Hi
Sorry, I don't really follow your argument here.
Whilst I understand your concerns about the industrial
order I don't see how this translates into a decision
not to visit friends and relatives. Surely developing
and maintainting human relationships is worth a few
tonnes of carbon? After all, most people travel for
this purpose -- not because they are deliberately
trying to damage the environment.
Alex
--- Chris <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I subscribed to a list titled crisis-forum, because
> I pretty much identified
> with the mission statement/ statement of values,
> about the whole industrial
> way of being in the world as creating a crisis. Do I
> think this crisis can
> be resolved whilst continuing with this way of being
> in the world? Not
> really. Do I want to work towards the maintenance of
> the industrial order?
> No. Do I think a non-industrial world can support
> several hundred different
> airlines, and the associated global infrastructure?
> Probably not. So for me
> to fly would be in direct contradiction to my
> beliefs and principles, and
> though I have close family in other parts of the
> world I will not be flying
> to see them, no matter how much I miss them. But I
> wouldn't damn anyone else
> for choosing otherwise, and an emotive word such as
> sin is bound to get
> peoples' backs up. .
>
> Best
>
> Chris
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dan Welch" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:37 PM
> Subject: Re: Travel to Barcelona
>
>
> >I think there is a certain conflation going on
> between a) flying as a
> > component of an individual's carbon footprint and
> b) air travel as a
> > rapidly
> > rising proportion of total carbon emissions. Air
> travel in itself is not a
> > uniquely inefficient and wasteful way to travel
> (although short-haul
> > flights
> > are), comparable to a single person driving and,
> as far as I'm aware (and
> > I
> > was surprised the ratio was not higher) two to
> three times as carbon
> > intensive as high speed train travel (including .
> The problem therefore is
> > the distance travelled enabled by flying, or
> rather the distance that can
> > be
> > travelled in such a short time by flying. So on an
> individual level one
> > might be able to allow oneself air travel very
> occasionally if cutting
> > your
> > carbon budget in other ways. On a global level
> however there are not the
> > carbon savings to be had to allow increasing air
> travel. It's important to
> > get the message out about air travel but I think
> we need to be wary of
> > feeling guilty if we don't vow never to get on a
> plane again. I have
> > immediate family on three continents, as do many -
> I don't intend to visit
> > every year but when I do I'm going to want to
> trade off two weeks spent at
> > sea against saving carbon in other ways.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Discussion list for the Crisis Forum
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
> Alex Sampson
> > Sent: 24 January 2007 12:42
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Travel to Barcelona
> >
> >
> > Dear all
> >
> > I would like to pose a question. Is flying a sin?
> >
> > RSVP
> >
> > Alex
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
___________________________________________________________
New Yahoo! Mail is the ultimate force in competitive emailing. Find out more at the Yahoo! Mail Championships. Plus: play games and win prizes.
http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=44106/*http://mail.yahoo.net/uk
|
