How Many Air Miles Does Your Annual Holiday Add Up To?
According to new research*, the carbon footprint from overseas tourism is three to four times higher than previous estimates. As of 2019 it accounts for about 8% of global carbon emissions.
Here at Away Resorts we are passionate about staycations and helping holidaymakers become more eco-conscious. So we have put together an air miles calculator to help you work out your annual carbon footprint.
Give us your totals now!
https://www.awayresorts.co.uk/air-miles-calculator/
HT/Hayley S
The interesting and important issues are just how many people actually buy these and who verifies if and where these trees are ever planted.
How many times can you plant the same tree?
How long will it need to grow to have enough CO2 uptake to save Father Earth…let’s not forget that it has only 12 years to do this magic.
So Earth is trans now?
In any case, if CO2 is continually classified as carbon, then the mass of such emissions should be adjusted downward correspondingly to account for the fact that CO2 is only ~27% carbon.
Voila, a 73% reduction in emissions. BTW, if walls don’t work, why did they surround the Eiffel Tower with a bullet proof glass one?
Speaking of walls, Trump said this morning he is going to have a big announcement on the crisis at the southern U.S. border later today or tomorrow. One of the biggest announcements he will make, he says.
My guess is he is going to put the U.S. military on the southern border with the authority to arrest illegal aliens, which the president can do under certain circumstances and current circumstances seem to call for this kind of action.
That’s about the only dramatic announcemet I can think of that he would make. I didn’t catch the name of the law that authorizes Trump to do this but I heard it talked about last week, so the idea has been circulating.
Something has to be done. We can’t wait on the Democrats to do anything about the border. We might be able to oust the House Democrats in the 2020 elections, but that’s 18 months away and we can’t afford to allow the chaos at the border to continue for that long. Trump needs to put in enough U.S. troops to seal the border. The Democrats will howl ! 🙂
Never a dull moment with Trump and these crazy Democrats.
NBC news is reporting today that more than 1,000 “migrants” were apprehended near El Paso, Texas after illegally crossing the border early Wednesday morning. (NBC News likes to call illegals aliens “migrants.” Kind of like calling carbon dioxide “carbon” or “carbon pollution.” They need a refresher course in basic English.) NBC News further reported that more than 100,000 “undocumented immigrants” were apprehended in both March and April, and the projected number for May is 120,000. (Again, NBC likes to call illegal aliens “undocumented immigrants.” I guess English is their second language over at NBC.)
Imagine, more than 300,000 in three months!!! How many Anglo-Saxons invaded Celtic Britain per month after the Roman legions left? If 100,000 people crashing our borders a month isn’t a national emergency then what is?
I just heard that Trump is going to impose a 5 percent tariff on Mexico’s exports until the Mexican government puts a halt to the illegal aliens coming up through Mexico to get into the United States.
I guess Trump is going to save the military option for later if it’s needed.
Realistically, I’d bet tariffs, which increase the cost of US imports and quickly quickly reduce income to Mexico (and their ever-ubiquitous crooks), is far more effective than the US military.
5% June 10th, 10% July 1st, 15% Aug. 1st, 20% Sept. 1st then 25% Oct. 1st, to stay until TRUMP decides he is satisfied. I hope he is never satisfied. All the factories shipped to Mexico may start coming home.
Planting trees is an absurd gesture, since most of the ones that get planted are non-native species that get stuck somewhere with no fore-thought about the way they will contribute to the local environment. And you are absolutely correct, a single tree don’t do crap. If these people were serious about the environment they could just go pick-up trash along, (name your urban waterway here) …
And how long until they cut down the trees to chip them up and send them to Drax to burn them for electricity?
The whole tree thing only works if you bury the tree to prevent the ultimate rot, conversion back to CO2. Ultimately, all the trees complete the natural cycle unless they are sub-ducted into a swamp.
To save Tourism , one must cease to have tourist. Simple really.
MJE VK5ELL
If the figures are accurate, then it would be interesting to see how much CO2 the activists produce in their daily lives and on holidays.
Especially if they are academics/students wanting to get their universities and colleges to divest from investments in fossil fuel companies.
I particularly liked the comment in the calculator that one long haul flight produces more CO2 than a year’s motoring in the UK.
Maybe Birmingham would be a more appropriate venue for the next climate jolly.
I don’t know about the air travel, but according to a 9 year old, I personally toss out about a billion plastic straws every month or so…
I generally didn’t use straws in the past, but now I’m reconsidering.
There’s definitely a new market opportunity.
I’m also curious as to how the new UK law actually defines “plastic” as they have banned it in drinking straws.
Straws? Nah. Cotton Buds? Nah. Come on, it’s those brand new blue plastic asthma inhaler cases you get with each 200 dose metal cartridge of salbutamol. Why can’t asthmatics simply wash their original case out and use them again? A 60-year old diagnosed with asthma since childhood may have thrown away 550 plastic cases in their lifetime. With 339 million asthmatics in the world, that sure is one hell of a lot of plastic.
😎
San Francisco is one of those cities that has banned plastic straws yet they give away needles and PLASTIC syringes to druggies.
( https://nypost.com/2018/05/11/san-franciscos-streets-are-littered-with-free-syringes/ )
Just what “virues” are being signaled?
The whole concept of carbon footprint is such a load of old tosh as to be not worth commenting on. That higher atmospheric CO2 levels is feeding more people is.
So the say 5 million people a week in the UK going on holiday abroad in the summer should now stay in the UK? And where exactly are we going to put all these millions of people? Build new resorts, hotels, and all the rest? What’s that going to cost in terms of money and CO2? And paving over the nice places in the UK we want to spend our holidays in?
Yet again, delusional stuff.
Stay home and worship at the temple of GAIA.
Like a good little drone.
My total for the last ten years is a big fat zero. There again, I do live in a beautiful country, so why would I want to fly anywhere else? If only we had a bit more global warming so that it wasn’t so bloody cold.
I totally agree, and share the big fat zero. I love the UK, and all its wonderful scenic variety.
There’s your answer.
If CO2 is not the problem why is WUWT propagating concerns about carbon footprints and supporting climate panic?
It’s not every airline and flight. We’re mainly concerned about Emma-rites
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6993173/Actress-Emma-Thompson-spotted-carbon-spewing-BA-plane-jetting-New-York.html
John H, apparently you don’t understand the concept of ridicule.
Also, this is just about the ONLY site that presents all arguments and viewpoints on climate change. You most likely won’t find skeptical articles on alarmist sites, even for the purpose of ridicule.
You don’t recognize ridicule when you see it?
How is highlighting hot air supporting climate panic?
So… howz come every local Council or Chamber of Commerce spends a fair amount of time figuring out how to increase tourism?
Oh wait… all that caaaahbon pollution from tourism will be offset by the vexatious green virtue signaling ideas that they come up with to torment the local residents.
It seems there’s never time on the agenda to figure out how to fix the potholes in the roads.
/grumpiness born of experience
The virtue signallers have had 40 years to figure out the ‘carbon footprint’ of fly away holidays.
Suddenly it’s three to four times higher.
How did they get it so wrong for so long?
Easy, the science was settled.
In America, staycation refers to a vacation experience without leaving one’s home. What Away Resorts is talking about would be called a domestic vacation over here.
Thanks. Wondered about that.
In other words, just days off.
Here at `Toilet Duck’ we recommend: `Toilet Duck’
GIGO
This is built on the premise that aviation is bad therefore all conversations now work around ways of reducing this ‘badness’ without even checking this premise. It will always be ‘worse than thought’ because that is how confirmation bias works.
The link calculated I would use 810kg for a 9 hour flight.
I calculated I would about 150kg flying in either an A350 or B787 or about 225kg with an older B747
Here is a fuel consumption table I used and then divided by seating capacity: https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1355819
I have seen this before where numbers are chosen to confirm AND exaggerate an assertion such as ‘aviation is bad’. One example was using the fuel capacity of a 747 to ‘calculate’ a fuel burn for a London to New York flight. They did not apply any thought or question how such a flight was operated and even ask how much was consumed. In this case a 747 only required half it’s fuel capacity to cross the Atlantic. It seems using facts, logic and reasoning is an inconvenience.
GIGO
This is built on the premise that aviation is bad therefore all conversations now work around ways of reducing this ‘badness’ without even checking this premise. It will always be ‘worse than thought’ because that is how confirmation bias works.
The link calculated I would use 810kg for a 9 hour flight.
I calculated I would about 150kg flying in either an A350 or B787 or about 225kg with an older B747
Here is a fuel consumption table I used and then divided by seating capacity: https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1355819
I have seen this before where numbers are chosen to confirm AND exaggerate an assertion such as ‘aviation is bad’. One example was using the fuel capacity of a 747 to ‘calculate’ a fuel burn for a London to New York flight. They did not apply any thought or question how such a flight was operated and even ask how much was consumed. In this case a 747 only required half it’s fuel capacity to cross the Atlantic. It seems using facts, logic and reasoning is an inconvenience.
I moved to the NW of the UK 50 years ago to avoid the expense of travelling here for holidays.
I was kinda wondering what the IPCC and Hollywood, et al had to say on this-
https://www.msn.com/en-au/finance/news/this-new-2412-billion-airport-will-be-the-biggest-in-the-world-e2-80-94-take-a-look-inside/ar-AAC4czw
How many on the who’s who boycott list so far?
Virtue signalling – Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling
Virtue signalling is the conspicuous expression of moral values. Academically, the phrase relates to signalling theory and describes a subset of social behaviors that could be used to signal virtue—especially piety among the religious.
This is all a fully featured self debunking nonsense.
Nations that feed on tourism are equally eager to cash-in on global warming free money to preserve the natural features that attract planeloads of tourists. Wow.
OK, no objection, let them plant windmills on their airports and go back to spear fishing and tribal medicine.
I’m terribly proud of my zero carbon footprint and intend to keep it up. Oh, sorry, I use a pencil for sketching . The prize for pointless virtue signalling goes to the Synod of the Church of England for disinvesting in fossil fuels. They wish, with David Attenborough, to keep sub Saharan Africa in grinding poverty, disease and short life spans.
I’d also question some of their numbers.
Their “London to Lake District” being 5.5kg, but “London to Cornwall” being 97kg?
Marble Arch, London to Windermere is 280 miles.
Marble Arch, London to Penzance is 285 miles.
Why is Lake District ~1/20th that of Cornwall, despite the fact they’re the same distance?
Their calculations (assuming that the 97kg is “correct”) has the vehicle running 31 imperial mpg. The average new car in the UK is 50 mpg for petrol and 60mpg for diesel.
What good for is such a flight consumption calculator anyway –
every business man, tourist, eco-coral reefs protector, family visitor, UN or EU member consumes the same mass of fuels per 100 flight-miles.
Driving to Cornwall one is stuck behind a caravan most of the way. I expect they are applying the same rule to airplanes!
You guys have it all wrong!
You *want* to calculate your Carbon Footprint!
But what a retched web-based calculator.
They need *at least*
A) Drop Down lists for all major cities for departure.
B) Drop down lists for all likely destinations.
C) Allowance for at least two stopovers, because we never seem to get direct non-stops anymore.
Truth to tell, your best vacations will likely have a layover somewhere.
D) Equipment: Boeing 727/737/747/757/767, Airbus A320, ATR/SuperATR
The ATRs are common in the Caribbean, you will usually get one, island hopping.
E) Make it clear if the calculator is doubling up the number for the return trip, or you have to do it yourself.
Anyway:
I did a 6.5 hr trip and got a modest 585 Kg. If it is one-way, we can double it for 1070 Kg. round trip.
OK, everybody at WUWT, let’s see how well we all can do. I am sure many of you can do way better than my humble effort.
RULE: Let’s do this annually, so multiple flights on multiple vacations SUM together.
Business travel does *NOT* count.
Have Fun.
Weird:
From London – Florida is given as 833 Kg.
Mexico is given as 788 Kg.
Mexico is closer than Florida ?????
The calculator is incorrect and appears to be multiplying (by 4+) what actual fuel use is.
This link will give you fuel consumption by type and if you scroll down the comments the numbers improve:
https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1355819
Choose correct plane for a journey and then divide by number of seats.
The problem for the environmental activists is that aviation only accounts for 2%/3% of oil consumption. It was then claimed that the affect of aviation is twice that of any other oil consumer (of course) which bumps up aviations ‘affect’ to 6%. This obviously is not enough so this new ‘research’ has just multiplied the 2% by 4.
The actual source of this is here:
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/your-summer-vacation-carbon-emissions-nightmare-180969031/
Notice the use of the highly emotive word ‘nightmare’.
Of course it is.
The Wrong Way Corrigan’s that made the calculator assume all flights leaving London fly East until they reach their destination. So of course, Mexico is closer than Florida.
Hang on a minute. The calculator may have been worked up by Mrs. Murphy’s 4th grade class as a group project. That would explain a lot.
The calculator is incorrect and appears to be multiplying (by 4+) what actual fuel use is.
This link will give you fuel consumption by type and if you scroll down the comments the numbers improve:
https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1355819
Choose correct plane for a journey and then divide by number of seats.
The problem for the environmental activists is that aviation only accounts for 2%/3% of oil consumption. It was then claimed that the affect of aviation is twice that of any other oil consumer (of course) which bumps up aviations ‘affect’ to 6%. This obviously is not enough so this new ‘research’ has loaded up the numbers with extras and multiplied the 2% by 4.
The actual source of this is here:
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/your-summer-vacation-carbon-emissions-nightmare-180969031/
Notice the use of the highly emotive word ‘nightmare’.
I appear to be repeating myself. Sorry.
Sorry
Since my wife and I have been living in Florida for 28 years and did not need to fly here, we saved 46,620 kg. However, we do fly to Vegas twice a year, about half the distance from London to Florida, so it should be a wash. That means I am carbon neutral on my vacation airfare.
I was thinking of flying to Hawaii this year, but didn’t.
Can I count that as a saving?
This information is dated (from 2013), but it projects an annual Passenger-mile growth rate of 6.0 – 6.5% each year 2014-2016 (2013 base: 6.8 billion (10E9) passenger-kilometres).
Air freight (tonne-kilometers) is projected to increase 3.7 – 4.4% in the same period (I couldn’t find a base).
Fuel consumption and therefore CO2 emissions would be grossly proportional in both cases.
See here for details.
It would appear we are doomed, all the valiant efforts of Away Resorts notwithstanding.
EnvironMental guilt driving you to reduce your ‘carbon foot print’? It’s simple.
Remember to wipe your feet on the door mat, before coming in the door.
It’s soooo virtuous! And it keeps your carpets clean! };>)
Interesting article about Space-x multiplicity of satellites effect on night skys:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanocallaghan/2019/05/27/spacexs-starlink-could-change-the-night-sky-forever-and-astronomers-are-not-happy/#4cb5fdf259b6
perhaps worth considering for a WUWT discussion.
What good for is such a flight consumption calculator anyway –
every business man, tourist, eco-coral reefs protector, family visitor, UN or EU member consumes the same mass of fuels per 100 flight-miles.
https://www.google.com/search?q=fuel+consumption+cars+vs+planes&oq=fuel+consumption+cars+vs+planes+&aqs=chrome.
If you follow the link at Away Resorts to the study, it reveals:
So it isn’t just the air travel itself, it’s everything tourists do once they get there. I don’t know if they considered that many of these tourists – especially the more affluent ones – would still visit spas, eat restaurant meals and emit carbon in other ways even if they stayed home.
I was wondering how they got to tourism travel accounting for 8% of global emissions as that figure seemed way too high to me.
And the bottom line:
In other words, you will be forced to act the way we think you ought.
This is all fairly silly. There is no practical alternative to air travel for trans-oceanic trips. The regularly scheduled ocean liner business died out 50 years ago thanks to jet aircraft.
I tried this calculator and put in 1 litre of fuel (~1 kg). Apparently this releases 2.31 kg of CO2 (!). Am I missing something?
If you signal virtue, you don’t have it and you probably don’t even know what it is.
What you are actually signalling is self-righteousness.
Sydney is lovely . I shall go again now.
Boston radio talk show host Howie Carr offers “Honest Howie’s Carbon Credits” to help offset your guilt over heating the planet.
Skeptical? Think it’s a scam?
Not to worry. As Howie soothingly assures us,
“You can trust me. I’m not like… the others.”
If I wish to fly from Perth to London return the airline will generate, on my behalf, about 16.5 tonnes of CO2 [or so I have been reliably informed].
A kilo of wood contains about 500g of carbon which, when burnt, will produce about 1.65 kilos of C02.
To offset 16.5 tonnes of CO2 I will need to produce 5 tonnes of wood.
I’m planning to go in September…anybody know any quick growing trees?
Perhaps bamboo will do the job though if everybody offsets with bamboo there’s going to be a bit about.
I have a better idea for quantifying virtue signallers- if they are so hyperventilatable , they must simply cease living. Their bodies must be planted under a tree to give sustenance for the tree to act as a carbon sink.
Even if they do not sacrifice their self-righteous selves, they must cease several of the following-breathing, using any kind of transport (remember, bicycles need a lot of metals to make them), mobile phones and all other electronic devices, clothes, food(all those food miles) and using water from dams (dams impact on the environment-think I am joking-this is in chapter 18 on fresh water resources in UN Agenda 21) etc.
I was talking with a greenie at then recent election-brought up the population issue. The greenie was fine with the idea of culling humans. I asked who shall be allowed to live and who must die? Who will make that decision? What will be the criteria to decide who may be allowed to live. The answer- those that care for the planet (her) of course. Look up “Sustainable Development”- it is code for a stable population of 500 million. Oh dear, 94% of us will be the ones who must die.
I am well and truly on their chopping block for execution-white, male, straight, climate skeptic, patriotic, Libertarian, conservative, activist, have some semblance of humour that is used to ridicule the left, not a spring chicken, educated and Jewish. Yes, I am stuffed-well and truly stuffed under Green rule.