What would persuade frequent fliers to fly less?

[hippospot]

I read this very article and liked the suggestion of having to pay more for each subsequent flight you take in a year. Maybe a family who take one holiday a year won't be penalised but the people who fly multiple times a year would face increased penalties the more they fly. Currently 5% of the population is taking 33% of the flights!

I worry so much about climate change but people around me seem to not be making any adjustments to their carbon-heavy lifestyles. What could be the solution in your view?

I don't really want to debate whether flying is the biggest cause of climate change. It isn't. But it's one of the biggest discretionary changes we can make to our impact on the climate as individuals.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/oct/03/heathrow-third-runway-climate-warnings-economic-reality?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

The only people I know who are frequent flyers are ones who travel for work.
I’d say start with businesses and penalise them for unnecessary travel.
People flying multiple times a year for personal reasons are likely to be quite rich to be able to afford it so they’re probably just going to pay the extra and still fly

I don’t think it’s so much that people aren’t concerned about climate change but that they are sick of being lectured and made to feel guilty whereas big business and the very rich will continue as they please.

Well then they should continue to take their flights - fuck the planet, that shows the big businesses what’s what 🙄

Nothing. My day to day carbon footprint is tiny. No kids, electric car, live in a country with 98% renewable sources, tank water only, grow most of our greens, eat seasonally, take public transport to work, don’t use fast fashion.
My flights (of which there a quite a lot, most ultra long haul to se family and friends and sometimes work) are nothing compared to a family of 4 just existing in the UK. The nappies, clothes, washing, fuel, car trips, plastic toys, plastic food boxes, wipes, disposable everything, toys, juice boxes, plastic straws, individually wrapped stuff, crisp packets, gas central heating etc etc.
I’d love to see a carbon quota allocation. I spend it on flights. You spend it on nappies, plastic toys and individually wrapped cheese bits.

Nothing. Only if flying became so expensive it was unaffordable.

Cheaper trains. I am going to the south of France next summer. I wanted to go by train for exactly the reason I believe we all need to fly less. It was just not doable for 6 people. I think investing in better and cheaper train.trains should be cheaper than planes.

I was a public discussion forum local to me a couple years ago, and the speaker put up 5 households and we were to rank them by which we thought had the highest carbon emissions.

The results had the highest ranked household as the 'eco travel' couple, largely due the greenwashing by companies having led them traveling more frequently. That surprised a lot of people at that event. I also think a lot of these types of events including the People's Emergency Broadcast showings, the focus on individuals around this obscures the picture. There is strong data that over 70% of harmful emissions are from 100 companies, many of them government backed companies, so even has someone who hasn't flown in decades, I get why so many feel their drop in the bucket is meaningless.

Large businesses need more actual pressure on their sustainability practices, not lip service, which would likely lead to a changing in balance of online to in-person meetings. The includes British governments - I'm a civil servant, I've seen how sustainability is largely framed in costs (like how every page printed is a charge) rather than really much data on the environmental impact of using pages printed vs having screens.

Leisure, as many mentioned, UK needs better transport options. I mean, it is ridiculous as someone living in the Midlands that it is far easier, cheaper, and more accessible for me to fly to most of Europe or North America than it is for me to take a train or bus to Inverness. I medically cannot drive. I've been trying to plan that trip for months. Part of the reason for this dream trip is small businesses in Inverness who will take couples and small groups out into the nearby dark sky area to go star gazing, and I've largely ended up feeling hopeless more than a few times almost entirely around transport. It's become a family joke that we'll just wait until my 17 year old who is keen to drive to be able to afford to do so.

I definitely don't approve of excessive business travel but I assume employees don't have much leeway to say no if travel is expected of them.

Then the focus should be on businesses making it required to travel, just like the focus on carbon emissions, water usage, and so on should be on the large businesses and governments having the largest impact. The company and events should be viewed as the very frequent flier rather than the individual, we should have data on that to have real context.

As others mentioned, it's ridiculous to have a global summit on climate issues involve people flying all over the world when there are far less carbon heavy options for global communication.

Or cut down on unnecessary travel completely

"I don't really want to debate whether flying is the biggest cause of climate change. It isn't. But it's one of the biggest discretionary changes we can make to our impact on the climate as individuals."

The problem is once you start suggesting disincentives for certain things you CAN'T separate it from the overall argument. It's unfair penalising 'normal' people for comparatively small actions when the vast majority of poluution is down to the actions of huge multicoglomerates. Or, indeed, penalising someone who takes two or three rammed flights a year while billionaires continuing flying nearly empty private jets for 20 minute flights.

The absolute biggest discretionary change anyone can make to their impact on the climate as individuals is to not have kids. The impact on that would mitigate thousands of flights. Should childfree people therefore be exempt from any proposed tax on the basis that they've more than done their bit?

Nothing will stop me flying because the places I like visiting are too far away by other means.

Nothing will stop me wanting to experience the history, culture, architecture, and cuisine of foreign lands.

However, wall to wall sunshine, palm trees, and a pretty beach outside my front door might reduce my overseas trips a tiny bit. I’d still get wanderlust though!

Exactly. I hope none of the 'you must stop flying' crowd have DC because if you do, even one child vastly outweighs the carbon cost of multiple long haul flights a year.

The most passionate worthy green people I know all have 3
plus kids. So they can stop judging my twice yearly short haul flights.

Only significantly increased cost would have any impact, IMO. This would price out lower income families but the rich would continue flying as normal.

Selfishly, I would love tourist destinations to be much less busy, so I would welcome something like this. I’m someone who prioritises travel so I would continue doing it at the expense of other things, but hopefully other people don’t and places I love become bearable again.

Strange response .

I typically take 4/5 flights a year to Europe for leisure.

It is so much cheaper abroad than here in the UK when you take into account the cost of accommodation, eating out, etc. Plus you have the weather which is a huge plus.

Until the UK can provide more value for money I'll continue to use air travel.

If you stop ordinary people flying to Benidorm then the pay off is that you also have to stop rich people flying to the Bahamas.
As a second thought - all the people who are saying they/their DP absolutely has to fly for “ “business reasons” how did they cope during Covid? Did their businesses grind to a halt?

I still won’t holiday in the UK. I like the weather abroad and it’s not guaranteed here.

If you know of unemployed people who are taking multiple holidays a year then you should inform the Department of Employment.
Of course you won’t because it isn’t true.

But some people have flown every year since maybe 1960s/1970s. Some like me have only be lucky enough to travel more in the last few years and not many years left.

So the people who started early, even if much younger, are many flights ahead of me.

Of course you CAN, but those of you with an investment in future generations convince yourself that it’s okay to contribute to fucking up the planet because other companies or countries do it more.

Do I get a special award because nobody on the planet has flown fewer times than me?

Yes @Anarchy99- give yourself a medal 🥇

Wouldn’t it be brilliant if HS2 was connected to the Eurostar. How fabulous to be able to get on a train in Birmingham and travel straight into France and the rest of Europe. Until the powers that be start thinking about what they’re doing, I won’t stop flying.

There used to be chimneys on our houses. There used to be ‘pea-soupers’. We used to get a free plastic bag every time we went shopping. All that has changed. I’m happy to go with new ways of doing things. I’m not happy to be told I’ve got to stop flying when private jets will be flying as normal. The change has to come from the top.

And there you have it.,,

I won’t stop flying . I like travelling . That’s it .

We are that family flying to Mexico for a beach holiday, because we want to see Mexico, my son and husband want to do some scuba diving there also. We can't get a train there!
Also have you thought about all the countries that rely on tourism, what happens to them if people stop flying.