Steve Endacott says the industry must be honest about its impact but also press for change elsewhere
Having worked in travel all my working life, I have seen first-hand the benefits that travelling brings in terms of global understanding and tolerance.
However, I have also become one of a growing number of “green activists”, looking at how we can save the planet by slowing and eventually stopping global warming.
More: Comment: We can all make big sustainability leaps without overcomplicating
Comment: Small steps make a difference to sustainability
I regularly hear fellow activists demanding that people fly less. In this regard, it is worth noting that travel represents only 12% of an individual’s carbon emission and there are many other sources of CO2 emissions that if dealt with would have a much bigger impact.
However, the travel sector also needs to openly admit it will not be carbon neutral by 2030 – or any time soon – and address what it does to compensate for this. If it doesn’t, then flying could quickly become the equivalent of smoking and become seen by younger generations as a polluting or anti-social behaviour.
Offset all flights
A simple solution might be compulsory carbon offsetting for every flight taken, with the funds generated driving carbon removal programmes around the world.
Global warming can be reduced by removing carbon from the atmosphere anywhere in the world, which is why I have invested/donated substantial funds to help develop modular hemp farming containers. These are four times more effective per acre at extracting CO2 than planting trees and can be powered by generators that burn the oil created from crushing hemp so that it can create a material that is used for clothing or building. These generators also power lighting and water irrigation, which allows food crops to be grown.
Travel needs to clean up its image by offsetting in the short term and using less polluting fuels in the longer term
The bottom line is that all these schemes need funding, and the best route is via taxation on polluting activities. But can we trust the UK government to not just pocket any carbon offsetting tax in the same way it pockets air passenger duty, with no explanation of how it is spent or why it is even charged?
The UK travel industry needs to admit it is a polluter and pay its taxes, while ensuring they are well spent on reducing carbon emissions. If this cannot be done via our government, then the major airlines need to join forces and operate a compulsory carbon offsetting programme themselves.
Widen the debate
Travel also needs to widen the debate and focus customers’ minds on the bigger CO2 issues which, if dealt with, would allow them to continue to travel with a clearer conscience.
Unplugging the petrol pump and buying an electric vehicle would cut 29% of an individual’s CO2 emissions while cutting running costs by 66%. Switching household heating from gas to electric or ground source heating would rapidly eat into the 41% of emissions created by running our houses, although electric heating is currently four times more expensive than gas.
Looking at the wider picture, however, what is the point of moving the UK population to clean EV cars and electric heating if they are powered by expensive and “dirty” electricity?
The UK’s electricity board is one of the country’s biggest polluters, with 50% being generated by burning gas or other fossil fuels. The quickest solution to stopping this is a massive investment in nuclear power, but the government is still dithering about funding.
Travel will always be a force for good, but it needs to clean up its image via offsetting in the short term and in the longer term by introducing less polluting fuels or power sources such as hydrogen.
In my opinion, we do not need to stop flying to save the planet, but we do need to compensate for our experiences and drive change elsewhere.
More: Comment: We can all make big sustainability leaps without overcomplicating