The Republic of Heaven

Well, this is the question: Philip Pullman has just announced in his email newsletter, that he intends to stop flying, because of the environmental damage it causes. He wants aviation fuel to be taxed as much as possible, and in he wants to stop 99% of all air travel worldwide. I'd like to know whether you could give up flying, and if you could why. If you can't, is there a reason you should be allowed to ruin the planet?

Personally, I want to give up flying, because I acknowledge the amount of damage it causes. It's terrible. But as someone who flies fairly often (usually 4 or 5 return trips a year) I think it would be very difficult. Through flying, I make what would otherwise be a 30 hour journey into something as simple as 5 or 6 hours. So, I continue to fly, but I feel as guilty as hell about it

What damage does it do?

There's no other way to get people to places cheaply and quickly though. if people didn't fly, they wouldn't go abroad, the tourist industry would do terribly...

plus i have my flights booked for the summer, no way am i giving those up.

I would. But then I'm a Green and I don't think it's that much to give up. I like flying but I think there are other, more enjoyable ways to travel. I think saying something like 'giving up flying' creates such a manic response because people think it means they have to give up travelling and their preciousssss holidays to tenerife and marbella. They don't and once an alternative is established they won't even notice. Besides, flying is such a hassle. It's much nicer to use trains or boats.

In fact, from the age of 6 to about 13 we took the ferry from Dover to Calais every summer and then drove through France until we got to Cannes. It was a hell of a lot more fun than sitting on a plane for an hour and a half. I used to wave my bear Ben out of the back window and see how many drivers would wave back

I could give up flying, but I hate boats. Besides, I never go anywhere anyway. I'd rather go by train and car to the continent. So yeah, I could quite easily give up flying. But, you ain't getting me on no boat, fool.

Through flying, I make what would otherwise be a 30 hour journey into something as simple as 5 or 6 hours. So, I continue to fly, but I feel as guilty as hell about it

I haven't flown anywhere for six years now. Even when i go to Poland I tend to go overland, by train or even bus.

But then I like the 30 hours travelling. I don't just want to be picked up in one place and dropped in another. I don't want to see only cities. I want to enjoy the bits in between.

So yes, no problem for me. If I wanted to go to New Zealand, say, or Buenos Aires, that would be different (although I regret the fact that I was born too late to enjoy ocean travel!)

I don't think i could give up flying because i love going on holidays abroad. Also because i'm going to need to fly to get to america because i want to move to Detroit when i'm older and there isn't any other way i can get there!

I don't think i could give up flying because i love going on holidays abroad. Also because i'm going to need to fly to get to america because i want to move to Detroit when i'm older and there isn't any other way i can get there!

Why on earth do you want to move to Detroit? Everybody else is getting the hell out of Detroit!

I don't know i'm rethinking about it because of the rapper that got shot in the head but he is still alive. Its between California and Detroit and i can't decide.

I don't think i could give up flying because i love going on holidays abroad.

Did you read what Sophie said? If you believe that "abroad" is where you arrive after being on an airplane, you really are pretty narrowminded.

I think saying something like 'giving up flying' creates such a manic response because people think it means they have to give up travelling and their preciousssss holidays to tenerife and marbella.

What damage does it do?

As far as I understand one person taking one transatlantic flight is roughly the equivalent of them driving their car for a year (in terms of carbon emissions).

It's much nicer to use trains or boats.

I agree with the Toad. I love trains, but I don't do boats. Just a thing I suppose. They make me very nervous.

But then I like the 30 hours travelling. I don't just want to be picked up in one place and dropped in another.

30 hours doesn't bother me in theory. It's an issue though. If I only have 7 days holiday, 60 hours of travelling isn't really a realistic option (yes I know, I should just not go away then). The only reason I feel able to defend the convenience of the particular route I often fly, is that we fly to somewhere which isn't even close to where we're going (but it's closest). So we do a further 2 or 3 hours on the train. We also travel by bus to the airport (not that it makes much difference).

I guess one issue as a young person is, that if I wanted to go to Spain by myself, or with my friends, and we decided to go "green", it wouldn't be realistic (for us as poor teenagers) to go by train or bus, as plane would be cheaper. The solution to that, and one that I support (and also solves Heather's query about what would happen to tourism) is holidaying at home. Up until the age of 15, I'd only ever been abroad (although granted a lot of times) to Sweden (and Norway and Denmark in transit). All my other holidays were taken in the UK, and often by train.

I don't think i could give up flying because i love going on holidays abroad.

Did you read what Sophie said? If you believe that "abroad" is where you arrive after being on an airplane, you really are pretty narrowminded.

.

Thats not what i mean. The places my family usually want to go to you have to get a plane, there is no other way and it would take too long on a boat.

It's uncomfortable and undignified. I dislike it.

But - how would Mr Pullman propose I travel to America or the Antipodes? Unlike him, we don't all have large amounts of money and vast deserts of time at our disposal.

it wouldn't be realistic (for us as poor teenagers) to go by train or bus, as plane would be cheaper

There are ways to get cheap train tickets. The reason we drove through France in hte first place was because it was cheaper to get the ferry. Eurostar can be cheap if you book at the right time.

Anyway, the point about what PP said is that

He wants aviation fuel to be taxed as much as possible

thus making it far cheaper for people to travel using friendlier methods - the money gained from fuel tax could be used to invest in better, faster and even cheaper methods.

I don't really like planes, I find them uncomfortable but if I was going to Oceania or the Americas there would be no way i'd take a boat. "Ooo, look! It's more water!"

I'm as green as the next person but more than 1% of flights do seem necessary.

it wouldn't be realistic (for us as poor teenagers) to go by train or bus, as plane would be cheaper

There are ways to get cheap train tickets.

There are. However, it's much more difficult to implement when crossing international borders. In terms of the Spain example, it was far more a generic situation. It would of course be ideal if fuel was taxed (more), and public transport improved (by public transport it is agreed we refer to train, bus, boat?), but at the moment, flying is often the cheapest way. The cheapest way is not of course the best way. I've had people point out that all the train journeys I make could be done quicker in a car, or cheaper by bus. I choose train because I happen to like them.

I think what worries me is the way the EU have messed about with state run institutions. They forced the break up of British Rail, which made things significantly worse. At the moment, we seem to have private companies who are there for profit. Now I'm not suggesting they're deliberately doing badly - in the fact, the opposite. I think they're doing their best in a bad situation. But the reality is that trains are getting more expensive, later, fuller and so on. Not to mention the continuous messing about with franchises the government insists on. Now these are private companies, yet the government is all but bankrolling them. Therefore, our tax money is going into private companies who are their for profit. How is this logical? We need to have a nationalised railway where everything is run by one organisation, preferably who know what they're doing. And Beeching didn't help.

If you can't, is there a reason you should be allowed to ruin the planet?

Cause I dont drive, and have no intention of learning, I consider it a personal challenge to get through life without needing to operate one of those noisy contraptions. Besides, Ive flown about three times in the last 5 years, and I aint taking no boat to New Zealand or new York. Plus I ~*iguana*~ hate it, too noisy and uncomfortable and too bad on my paranoia.

Did you read what Sophie said? If you believe that "abroad" is where you arrive after being on an airplane, you really are pretty narrowminded.

What you get your head out of your "Im so open minded Im awesome!!1!" arse for a minute there Ian, when you arrive at a foreign airport you're not confined within the walls of the ~*iguana*~ place, if you fly to Spain instead of getting a 3 day train journey there it doesnt somehow make it less "abroad." How much of another culture someone takes in has nothing to do with how they get there. Its a choice people make, you can go to Spain and see the sights instead of lying on the beach getting Skin cancer. I know, Ive done it. (btw kidz, Seville's really nice in the summer, though you may die of heatstroke.)

I think what worries me is the way the EU have messed about with state run institutions. They forced the break up of British Rail

Allow me to be very northern for a moment...that was maggie's fault, god knows where you got the idea that it's the EU's fa....do you read the Mail?

Reading PP's newsletter Im glad to see he admits Nuclear power is the way forward, the only reason anyone thinks its so awful is of course, "OMFG ChERnoByL!11!!!!," but the difference of course is that we arent piss poor soviets who couldnt properly maintain a wheelbarrow never mind a nuclear power planet.

I agree with Pullman about aviation fuel, and I hate flying and do it as little as possible, and I also enjoy taking boats on holiday (though I hate those as well) but Im not going to become incredibly arrogant and think myself so much better than those scummy bastards who fly. Just because Im 18 and have all the time in the world to go travelling doesnt mean Im better than the 30 something parents with young kids who get two weeks a year to go on holiday and dont want to spend three days on a train to go somewhere sunny. Im not those people, and hopefully never will be, but Im not going to hate them for taking advantage of the oppurtunities available to them to get a bit of happiness. The responsibility lies with governments to fund research into clean energy, and to stop showboating and actually ~*iguana*~ do something... However, people who fly from Manchester to London need a slap though, thats just retarded.

If anyone wants a decent foreign holiday without flying trek up to Newcastle and get the boat to Norway, beautiful place and no flying needed.

What damage does it do?

As far as I understand one person taking one transatlantic flight is roughly the equivalent of them driving their car for a year (in terms of carbon emissions).

ouch, i always thought flying was rather clean...they should bring back zeppelins. helium fun for all.

Helium worked for pooh bear

Where are scientists with the Star Treky transportermabeamy thingy anyway? i want to be transmozzled somewhere cool.

...but the difference of course is that we arent piss poor soviets who couldnt properly maintain a wheelbarrow never mind a nuclear power planet.

OMFG!!! You no nothing about wheelbarrows!!! Commie barrows PWN!!14

Allow me to be very northern for a moment...that was maggie's fault, god knows where you got the idea that it's the EU's fa....do you read the Mail?

It may have been her who done it, but it's EU law that things like the railways can't be state run (or I was under than impression anyhoo). Even if Thatcher hadn't broken up British Rail, someone would have.

when you arrive at a foreign airport you're not confined within the walls of the ~*iguana*~ place

Misunderstanding. That's not what I meant.

if you fly to Spain instead of getting a 3 day train journey there it doesnt somehow make it less "abroad."

Or that.

What I did mean was that sophie pointed out that a big reason for people being so against reduction in air travel is they can't bear the thought of giving up their foreign holidays - while she pointed out that this was irrational. What I was therefore commenting on was someone managing (after Sophie's remark and a couple of other posts advocating public transport) to say just that.