It is well known that transport is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, mainly due to the fact that most forms of transport are powered by fossil fuels, the burning of which leads to the release of carbon dioxide and other waste products, some of which are also greenhouse gases. In the UK, for example, 22% of greenhouse gases come from road vehicles.
However, the increased popularity of flying is a
fast-growing problem. If an express coach takes 50 people from London to
Edinburgh, the total emission of carbon dioxide will be around 460 kilograms.
If those 50 people fly, the journey will be a lot faster, but they will be responsible
for depositing no less than 4820 kilograms of CO₂ into the atmosphere – more than
ten times as much.
If they let the train take the strain the emissions would
come to 595 kilograms – more than by coach but far less than by air. Given
the fact that trains run from city centre to city centre and therefore save a
huge amount of time that has to be used in getting to and from airports, checking
in and collecting baggage, it may indeed turn out that the train is the quicker
option.
The annual figure recorded by the Department for Transport
for emissions by aircraft is 2.5 million tonnes. However, this is just for
domestic flights; if the UK’s share of international aviation is included (i.e.
half of all flights taking off or landing in the UK) then the figure is more
than ten times higher.
Another factor to bear in mind is that aircraft create
pollution high in the atmosphere and not just at or near ground level. How much
difference this makes is uncertain, but conservative estimates put aviation as
being responsible for 13% of the UK’s total impact on climate change.
What can be done to cut these figures?
Clearly there needs to be a lot less flying done, both
within the UK and internationally. This applies to business and leisure flying
and also air freight.
A major change in recent years has been the growth of “no
frills” cut-price aviation companies that have encouraged more people to take
flights and on more occasions. People now think nothing of hopping on a plane
to take a weekend break as well as several week-long holidays in places such as
Majorca, the Greek islands and Turkey. Many people look even further afield and
regularly cross the Atlantic for a holiday. Even if they only took one foreign
holiday break a year, and stuck to the UK for other breaks – not involving flights
– they would make a huge difference to carbon emissions.
The Government could certainly encourage such a trend by
making flights more expensive through increased taxation, as well as abandoning
any proposal to build new airport capacity in the London area.
Given the increasing use of the Internet for doing business,
such as international video-conferencing, is it really necessary for so many
business flights to take place? Surely there is room for huge savings in carbon
emissions from the business community alone, simply by executives asking
themselves the question: “Is your flight really necessary?” and answering No
more often than Yes.
The ordinary food consumer could also make a huge
contribution by ceasing to demand items that are out of season in the UK but
can be imported from overseas relatively cheaply via air freight.
Granted, some crops cannot be grown locally, but, for those
that can be, there is no excuse for demanding access to them throughout the
year. We need to go back to the days when dietary habits varied according to
season and imported food came via ship rather than aircraft.
We also need to cut out practices such as that of flying
shellfish from the UK to Southeast Asia so that it can be packed by cheap
labour before being flown back for sale in supermarkets only a few miles from where
it started!
It is high time that common sense prevailed over raw economics.
The climate is far more important than filling the pockets of wealthy businessmen,
which seems to be the only criterion that some people are taking seriously.
© John Welford
No comments:
Post a Comment