Cheap(est) travel without flying?

joebloggs69

Hi all,

I've been using this site for a long time now but it's my first time posting.

It seems to me that money-saving and ethical/environmentaly friendly living seem to nearly always go hand-in-hand, presumably because both methods depend on as little waste as possible. This suits me down to the ground since I'm interested in both.

However, it does appear that the one area where this doesn't hold true is with travel (abroad) - as air travel is a huge contributer of carbon emissions, amongst other things, I've been looking at travel to Europe by rail or sea (it's more exciting anyway) but frankly the prices are huge in comparison. I'm only looking for economy class for two people to somewhere like Barcelona or even Paris, but in comparison to Easyjet etc. it is a hard pill to swallow!

Do any of you have any suggestions or interesting experiences in this area?

Thanks

jonesMUFCforever

Tried walking or going on your bike? (Pedal power of course)

black-saturn

Have a look at this:

http://www.travelscope.co.uk/coach-holidays.html

joebloggs69

Thanks for your responses. Those coach tours certainly work out cheaper than going it alone. Unfortunately it seems that it is simply impossible to travel abroad with out flying if you're on a low budget - at least not until the government stop given airlines all the tax breaks and start dishing them out to other modes of transport!

nelly_2

Im not sure if a train/car would give out less emisions per person

joebloggs69

No, going by plane is estimated to create 3 times more CO2 emissions per person per mile than by rail, and about 25% more than by car. Not to mention vapour trails which contribute to global warming...and that Boeing make money out of killing people, and package holiday agents like Thomson make money out of exploitation (nearly all money spent by tourists is sent back home to the UK, so the locals get hardly anything out of it).

But besides all that hippy stuff I actualy think I would prefer to go by rail - you not only get to see more of the country you're visiting but also all the ones that you pass through! It's better than the virtual teleportation of Enter plane at Gatwick ---> Exit plane at Barcelona, that's not 'travel'.

And on top of that you can get an en suite cabin to yourself for the night, or spend a few hours like a battery hen. And better food!

Unfortunately, at the moment, you also get to pay at least four times as much for it too. Never mind!

jenniferpa

I listened to a report on Radio 4 once about carbon footprints and air travel. Too too depressing. I can't remember the exact figures, but I do know that once you've flown transatlantically, there is no way to get back into "credit", at least within a normal lifespan, even if you never get in a motorized vehicle again.

Jennifer

joebloggs69

It is depressing, there's always the danger of dismissing it all as "hippy stuff" but once you make connections: the cooling of the Gulf stream gives us cold long winters like we've just had for one example.

And travel is one of the biggest areas where I really don't want to cut down! You can go to https://www.climatecare.com where they calculate the cost of you emissions for flights and other things, and you can then pay them to ofset it with various tree planting and eco-friendly projects. I ccan't help but feel it's just buying a clear concsience though.

I also just wanted to point out that what motivates me to do something about it even against the odds is that, in fact, it is quite easily correctable, as long as everyone makes a few cutback - something I'm sure people here would understand.

plane_boy2000

Last time I flew transatlantic with BA they were offering some scheme where you could pay something to have trees planted and in effect make your journey carbon neutral - may have been the same thing

joebloggs69

Yeah that's right, but they've stopped it now because less than 2% of customers agreed to pay the extra 4 quid! Shame. I was considering making a new 'Save and be Green' type thread - it's not that I'm whinging or want to convert people, it's just that it can be tricky sometimes and I'd like to discuss it - not to mention that it's yet another way we can 'screw them back' as Martin says.

redux

In terms of miles per gallon etc, or CO2 emissions as you say, it isn't so inefficient at all. And the 'vapour trails' themselves are not a problem, just ice cloud for a short time until they melt, caused by the low pressure vortices from the wingtips.

It is the other harmful emissions like oxides of nitrogen that simply cannot be as easily controlled as the catalyst on a car exhaust. Maybe they need to make a bit more effort with pre-treating the fuel with additives, like the next generation of car engines Euro 5 will use, such as urea apparently (don't ask me - I'm not a chemist)

edit - now I've just read a bit about this, it seems to be injected into the exhaust, which sounds like it might be ideal for jet engines. It reduces NOx to nitrogen and water, and also HC and CO to water and CO2

nb - do a Google search for urea injection - a Swedish ferry engine treatment claims NOx 85-99 % reduction, HC 70-90 % reduction

- maybe they should have done this years ago.