to ask if you would really make these journeys without flying for the sake of the environment

[IDSNeighbour]

I'm terrified of flying. I will fly but only if there is absolutely no other feasible way of getting somewhere.

I've just booked my transport for my summer holiday - 36 hours each way on long distance coaches for £230 instead of 2 hours each way on a plane for £160.

A couple of years ago I took 3 trains over about 48 hours to get to Russia for about £300 (I think - can't remember). I think flights took 4 hours though I think they were a similar price that time, not sure.

Other than fear (which isn't that common?), I can't think why anyone would choose a transport method that is both longer AND more expensive, except for environmental reasons. But these buses and trains are pretty popular and book up. I know some will only do one leg but the buses in particular are often straight through and the huge distance tickets are easy to source.

So I'm wondering if anyone would do this purely to lower their carbon footprint? Is it a reasonable expectation on people for the environment?

Yes. I took the train to Italy with 2 toddlers last May.

I would - and have - done the long train journeys to get to interesting places. Luckily my children are big fans of train travel, and the eldest is particularly concerned with "looking after the world" so not an issue.

Unless it were life or death, there's nothing that would make me sit on a coach for 36 hours.

No. I'm on trains all day every day!

I love flying. I've flown to 3 countries all ready this year 😬

I rarely use my car though so maybe I do my bit that way!

Again, children aren't commodities. We can't compare having children with going on holiday. Western families rarely have more than 2 and in most countries population is still growing or stable due to immigration of immigrant families.
We need children as a species and as nations.

We really don't need more children in the UK than people actually want to have. The population grows every year. We could do with less children being born actually.
Not saying you should not have children by the way, but you are not doing everyone else a favour by having them.

Not saying you should not have children by the way, but you are not doing everyone else a favour by having them.

Explain. What would happen if everyone stopped having children?

I really think we need to bring back the sleeper train - especially on the continent, where trains are much bigger than ours. British sleepers are always going to be rather pokey affairs.

There are regular sleeper services in most of the larger European countries. I use one regularly (at least once a month). Best way to travel long distances in my opinion.

And the U.K. has brand new trains for the Scottish sleeper service.

Lweji That is not going to happen though. But people having less children so our population did not keep growing, would actually be a good thing.

So, if you commit to taking the train to Spain for your summer holiday you get two additional days' leave to account for the extra travel time.

It's not clear to me that it actually takes that much longer. For eg to Barcelona, you could get a late afternoon Eurostar to Paris, then the night train to Toulouse, then the TGV to Barcelona. You'd be there by lunchtime.

We do need to keep having children - the population grows due to immigration - but our society is getting older and older as in Western societies we are having fewer children.
This is not a good thing for the future. We do need children.

Agree with Lweji - we can’t compare having children with flying to Spain twice a year on holiday...

Mistigri Most of us will take at least a few hours or more in the train to actually get to Eurostar. So leaving on train from home town say at lunchtime or late morning, and getting to Barceloan the next day at lunchtime is very different from flying from a regional airport. Yes it does take longer. I know people who do it though.

Sleeper trains are definitely alive and well across Europe.

Only in UK it seems to be perceived as an outdated concept / unacceptable mode of travel.

GoneFishing There are countries with an older age profile than ours. They manage.
We need a continued growth in population for capitalism to continue to grow, that is true. But no for society to function we don't.

Another one here for the carbon allowance for a household.
Hopefully it would encourage people to look at their overall impact, from driving to energy consumption to flights, and work to reduce it.

Mistigri Most of us will take at least a few hours or more in the train to actually get to Eurostar. So leaving on train from home town say at lunchtime or late morning, and getting to Barceloan the next day at lunchtime is very different from flying from a regional airport. Yes it does take longer. I know people who do it though.

Yes, of course it depends where you live, but many people have to travel long distances to an airport anyway. I'm not convinced that it necessarily takes much longer just to get on a train. And you could for eg arrive in Barcelona for lunch, properly rested, whereas if you did that by air you'd be looking at a 4am start and you'd be knackered.

No. It is hardly relaxing and with just 2 weeks holiday it would eat too much into it,

I think there are people who like to do train journeys for the sake of experience and really enjoy it with lots of breaks in between but I am not one of those.

Lweji That is not going to happen though. But people having less children so our population did not keep growing, would actually be a good thing.

That is not why the UK population is growing. Even so, it's growing very very slowly.
www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/overviewoftheukpopulation/mar2017

Might as well tell people to stop growing old. Are there any estimates how much a 1 extra year in life expectancy costs in carbon?

The issue of overpopulation has to do with countries with high birth rates and much reduced infant mortality rates, which drives up life expectancy at birth.
If you want to berate people for having children, I suggest you start posting on Non-European MN sites.

There are countries with an older age profile than ours. They manage.... not that well.

Also, not that many and not that high.
www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-with-the-largest-aging-population-in-the-world.html

The highest is Japan, which is not happy about it.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_Japan#Effects

It's not just capitalism. It's available funds to support the elderly, as well as care provision. The alternative being a sharp increase in retirement age.

Anyway...

Lweji but the footprint of the average human in the developed world is much greater than that of those in the 'developing' world.

It's all the crap we buy and all the places we travel to, and ship goods from, and energy we use.

I wouldn't do the longer journey as I only have limited time of work and would rather spend it on holiday and not travelling, I no some people include the traveling as part of their holiday but that's not me, it may be something I look at in the future though

I always take the train or car (multiple passengers) if the journey can be done in a day (12-14 hrs) and often do so if it can be done in two days.

I travel a lot for work and also have family abroad. Used to do this kind of thing 10x a year pre kids- now maybe 4 times a year.

We do this for environmental reasons but I also like long journeys overland. And you can bring lots of luggage.

Often been asked why you would take a 9h drive over a 1h flight - but the difference is much less if you work out the time door to door. I find if you fly somewhere it pretty much takes up the whole day anyway.

But we aren't increasing in numbers. Not that much. And higher birthrates in the West are often associated with immigrant families, who may still value having many children.

You're underestimating the increasing footprint of raising economies with higher population growth and also increasing carbon footprints.
That's the populations you should convince to have fewer children.
We already are.

Yes we're reducing in numbers but we're not really reducing consumption. And a lot of the burden on our consumption is placed on developing countries - factories, food, waste disposal etc.

I'm not saying that we should ignore population growth, I do totally agree it is one of the major concerns, but until we have our own house in order we really haven't got much of an influence.

So, if you commit to taking the train to Spain for your summer holiday you get two additional days' leave to account for the extra travel time

We have driven to southern Spain. It took two days but we just regard the journey as part of the holiday. No need to book extra time.

So flying should be banned or restricted, but people can crack on and have ten children.......