Author Jack Miles, writing in the Washington Post, says we should cut down the amount we fly. He is writing as an American, and Americans fly a great deal – the country is huge, so many flights are domestic. Jack says: “According to … Christiana Figueres, we have only three years left in which to “bend the emissions curve downward” and forestall a terrifying cascade of climate-related catastrophes.” … “Staying home, in fact, is the essence of making a big difference in a big hurry. That’s because nothing that we do pumps carbon dioxide into the atmosphere faster than air travel.” … “There are 7 billion people on our planet, but the billion with the largest carbon footprint includes the most frequent fliers. I belong to the top billion. So do many of you.” … “So for the love of the Earth, our common home, our only home, start conducting more remote work meetings and training sessions virtually. Inform those jet-setting friends that you won’t attend their destination wedding in the tropics — you’ll send a gift in the mail. Tell that conference organizer that while you’re honored to be invited, you would prefer to participate in live online sessions instead. Start taking vacations by train or car, rather than flying to Paris or beyond. Explain to your ecological public interest group that the Galápagos will be much better off without you. “
For the love of Earth, stop traveling
By Jack Miles (in Washington Post)
November 2nd 2017
Jack Miles, a Pulitzer Prize and MacArthur “genius” award-winning author, was a contributor to the University of California’s “Bending the Curve” report on climate stability. His forthcoming book is “God in the Koran” (Alfred A. Knopf 2018).
According to former U.N. climate chief Christiana Figueres, we have only three years left in which to “bend the emissions curve downward” and forestall a terrifying cascade of climate-related catastrophes, much worse than what we’re already experiencing. Realistically, is there anything that you or I can do as individuals to make a significant difference in the short time remaining?
The answer is yes, and the good news is it won’t cost us a penny. It will actually save us money, and we won’t have to leave home to do it. Staying home, in fact, is the essence of making a big difference in a big hurry. That’s because nothing that we do pumps carbon dioxide into the atmosphere faster than air travel. Cancel a couple long flights, and you can halve your carbon footprint. Schedule a couple, and you can double or triple it.
Atmosfair is a German public interest group that recommends limiting your air travel to about 3,100 miles per year — if you live in Los Angeles, that’s one round-trip flight to Mexico City. If you must exceed that limit, Atmosfair invites you to compensate by sending conscience money on a prorated basis to support climate stabilization efforts around the world. Last fall, having accepted an invitation to speak in Morocco, I used this online calculator to determine the carbon cost of my trip. My seats alone on the round-trip flights from Los Angeles to Casablanca (with a layover in Paris) helped emit about 8,400 pounds of carbon dioxide, prorated, into the atmosphere. Double that because my wife accompanied me. In sum, our seats alone on the planes to and from Morocco helped unload about 16,800 pounds of carbon dioxide. And this, of course, was just a small fraction of the emissions cost of the flight as a whole.
To put this into perspective, my wife’s and my annual carbon footprint in Orange County, California — counting gas, electricity, transportation and waste disposal — is about 33,000 pounds, according to the carbon footprint calculator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (To put that total into further perspective, the average Indian’s annual carbon footprint is just 3,000 pounds.) By taking one optional international trip that helped emit about 16,800 pounds of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, my wife and I increased our 2016 carbon footprint by more than a third. The harm we did with one international trip surely neutralized any good that we did all year as recyclers, eco-consumers and financial contributors to environmental organizations.
To put our flights’ 16,800 pounds of carbon dioxide further into perspective, the average American generates about 1,300 pounds of carbon dioxide a year through beef consumption. Minute by minute, mile by mile, nothing that we do causes greater or more easily avoidable harm to the environment than flying, which more often than not is optional or merely recreational.
The delegates meeting in Bonn, Germany next week for the U.N. climate conference recognize this. “The lion’s share of greenhouse gas emissions” from the COP23 conference, the organizers note, “is from long-distance air travel.” After the conference, a COP23 sustainability task force will tally up the overall carbon footprint and seek to offset as much as possible by buying certified emission reduction credits, many of which will go to green development projects in small island states in recognition of Fiji holding the presidency of this conference.
There are 7 billion people on our planet, but the billion with the largest carbon footprint includes the most frequent fliers. I belong to the top billion. So do many of you. If all 7 billion had a carbon footprint as large as ours, global carbon dioxide emissions would increase from the current 38 billion tons per year to 150 billion tons — a trillion tons every seven years, according to “Bending the Curve,” a 2015 University of California report. That trillion would translate into a catastrophic spike in global warming — an increase of 33 degrees Fahrenheit every seven years.
So for the love of the Earth, our common home, our only home, start conducting more remote work meetings and training sessions virtually. Inform those jet-setting friends that you won’t attend their destination wedding in the tropics — you’ll send a gift in the mail. Tell that conference organizer that while you’re honored to be invited, you would prefer to participate in live online sessions instead. Start taking vacations by train or car, rather than flying to Paris or beyond. Explain to your ecological public interest group that the Galápagos will be much better off without you. And please, all you professionals bouncing between New York City and Washington D.C., take a train, not a plane.
The 17th-century poet Andrew Marvell warned his “coy mistress” and himself that life was brief and youth briefer. They could wish it otherwise, but:
…at my back I always hear
Time’s winged chariot hurrying near;
And yonder all before us lie
Deserts of vast eternity.
In our day, the winged chariot that is hurrying near is species extinction. The deserts of vast eternity that lie before us are the wastelands of the planet itself as we send it to its death. But there is something you can do about all that — something big, something easily within reach, something that won’t cost you time or money.
Take a deep, slow breath, and throw away that bucket list for good. You are needed at home, my friend, urgently needed. For the love of the Earth and of those who will inherit it when you are gone, stay right where you are.
This was produced by The WorldPost, a partnership of the Berggruen Institute and The Washington Post.
With rising affluence in much of the world, and flying being unrealistically cheap (as it pays no fuel duty, and almost no other taxes) people want as many short holidays and city breaks as they can get. This is starting to have very negative impacts on some of the cities most visited, eg. Barcelona. Growth is relentless. The UN World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) even speaks about tourism as a right for all citizens, and their forecasts suggest increases from 1 billion international travellers today, to 1.8 billion by 2030. But there is a huge price to pay in carbon emissions from all these trips and holidays, most of which is the flights. Short breaks therefore, pollute more per night than longer breaks. And you can fit more into your year. “The marketing department might prefer a Japanese tourist to Barcelona because on average they will spend €40 more than a French tourist – according to unpublished data from the Barcelona Tourist Board – but the carbon footprint we collectively pay for is not taken into account.” People are being persuaded by advertising and marketing, and a change in ethos of society, to take more short holidays – not one longer one. A report in 2010 suggested that makes people the happiest. More trips = more carbon emissions.
How to stop city breaks killing our cities
Can’t wait to pack your bags and head off on holiday again? It used to be that people would look forward to a long break in summer, but now tourists have got used to regular short breaks through the year. We love to jet off to the world’s glittering cities, even if only for a day or two. The trouble is, binge travelling may be killing the places we visit.
You may even have seen some “tourists go home” graffiti on your last trip, and it’s not hard to see why. Barcelona is a good example of how a city can groan under the weight of its popularity. It now has the busiest cruise port, and the second fastest growing airport in Europe. Walking through the Barcelona streets at peak season (which now never seems to end) flings you into a relentless stream of tourists. They fill the city’s hot spots in search of “authentic” tapas and sangria, and a bit of culture under the sun. The mayor has echoed residents’ concerns over the impact of tourism; a strategic plan has been put in place.
It is true though, that cities tend to start managing the impact of tourism only when it is already too late. It creeps up on them. Unlike visitors to purpose-built beach destinations and national parks, city-break tourists use the same infrastructure as the locals: existing systems start slowly to stretch at the seams. Business travellers, stag parties and museum visitors will all use existing leisure facilities.
Barcelona may only be the 59th largest city in the world, but it is the 12th most popular with international visitors. Compared to London or Paris, it is small, and tourism has spiked sharply since the 1992 Olympics rather than grown steadily as in other European favourites like Rome.
Growth is relentless. The UN World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) even speaks about tourism as a right for all citizens, and citizens are increasingly exercising that right: from 1 billion international travellers today, we will grow to 1.8 billion by 2030, according to UNWTO forecasts.
Faced with this gathering storm, just who is tourism supposed to benefit? Travellers, cities, residents or the tourism industry?
Managing the impact of tourism starts by changing the way destinations market themselves: once the tourists arrive, it’s too late. Tourism authorities need to understand that they are accountable to the city, not to the tourism industry. When the city of Barcelona commissioned the University of Surrey to look into how it might best promote sustainable development, we found a series of techniques which have been incorporated, at least in part, into the city’s 2020 Tourism Strategy.
In the simplest terms, the trick is to cajole tourists into city breaks which are far less of a burden on the urban infrastructure. In other words, normalising the consumption of sustainable tourism products and services. In Copenhagen, 70% of the hotels are certified as sustainable and the municipal authority demands sustainability from its suppliers.
Destinations must also be accountable for the transport impact of their visitors. The marketing department might prefer a Japanese tourist to Barcelona because on average they will spend €40 more than a French tourist – according to unpublished data from the Barcelona Tourist Board – but the carbon footprint we collectively pay for is not taken into account.
Crucially, for the kind of city breaks we might enjoy in Barcelona, most of the carbon footprint from your holiday is from your transport. Short breaks therefore, pollute more per night and so destinations ought to be fighting tooth and nail to get you to stay longer. It seems like a win for tourists too: a few extra days in the Spanish sun, a more relaxing break, and all accompanied by the warm glow of self-satisfaction and a gold star for sustainability.
Destinations can also target customers that behave the most like locals. Japanese first-time visitors to Barcelona will crowd the Sagrada Familia cathedral, while most French tourists are repeat visitors that will spread out to lesser-known parts of the city. Reducing seasonality by emphasising activities that can be done in winter or at less crowded times, and geographically spreading tourism by improving less popular areas and communicating their particular charms can also help reduce pressure on hot spots, much like Amsterdam is doing.
Turnover is vanity, and profit margins are sanity. No city should smugly crow about the sheer volume of visitors through its gates. If tourism is here to stay, then the least cities can do is to sell products that will have the greatest benefit for society. Whether it’s Barcelona, Berlin, Bologna or Bognor, there should be a focus on locally and ethically produced products and services which residents are proud to sell. Tourist boards should work with small businesses that offer creative and original things to do and places to stay, adding breadth to the city’s offering.
Whether Barcelona will introduce these ideas will depend on the bravery of politicians and buy-in from the powerful businesses which are happily making short-term profits at the expense of residents and the planet. It is possible to do things differently, and for everyone to benefit more. It may be that the tipping point lies in the age-old mechanics of supply and demand: bear that in mind next time you’re booking a quick city break that looks like it’s only adding to the problem.
Take shorter breaks more often for the happiest time off
The best way to extract full value from a holiday is to interrupt it with some work, says a leisure study
BY SUSIE MESURE (Independent)
It’s the annual highlight for millions of Brits: two weeks doing nothing on a beach. But holidaymakers could be missing a trick by taking long breaks, new research suggests. A number of short trips leaves people happier than one long one, psychologists believe.
What’s more, seeking out a holiday you might not enjoy at the time will pay off in the long run by providing better memories, the behavioural economist Dan Ariely argues in a new book, The Upside of Irrationality. His findings come as official figures show the number of visits abroad by British residents has slumped, leaving Europe’s biggest holiday companies with thousands of unsold summer breaks.
Tom Meyvis, associate professor of marketing at New York University’s Stern School of Business and an expert on consumer behaviour, claimed: “Longer vacations don’t give us better memories. We forget how long things actually take and just remember peak moments.” He added: “Vacations are not always that much fun, but we anticipate them as fun and remember the good parts, not, for example, the bad bus journey.”
For maximum vacation fun, experts actually suggest breaking up a trip with a spot of work, to delay the so-called “adaptation process” that makes holidays spent in the same place appear to speed up as the days go by. Professor Ariely, who teaches at North Carolina’s Duke University, said: “On a long vacation, day seven is less good than day one because it’s not as exciting. That’s why in general, going away four times [a year] provides more benefit than you would expect, and going away for one week provides less benefit than you would expect.”
Although a lucrative mini-break market has sprung up to cater for demand for shorter trips, most employees – and families – still take at least one longer holiday, usually in August, as a glance around most offices across Britain will confirm.
If your bags are packed ready for a fortnight away, then Professor Meyvis’s research might help you get the most from your time off. He discovered that disrupting a hedonistic experience helped to intensify it. So tearing yourself away from a day at the beach to tidy up your hotel room would make your holiday more fun. “We found a strong preference for not breaking up a positive experience, but it turns out that when you gave [our respondents] a break, they enjoyed something more. It’s counterintuitive; nobody wants to take a break, but the break disrupts the adaptation process so the enjoyment goes back to the original level,” he said.
Charlotte Robinson, 35, a consultant radiologist who lives in Maidenhead, said she could still visualise the high points of childhood summer holidays, even if on paper they did not sound very good. “I remember a gîte in France where it rained, the roof leaked, the septic tank overflowed, and we had power cuts, but what I really remember is the fields of sunflowers, the bicycle that came with the gîte and us calling my mother Speedy Gonzales as she cycled around, smiling, with the wind in her hair,” she said.
Not all behavioural economists back the mini-break logic. Tim Harford, the author of Dear Undercover Economist, said: “Some psychologists suggest that there’s a bigger psychic payoff from taking more, shorter holidays. But remember the hassle of packing and airports or traffic jams, the time it takes to get anywhere, and the expense of taking more short breaks. If you pack three times as many holidays into the same amount of leave, you can expect three times as much trouble. It’s not obvious to me that it’s worth it.”
Less is more: The case for the micro holiday
Emma Cotton, 35, from London, says: “My most enduring and best holiday memories are from action holidays. On short trips away I have surfed on the longest board known to man in Portugal; been flung through the air kite surfing in Egypt; hiked through the Atlas Mountains in Morocco, and been on walking trips in the Basque area of Spain. Most of these have resulted in a severe sense of humour failure at some stage, but they were all exhilarating, tiring in the best sense of the word, and above all, memorable.”
The Sun has used an undercover reporter to work as one of Heathrow’s Passenger Ambassadors, whose job is to boost retail sales in the terminals. There is a Channel 4 Dispatches programme on this, also showing how airport passengers are getting a raw deal from changing money. In 2016 the airport made a record £612 million in retail income, which is rent from retailers and from car parking charges. This was up 7.7% compared to 2015, while aeronautical income remained unchanged at £1,699 million. Heathrow’s retail division now makes up 22% of its revenues – £612 million out of £2,807 million. The 150 Passenger Ambassadors help travellers once they are through security, and are set strict targets about persuading them to visit shops and spend money. These are between £2,500 to £4,000 per day, and the most successful senior ambassadors claim to hit £10,000 per day. They are told: “The majority of the role will involve interacting with passengers, persuading them to shop if they had not planned to, or encouraging them to spend more by talking to them about offers and promotions across the Terminal….The average spend per passenger must go up as a result of your presence on the terminal floor.” The job description says: “A minute should not pass without a conversation with one or more passengers.”
DUTY SPREE Investigation reveals Heathrow airport staff are set targets to encourage passengers to spend money in shops
An undercover reporter lifted the lid on the sales targets that are Heathrow Passenger Ambassador staff are set
BY HARRY WALLOP (The Sun)
26th February 2017
HOLIDAYMAKERS are being secretly enticed into spending money at Britain’s biggest airport, an investigation has found.
Heathrow has hired staff to stealthily persuade reluctant shoppers to part with their cash, according to a Channel 4 Dispatches programme, which also lifts the lid on how passengers are also getting a raw deal from changing money.
The revelation comes just two days after the airport published figures which shows it is making a record amount of money from renting out space in the airport to retailers such as Harrods, Burberry, World Duty Free and WH Smith.
It made a record £612 million in rent from retailers and from car parking charges last year. This was a jump of 8%. Its retail division now makes up nearly a quarter of its revenues.
One of its methods of boosting sales is the use of Heathrow Passenger Ambassadors.The airport employs more than 150 of these to help travellers once they are through security. “Whether you’re looking for flight information, directions or any kind of help with your journey, our team will get you quickly on your way,” the airport says on its public website, explaining the role of the ambassadors.
But what the company does not make clear is that the employees, who wear a distinctive purple uniform – as well as helping passengers find their way about – are set strict targets about persuading them to visit shops and spend money.
Passenger Ambassadors are set daily targets to persuade travellers to spend between £2,500 to £4,000, by guiding travellers towards the shops. The most successful senior ambassadors claim to hit £10,000 a day.
Dispatches sent a reporter undercover to work as a Heathrow Passenger Ambassador. On being hired, they received the following job description: “The majority of the role will involve interacting with passengers, persuading them to shop if they had not planned to, or encouraging them to spend more by talking to them about offers and promotions across the Terminal….The average spend per passenger must go up as a result of your presence on the terminal floor.”
Ambassadors, who wander the public areas “airside” (where passengers kill time once they are through security), are told they need to approach as many passengers as possible, asking if they need any help, and then guiding the conversation towards the shopping opportunities and the deals in the shops.
“Approach all passengers with a smile and a benefit statement regarding the promotions on offer. The more passengers you approach and help, the more conversions achieved. A minute should not pass without a conversation with one or more passengers,” the job description states.
The aim is to persuade passengers to visit the shops, which ambassadors escort them to. If a holidaymaker spends money, the Ambassador can then find out from the shop assistant the value of the transaction, which the Ambassador then logs on a handheld terminal. If they hit enough of their targets they are paid a bonus.
Agnes Nairn, a consumer and marketing expert who is dean at the Hult International Business School, says: “I think that’s deceptive. There are rules about how any advertising has to be clearly labelled as advertising. I’m not sure this is much different.”
Helen Dewdney, a consumer champion who runs the Complaining Cow website, says: ‘Heathrow is not breaking any laws, but I do think it is underhand.
‘It’s one thing for a Turkish taxi driver to take you via his brother’s carpet shop, but you kind of expect that. You certainly are not prepared for these sort of tactics at Heathrow.’
At the end of last year, it was disclosed that bureaux de change at airports were offering terrible rates to customers, with the average rate 13% worse than the market exchange rate, according to one report.
But the Dispatches programme also reveals that at Stansted, Moneycorp, which operates all the bureaux de change at the airport, fails to inform customers that they can avoid paying a 5% commission on changing money if they use the foreign exchange ATM – also operated by Moneycorp – right next door to the desk.
The member of staff is recorded as telling an undercover reporter: “I can’t tell you that; you have to ask me. If you ask me is it cheaper I can tell you. Because if we…say to every customer who walks past we’d never get anyone to serve because everyone would just go to the cash machine. So we are not allowed to tell you it.”
Mark Horgan, the chief executive of Moneycorp, said: “Our aim is to provide the best possible service to our customers, and we do not ask staff to conceal information about where to find the best rates.”
Heathrow denied they were misleading any travellers and that it had been voted by passengers as ‘best airport shopping experience’. A spokesman added: “Passenger Ambassadors are an important part of our business and we expect the team to put the needs of our passengers first.”
Increased passenger numbers helped Heathrow hike profits by almost 20% last year.
The west London hub achieved a pre-tax profit of £267 million, a rise of 19.7% over 2015.
This came a revenue rose by 1.5% to £2.8 billion with passenger numbers up 1% to a record 75.7 million as passenger charges fell by 1%.
Retail revenue increased by 7.7% to £612 million, including £138 million from duty free sales and £114 million from car parking.
The airport received the green light in October to build a third runway, subject to final government approval, and will consult on plans to bring in 25,000 extra flights a year from 2021 including up to 40 new long-haul routes.
Chief executive John Holland-Kaye said: “2016 was a milestone year for Heathrow. I am very proud of what our 76,000 colleagues have achieved.
“We gave better service at lower cost to a record number of passengers and helped British businesses across the country trade more with the rest of the world.”
He added: “We have started the planning process for expansion and are preparing the skills and the supply chain we will need to build it sustainably and affordably. Heathrow is delivering for Britain.”
Passengers 75.7 million in 2016 compared to 75.0 million in 2015 (up 1.0%)
Retail revenue per passenger £ 8.09 in 2016 and £7.58 in 2015 (up 6.7%)
. 3.2.2 Revenue
In the year ended 31 December 2016, revenue increased 1.5% to £2,807 million (2015: £2,765 million). Aeronautical £1,699 million in 2016 and the same £1,699 in 2015
Retail £612 million in 2016 and £ 568 million in 2015 (up 7.7%) Other £496 million in 2016 and £ 498 million in 2015 (up 0.4%)
Total revenue £2,807 million in 2016 and £ 2,765 million in 2015 (up 1.5%)
. 188.8.131.52 Retail
In the year ended 31 December 2016, retail revenue increased 7.7% to £612 million (2015: £568 million).
Retail revenue per passenger rose 6.7% to £8.09 (2015: £7.58).
Duty and tax-free £138 million in 2016, and £128 million in 2015 (up 7.8%)
Airside specialist shops £115 million, and £100 million in 2015 (up 15.0%)
Bureaux de change £50 in 2016, and £53 million in 2015 (up 5.7%)
Catering £49 million in 2016 and £ 45 million (up 8.9%)
Other retail income £86 million in 2016, and £75 million in 2015 (up 14.7%)
Car parking £114 million in 2016 and £107 million in 2015 (up 6.5%)
Other services £60 million in both 2016 and 2015 Total retail revenue £612 million in 2016 and £568 million in 2015 (up 7.7%)
“Retail performed strongly in 2016 following the major redevelopment of luxury stores in Terminal 5 including new brands which have strengthened Heathrow’s unrivalled airport shopping experience.
Performance in duty and tax-free stores has continued to improve following extensive store refurbishment in Terminals 4 and 5. Catering has grown in the year as a result of new and refurbished outlets and increases in passenger participation.
Car parking also performed well, with continued take-up of Heathrow’s expanded car parking product range and successful yield management. Growth in retail income accelerated in the second half of the year, particularly in areas such as duty and tax-free and airside specialist shops, driven by the depreciation of sterling following the EU referendum in late June
2016. Redevelopment of luxury stores in Terminal 4 was largely completed in late 2016 and started contributing to overall retail performance.”
“The benefits of investment in Terminal 5 retail outlets and new car parking capacity continue to flow through strongly with over £200 million secured out of the £300 million incremental commercial revenue target set for the regulatory period.”
Many of us would love to go to exotic destinations and see wildlife. It will never be quite as good a glimpse as the remarkable programmes on wildlife on TV, where film makers can take months to get the shots. Ecotourism is beneficial to some areas, from money it brings in to the local economy, and demonstrating to local people that there is more commercial value in keeping wildlife alive than in killing it. However, it has its downsides, and even when ecotourism done sensitively it has drawbacks. These include the high carbon footprint, from flights; wildlife disturbance, potential for disease introduction, and development of roads and infrastructure which have a detrimental effect on wildlife. Also many people are unable to afford the high price of ecotourism, or are too old, young, or otherwise unable, or unwilling, to travel. Virtual Ecotourism (vEcotourism) can contribute to overcoming these problems by providing a way to experience a conservation site virtually, using many on-line technologies combined with a live, on-location tour guide. The Virtual Ecotourism website offers a number of “tours” which are 360 degree panoramas, from where the actual tourists go, showing what they see. This is a positive development meaning people do not have to fly across the world, just to see rare populations of animals.
This is a new, and genuinely significant development in tourism without CO2 emissions
The Virtual Ecotourism project uses interactive on-line tours to connect the general public with conservation projects and local communities in ecologically and culturally sensitive areas worldwide. We aim to nurture curiosity about the natural world, promote effective world citizenship, contribute to alternative livelihoods for communities living in areas of high conservation importance, and combat environmental degradation.
vEcotourism was invented in 2004 by Mark Laxer, the director and founder of the Virtual Ecotourism project. Currently, vEcotours are primarily being produced in Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Indonesia to highlight the plight of the great apes in those countries, but as we grow we intend to tackle the challenge of conservation world wide.
Connecting and empowering conservation projects by integrating state-of-the-art immersive digital technologies with traditional storytelling.
What is a Virtual Ecotour?
In its current, “beta” state, a vEcotour is a series of immersive 360-degree photographs (similar to Google’s Street View) combined with ambient background audio, still images, and embedded videos. An expert guide provides introductory voiceovers for each panorama and comments on the hotspots.
The next step for vEcotourism is to incorporate our immersive panoramas into an interface that will allow tourists to interact, pose questions, and be guided through the experience by a conservation professional in real-time.
Why is Virtual Ecotourism Needed?
Ecotourism has been widely heralded as a means to provide an income in a way that encourages protection of biodiversity. However, even Ecotourism done sensitively has disadvantages including: high carbon footprint, wildlife disturbance, potential for disease introduction, and development of roads and infrastructure which have a detrimental effect on wildlife. Furthermore, many people are unable to afford the high price of ecotourism, or are too old, young, or otherwise unable, or unwilling, to travel. vEcotourism overcomes these challenges by providing a way to experience a conservation site virtually, using many exciting on-line technologies combined with a live, on-location tour guide.
From this global perspective you may explore vEcotours from four continents (and counting!). Every vEcotour features an immersive full-sphere panorama and a voiced introduction. In addition, some of the tours also feature close-up photos, embedded videos and audio, and interviews to enrich the experience.
The page with 3 short virtual ecotours seeing Sumatran orangutans
Heathrow has been working on its PR by giving figures on how much parents spend on air travel and holidays (some exotic) for their children. They hope to give the impression to parents that they need to provide these luxuries to their children, as part of being good parents …. more consumerist pressure …. Heathrow says in 2016 an unbelievable 19% of children (presumably in the UK, or those passing through Heathrow?) took at least 7 trips trips per year; 5% go on more than 10 trips per year, taking into account family holidays, school trips and holidays with friends. And the “dream destinations” (ie. long haul ones that make more profit for airlines and Heathrow) for under 16 year olds were “Australia, Hawaii, Everest and Thailand”. (Really? Everest? Is this a joke?) Heathrow says the average cost per trip for a child (those under 16 pay no Air Passenger Duty) is about £616 – and on average parents will spend about £30,000 for the holidays of their children, up to the age of 16. Heathrow says “The current generation of kids are dreaming of Bondi Beach, kangaroos and the Outback, with nearly a quarter (23%) of children citing far-flung Australia as their dream destination for 2017.” And on it goes …. Heathrow’s future customers. “Get ’em young” … So THAT’s why we need another Heathrow runway, with all its public expense and negative impacts over vast areas within perhaps 20 miles of the airport.
Generation destination: Modern kids clock up air miles on foreign adventures
Average British parents spend £29,962 on holidays for little ones
29.12.2016 (e Turbo News – Global Travel Industry News)
2016 saw a fifth (19%) of children take at least seven trips away, compared to their parents who only took four breaks each year
Dream destinations for under 16 year olds include Australia, Hawaii, Everest and Thailand
Tiny travellers receive an average of £46.80 worth of pocket money per trip
Average getaway costs parents £616.47 – totalling over £29,962 during the course of a childhood (under 16)
Heathrow, the UK’s only hub airport, has revealed that today’s kids are a generation of tiny travellers, visiting more countries, clocking up more air miles and having more overseas experiences than ever before. New research reveals that in 2016, one in five (19%) kids went away seven or more times and one in 20 went on more than 10 breaks taking into account family holidays, school trips and vacations with friends.
The current generation of kids are dreaming of Bondi Beach, kangaroos and the Outback, with nearly a quarter (23%) of children citing far-flung Australia as their dream destination for 2017. Meanwhile, parents were dreaming of vacations closer to home, with the likes of Mallorca (17%), Tenerife (17%) and Blackpool (16%) topping their holiday wish lists.
The rising popularity of American television shows may be why many children also now want to take a trip across the pond – first place on the dream list for little ones was the Big Apple, one in three (31%) said New York is the place they would most like to visit this year. This was followed by Australia (23%), Hawaii (13%), Mount Everest (11%) and Thailand (10%).
To help parents make airport experiences as smooth as possible, Heathrow has revealed its top tips for airport travel – including free play areas, kids-eat-free meals and complimentary pampering with over 50 free beauty treatments – before its time to fly.
For many kids, the fun starts before reaching their destination – a fifth (21%) of parents say their child’s favourite part of a holiday is going through the airport or being on a plane.
Wanting to make sure their little ones can capture every moment, 15% of parents will buy them a new SLR camera, video camera or iPhone to give them the best possible technology for capturing their adventures abroad.
While swimming (46%) and camping (23%) was a favourite childhood holiday activity for today’s parents, this generation of mini adrenaline-junkies are increasingly excited by adventure activities such as scuba diving (18%), safaris (14%) and jet skiing (12%).
With getaways becoming increasingly action-packed, parents are now spending £2,333 on an average family holiday, around £616.47 per child. This totals £29,962 on holidays over the course of a childhood.
Parents also give their kids £46.80 pocket money, a 56% increase to what they used to get from their parents.
Notes to editors [Lots more PR stuff from Heathrow airport, which seems to be the source of the story, including:]
Children under the age of 15 travel free on Heathrow Express and adults can save a further £18 by booking a Heathrow Express Duo Saver ticket online which gives two adults a 25% discount when travelling together. Details of the Heathrow Express Duo Saver ticket can be found here. Details of available Kids Eat Free restaurants during half term are available here.
The advertising industry is salivating about the advertising opportunities it hopes will come from a new Heathrow terminal and runway. There are hopes for hugely more hoardings and outdoor adverts around the airport, as well as in terminals. By the time the expansion might take place, after 2026, “through vastly increased computing processing power and more easily accessible data sets, the opportunities available to airport advertisers will most likely be multi-sensory, integrated, ultra-targeted communications, far beyond what’s available today. Through this development, brands will find a way to be a seamless part of the traveller’s experience.” … “targeting will go beyond the airport as those travelling by coach to catch a flight could be served with ads for holiday insurance along the motorway.”…”advertisers must also consider the unique mind-set of the airport traveller. Consumers are both enjoying down time away from the daily routine, and simultaneously anticipating the excitement of a departure. This unique state of mind, combined with dwell time, opens up opportunities for brands to offer key life moment purchases, for example a new car or mortgage.” And yet more nauseating consumer stuff, generating more excess consumption in association with more air travel.
Why Heathrow’s third runway is a milestone for advertisers
13.12.2016 (Real Business)
Hailed as a “truly momentous decision” by transport secretary Chris Grayling, the government’s go-ahead of Heathrow’s third runway has delivered a succinct and clear message to global brands and advertisers – that the UK is open for business. [That is the standard sound bite patter that is put out about the Heathrow runway, as its advertising slogan, meaning about as much as “Brexit means Brexit” … AW comment]
After years of delays, set-backs and false starts, the government finally approved [they have not approved it – they said that is the scheme they hope to get built …. AW note] a third runway at Heathrow. The first full-length runway in the south-east since World War II will [it is is ever built] mean hundreds of thousands of extra flights in the West London airport and a huge impact on the UK economy.
The expansion won’t come cheap though – it’s expected to cost £17.6bn to build the additional runway. That aside, the third runway is predicted to be the catalyst for economic benefits worth up to £61bn, as well as creating up to 77,000 additional local jobs. [The actual figure, calculated by the DfT in October is more like 37,700 jobs by 2030 – the 77,000 figure is seen as too high, but the DfT persist in keeping that figure on their website, saying it is a “range” … AW note] The move will also create new and lucrative opportunities for other business sectors, not least the UK’s media and marketing industry.
In a time of nationwide economic uncertainty, the UK airport media landscape is in rude health.This year has seen a number of pivotal developments including the recent acquisition of Airport Media by OOH media operator Primesight, meaning that airport ad sales are now largely handled under two roofs (Primesight and JCDecaux), making media planners’ lives that bit easier.
OOH inventory has also seen something of an upgrade with new and improved screens being added alongside existing landmark sites, such as JCDecaux’s imposing digital towers, wowing passengers in departures at Terminal 5.
Heathrow’s third runway is set to eclipse all recent developments though and will create opportunities not just for West London, but all UK airports. With many UK-based passengers typically driving to Heathrow airport from afar, the third runway will see an improvement of British air-links, increasing advertising reach in regional airports.Media opportunities will improve, and offer a wider network of digital sites across all media owners.
But don’t expect that change to happen immediately. Given the opening of the new terminal and runway is likely to be at least ten years away, what’s important to consider is the advancement of technology and the likely implementation of ground-breaking hardware integrated into the architecture by that time. And by 2026, through vastly increased computing processing power and more easily accessible data sets, the opportunities available to airport advertisers will most likely be multi-sensory, integrated, ultra-targeted communications, far beyond what’s available today. Through this development, brands will find a way to be a seamless part of the traveller’s experience.
Brands that understand the customer’s new “active journey” will have an opportunity to reach airport passengers with the right message at the right time.
Outdoor advertising was long considered a passive medium, but this has changed. Consumers out-of-home are shopping, socialising and travelling – all while hooked up to a connected device, which is creating a plethora of new opportunities for advertisers.
For example, targeting will go beyond the airport as those travelling by coach to catch a flight could be served with ads for holiday insurance along the motorway.
Or arrivals to the UK could be targeted with ads for hotel booking sites as they exit the airport. Thanks to tech advancements, OOH advertising is becoming increasingly contextual, delivering messaging relevant to the advertising environment.
Within the airport space, advertisers need to be flexible and offer something new and enticing to consumers. This can be achieved in a number of ways; from contextual targeting to full-on experiential brand experiences. Advancements are also being facilitated by tech innovations such as bluetooth beacons, facial recognition and enhanced connectivity which are already changing the game, providing key data for airports and advertisers.
As well as relevant messaging and tech innovations, advertisers must also consider the unique mind-set of the airport traveller. Consumers are both enjoying down time away from the daily routine, and simultaneously anticipating the excitement of a departure. This unique state of mind, combined with dwell time, opens up opportunities for brands to offer key life moment purchases, for example a new car or mortgage.
Airports have long offered brands rare advertising opportunities, but landmark developments such as Heathrow’s third runway will ensure airports are a crucial environment for a growing myriad of brands. Advertisers that take advantage of OOH’s broadcast power, tech innovations and the unique mind-set of the traveller will see their campaigns take flight.
Airbus is producing plans for additions such as gyms, coffee bars, children’s play areas and a spa on its planes, instead of more seats. Their new concept that Airbus calls ‘Transpose’ would allow airlines to customise cabins for each flight using modular technology. Airlines could chop-and-change the interior setup in a matter of minutes in the project developed by an Airbus off-shoot called A³. The plan is to …”enable entirely new categories of passenger experiences, making your time spent in the sky more interesting, personalized, and enjoyable.” There could be a gym, with exercise bikes. “A major coffee chain could run a co-working cafe, providing artisanal beverages and a space for collaboration. An airline could design a kid-safe play zone … where families can spend quality time together” … and so on. Also there are new opportunities for advertising to get extra revenue. Now that ICAO has come up with the least ambitious scheme it could achieve for limiting the growth in global aviation CO2, airlines can have lower load factors and more space on planes that is not used to carry more passengers. If the industry was serious about lower CO2 (rather than just cost) per passenger, they would get planes to carry more people – not coffee bars and gyms. Is this Airbus etc effectively thumbing their nose at serious attempts to cut aviation CO2?
Airbus cabin of the future with gyms, a spa and children’s play areas
The new concept Transpose would allow airlines to customise cabins for each flight using modular technology
13.12.2016 (Daily Post)
By OWEN HUGHES
Air travel may be set for a radical change after Airbus revealed a vision of the future where seats could be replaced by gyms, coffee bars, children’s play areas and a spa.
A new concept from the aviation manufacturer called ‘Transpose’ would allow airlines to customise cabins for each flight using modular technology.
Airlines could chop-and-change the interior setup in a matter of minutes in the project developed by an Airbus off-shoot called A³.
“Well, first and foremost, we believe that this project will enable entirely new categories of passenger experiences, making your time spent in the sky more interesting, personalized, and enjoyable.
“A gym could fill a module with exercise bikes, and give folks the opportunity to stay active.
“A major coffee chain could run a co-working cafe, providing artisanal beverages and a space for collaboration.
“An airline could design a kid-safe play zone (lined with sound absorbing materials) where families can spend quality time together.
“A seat manufacturer could test out a new sleeper seat before widely rolling out the product.
“You’re probably thinking, Sounds nice, but expensive. We’re convinced that this won’t be the case. Besides providing an unprecedented amount of choice and flexibility for passengers, our modeling and research shows that many experiences can be provided with little to no increase in the amount passengers currently pay for comparable experiences on the ground.
“Additionally, we’ve identified significant opportunities for advertisers and businesses to provide new revenue to airlines, potentially sidestepping the need to pass on some costs to passengers.”
“Currently, work on cabin interiors can’t begin until the final weeks of the manufacturing process, but modular cabin interiors could be developed on a parallel timetable with the core fabrication of the aircraft itself.”
They say they could have the Transpose enabled aircraft flying within a few years.
Mr Chua said: “Is that ambitious? Absolutely. But if we keep up our current pace, I think it’s completely achievable. For the past year, our lean A³ team has recruited a great group of engineers, designers, and researchers from across the globe. We are also working closely with Airbus Group’s renowned experts in cabin and airframe engineering, as well as with Airbus industrial design.
“Together, we’ve kicked off manufacturing work around an initial module, and a full-sized aircraft mockup.”
Heathrow Airport reported a retail revenue increase for the year ending 31st December 2016 of +8.4% in 2015 to £568 million. The revenue per passenger rose by +6.2% above the level in 2014, to reach £7.58. (The Moodie report said the figure was about £7.14 in 2014, £6.21 in 2012, £5.95 in 2011, and £5.64 in 2010). Over the year, Heathrow had an overall growth in revenue of +2.7% to £2,765 million in 2015. EBITDA was £1,605 million, up +3.0%. Heathrow also announced a +2.2% increase in passenger traffic in 2015 to 75 million. For the figures for the first 6 months of 2016 Heathrow said its retail revenue had risen by 7.7% year-on-year, to £280 million – and retail revenue per passenger rose +7.1% to £7.84. Of this, duty and tax free shops contributed £62 million, a +3.3% increase. Heathrow said that for the first 6 months of 2016, it made £62 million from duty and tax-free; £51 million from airside specialist shops; £24 million from bureaux de change; £22 million from catering; £55 million from car parking – with total retail revenue at £280 million. i.e. of total retail revenue 19 – 20% was car parking. Income from parking was £99 million in 2014 and £107 million in 2015. For the first half of 2016 the retail (including car parking) income was about 21% of total revenue.
Heathrow Airport retail revenue up +7.7% in first six months of 2016
London Heathrow Airport has reported a +7.7% year-on-year increase in retail revenue in the first six months of 2016 to £280 million. Retail revenue per passenger rose +7.1% to £7.84.
Of this, duty and tax free shops contributed £62 million, a +3.3% increase.
Total revenue at the airport increased by +1.0% to £1,320 million while adjusted EBITDA was up +4.4% to £781 million, which the airport said reflected “lower costs and better value”.
Heathrow reported a +0.6% growth in passengers to 35.7 million in the first six months of the year. Underlying traffic increased in the early part of the year but softened in the second quarter reflecting a more uncertain macro-economic environment, the airport said.
Long haul traffic increased +1.4%, largely from routes serving the Middle East and Asia Pacific.
The airport also provided an update on the retail refreshment programme in Terminal 4. The Drake & Morgan group will open ‘The Commission’, its first airport unit, “shortly”. Terminal 4’s luxury stores, such as Harrods, Burberry and Cartier, are also being re-developed. Five new luxury brands will be introduced, two of which will be new to Heathrow, it said.
Grimshaw Architects has been selected by Heathrow as the concept designer for the airport’s proposed £16 billion expansion
….. and there is more spin from Heathrow about runway etc.
Heathrow Airport has reported a retail revenue increase of +8.4% in 2015 to £568 million.
On a revenue per passenger basis, +6.2% increase over 2014 was recorded to reach £7.58.
The airport saw an overall growth in revenue of +2.7% to £2,765 million in 2015. EBITDA was £1,605 million, up +3.0%. However, a downward trend in operating costs in the second half of 2015 was noted.
Heathrow also announced a +2.2% increase in passenger traffic in 2015 to 75 million.
Heathrow Airport Chief Executive Officer John Holland-Kaye said: “It’s been an excellent year for Heathrow. As we approach our 70th anniversary, our colleagues are delivering the best service we’ve ever achieved to a record number of passengers.
Heathrow award for top airport for shopping for 3rd year. Net Retail Income per passenger £6.21 in 2012 (£5.64 in 2010)
April 18, 2013
For the third year, Heathrow got the award (within the airports industry) for the top airport for shopping. Heathrow has over 52,000 square metres of retail space and more than 340 retail and catering outlets. Heathrow overtook Dubai International to win the title of “World’s Best Airport for Shopping” for 2012. Heathrow has the highest retail sales of any airport in the world ahead of Incheon airport in South Korea. Figures from the Moodie Report in February 2013 said that Net Retail Income per passenger at Heathrow was £6.21 (up 4.4% on 2011, partly due to the Olympics) in 2012 and £5.95 in 2011, while it was £5.64 in 2010. (By comparison the Net Retail Income at Stansted in 2012 was £4.27 per passenger). At Heathrow in 2012 the gross retail income increased +5.7% to £460.1 million.
How much profit do airports make from their retail activities, rather than flying?
13.2.2013.Heathrow got 21.3% of its income from retail in 2010, compared to 53% from aeronautical. On average each Heathrow passenger spent about £5.70 (maybe £5.90) at the airport, with women spending more than men (!). BAA data say frequent fliers spend more than infrequent fliers. In the year 2010/2011 Gatwick airport made £115.6m from retail, and another £51.7m from car parking, with an average of £5.80 spent on retail per passenger. Stansted retail spending per passenger is about £4.00 to £4.20. In the year 2010/2011 Heathrow made about £380 million per year on retail, Gatwick about £115, and Stansted net retail income fell from £79.8m in 2010 to £73.9m. Manchester made about £70 million on retail, with about £3 per passenger. http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/?p=1045
Gatwick continues to get around 22 – 23% of its income from retail, as it has in previous years. Moodies’ data shows that in the year that ended 31st March 2016 the airport reported a +2.3% increase in retail income to £152.5 million. But the net income per passenger decreased -3.7% to £3.67. Income per passenger from retail has stayed around the same figure as in 2011. Gatwick has added a great many retail shops in previous years (it now has 36 shops and 27 restaurants) and offers “collect on return.” Gatwick has done less well than it hoped on sales which it described as “challenging trading” due to “changes in passenger mix and adverse currency movements against Sterling.” Income from food and drink and catering grew by around 2%. Car parking revenue for the year to 31st March 2016 was up +7.6% to £77.9 million and net income per passenger from parking increased by +7.3% to £1.47. So retail + parking is about £5.14 per passenger. Aeronautical revenue rose +5.4% to £350.8 million (so that is around £8.50 approx per passenger) and other income was up +9.7% to £91.9 million. Turnover increased +5.5% to £673.1 million while EBITDA was up +9.7% to £331.0 million. The airport made a profit before tax of £141.0 million.
Gatwick reports +2.3% increase in retail and single runway records
Gatwick Airport has reported a +2.3% increase in retail income to £152.5 million for the 12 months ended March 31 2016. The airport had a record year for retail in terms of sales.
However, net income per passenger decreased -3.7% to £3.67. The airport attributed this to “challenging trading” conditions in the tax free category including changes in passenger mix and adverse currency movements against Sterling.
It said this decline was partly offset by strong growth in catering.
Relevant and engaging shopping: Gatwick said it would continue to invest in retail growth
“The Gatwick retail strategy is based on a sound understanding of our customers and a relentless approach to ensuring our retail mix is highly relevant to our growing passenger numbers,” the airport stated. “It is therefore pleasing for us to see that customer satisfaction remains at an all-time high; in Q1 2016 87% of customers rated our selection of food & beverage outlets as Excellent or Good with 84% of customers giving this score to our choice of retail stores.”
Car parking revenue was up +7.6% to £77.9 million and net income per passenger increased by +7.3% to £1.47. Aeronautical revenue rose +5.4% to £350.8 million and other income was up +9.7% to £91.9 million.
Gatwick said it set new world records for aircraft movements and passenger numbers for a single runway airport in the 12 months ended 31 March.
Passenger numbers were up +5.5% to 40.8 million. The airport handled 265,970 air traffic movements, a +4% year-on-year increase.
Turnover increased +5.5% to £673.1 million while EBITDA was up +9.7% to £331.0 million. The airport made a profit before tax of £141.0 million.
…. and it continues with Wingate talking about a runway …..
“On opening, it will join Gatwick’s line-up of 35 shops and 27 restaurants, enhancing an already extensive range including Harrods, SuperDry, Jo Malone, Ted Baker and Dixons.”
Gatwick Airport Chief Commercial Officer Guy Stephenson said: “Next is the latest quality addition to Gatwick’s extensive retail offering.
“The store’s arrival is in response to passenger requests in our regular surveys and joins a stellar line up of recent new openings at Gatwick, including the world’s first airport gin distillery, The Nicholas Culpeper and renowned chef Bruno Loubet’s Grain Store.
“Coupled with the convenience offered by our airport wide ‘carry on-board’ and ‘collect on return’ services, the 41.7 million passengers travelling through the airport every year will experience the best of the high street at tax free prices.”
Next Gatwick Store Manager John Rowland said: “Launching the new Gatwick store is a great privilege. We will be able to show off our fantastic range and serve customers travelling to 80 countries in five continents.”
Buoyed by the busiest six months in the airport’s history with a record 23.5 million passengers (+4.7% year-on-year), Gatwick Airport posted a +5.2% rise in revenues to £411.8 million (US$626 million) for the half year ended 30 September 2015.
Combined with careful cost management, this resulted in a +6.8% rise in EBITDA to £241.0 million (US$367 million) and a pre-tax profit of £135.2 million (US$205.7 million) on a consolidated basis
Retail income rose +1.4% to £85.5 million (US$130.6 million) but, importantly, net income per passenger decreased by -3.0% to £3.60 (US$5.48) due to “challenging trading” in the duty free and tax free category. Income from duty free and tax free declined by -2.5% period-on-period.
The specialist shop category continued to perform well with per-passenger income broadly in line with traffic growth despite some impact from landside closures as a result of the North Terminal Development programme. Summer 2015 saw several new openings amid an ongoing revamp of the retail offer, including a new Boots store in the South Terminal while Simply Food was also updated in both terminals (a new store in North Terminal arrivals and an extended and modernised unit in the South Terminal).
“Where we have opened new or modernised stores, performance has been strong and we have delivered strong growth compared to last year,” the airport company said.
FOOD & DRINKS AND CAR PARKING FLOURISH
Food & drinks performed well. “Catering remains a particular highlight, where we have grown per passenger income by +2% compared to last year,” said the company. Summer 2015 saw several new openings, including Wondertree restaurant in the South Terminal departure lounge along with Wagamama in the North Terminal departure lounge. Landside the company opened a new Costa Coffee in both terminals.
“Passengers can look forward to some further development in this area as we open new restaurants in both terminals in the second half of the year,” Gatwick Airport said.
Car parking income rose +7.4% and net income per passenger increased +11.9% to £1.60 (US$2.43) due to improved yield management, valet capacity increases and cost savings.
Gatwick Airport said that the mid-year results were “in line with expectations” as it continues to compete to attract new airlines and routes, invest in new facilities, and deliver an excellent service to passengers.
Specialist retail and food & drinks both performed strongly
Car parking revenue was buoyant but retail income per passenger was hit by challenges in the core duty free and tax free sectors
Passenger traffic hit record heights in the six-month period
Gatwick’s passenger traffic growth is a combination of more planes, bigger planes and fuller planes – load factors have increased to 87.2%
Gatwick’s retail income still about 22% of total – around net £3.72 on retail sales + £1.35 on parking per passenger
June 30, 2014
The Moodie Report has published figures for the retail income of Gatwick airport in the year to 31st March 2014. Gatwick’s retail income rose 9.7% on the level in 2013, from £123.2 million to £135.1 million. By contrast their aeronautical income (aircraft landing charges etc) rose by 11.1% from £285.8 million to £317.4 million. There was a 4.8% increase in passengers, to about 36 million. Gatwick’s car parking income rose by 12.9%, from £58.1 million to £65.6 million. In the year to March 2014, Gatwick made on average £1.35 per passenger on parking. It made, on average, £3.72 per passenger from retail sales. This was up by 4.2% from the level in 2013, but only up 2.7% on 2011. There is now even more retail space, with even more food and beverage facilities. In the year to March 2011 their retail income was £115.6 million and the net retail income was £3.62 per passenger. ie. barely changed over 3 years, (up 2.7%). And that’s a new World Duty Free store opened, and 33 other new stores opened in the past year. Net retail income per passenger at Heathrow was £5.98 in 2011, and about £6.21 in 2012. For both Heathrow and Gatwick, retail income is about 22% or so of income.
How much profit do airports make from their retail activities, rather than flying?
13.2.2013.Heathrow got around 21.3% of its income from retail in 2010, compared to 53% from aeronautical. On average each Heathrow passenger spent about £5.70 (maybe £5.90) at the airport, with women spending more than men (!) BAA data say frequent fliers spend more than infrequent fliers. In the year 2010/2011 Gatwick airport made £115.6m from retail, and another £51.7m from car parking, with an average of £5.80 spent on retail per passenger. Stansted retail spending per passenger is about £4.00 to £4.20. In the year 2010/2011 Heathrow made about £380 million per year on retail, Gatwick about £115, and Stansted net retail income fell from £79.8m in 2010 to £73.9m. Manchester made about £70 million on retail, with about £3 per passenger.http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/?p=1045..
Academics fly a lot, and there is the presumption that this is essential for their work and for international university connections etc. A climate scientist, Dr Peter Kalmus (who works for the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory) has decided that his own lifestyle is not consistent with his understanding of rising anthropogenic carbon emissions. “I try to avoid burning fossil fuels, because it’s clear that doing so causes real harm to humans and to non-humans, today and far into the future. I don’t like harming others, so I don’t fly.” He says: “I experienced a lot of social pressure to fly, so it took me three years to quit. Not flying for vacations was relatively easy.” Long trips by road to visit family were a bit harder. He comments that he knows scientists who fly a lot, but “just don’t think about it” and “most people simply don’t know the huge impact of their flying—but I also suspect that many of us are addicted to it. We’ve come to see flying as an inalienable right, a benefit of 21st-century living that we take for granted.” “In today’s world, we’re still socially rewarded for burning fossil fuels. We equate frequent flying with success; we rack up our “miles.” This is backward: Burning fossil fuels does real harm to the biosphere, to our children, and to countless generations—and it should, therefore, be regarded as socially unacceptable.”
How Far Can We Get Without Flying?
When a climate scientist decided to stop flying to cut his carbon emissions, he caught a glimpse of the post-oil future
By Dr Peter Kalmus (an atmospheric scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory)
11.2.2016 (Yes Magazine)
I’m a climate scientist who doesn’t fly. I try to avoid burning fossil fuels, because it’s clear that doing so causes real harm to humans and to non-humans, today and far into the future. I don’t like harming others, so I don’t fly. Back in 2010, though, I was awash in cognitive dissonance. My awareness of global warming had risen to a fever pitch, but I hadn’t yet made real changes to my daily life. This disconnect made me feel panicked and disempowered.
Hour for hour, there’s no better way to warm the planet than to fly in a plane.
Then one evening in 2011, I gathered my utility bills and did some Internet research. I looked up the amounts of carbon dioxide emitted by burning a gallon of gasoline and a therm (about 100 cubic feet) of natural gas, I found an estimate for emissions from producing the food for a typical American diet and an estimate for generating a kilowatt-hour of electricity in California, and I averaged the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Environmental Protection Agency estimates for CO2 emissions per mile from flying. With these data, I made a basic pie chart of my personal greenhouse gas emissions for 2010.
This picture came as a surprise. I’d assumed that electricity and driving were my largest sources of emissions. Instead, it turned out that the 50,000 miles I’d flown that year (two international and half a dozen domestic flights, typical for postdocs in the sciences who are expected to attend conferences and meetings) utterly dominated my emissions.
Hour for hour, there’s no better way to warm the planet than to fly in a plane. If you fly coach [economy class] from Los Angeles to Paris and back, you’ve just emitted 3 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, 10 times what an average Kenyan emits in an entire year. Flying first class doubles these numbers.
However, the total climate impact of planes is likely two to three times greater than the impact from the CO2 emissions alone. This is because planes emit mono-nitrogen oxides into the upper troposphere, form contrails, and seed cirrus clouds with aerosols from fuel combustion. These three effects enhance warming in the short term. (Note that the charts in this article exclude these effects.)
Given the high climate impact, why is it that so many environmentalists still choose to fly so much? I know climate activists who fly a hundred thousand miles per year. I know scientists who fly about as much but “just don’t think about it.”
I even have a friend who blogged on the importance of bringing reusable water bottles on flights in order to pre-empt the miniature disposable bottles of water the attendants hand out. Although she saved around 0.04 kilograms of CO2 by refusing the disposable bottle, her flight to Asia emitted more than 4,000 kilograms, equivalent to some 100,000 bottles.
I suspect that most people simply don’t know the huge impact of their flying—but I also suspect that many of us are addicted to it. We’ve come to see flying as an inalienable right, a benefit of 21st-century living that we take for granted.
The quantitative estimates of my emissions guided me as I set about resolving the dissonance between my principles and my actions. I began to change my daily life. I began to change myself.
My first change was to start bicycling. I began by biking the 6 miles to work, which turned out to be much more fun than driving (and about as fast). It felt like flying. Those extra few pounds melted off. Statistically speaking, I can expect biking to add a year to my life through reduced risk of cardiovascular disease.
YES! Illustration by Jennifer Luxton.
Other moves away from fossil fuels turned out to be satisfying as well. I began growing food, first in the backyard and then in the front, and I discovered that homegrown food tastes far better than anything you can buy. I began composting, an honest and philosophical practice. I tried vegetarianism and found that I prefer it to eating meat; I have more energy, and food somehow tastes better. I began keeping bees and chickens, planting fruit trees, rescuing discarded food, reusing greywater, and helping others in my community do the same.
I stopped taking food, water, air, fuel, electricity, clothing, community, and biodiversity for granted. I became grateful for every moment and more aware of how my thoughts and actions in this moment connect to other moments and to other beings.
I began to experience that everyday things are miracles: an avocado, a frame of honeycomb crowded with bees, a conversation with my son. Now, I feel more connected to the world around me, and I see that fossil fuels actually stood in the way of realizing those connections. If you take one idea from this article, let it be this: Life without fossil fuels is fun and satisfying, and this is the best reason to change.
But none of these changes had the quantitative impact of quitting flying. By 2013, my annual emissions had fallen well below the global mean.
I experienced a lot of social pressure to fly, so it took me three years to quit.
I experienced a lot of social pressure to fly, so it took me three years to quit. Not flying for vacations was relatively easy. I live in California, and my wife and I love backpacking. We drive on waste vegetable oil, but even normal cars are better than flying. Four people on a plane produce 10 to 20 times as much CO2 as those same people driving a 25 to 50 mpg car the same distance.
My wife and I drive 2,000 veggie oil miles to Illinois each year to visit our parents. Along the way, we sleep under the stars in the Utah wilderness. This is adventure travel, the opposite of fast travel, and it has deepened my relationship with my parents. After such a journey, I more easily see how precious my time with them is.
Not flying is an ongoing challenge as I progress in my scientific career, but I’m finding that I can thrive by doing good work and making the most of regional conferences and teleconferencing.
Not flying does hold back my career to some extent, but I accept this, and I expect the social climate to change as more scientists stop flying.
In today’s world, we’re still socially rewarded for burning fossil fuels. We equate frequent flying with success; we rack up our “miles.” This is backward: Burning fossil fuels does real harm to the biosphere, to our children, and to countless generations—and it should, therefore, be regarded as socially unacceptable.
In the post-carbon future, it’s unlikely that there will be commercial plane travel on today’s scale.
Biofuel is currently the only petroleum substitute suitable for commercial flight. In practice, this means waste vegetable oil, but there isn’t enough to go around. In 2010, the world produced 216 million gallons of jet fuel per day but only about half as much vegetable oil, much of which is eaten; leftover oil from fryers is already in high demand. This suggests that even if we were to squander our limited biofuel on planes, only the ultra-rich would be able to afford them.
Instead, chances are that we’ll live nearer to our friends and loved ones, and we won’t be expected to travel so far for work. Those both seem like good things to me.
With the world population approaching 8 billion, my reduction obviously can’t solve global warming. But by changing ourselves in more than merely incremental ways, I believe we contribute to opening social and political space for large-scale change.
We tell a new story by changing how we live.
Dr. Peter Kalmus wrote this article for Life After Oil, the Spring 2016 issue of YES! Magazine. Peter is an atmospheric scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (speaking on his own behalf) and a contributing editor for YES! Magazine. This article draws on material from a forthcoming book about our interconnected ecological predicament. A working draft is available to read here.
Kevin Anderson blog on decisions of academics and climate community about personal travel
October 10, 2014
In a blog in June 2014, Professor Kevin Anderson writes about the need for people to consider their own behaviour in relation to flying. He is personally highly conscious of his own energy use. He looks in particular at academics and those in the climate change community, and their justification for the use of high carbon travel. These are some quotes: “Amongst academics, NGOs, green-business gurus and climate change policy makers, there is little collective sense of either the urgency of change needed or of our being complicit in the grim situation we now face.” And on the desire to fly to save time to spend with our families: “When we’re dead and buried our children will likely still be here dealing with the legacy of our inaction today; do we discount their futures at such a rate as to always favour those family activities that we can join in with?” And “Surely if humankind is to respond to the unprecedented challenges posed by soaring emissions, we, as a community, should be a catalyst for change – behaving as if we believe in our own research, campaign objectives etc. – rather than simply acting as a bellwether of society’s complacency.”
Petition set up by academics from many countries asks universities across the world to reduce flying
October 27, 2015
A group of 56 scholars has launched a petition calling on universities and academic professional associations to greatly reduce flying-related footprint as part of effort to cut greenhouse gas emissions. The academic group believe there is a need for collective action to improve the climate profile of academic communities. A petition has been set up, asking universities, institutions of higher education and professional associations to greatly reduce their flying. It appreciates that for academics to fly less, it requires their colleagues to change behaviour. There is an expectation to attend meetings and conferences. The petition asks universities etc to include all university-related flying (whether directly paid by the university or by others) in their environmental impact measurement and goal-setting. Also to support and work to realize marked reductions in flying by faculty, staff, and students commensurate with the cuts suggested by climate science. And to establish and publish short- and medium-term benchmarks for reductions. The petition originators hope universities etc will use their influence with professional associations to reduce reliance on flying for academic and research conferencing. Professor Kevin Anderson, a respected UK climate scientist, has already written and spoken often on this subject, and does not fly to conferences.