to not want to go by train.

[Frazzled2207]

I have posted before about husband who is very worried about climate change. I am also worried and we are taking lots of steps to reduce our carbon footprint but there's a limit to what I'm prepared to do (at the moment). Currently down to one car and saving for an electric. Solar panels on roof (these cost a fortune). Cutting down on unnecessary purchases (he literally never buys new clothes but accepts stuff I get him for birthdays etc). Massively cut down on meat

Anyway he never wants to fly again. I have said that I am willing to cut down on flying to maybe once every year or two but am not going to say I'm never getting on a plane again.

So his best mate who we see very rarely lives in a nice part of Europe. I also get on well with the mate and his wife and they have kids similar ages to ours who are young primary age. They have invited us to stay this summer.

Husband wanted to look into going by train so I did. In some depth.
Train option costs between £800 and £1000 for four of us. We are up north so this means three hours in a train (cross London) then Eurostar to Paris (cross Paris) then four hours in a train. With two small children and luggage in tow. The way the train works we would leave the house at 6.30am and get there for 10pm.

Or.... there is a flight option. Both we and the friends are close to an airport and direct flight for all four of us costs £300 if we're savvy.

He thinks we should take the train despite the fact that it is enormously more expensive and stressful. I have suggested a compromise that we fly one way and train the other way. But I am not up for the train both ways. The kids are not easy to entertain and having to cross Paris with them in a bit of a rush on a summer Saturday fills me with dread, as well as getting to our friends' house really late when they will be super grumpy.

We can consider overnight in Paris etc but obviously it all adds to the cost and he has limited leave.

AIBU to not want to go by train? I have said me and the kids will fly and he can get the train. But he doesn't think that gives the right message to our children (that flying is an unnecessary luxury), nor does flying one way.

Both of us want to go to see the mate, if we just don't go there will need to go somewhere else for our summer holidays and will probably have exactly the same argument. I'm just not sure how to resolve this as we are both as stubborn as Mrs May and Mr Corbyn at the moment.

The biggest problem facing humanity and as ever, somebody else should deal with it because its a bit inconvenient for me to do so.

If 25 families like yours decided to do the same then the plane wouldnt be flying at all.

Youve got kids and clearly couldnt give a fuck about them or their futures because crossing a street in london is too much hassle.

Plus the train is a far superior method of travel anyway

As others have said, the plane will be going anyway, so your husband refusing to use it will be no saving in emissions anyway. Yes, I don't like the way things are going environmentally either, but your oh's stance, although possibly laudable, is illogical in this instance.

We do a lot of trains. When DC were small, I found it a lot easier to courier luggage ahead and just travel with one backpack with food/activities. You have two school-age children and two parents, so it shouldn’t be that difficult to manage them on a train journey.

If you don’t want to do it, that’s your choice. But blaming children and baggage is silly.

do many of you think about your carbon footprint when booking flights these days?

no.

I haven't got the time or a boss patient enough to let me go on holiday on a horse, so I do fly completely guilt-free.

I do try to take other steps and be careful of things I can do, but I am also living my life.

I have to say in total honesty and shame that I do not give my carbon footprint a second thought when booking our holidays. The older I get the more I value our holidays and want to see more and more of the world which usually involves flying. I am, however, good at the small stuff - the re-cycling, not using throwaway cups etc so not totally selfish!

If going by plane is not an option for your DH, then you have to accept until your DCs are older (I would say both over 7/8 at the youngest) this isn't a place you can realistically travel to for a couple of weeks.

Travel used to be the preserve of the rich, it would take days to get anywhere and people accepted it cost a lot of money, with 'stop offs' needed on the way. Cheap airtravel has made travel available to all, the expectation that it'll be afforable to the average family and the expectation that a wide range of locations will be practical to tavel to in an average 2 week holiday. If you take out the air travel, you also have to take out the expectations that go with it.

Pre airtravel, most UK families would holiday within the UK. Giving up air travel really takes your options back to that.

Perhaps he needs to realise giving up air travel means giving up the world being a small place.

I think I'm going to say to him that I'll do the train one way but not both and that's as much compromising as I'll do. The kids do like trains and I think would enjoy it up to a point. But if he wants to train both directions, with or without the children, then that's totally fine (especially if he takes the kids!)
He can't really argue with that can he?

According to DS2s physics teachers (both PhDs) electric cars have a worse carbon footprint than petrol cars if manufacturing of batteries and source of electricity are factored in rather than just counting individual/exhaust emissions. Are you sure this is about science and not him?

Plus the train is a far superior method of travel anyway
that's debatable. Trains in the UK are shit. I take a commuter train most days, and cross-country trains often enough, they are embarrassing.

I'll do the train one way but not both and that's as much compromising as I'll do.
sounds very reasonable and sensible!

do many of you think about your carbon footprint when booking flights these days?
Nope. I don't have the time, money or inclination to do a ridiculous train journey vs a short flight.
I do however have a bottle for water and never buy coffee cups/ plastic water bottles. I am meticulous about recycling and buy loose fruit and veg.

I would 100% fly in your situation.
Also Gard de North-Gard de Lyon is awkward, even more so with luggage and kids.

So your husband had children and is now worry about his carbon footprint? Bit late for that. Tell h that he can take the train with the kids and you will meet him there (after a very relaxing flight first class).

As far as im aware rush hour commuter trains dont travel across europe.

East or west coast mainline to london with a reserved table, eurostar then tgv in france is a great way to travel

As others have said, the plane will be going anyway, so your husband refusing to use it will be no saving in emissions anyway.

That plane will be flying and way, you may as well be on it.

Replies like this are missing the point- the plane is only flying because people want to go on it. If enough people took OP's DH's stance the plane wouldn't be flying at all.

*genuine question - do many of you think about your carbon footprint when booking flights these days? I obviously do but don't think that one short haul flight per family most years (perhaps not every year) is unreasonable.

But when I say to friends that we are as a family trying to reduce our emissions, get an electric car, fly less etc I do get a 'you're a bit batshit' look. Really?*

Sadly can honestly say the thought has never crossed my mind. Agree with PP, the plane is taking off whether you are on it occupying a seat or not, so why make hard work for yourself and spend hundreds more, for lets face it, no benefit to the planet whatsoever.
I have to say I'd also give you a puzzled look, although you are completely entitled to do your bit for the planet of course! But you do only get one life to live so I wouldn't let it become an obsession.

Frazzled I haven't had a passport since 2007, and I last went on a plane in 2006, I think it was. Not actively to reduce emissions, more that we just enjoy our UK holidays - but I'm also glad we're not adding to these particular emissions.

Because of that, should we ever head abroad again (!) I probably wouldn't be bothered about the carbon cost because personally ours is so low.

Take the kids on the plane and leave him to fuck about for 14 hours playing Thomas the environmentally friendly wank engine.

I couldn't live with such obsessive selfishness.

The argument that the plane will fly anyway is a poor one.

The planes fly due to demand.

The more people that opt for more sustainable forms of transportation the less flights there would be.

Equally the cost and time of Train travel would reduce as demand resulted in more investment re: bigger rail networks and better technology.

The truth is uncomfortable and that is that all of us need to be doing more and that will involve making some sacrifices to convenience.

Like with other posts where the Ops H has been dead set on the least convenient option, is it a wild leap to imagine you will be expected to do all the child wrangling/ entertaining / calming and cojoling to keep walking? So as a result it's no hardship to him?

As ever, I'm hopelessly confused. If hubby is so concerned about global warming, and I'll assume the environment generally, then why did he, presumably, assist in the production of more consumer units, aka sprogs?

I think YANBU. You've looked at options and I don't think a 15 hour journey is reasonable. The realistic choice is fly or don't go.

I couldn't live with such obsessive selfishness

Agreed, they should take the train.

When my DDs were in their teens we took a train to Greece. It was a fantastic experience for them and me, but much, much more expensive than flying. If you have the time and the cash then getting the train is a wonderful thing to do, and it's brilliant to be able to take the moral high ground of not always doing things the cheapest and fastest way. Would I have done it when they were younger? Absolutely not. Even if things go to plan you've got lots of changes in places you don't know, and of course often things don't go to plan and you have to be able to think on your feet and make alternative arrangements. I thought my teenagers got a lot from that aspect of the experience, but no way would I have considered it when they were little.

If you do end up getting the train one way I'd suggest you do it on the way home. That way you won't be arriving at an unfamiliar destination with tired, grumpy children. But I'd hold out and either insist on flying or agree that you won't be visiting these friends until your DC are old enough to enjoy (not just endure) the journey.