The Lahaina fires put me into a climate anxiety spiral, made worse by guilt. As an active participant in travel media, I not only flew to Hawaii several times a year many years in a row, I encouraged you to do the same.
We know flying contributes to global warming, but travel media tends to overlook or minimize our impact. We like to “whatabout” it by pointing to business travel, the wealthy, and the transportation industry at large. We like to wave off our impact and go about our business.
I’m aware my own travel is a minuscule addition to global warming, but I got into a terrible funk all the same because, as travel media, an implied part of my work was getting others to, you know, travel. The more people board planes, the more global warming accelerates. And we’re just not going to sit down. Americans, in particular, suck at making sacrifices for the greater good. See also: Covid.
So we throw up our hands. What are we supposed to do? Stop traveling? Obviously, we’re not doing that. Ridiculous! But we’re shirking our duties as media if we don’t speak up about the carbon costs of all this globetrotting.
We know travel contributes, and we know industry and governments need to be held accountable for things we can’t change ourselves. As ethical writers and travelers who love to see new places, love to get out in the world, love to argue that travel is the greater good, why aren’t we disclosing the carbon cost of our trips? If we believe that the industry has to change, why not pressure them to do so by adding this information to our stories?
“My round trip flight from Seattle to Kahului, Maui, generated 1.4 tons of greenhouse emissions. To stem climate change the annual recommended amount per person is two tons.” Put that on your sponsored FOMO Instagram and blog posts. Put that in the “if you go” box on that magazine or newspaper spread. Want to take it one step more? Include your carbon cost when you step up to the mic on that conference stage. “My name is Pam Mandel. My pronouns are she/her. My flight from Seattle to Berlin burned 3.73t of carbon. I’m here today to talk to you about why transparency in travel stories matters.”
Lahaina is in ashes and Yellowknife, in Canada’s Northwest Territories, is under evacuation. Kelowna is burning and we await landfall of the next tropical storm — in California, a region not known for tropical storms. Floods in Pakistan displaced nearly 8 million people. The stories are seemingly endless. All of these situations were either precipitated and/or made worse by climate change. Every morning, as I worked to make my ideas cohesive on this piece, another climate crisis was breaking news.
Travel media is going to hate this idea of disclosing the carbon cost, I can hear the objections already. Before we dismiss it, though, I’d ask why we hate this idea. Do we think people should be shielded from the carbon costs of travel? Do we think showing our carbon consumption makes us look bad? Do we think including carbon data in travel information is bad for business? Explain it while I change out my air filters in anticipation of another smoke front, this one expected to arrive any minute thanks to the wildfires in the Okanagan. Explain why we should divorce this inseparable byproduct of travel from writing about travel.
Collective travel media has a voice. I’d like to see what happens to airline alternative fuel development programs or cruise ship management policies when every travel story posts its carbon footprint. Think of it like nutritional information on a can of soda or a health warning on a pack of cigarettes. My flight to Maui was ¾ of my annual recommended carbon serving to stem climate change. That’s worth knowing and worth sharing.
Travel publishers, editors, writers, videographers, podcasters, influencers, and anyone with a platform in this space: I did not ask we stop traveling. I ask that we share the true cost. It is such a small thing to ask and the potential for it to accelerate long overdue change is … well, let’s find out.
We could keep doing nothing. But Lahaina is in ashes.
I haven’t looked into the details in some time, but Expedia Group started buying carbon offsets to keep flights booked through our platform in in 2017, and as of our 2022 global impact statement, we were still carbon neutral: https://www.expediagroup.com/investors/news-and-events/financial-releases/news/news-details/2022/Expedia-Groups-Annual-Global-Impact-Report-Reveals-Positive-Momentum-and-Commitment-to-a-More-Inclusive-and-Responsible-Travel-Industry/default.aspx
There are a number of companies doing r&d towards electric aviation. I recently heard about a carrier getting ready to start all electric regional flights (the tech hasn’t yet advanced beyond the capability to do short local flights)
This is all too little and too slow, but there are sincere efforts underway.
Do you know if Expedia buys carbon offsets when requiring employees travel for work? Does the site expose the carbon cost of a flight purchase? Do they offer the option to buy carbon offsets when you buy a plane ticket? How much is communicated to the travel consumer about carbon costs? I appreciate the efforts, sure, and … what you said. Too little, too slow. The tech nerds should be able integrate a calculator and offset purchase program pretty quickly, I’d think, and yeah, I work in software so I know, I know.
Hi Pam, thank you for this honest take of the role of travel and the travel media. I work at the Travel Foundation, a global NGO which seeks to improve tourism’s impacts. As you suggest, more transparency about the carbon impacts of tourism, in the media and on travel products, would provide an important signal and may nudge consumer and industry behaviour. Your readers may like to find out more about the challenges ahead for tourism and the actions that should be taken to decarbonise the system, by reading our free and independently produced research report. https://www.thetravelfoundation.org.uk/envision2030/
you’ve got a little math error there, Pam.
how many people were on that plane?
we’re they alldoing most of their “carbon allowance” by themselves?
I think that dividing the carbon allowance by the number of souls on the flight (not counting the crew) would be more accurate.
otherwise, folk who’re already leaning towards denial could point out this is an exaggeration (at best), and feel quite comfortable denying anything else that people say about “carbon footprint” and such.
sitting here sweating in 90+ degree weather, I’m pretty convinced that climate change is real. I’m not so much convinced it’s entirely man made, but it’s at minimum exacerbated by us.
don’t give the deniers ammunition.
It’s actually pretty shocking. Look into it. It’s per person, though I believe the calculations are for a full flight. Then, when you’ve picked your jaw up at how bad it is, take a look at what cruise passengers spew.