AIBU to ask how many of you are seriously revising whether (or how often) you fly again?

[Thelowquietsea]

We don't fly often (one flight a year tops, mostly to Europe) but reducing my air travel is one of the few differences I can make towards climate change.

And yet, I'm celebrating a big birthday this year. I had an idea to take myself to a retreat quite far away, and now it's 'booking' time, I can't quite bring myself to do it. Especially in light of Australia's tragedy. I'm really torn.

How many of you are making serious sacrifices in this area?

I know you probably didn't mean it but this is a hot mess of colonial nonsense.

People largely took land the was being lived on in a massively sustainable way by people whose lives they saw as having zero value.

I think you've possibly missed the point of my post. Several hundred years ago, there was land unsettled by any modern government, long after property rights were established - this isn't really a commentary on the indigenous people who lived there or colonialism but rather how quickly modern governments have evolved and how I fear a totalitarian future.

I.e. -today, you'd need a series of permits to set up an ice cream stand. What does the future hold?

Every flight I've been on over the past few years has been full, so virtue signalling and not flying ourselves wouldn't make any difference - someone else would buy "our" seats.

...ofgs are you being deliberately dense?

Agree. Obviously I realise that if everyone had no children at all, then that would be a problem. But maybe we should see having 3+ as being as socially unacceptable as some people want flying to be, obviously making allowances for when a second pregnancy is twins etc.

Yes, another good post and among my friends, it already is seen as a bit like flying or having a big diesel car. Nobody is going to run you out of town for it, but it isn't considered a good move for the planet to have more than two children (three if twins etc).

Obviously people who already have larger families shouldn't be punished for it now, as that ship has sailed, but I definitely think, among younger generations, a large family doesn't seem at all aspirational anymore. Where I live anyway (SE England).

The flights do add up, although honestly it's the business travel that's the killer, rather than the once-a-year leisure holiday or trip to see relatives.

Planes are going to be targeted in the future: the aviation footprint is too large not to be. Either there will be a carbon tax (unfair, but easy to enforce) or else everyone will get a carbon allowance and the choice to use it or trade it. Right now, governments are tiptoeing around the elephants in the room on food, travel and the fact we need to retrofit a lot of housing with better insulation. They are up against the Paris agreement and horrific climate news. Eventually, it's going to be too painful NOT to take action.

China has signed up to the Paris agreement and is taking action. The USA is not on a federal level (thanks, Trump!) but eleven states, plus Washington, DC and Puerto Rico, have pledged to go ahead. There is also piecemeal work being done s Ross the continent by various cities and counties. My best guess is that if a Democratic candidate is elected President in the future, America will swiftly sign the Paris accord again with very little pushback.

We can't use the inaction of our neighbors to justify our own lack of change.

I fly a couple of times a year to see my family + maybe 1 other flight for our family holiday. Long haul maybe once every 6-8 years.

I do other things to weigh up my footprint, although I'm nowhere near good enough. I do my recycling, haven't eaten meat for years, drive a second hand electric car, I don't buy water bottles or fruit, veg, bread etc in non recyclable plastic packaging, take the train whenever I can, I'm not a shopaholic and if I do need clothes I tend to buy second hand. Oh, and I also have turned my garden into a big, luscious green oasis.

ChardonnaysDistantCousin : PSA China releases the equivalent of the UK’s total annual output of CO2 in just over two weeks. It really doesn’t matter what you do, or what anyone else in the UK does.

This totally. That's the reality of it. Gluing yourself to the DLR or jumping onto the roof of an East End rush hour tube will do absolutely nothing , apart from being the quickest way to get your nose broken.

The aspirational / status part of large families is the part I’d like to see go. Replaced with more consideration.

You do realise that ferries are far more polluting that a plane?

I did say it wasn't really for climate reasons. I just hate airports.

Gluing yourself to the DLR or jumping onto the roof of an East End rush hour tube will do absolutely nothing , apart from being the quickest way to get your nose broken.

Why would I that? And why do suggest anyone would?

That's a very odd and incredibly inappropriate comment. You know nothing about me or other posters here. You don't know if your comment might be triggering or personal.

You are out of order to suggest any of this.

Triggering?

Chardonnay is just talking about the ridiculous form of protest that environmentalists have taken of late.

I'm on the other side of this argument but I can't see anything wrong with pointing out the pantomime protests don't achieve anything apart from preaching to the converted.

Planes are going to be targeted in the future: the aviation footprint is too large not to be

2% is too large? When it is also mathematically the most carbon efficient means of travel per passenger for long haul travel?

The aspirational / status part of large families is the part I’d like to see go. Replaced with more consideration.

Yes, I agree and I do think it is beginning to happen.

Sorry, I mean Charlotte.

But these protests are part of the reason we are talking.

No they're not.

I didn’t realise large families were a status tbh. It signifies the opposite to me

Fochit, not always it’s true.

Carbon tax and dividend is what I hope happens. Everyone pays carbon tax on everything, then the money is divided equally and paid back to everyone. A massive incentive for businesses to cut down on carbon and more money for individuals to offset the inevitable rise in the cost of living. Most carbon, as pp have said, is emitted by businesses, so using market forces to combat that seems sensible.

Re: population, no of course I didn't mean that everyone should have children so they have someone to care for them. And yes, I absolutely agree with the pp that eg individuals with early stage dementia should be allowed to decide when they would like to be helped to die. I hope and expect that that law will come as more people witness their elderly parents suffer.

What I meant was that this shit is complicated, that reducing the number of children you have is probably not going to reduce the population of Britain as what is likely to happen is that the government will increase the number of immigrants we need to take in in order to allow our society to function, and that there are better ways to deal with the population question, namely taxing the wealthy, educating girls on developing countries and making sure everyone who wants it has easy access to safe, free, judgement-free contraception.

Yes. We went on holiday by train last year. It was magical.

This is a pretty depressing thread really.

Everyone here who are saying they'll not change their behaviour, or wittering on about virtue signalling are missing the point. Just because you think China hasn't changed its behaviour doesn't give you an excuse not to change yours. We have to be the change we want to see and the lightning rod to change our government's behaviour for a start.

Jeez... it's Mumsnet. Isn't looking down the years at the uncertain future of your children's lives enough to make you change?

I didn’t realise large families were a status tbh. It signifies the opposite to me

There is a certain thread of middle or upper-middle class families where it's a trend. Rumpled, apple-cheeked kids running around with the dog and so on.

I can't trust my judgement because I'm fairly hard core on the matter but I get a sense that an eco-stigma has settled on 3+.

buying cheap clothes all the time is consuming more energy and creating more waste than flying so there are also other ways to be environmentally conscious. Enjoy your holiday.

There is a certain thread of middle or upper-middle class families where it's a trend. Rumpled, apple-cheeked kids running around with the dog and so on.

Ah! Yep, that’ll be me 😂

If we all just try a little but harder in all areas then it would help
I keep hearing this claim. How much would it help

The recent david attenborough climate change documentary said it was a myth that people can't make a difference on an individual level and urged everyone to do everything they can - from flights and meat (biggest issues) down to buying fewer but better quality items. Businesses don't change unless consumers force them to.

No. I struggle 51 weeks a year working, studying, being a single parent. Boarding that plane for my 1 week of uninterrupted holiday time with my dd keeps me going for the rest of the year. Ferries make me travel sick and I don't have enough annual leave, patience or funds to try and get to a Greek Island (for example) any other way than by plane.

buying cheap clothes all the time is consuming more energy and creating more waste than flying so there are also other ways to be environmentally conscious. Enjoy your holiday.

Why not do both? Cut down on consumption of cheap clothes and reduce flying? Reducing one doesn’t give a free pass to splurge on the other.