the dude's mentality toward AGW would be: fuck it, lets go bowling.
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell play people what they do not want to hear" - George Orwell

It's not the money that's the problem - it's the occupational therapy.
User avatar
Keep It Real
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 7788
Age: 37
Male

England (eng)
Print view this post

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#29  Postby OlivierK » Feb 03, 2019 9:07 am

Matt_B wrote:I'd think it fair to note that air travel is a major consumer of fossil fuels, and that - unlike fuel for most other forms of transport - there's very little tax on it. As such, it can be seen as something that is artificially cheap, which is in turn driving over-consumption to the detriment of the environment.

That's not to say that we should necessarily just attempt to fix the problem by driving the price up. While I'd think that I might consider taking the fourteen hour train journey from Sydney to Brisbane, if a flight were ten times the price rather than about the same, that's not an option for all destinations. There are communities that rely upon air transport that are neither particularly wealthy nor in the possession of alternatives. Certainly, here in Australia, only the major cities are served by rail; there are many outback towns where your choice is between flying for an hour or two or a three day trek across unsealed roads that can become impassable after rain.

Yeah, but that tyranny of distance means that Sydney-Melbourne and Sydney-Brisbane are amongst the busiest air routes in the world. A sane solution would be to build the often-proposed, but never started, high-speed rail system on the Brisbane - Melbourne corridor, as those trains could be renewably powered, and would easily compete on CBD to CBD travel time given the location of the airports concerned, unlike the archaic clusterfuck of the current intercity rail system. The corridor serves a population of well over 15 million people (around 65% of Australia's population live on the route), and as well as competing well on BNE-SYD and SYD-MEL, would serve other major city markets like the Gold Coast, Newcastle and Canberra, as well as up to a dozen other major regional cities.

Yes, many other cities outside the corridor would still be best served by air in Australia, but when we're not implementing alternatives where they would work, we can't really claim that we fly so much because our geography dictates it. It's a mix of geography, and not being arsed to do better where we can.

Sounds from fellto's posts that Canada is similar. 7-8 hours for a Toronto-Montreal train? In Japan, that distance would be a three-hour ride, and the shinkansen system is being extended into areas without the huge population densities of the Tokyo-Nagoya-Osaka corridor, such as new line extensions to the Sea of Japan coast and Hokkaido.
User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 8488
Age: 52
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#30  Postby felltoearth » Feb 03, 2019 2:17 pm

There are a number of issues that challenge high speed rail in Canada.

I’m not sure about Australia but one of the challenges of high speed rail in Canada are temperature extremes. We can go from -20/25 in the winter to 30/35 in the summer. A two week to one month heat wave in the summer would adversely effect rail speed and travel time. Also temperature stress effects maintenance cycles which is more frequent.

Cost. This cost of high speed rail due to the fact that we would be starting from scratch is enormous. All infrastructure would have to be renewed. Hundreds of thousands of square miles of land would need to be expropriated which would be difficult for about 100 km on either side of most city centres the rails would pass through (most of Southern Ontario is low density development planned around the automobile.) New stations would have to be built to accommodate the increased load. Toronto’s Union Station and Montréal’s central station could not handle the increased passenger load. As a result cost per trip would go way up which leads to the final point...

Attitude of the average voting Canadian. As cost goes so too would the required subsidy to keep the seats full and system running. There is the attitude that travel between cities by air and rail is an elite luxury of city dwellers and shouldn’t be subsidized. Ironically, it’s the same attitude on display here from KIR and tuco, about judgement of other people and how they live, that is preventing a lot of needed public transport infrastructure from being built. We currently have about 250 Billion in public infrastructure backlog in the province that is needed to meet current demand and state of good repair. If a subsidized high speed rail line was added to that price tag it would be untenable to most Ontario voters as it would be seen as a benefit for rich city dwellers.
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 10861
Age: 51

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#31  Postby laklak » Feb 03, 2019 3:47 pm

Keep It Real wrote:I think we can guess what the dude's mentality toward AGW would be: fuck it, lets go bowling.


Lol, yeah.

"I don't have time for this shit, man, life goes on".
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 19003
Age: 65
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#32  Postby Keep It Real » Feb 03, 2019 4:02 pm

"Maybe if I hit the pins hard enough one of them will make it to Bangladesh and and act as a life saver to a drowning old woman."
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell play people what they do not want to hear" - George Orwell

It's not the money that's the problem - it's the occupational therapy.
User avatar
Keep It Real
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 7788
Age: 37
Male

England (eng)
Print view this post

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#33  Postby OlivierK » Feb 03, 2019 11:02 pm

felltoearth wrote:There are a number of issues that challenge high speed rail in Canada.

I’m not sure about Australia but one of the challenges of high speed rail in Canada are temperature extremes. We can go from -20/25 in the winter to 30/35 in the summer. A two week to one month heat wave in the summer would adversely effect rail speed and travel time. Also temperature stress effects maintenance cycles which is more frequent.

Yeah, that's a consideration, but Japan's shinkansen operate brilliantly in the same temperature range, so it's clearly doable. Air travel is also subject to weather-related delays or cancellations.

felltoearth wrote:Cost. This cost of high speed rail due to the fact that we would be starting from scratch is enormous. All infrastructure would have to be renewed. Hundreds of thousands of square miles of land would need to be expropriated which would be difficult for about 100 km on either side of most city centres the rails would pass through (most of Southern Ontario is low density development planned around the automobile.) New stations would have to be built to accommodate the increased load. Toronto’s Union Station and Montréal’s central station could not handle the increased passenger load. As a result cost per trip would go way up which leads to the final point...

Yeah, same in Australia. We'd need to tunnel under suburbia to clear the cities, and acquire new alignments as the old early 20th century rail alignments are far too curvy for high speed rail. So, it would be expensive, and so it doesn't get done. But once built, it would be very effective at reducing air miles. The party likely to win the upcoming federal election here has yet again promised to fund feasibility studies. Nobody expects things to go further though. :(

felltoearth wrote:Attitude of the average voting Canadian. As cost goes so too would the required subsidy to keep the seats full and system running. There is the attitude that travel between cities by air and rail is an elite luxury of city dwellers and shouldn’t be subsidized. Ironically, it’s the same attitude on display here from KIR and tuco, about judgement of other people and how they live, that is preventing a lot of needed public transport infrastructure from being built. We currently have about 250 Billion in public infrastructure backlog in the province that is needed to meet current demand and state of good repair. If a subsidized high speed rail line was added to that price tag it would be untenable to most Ontario voters as it would be seen as a benefit for rich city dwellers.

Not such a problem here. Travel between major cities is accepted as pretty normal, and the high-speed rail would be a relatively bigger benefit for the regional centres along the route - giving faster, more frequent links to major cities - than for the major cities themselves, who already have good air links. Western Australia would bitch about all that investment on the East Coast, but they do that all the time anyway. :lol:
Last edited by OlivierK on Feb 03, 2019 11:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 8488
Age: 52
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#34  Postby laklak » Feb 03, 2019 11:17 pm

Solar powered Zeppelins.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 19003
Age: 65
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: AGW impact of air travel

#35  Postby Cito di Pense » Feb 04, 2019 5:39 am

laklak wrote:Solar powered Zeppelins.


On that train, all graphite and glitter - undersea by rail
Ninety minutes from New York to Paris - by '76 we'll be A-OK


Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Ivar Poäng
Posts: 27751
Age: 22
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Previous

Return to Earth Sciences

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest