FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   The Suggestion Box (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/suggestion-box-756/)
-   -   Carbon Conscious Travel [forum now open - see inside] (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/suggestion-box/1976199-carbon-conscious-travel-forum-now-open-see-inside.html)

Prospero Jun 30, 19 10:23 am

Carbon Conscious Travel [forum now open - see inside]
 
I'd like to raise the subject of Carbon Conscious Travel in its broadest scope within the FlyerTalk space, with a view of possibly forming a dedicated forum for this and related topics

Possible subject matter could include:
  • environmentally friendly travel questions and tips, ie. alternatives to single use plastics
  • carbon embodiment in new hotels, airport construction, and infrastructure
  • carbon benchmarking
  • carbon calculation, tracking, and offsetting

I'll confess as a Generation Xer I'm not at the forefront in this area but I am learning fast and have made adjustments in how I travel but acknowledge there is more I could do. I also recognise this is a hot topic among younger generations and as a community there is a lot we can learn from them.

JDiver Jun 30, 19 12:28 pm

/Moderator hat off

I think there are numerous topics that could fit under this rubric that could contribute to the discussion of how we can travel “more softly” and offset our carbon footprint as we travel. Great suggestion.

devdas Jul 9, 19 6:18 am

++ in support.

psiddle Jul 9, 19 7:10 am

Please, no.
 
I beseech FT to not enter the PC arena!

MDteX Jul 9, 19 7:17 am

I agree with psiddle. Do not enter a political area. That is not what I came here for.

rufuswhynot Jul 9, 19 7:19 am

Not needed here.
 
Please. Let the green 'save the planet' warriors join in one of the many global warming sites already out there.
Not this site.

zitsky Jul 9, 19 7:19 am


Originally Posted by psiddle (Post 31284725)
I beseech FT to not enter the PC arena!

I'm ok with it, as long as it does not become a forum for some posters to talk down to or criticize others because they are not environmental enough. I could see this forum having constant debates about who is right and who is wrong.

bluemarble Jul 9, 19 7:25 am

Climate change is not "political." It is scientific. And, yes, very much associated with air travel, for better or for worse.

Prospero Jul 9, 19 7:26 am

Here's a good example of the travel industry's response to the growing demand for greater sustainability

https://www.usgbc.org/articles/hotel...ing-green-leed


Good news: the pace of green building in the hospitality sector is on the rise, and it doesn’t require making any sacrifice in the luxury of your stay away from home!

Across the world, demand for green hotels is rising. Today, LEED-certified hotels of all sizes are found in more than 40 U.S. states, 31 countries and five continents. It’s a movement sparked in part by guest preferences. According to a recent TripAdvisor survey, nearly two-thirds of travelers reported plans to make more environmentally friendly choices over the next year. And while on vacation, 88 percent of travelers turned off lights when not in their hotel room, 78 percent participated in the hotel's linen and towel reuse program and 58 percent used recycling in the hotel.

In response to this shift, companies such as Starwood’s Elements brand, Richard Branson’s Virgin Hotels and Hyatt Hotels include LEED mandates and policies in their design and construction specs. ITC Hotels in India requires not just LEED certification, but also top performance.
Does anyone here actively check LEED certification scores when selecting hotels?

psiddle Jul 9, 19 7:46 am


Originally Posted by bluemarble (Post 31284766)
Climate change is not "political." It is scientific. And, yes, very much associated with air travel, for better or for worse.

Here we go.

PeS Jul 9, 19 7:47 am


Originally Posted by rufuswhynot (Post 31284741)
Please. Let the green 'save the planet' warriors join in one of the many global warming sites already out there.
Not this site.

+1000

Prospero Jul 9, 19 7:52 am

I think there is plenty of space in the OMNI forums for existential discussions on climate change. What I am doing here is testing the water to see if there is demand on FT to discuss practical sustainability issues and initiatives

arlflyer Jul 9, 19 7:53 am

Hopefully the people who think that climate change is "political" have never asked how an airplane works, because aircraft happen to be designed using that same "science" mumbo jumbo that fuels the hot air bags of those durn young hippy whippersnappers and their "green" nonsense... *eyeroll*

THAT BEING SAID...FT already has forums that are tailored to the needs/interests of groups that not everyone is in alignment with (Smoking Lounge, GLBT Travelers, etc. - to clarify, personally I strongly support both of these groups even though I am not a member of either demographic).

So if someone is saying that having a climate conscious / low impact travel forum would be crossing some Rubicon, they have their head in the sand or are cherry-picking.

PepeBorja Jul 9, 19 8:21 am

The issue will be on the fine line between those who wish to genuinely inform and those who are activists and enviro-fascists. It already started if you read the replies and will only get worse.

As long as we can tune it out or disable it we should be OK.

arcticflier Jul 9, 19 8:44 am


Originally Posted by arlflyer (Post 31284862)
Hopefully the people who think that climate change is "political" have never asked how an airplane works, because aircraft happen to be designed using that same "science" mumbo jumbo that fuels the hot air bags of those durn young hippy whippersnappers and their "green" nonsense... *eyeroll”

So if someone is saying that having a climate conscious / low impact travel forum would be crossing some Rubicon, they have their head in the sand or are cherry-picking.

People who think they can be Carbon Conscious AND fly in aircraft for holiday and work have their head in the sand and/or have little concept of the topic. *eyeroll*

Would be very interested in your opinions as soon as you quit flying and start living a carbon frugal existence.

arlflyer Jul 9, 19 9:00 am


Originally Posted by PepeBorja (Post 31284925)
The issue will be on the fine line between those who wish to genuinely inform and those who are activists and enviro-fascists. It already started if you read the replies and will only get worse.

As long as we can tune it out or disable it we should be OK.

I agree that moderation would be a challenge in both directions - in the airline/hotel forums, the mods do a very good job of quickly shutting down OMNI discussion, but the question would just be if the volume would be overwhelming here. Generally speaking, the FT account restrictions are pretty good about keeping out true spammers.



Originally Posted by arcticflier (Post 31284983)
People who think they can be Carbon Conscious AND fly in aircraft for holiday and work have their head in the sand and/or have little concept of the topic. *eyeroll*

Would be very interested in your opinions as soon as you quit flying and start living a carbon frugal existence.

This post is very exemplary of what is wrong with modern American discourse - everything has to be spoken of in extremes. Either completely unbounded or completely banned (e.g. guns, substances). Could it not be that people want to take the first step in a certain direction without going to the furthest possible extreme? In your mind, no, but in the minds of reasonable people, of course. This is why the rest of the developed world is running ahead of us in many domains - making positive steps with beneficial impacts while we are paralyzed arguing about the furthest possible ends of the spectrum.

johnasmith Jul 9, 19 9:05 am

Please NO! You will regret it.

Caciucco Jul 9, 19 9:06 am

I think it should have one, it seems the sensible thing to do

arcticflier Jul 9, 19 9:06 am


Originally Posted by arlflyer (Post 31285043)
This post is very exemplary of what is wrong with modern American discourse - everything has to be spoken of in extremes. Either completely unbounded or completely banned (e.g. guns, substances). Could it not be that people want to take the first step in a certain direction without going to the furthest possible extreme? In your mind, no, but in the minds of reasonable people, of course. This is why the rest of the developed world is running ahead of us in many domains - making positive steps with beneficial impacts while we are paralyzed arguing about the furthest possible ends of the spectrum.

When you get a more informed understanding of the issue then you will understand that anything less than extreme measures will be insufficient.

I guarantee I live today and have lived the past 50 years being far more environmentally conscious than yourself...but go ahead and paint me with whatever brush makes you feel superior.

I am excusing myself from further participation since you were aggressive and rude and judgemental from your first *eyeroll* post.

arlflyer Jul 9, 19 9:13 am


Originally Posted by arcticflier (Post 31285064)
When you get a more informed understanding of the issue then you will understand that anything less than extreme measures will be insufficient.

I guarantee I live today and have lived the past 50 years being far more environmentally conscious than yourself...but go ahead and paint me with whatever brush makes you feel superior.

I guess I'm confused about your position - are you saying that there should be a Carbon Conscious forum, or that there shouldn't be because it wouldn't be up to your standards?

Generally speaking, I'm having difficulty here - you apparently live an environmentally conscious lifestyle and believe that "extreme measures" are needed to address the issue, yet attack posters who are in support of giving people a venue through which to discuss first steps. Would you rather the status quo continue? Because we're not going to go straight from A to Z; there will need to be intermediate steps.


Also, I found this quote of yours very apropos, given your second line above:


Originally Posted by arcticflier (Post 31057923)
I always love how FT members manage to work in a good “brag” about themselves with most every topic.


taffygrrl Jul 9, 19 9:43 am

I'm in!
 
My hometown has a literal mountain made of trash that gets bigger every year. (I was not born with a platinum status card in my mouth! :p ) I know some of those single use plastics I use as I travel are going to my hometown and making that mountain higher. I don't like contributing to that. I'd love a place to discuss ideas on how to be better.

Disneymkvii Jul 9, 19 9:56 am

I don't subscribe at all to the idea of "Man-made climate change" or even "CARBON" being a bad thing (it does give plants life).

BUT!!!! I am in support of a forum here on FT that might give me tips and or tricks on how to travel more environmentally conscience. I think I might be pleasantly surprised with what I might learn.

JDiver Jul 9, 19 10:19 am

Fellow members: The discussion here is whether or not there could or should be a forum or subforum that discusses Carbon Conscious Travel.

Posts that violate the Rules will be summarily deleted. That includes those containing unfriendly content, attacks against individuals and groups, etc. This section of the Rules in particular will be enforced. Some guidelines:




12. Abusive Or Disruptive Behavior Or Content Link to this topic

12.1 Friendly, Respectful and Welcoming

FlyerTalk is a community and is intended to be a friendly, helpful and collegial place.

Please post in a friendly, respectful, welcoming manner. 'Snarky,' unfriendly posts will not be allowed. If you don't have something constructive to contribute to a thread, please do not post.

Unhelpful posts, such as "Do a search" or those that merely comment on the worthiness of others' posts or threads are neither friendly nor welcoming and will not be allowed. If you can't be helpful or contribute substantive content to a thread, please refrain from posting.

12.2 Avoid Getting Personal

If you have a difference of opinion with another member, challenge the idea — NOT the person. Getting personal with another member is not allowed. Personal attacks, insults, baiting and flaming will not be tolerated.

FlyerTalk is a diverse, multi-cultural community. Expressions of prejudice or discrimination in any form are not permitted (such as those concerning race, nationality, religious belief, gender, sexual orientation, age, disability, etc).

If another member gets personal with you, do not retaliate. Retaliation may well subject you to the same discipline. Instead, please use the 'Alert a moderator to this thread' button in the lower-left-hand-corner of each post, send a note explaining your concern to the moderator team, and leave it to them to handle. Please also see Rule 22 — When you believe someone has violated the rules.
Thank you for contributing your thoughts on this topic thoughtfully and civilly.

JDiver & cblaisd, Co-Moderators

boogen Jul 9, 19 10:48 am

The increase in CO2 since 1900 has increased gross primary productivity of plants worldwide by 31%. So I'm all for anything that increases plant life. More carbon for everyone.

rxgeek Jul 9, 19 11:27 am

I vote no. Who would change their travel plans to reduce their "carbon footprint"?

arlflyer Jul 9, 19 11:44 am


Originally Posted by rxgeek (Post 31285606)
Who would change their travel plans to reduce their "carbon footprint"?

Enough people that the EU is going to start carbon-rating airliners:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...concerns-mount


Also, in a timely move, the New York Times announced just today that its travel desk will start buying offsets for all trips:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/r...n-offsets.html

bfollett Jul 9, 19 12:34 pm

No, No, No, totally irrelevant to why frequent fliers read this forum!. Furthermore, it can be a polarizing issue as demonstrated by responses to-date. Don't taint an excellent travel forum with something that might leave a "bad taste" for many readers.

psiddle Jul 9, 19 12:49 pm

Bravo, bfollett!!

Gnopps Jul 9, 19 1:47 pm

Great idea
 
Great idea Prospero! I'm in

tromboneboss Jul 9, 19 3:59 pm

Do not do this topic
 
This is a travel blog. It should not be about a pseudo science political argument. Man made global warming is only a theory as it has never been proven one way or the other. I can provide a plethora of citations both ways to illustrate this, but I will not go into this on a travel site. Stick to travel related topics.

psiddle Jul 9, 19 4:15 pm


Originally Posted by tromboneboss (Post 31286516)
This is a travel blog. It should not be about a pseudo science political argument. Man made global warming is only a theory as it has never been proven one way or the other. I can provide a plethora of citations both ways to illustrate this, but I will not go into this on a travel site. Stick to travel related topics.

Hear! Hear! Bravo!

klausa Jul 9, 19 6:00 pm

I would say 100% yes, I'd be interested to participate in the discussions myself.

However, you'll need to be _very_ careful about moderating that forum - as evidenced by this thread alone. There's no point of opening a sub-forum if the discussion is going to immediately devolve into people jumping with their takes about how 'climate change isn't man made!!!' or 'increased CO2 emissions are good, actually'.

brizone Jul 9, 19 6:08 pm

That's a great idea since it's obviously coming to the travel sector.

Anyone who opposes it because it's "political" is the same kind of person who could rationalize opposing vaccinations because they're somehow "political".

=> In fact, they're the only ones actually trying to make it political. Ignore these types who oppose basic science, and want to insert FUD.

<redacted>

tracon Jul 9, 19 6:39 pm

The environmental movement is the biggest fraud to hit society since the Atkins diet.
We don't need a forum for either subject.

Azamaraal Jul 9, 19 6:58 pm

Unfortunately 'climate change' is not basic science. As the planet we live on has passed through major and minor ice ages over the centuries there is no direct evidence that we are in a 'climate crisis'.

But groupthink rears its lovely head and "we all know that climate change due to mankind and CO2 is the culprit" which unfortunately cannot be proven as the models keep demonstrating that they are flawed. Henny penny and the sky is falling.

One thing is clear - we are approaching 10 Billion inhabitants in a world that probably could safely (and carbon friendly) support 4 Billion. Shut down 6 Billion wood fires and the amount of carbon in the atmosphere would drop significantly.

This is not the venue for a climate change war.

klausa Jul 9, 19 7:27 pm

One last comment:

I don't understand why people are arguing this isn't a venue to discuss about "climate change war". The sheer idiocy of denying human-caused climate change in 2019 aside, you just... don't have to participate in the discussions? Not every discussion requires your voice! In fact, very frequently it's better off without it!

It's gonna be a separate forum, for people who are interested in the subject - and FT already has plenty of those! I don't see anybody calling for getting rid of the "Premium Fare Deals" forum just because they only fly in economy.

There's no denying that our hobby (specifically) and transportation and travel industries (generally) contributes a great amount to the CO2 emissions and there's absolutely no reason to not have a dedicated subforum to discuss the impact and how to minimize it [1]. The connection between FT and why would people want to talk about it is clear.


[1]: Unless it turns out nobody actually has anything to say - then sure, shut it down down the line.

Tino Jul 9, 19 8:34 pm

Wait - FT is looking into creating a forum that is, by its very nature, anti-travel? Give it a shot and see how that turns out for you.

JDiver Jul 10, 19 12:23 am

Here’s an interesting article that includes the different views held regarding this issue on both sides of the Atlantic, as well as the difference in travel conditions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/trave...and-chance-us/

Gnopps Jul 10, 19 3:56 am


Originally Posted by tromboneboss (Post 31286516)
This is a travel blog. It should not be about a pseudo science political argument. Man made global warming is only a theory as it has never been proven one way or the other. I can provide a plethora of citations both ways to illustrate this, but I will not go into this on a travel site. Stick to travel related topics.

No matter if you choose to "believe" the scientific community or not, there can still be a forum to dicuss environmental conscious travel - just like there is premium travel forum do those interested in that.

tdietterich Jul 10, 19 4:28 am

I support creating the forum, as long as it is a forum for discussing how to reduce my impact as a traveler (Carbon emissions but also trash and other environmental impacts). Discussions of whether climate change is human-caused or not should be banned. Here are some questions I would like to discuss in such a forum:
(a) Are carbon offsets actually effective? (e.g., how long is carbon sequestered by planting a tree? Clearly not forever.)
(b) Is anyone auditing the claims of airlines, cruise lines, and hotels about their environmental impacts?
(c) Are green fuels actually green?
(d) What is the carbon footprint of different modes of travel, different aircraft, etc? What is the carbon footprint of infrastructure investments (e.g., building a new high-speed train must involve a huge amount of concrete).


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:55 am.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.