Road.cc will no longer fly to bike launches

You are right just checked calculator again and it’s per person not per plane. I’m shocked how much CO2 it actual is.

Media launches look great from the outside, but trust me, the reality tends to be a combination of exhausting travel schedules sandwiching intense indoctrination sessions albeit in a nice place with good food, usually. It’s not a holiday. You’re not spending time with mates. It’s work.

Does road.cc actually pay any journalist enough to make this worth their while? Kudos to them for opting out I suppose, but their content seems to be written by mostly side-hustlers who probably couldn’t drop the day job for such a jaunt anyway.

You are right just checked calculator again and it’s per person not per plane. I’m shocked how much CO2 it actual is.

For an average person in the UK the carbon footprint boils down to:

25% – heating your house

25% – driving your car

25% – going on holiday abroad

25% – eating meat

And we emit about 4x the sustainable amount ……

Numbers are simplified slightly, obviously a UK holiday, vegan diet, riding a bike, and a passivehaus aren’t absolutely zero, but they’re near enough for comparison and the current amounts equal about ~1000kg-1500kg per use.  Consumption of plastic tat (and bikes) isn’t a really big number in the scheme of things.

I think we need to do for CO2 what traffic light labels were supposed to do for sugar in food. Your forecourt diesel receipt, boarding pass, supermarket receipt, gas bill etc should say what percentage of the recommended annual allowance that purchase just contributed.  Would people still fly or drive as much if they were handed a piece of paper that said that the tank of fuel they just bought was 10% of what they could sustainably use, or the flight to Ibiza for a stag weekend was 30%?

Apparently we don’t need to go as far as a vegan diet to significantly reduce our carbon footprint?

WRT holidays, 90% of the carbon footprint is from the flights there, even for something like a skiing holiday.

Cycling by train is a faff, but using it lets the companies know that there is demand for it, and it is much more fun that going by air or driving.

Cycling by train is a faff, but using it lets the companies know that there is demand for it, and it is much more fun that going by air or driving.

Problem is that it’s the classic ‘assessing demand for a bridge by counting the number of swimmers’ scenario, isn’t it? Because it’s a faff, most people are put off at the planning stages.

@thisisnotaspoon There’s decent evidence for local travel that if people feel they have choices, they will choose appropriately. However, if they think they’re going to get killed because there’s no safe cycling infra, and if the buses are slow and unreliable due to the amount of traffic, and expensive due to misguided political decisions, then they’ll drive.

75% of flights, by uk citizens, are taken by 15% of the population. In the 2014 survey about had the population hadn’t flown in the previous year

https://fullfact.org/economy/do-15-people-take-70-flights/

We eat less meat than we use to. I’d say it was by far the easiest adaptation we’ve made. In general i think we eat better. Because we’ve had to think differently

Off to make a tofu curry. Which actually is less good than chicken. I’ll have to hope my vegetable side can compensate

Apparently we don’t need to go as far as a vegan diet to significantly reduce our carbon footprint?

Yea, about half to 2/3 the reduction is in going veggie. Meat production is by far the biggest contributor of CO2 in diets, followed by dairy and eggs.  Simply because the amount of feed required to give the animals to produce meat (or dairy) is a magnitude higher than it’s own nutritional value. Most of the worlds soy production isn’t to make Tofu and weird tasting coffee, it’s cattle feed because despite what the packaging implies, there isn’t enough grass in the UK to support the amount of cow we eat.

WRT holidays, 90% of the carbon footprint is from the flights there, even for something like a skiing holiday.

Yep, and it’s not a case of not going on holidays, just consider it the luxury it should be.  A once in a lifetime backpacking trip to Thailand, great. Three times a year skiiing, the Maldives and a weekend break to Budapest is more of a problem.

Ah, now we should be able to get the sleeper from London to Budapest…

@ratherbeintobago – yes people do get put off, but if we don’t use it at all, it’ll get even worse.

Having said that, apart from the faff of having to pick up printed tickets it has got easier to take a bike on the train in the years I’ve been doing it. Just waiting for Eurostar to start taking fully assembled bike to Paris again.

@kramer There’s a thread on the Cycling UK forum you may have seen that apparently has the latest about Eurostar on it – link

Question but I don’t know if there is an answer.

Which is worse for the world? All flying, engine powered of course,  or meat eating? No ifs, buts or compromises.

I would say that as meat eating is a natural thing and flying is pure luxury, the latter should go first.

Of course the real problem is people but we are not allowed to mention that.

Lets take the idea that we shouldn’t need to go by plane (darn good one) and extend it to trains as well. Why do we need to go anywhere by powered transport?  Much better for the environment.

Which is worse for the world? All flying, engine powered of course,  or meat eating? No ifs, buts or compromises.

I would say that as meat eating is a natural thing and flying is pure luxury, the latter should go first.

From a climate change standpoint, as I said it’s practically a dead heat.

The natural argument doesn’t really stack up unless you’re a Christian fundamentalist going for the “god gave us dominion over animals” bible quote. Several major world religions don’t eat meat.  And has there ever been a study to suggest eating meat is good for you?

From my previous post, I’m picking keeping my house warm (17.5C to be precise).

Lets take the idea that we shouldn’t need to go by plane (darn good one) and extend it to trains as well. Why do we need to go anywhere by powered transport?  Much better for the environment.

Congratulations, you just figured out “15 minute cities”.

It’s not necessary though. There’s nothing wrong with having a carbon footprint, as long as it’s a sustainable one.

sus·tain·a·bil·i·ty
[səˌstānəˈbilədē]
noun
the ability to be maintained at a certain rate or level:
“the sustainability of economic growth” · “the long-term sustainability of the project”
avoidance of the depletion of natural resources in order to maintain an ecological balance:
“the pursuit of global environmental sustainability” · “the ecological sustainability of the planet”

I wonder how much it costs to fly and put up all the journos for a few days?  If you didn’t have to fly ST, MBUK, MBR, etc etc to Finale or wherever,

Considerably cheaper and easier on logistics than boxing up a dozen test bikes and shipping them to each country where the various magazines in each country then have to fight over who gets it first, where it gets sent next, what happens if/when one of the journos rides it into a tree and bends the wheels, what to do when it gets lost in transit…

Far easier to have everyone in one place at the same time, share the same bikes on the same trails, have the same demos from [manufacturer], the same sales spiel, mechanics, support etc on hand.

Yes, there should absolutely be rules / guidance / support to get to said launches without flying and across Europe it shouldn’t be that difficult to do train journeys. Being in the UK with our uniquely shit rail system does require more effort but an Interrail ticket to include Eurostar is pretty straightforward. It’s just that as soon as you mention going to mainland Europe, everyone immediately thinks “Ryanair”.

Both the Verbier by train and tyres in Whistler trips were personal holidays paid for by my wife and I. The content produced was a bi product of those holidays. I’m not sure if that makes it any better or not. It’s the same carbon foot print either way.

Hannah’s sea otter trip was off the back of flying to spend some time with her American husband. Again, not sure if that alters the equation.

I’m going to Morzine in June. Again, a holiday. Will likely get content out of it. Take a test bike to review in the mountains.

I guess I’m kind of waiting my turn here. When billionaires have junked their private jets and oil companies stop being given licences to open new oil fields then I think maybe it’s my turn next to stop travelling for fun and/or work.

let’s get the big stuff that makes a real difference sorted first.

I’m not proposing we all do nothing of course- just making a broader point. Solar and EVs and a **** load of insulation in the house have been part of our home life for some years now. I guess what I’m personally trying to be is not perfect but definitely better.

the Verbier holiday was one of the best holidays I’ve ever had. The travel was amazing. It did cost over twice what it would have cost if we’d just got a flight and transfer from Manchester. That’s a major problem of course. Doing better  is often the most expensive option.

I guess I’m kind of waiting my turn here. When billionaires have junked their private jets and oil companies stop being given licences to open new oil fields then I think maybe it’s my turn next to stop travelling for fun and/or work.

I can see your point, but oil companies will keep getting it out the ground (remarkably efficiently and in a few cases carbon neutrally*), as long as Ryan Air keep buying Jet-A1, and Ryan Air will keep buying Jet-A1 as long as people fly to Morzine, etc, etc. If Shell turned around tomorrow and said they were shutting down all production.  Ryan Air would still be flying, they’d just get it from BP, Total, Aramco, whoever would sell it to them.

a **** load of insulation in the house

Is the same argument reversed.

Rhetorical question then, why did you decide to insulate your house before Shell stopped getting gas out the ground?  Because it makes no sense to think about it like that.

*Norway have built refineries powered by hydro electricity, there’s currently an ongoing project to power North Sea operations electrically from wind turbines rather than onboard gas turbines. But you know that’s piss in the wind compared to the emissions from actually burning the product.

Having just returned from a trip wher i flew 15000 miles and drove 3000 its a bit hypocritical but flying is a huge pollutter.  So is eating meat and so is having kids and pets.  Cars also a huge issue

Its not one thing or the other that needs doing.   Its everything

Environmental collapse has started.  Its too late for half measures

Quote

Which is worse for the world? All flying, engine powered of course, or meat eating? No ifs, buts or compromises.

I would say that as meat eating is a natural thing and flying is pure luxury, the latter should go first.

Quote

In a world sense it has to be food. Simply because 80% of the worlds population has never been on a plane. As i said above, for me eating less meat has been basically no effort. I don’t feel I’m missing out. If i never flew again i think i would be.

And don’t forget banking; or rather where your money is invested by the banks when you save, have your wages paid, keep the money for your direct debits or credit card payments. Changing to an ethical bank has more positive effect on the environment than swapping to an EV or going vegan. And it’s a lot simpler.
I believe someone already mentioned the internet; let’s not forget the electricity usage of server farms for social media including strava, and forums.
Very easy to become overwhelmed but little changes all help.

“When billionaires have junked their private jets and oil companies stop being given licences to open new oil fields then I think maybe it’s my turn next to stop travelling for fun and/or work.

let’s get the big stuff that makes a real difference sorted first.”

I get the point about proportions and effect but if we all wait for those fks to change first we’re in deep trouble. Game over.
There’s more of us than there are of them.

Changing to an ethical bank has more positive effect on the environment than swapping to an EV or going vegan.

Tried that, and then the Crystal Methodist happened 🤦‍♂️

I guess I’m kind of waiting my turn here. When billionaires have junked their private jets and oil companies stop being given licences to open new oil fields then I think maybe it’s my turn next to stop travelling for fun and/or work.

You will be waiting a long time and the planet will burn

I’m not sure all meat is as bad as is being made out. Using this as a source https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local

Cows and pigs are bad, but chicken is producing around 1kg co2 per portion (180g), which is around the same as driving 4 miles in an average car.

Of course the real problem is people but we are not allowed to mention that.

Oh right. Have you had a knock on the door since posting this?

Anyway, I haven’t given anything up but am significantly reducing polluting activities. Daughter is veggie so we all eat less meat, and I haven’t flown anywhere for a couple of years. Skiing is by train or car, and we’re taking the ferry to Spain this summer.

fwiw when I started feeling differently about flying to ride or climb it had a knock-on effect on other areas of life. I really miss the Alps. So if I go to the Alps less I feel like I want to make that count by being consistent – I eat way less red meat and I found I really like veg and I feel better for it, and don’t often eat meat when eating out now. And there’s commercial fishing .. etc. I think lockdown and exploring Wales has helped with Alpine withdrawal. Wales is so beautiful and I can ride to Chepstow in about 2.5 hours from home, the ease of the journey adds to the appeal.

It also inspired a (road) ride from the ferry port in France at Caen down to the Alps last summer. Took just over 4 days and when I first saw the Ecrins it was like seeing them the first time, felt so much more worthwhile for the journey there. Something clicked, about the journey:destination value ratio. Haven’t figured out an MTB ride there yet but tbh the uplift Alps MTB thing isn’t what I’m so into these days so it’s easier to say all this. Could do a bikepacking trip via European Bike Express any year though so no problem.

Skiing is quickly becoming one of the most environmentally damaging hobbies, especially in Germany, Italy and Austria.  So much snow is now created to keep resorts going whilst glaciers are shrinking at record levels.

I’ll hold up my hands, I’m an Aerospace research engineer, so do have bias, but I’m also very pro-environment.

Many of the figures used to compare various means of transporting things are extremely skewed.  Fuel use on aircraft is considered only on passenger capacity and always ignores cargo weight.   Sea shipping assumes point to point, but in reality, there’s a substantial head and tail on that journey which contributes highly to impact and often isn’t even close to being as significant for air travel.  Ferry travel assumes ideal sea conditions, which is rarely the case.

In general, Air travel is around 8-10 times worse than sea travel, (not the 80*someone posted earlier – simple math can tell you this) for cargo, around 5-7 times worse than sea travel for people and for rail, is highly dependent on grid mix, but usually 5-10 times more, the upper figure being for France with it’s highly electrified network and nuclear power….

What’s often ignored for Air travel is that it also supports substantial agricultural trade and allows vast amounts of agricultural products to be grown in more suitable places and then flown before spoiling.  This is often shipped in the belly of passenger aircraft.  Not using greenhouses, making use of already existing flights, etc all help to reduce impact.  You could say we should just eat seasonally, but that’s another argument.

On a per passenger basis, Air travel will have reduced its impact by almost 50% by 2030 and by almost 80% by 2050.  The issue is the continual growth of the market.  Currently everything that can be done by aerosapce is being done, but it’s hard.  Safe, reliable, lightweight cutting edge technology must be developed before it can be incorporated.

Surprisingly, you could, at a stroke, reduce aircraft emissions by between 10 and 15% by homologating the ATC network.  Continuous descent and ascent vectors would dramatically improve efficiency.

What’s often ignored for Air travel is that it also supports substantial agricultural trade and allows vast amounts of agricultural products to be grown in more suitable places and then flown before spoiling.

Is that more or less carbon intensive than heated polytunnels etc?

Sea shipping assumes point to point, but in reality, there’s a substantial head and tail on that journey which contributes highly to impact

But it’s not always point to point because the boat doesn’t go to point A then to B and drop everything off, then go back to point C for more stuff like a taxi.  It is like a bus in which stuff comes on and off at different locations. Well, more like a delivery driver (cos that’s what it is) with a flexible route that optimises pickups and drop-offs.  So the fuel used to bring your washing machine from Shanghai to Southampton is also bringing a laptop from Taipei to Akra or whatever.

@Daffy

I’ll hold my hand and say that i used a figure for shipping that was too low. Not that it changed the balance of the argument in that case

My sister has worked with airbus. I’m not in the all flying is evil camp.

There seems to be 2 problems with flying

It’s an easy way to go a long way. In co2 emissions terms it’s about that same as 2 people sharing a petrol car. But there is no way I’d drive to Greece for the week

The other problem is contrails. These contribute significantly to the climate impact of aviation