Travel.
It's fun; it's exciting; it's alluring; yet, to the mean green in all of us, it's a conundrum.
Travelling requires the use of carbon fuels, which, we all know, is a main contributer to green house gases and global warming. Unfortunately, the worst offender of this output is airline travel.
Yet, we live in a global world -- a world where families really do exist on either side of the pond and relaxation time really does include an escape to sun and surf.
So, how, then, can a green consumer make friendlier choices when it comes to travel -- in particular air travel?
According to PlanetSave (a web portal with green ideas for everyday living) we do have options. While the environment is not the main impetus for changing airline policy, the rising cost of oil (and the subsequent shrinking profit margin) IS enough to cause airlines all over the world to re-examine their methods of operation.
As such, PlanetSave believes that airlines have founder simple and safe ways to reduce their fuel burn, and thus their emissions. Solutions, such as winglets added to the aircraft, or flying more direct routes at energy-efficiency altitudes and speeds are methods being adopted by a large number of airlines. As is the eliminatino of excess weight and the use of electric vehicles for ground crew operations.
While all airlines are jumping on the efficiency wagon, PlanetSave does state that Asian and European airlines often have more advanced green programs than their American counterparts (but this is changing thanks to rising oil prices and savvy consumers like yourself). As such, PlanetSave singles out British Airways as a leader in this field of green-travel choices.
The stalwart of luxury travel, British Airways advocates an emissions trading scheme in the industry and has established carbon offsetting and sustainable-tourism initiatives. In the USA, JetBlue is potentially the greenest airline because of its newer, more fuel-efficient fleet and its in-flight recycling and waste-management programs. PlanetSave also gives kudos to American Airlines, Singapore Airlines, and several more for their in-flight recycling programs.
In the end, though, savvy, green travellers can opt for more sustainable choices by taking a few tips:
*Opt for direct flights instead of multiple stops—take-offs and landings are a major source of CO2 emissions.
*Choose an airline with fewer delays while the plane waits for a gate upon arrival, if possible. Planes burn excess fuel while waiting.
*Become a frequent flyer on an airline with a newer, more fuel-efficient fleet such as JetBlue, Singapore Airlines, or Virgin Atlantic.
*Consider purchasing carbon offset credits for the miles you fly.
Showing posts with label green transportation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label green transportation. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Monday, December 04, 2006
Ten years later the electric car is reborn
Ten years ago there was a cheaper, quieter, greener and more efficient alternative to the gas-combustable engine.
But we don't really know about it and we don't drive it because ten years ago the major car manufacturers, in conjunction with oil companies, governmental agencies and other lobbiests, set out to destroy the potential of this alternative transportation source.
That was 1996. This is 2006. This week, General Motors announced it is ready to launch a plug-in version of its upcoming two-mode hybrid model: the Saturn VUE Green Line. A plug-in version -- aka: electric car (or, at least, some variation of it).
In 1996, GM fought deep and dirty to destroy the electric car.
In 2006, the Big Three member announced its corporate intentions to expand its alternative fuel options.
So, what happened?
War happened. As did worldwide political unrest. Terrorism happened. As did socialization of the USA's fourth largest oil provider. Awareness happened. As did the momentum and belief in the decades of correlational proof on the human element of global warming.
In otherwords the GM (and perhaps other automakers) are living in a different world than 10 years ago.
In otherwords GM (and other automakers) can no longer make economic decisions based on short-term gain (five, ten, fifteen years is but a blip in a larger life-span). Instead, these major inhibitors and accelerators of transportation industry change have come to realize that to circle the proverbial wagons is to orchestrate one's own demise.
Though good ol' GM should be applauded for being the first major automaker to commit to producing a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle the sense of irony is a bit thick. At least, though, large corps are good foot-in-the-mouth swallowers. GM and other large corporations know that corporate image makeovers and PR games are all part and parcel of doing business in a global economy. So, applause the announcement, in my eyes, should be kept for other, not so large players in this realm.
In my view, applause for GM's decision to create and offer consumer accessible alternatives to the gas-combustable engine should be kept for people like Chris Paine and Jessie Deeter -- the writer/director and producer of Who Killed the Electric Car (an expose on the intentional death of an greener alternative to gas-powered cars in America).
Applause should also be kept for the thousands of Greenpeace activists, supporters and corporate personnel who have consistently drawn the public's attention to environmental issues such as global warming.
Applause should be kept for David Suzuki and all the people involved in his foundation that have kept up the barrage of news, views and data to support the need for a societal shift in how we think, act and feel about the Earth and its resources.
And applause should be kept for all those people, across the globe, that CHOOSE to ride their bike to work, take public transit, refuse to use plastic bags, continue to buy bulk (rather than fancy packaging) and opt for the admittedly rougher, but certainly far greener option of recycled personal hygiene paper products.
These are the true heros -- for without them, major automakers, such as GM, would not be in a position to realize public sentiment and corporate image is far more powerful than a small man with a big stick in an unstable oil-producing country half-way across the world.
For more information on Who Killed the Electric Car go to:
http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/electric.html
For more information on GM's announcement go to:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061110/AUTO01/611100327/1148
For more information on criticism on Who Killed the Electric Car go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F
But we don't really know about it and we don't drive it because ten years ago the major car manufacturers, in conjunction with oil companies, governmental agencies and other lobbiests, set out to destroy the potential of this alternative transportation source.
That was 1996. This is 2006. This week, General Motors announced it is ready to launch a plug-in version of its upcoming two-mode hybrid model: the Saturn VUE Green Line. A plug-in version -- aka: electric car (or, at least, some variation of it).
In 1996, GM fought deep and dirty to destroy the electric car.
In 2006, the Big Three member announced its corporate intentions to expand its alternative fuel options.
So, what happened?
War happened. As did worldwide political unrest. Terrorism happened. As did socialization of the USA's fourth largest oil provider. Awareness happened. As did the momentum and belief in the decades of correlational proof on the human element of global warming.
In otherwords the GM (and perhaps other automakers) are living in a different world than 10 years ago.
In otherwords GM (and other automakers) can no longer make economic decisions based on short-term gain (five, ten, fifteen years is but a blip in a larger life-span). Instead, these major inhibitors and accelerators of transportation industry change have come to realize that to circle the proverbial wagons is to orchestrate one's own demise.
Though good ol' GM should be applauded for being the first major automaker to commit to producing a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle the sense of irony is a bit thick. At least, though, large corps are good foot-in-the-mouth swallowers. GM and other large corporations know that corporate image makeovers and PR games are all part and parcel of doing business in a global economy. So, applause the announcement, in my eyes, should be kept for other, not so large players in this realm.
In my view, applause for GM's decision to create and offer consumer accessible alternatives to the gas-combustable engine should be kept for people like Chris Paine and Jessie Deeter -- the writer/director and producer of Who Killed the Electric Car (an expose on the intentional death of an greener alternative to gas-powered cars in America).
Applause should also be kept for the thousands of Greenpeace activists, supporters and corporate personnel who have consistently drawn the public's attention to environmental issues such as global warming.
Applause should be kept for David Suzuki and all the people involved in his foundation that have kept up the barrage of news, views and data to support the need for a societal shift in how we think, act and feel about the Earth and its resources.
And applause should be kept for all those people, across the globe, that CHOOSE to ride their bike to work, take public transit, refuse to use plastic bags, continue to buy bulk (rather than fancy packaging) and opt for the admittedly rougher, but certainly far greener option of recycled personal hygiene paper products.
These are the true heros -- for without them, major automakers, such as GM, would not be in a position to realize public sentiment and corporate image is far more powerful than a small man with a big stick in an unstable oil-producing country half-way across the world.
For more information on Who Killed the Electric Car go to:
http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/electric.html
For more information on GM's announcement go to:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061110/AUTO01/611100327/1148
For more information on criticism on Who Killed the Electric Car go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
