Simple question: Is the climate emergency real, or isn’t it?
If you believe it’s real — if you agree with U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres that the science proves beyond any doubt that we are “digging our own graves” (and our children’s) — then it’s time to stop flying.
I wish I had better news.
I love to travel, I have family in far-flung places, and I regularly get invited to events such as weddings that are incredibly meaningful to me. Many of my most cherished memories are of travel — the Himalayas, Sharm al Sheikh, Paris. To give up flying means giving up profoundly enriching, important, and even life-changing experiences.
But we can’t anymore. Not if we accept the science. Not if we understand the planetary emergency we face – the simple math of it.
The climate emergency means that there is no ethical justification for boarding a flight that is not necessary (I won’t define “necessary” but I think we can all make reasonable appraisals). No carbon "offset" will take the tons of CO2 each flight generates out of the environment – and in any case we need to be pulling carbon out of the atmosphere, not merely “offsetting” it. No donation to a charitable cause will undo the damage your flight causes to the hope of keeping the planet’s heating below 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Again, I am not disputing that air travel brings joy, creates friendships, encourages cross-cultural understanding, and is part of many people’s current lifestyle, even their "identity.” I’m only saying none of that matters if you understand the scope of the climate emergency. The plain fact is that when you get on the plane, you dump the CO2 and other climate-impacting particulates into the environment in massive quantities. It's just science.
Of course, we would already be flying less if the actual costs to the environment and human health and life were priced into the ticket. That would put frequent air travel out of reach for most of us anyway. But we pretend that the costs of planetary destruction are not applicable to the ticket price. And we rationalize, or maybe we don’t even do that.
Am I saying no one should ever board a flight again? Obviously not. I will fly again, probably. One round-trip flight per year, among the citizens of the wealthier, developed nations (not everyone!) might even be sustainable. But aviation unfortunately has no quick answers for going green. And flying is by far the single most destructive thing any of us does on a personal level, climate-wise.
Just to offer a few examples: a single round-trip flight from the UK to Australia generates around half the CO2 than the average UK citizen generates in a year. One flight. One long-haul flight cancels out two people going vegan for a year. One flight. One flight from Germany to the Caribbean produces the same emissions as 80 residents of Tanzania do in a year. One flight.
Could you commit to taking only one flight a year, or none at all? I have. I will miss my friend’s Palm Springs wedding this year. I won’t be taking my son, who loves skiing, to Vail to explore the amazing back bowls. I won’t be flying out to the West Coast for in-person meetings and to see all my friends there, who I miss. I won’t be taking my wife to Italy for our 20th anniversary. I want to do some or (if finances were not an issue) all of these things very, very much. But I want to save the planet more – and that IS the choice. The only question is whether to acknowledge it or rationalize it away.
And I know that people will say that such a draconian approach is not a winning message, that it will turn people off from climate action, that only comprehensive, global, systemic action will solve the problem and that until that occurs, it is unfair to ask the ethical to stop when the unethical and the ignorant will keep right on flying and sleep like babies. Isn’t our flight just a drop in the bucket? Yes, but right now, as you read this, there are around 9,000 planes in the air carrying around a million people. Every minute of every day. That’s a lot of drops.
Ultimately it comes down to one thing: Do you believe there’s a climate emergency, or don’t you?
If you do, I’m sorry, but it’s time to stay off the plane.
______
A number of people in the comments have pointed out that I should have included links to the statistics and generally about the impact of flying. That is true. I will add them when I can (they are also fairly easy to find online) but in the meantime this article, in spite of the provocative title, provides an excellent factual overview (scroll down to “flying’s effect on the environment” if you don’t want to read about Greta). There are other comments I take issue with, but I don’t post in order to insert myself into the discussion, but rather to see what there is to learn, and there is much worth reading below.
________
I guess I got ratio-ed! Is that a thing on DailyKos? In any case, I really appreciate the comments and the vibrant discussion.
As promised, here are some links to support the statistics above and for further reading.
One correction: the diary originally stated that a round-trip flight from the UK to Australia generated more CO2 than an average UK citizen did in a year. The actual figure is between a third and half (3,851tonnes/10,000 tonnes). The essential point remains the same. (2nd update: yes, that is per passenger in coach — each passenger generates that amount of carbon, as well as particulates and water vapor that also heat the atmosphere)
I highly recommend this extremely thoughtful and non-confrontational article by a couple who decided to stop flying, both for its sympathetic and helpful approach and the information it contains
Another excellent and comprehensive fact-rich article addressing the question of flying’s impact and our obligations.
This article in the Guardian discusses the impact one flight has relative to other activities. Please be aware that CO2 is only one way flying contributes to climate change.
This New York Times article offers a good overview of the challenges the aviation industry faces in its attempts to go green.
Also: Two Years of Veganism cancelled out by one long-haul flight.
And food for thought: A small percentage of frequent fliers are responsible for a grossly disproportionate amount of commercial aviation emissions.
___________
11/18: For those still engaging with this topic, I’ve posted an additional diary here responding to some of the more frequent comments, and adding new information
Stop Flying? (The Discussion Continues)