Travel Finances Home > The environmental cost of travel

The environmental cost of travel

When Orville and Wilbur Wright flew history's first aeroplane for 120 short feet in North Carolina in 1903, no one could have guessed how their new invention would transform the world. Air traffic figures soared to 297 million in 1980 and to 638 million in 2000. Far from the white-gloved splendour of the fifties, flying is now seen as uncomfortable and tedious but still necessary if we want to explore the globe.

But as the world becomes a smaller place and travel is cheaper than ever, are we in danger of wreaking environmental havoc on the very planet we love to explore?

The Aviation Environment Federation says that worldwide, passenger traffic is expected to grow by about 5% each year and air freight by more than 6% a year. The world fleet of aircraft is expected to double by 2020. Meeting this insatiable demand for air travel will have a massive environmental impact, especially with regards to climate change.

From floods in Mozambique to forest fires in Indonesia. From hurricanes in Florida to storms in the UK. Friends of the Earth says that extreme weather events are predicted to become more frequent because of climate change caused by pollution. And aviation - combined with the millions of cars, lorries, buses and trains - is one of the fastest growing sources of climate change. Of course there are also serious health risks from toxic nitrogen oxide emissions. Not to mention noise pollution.

Now new targets to reduce the environmental impact of air travel - set to triple over the next 30 years - are being launched by the UK's aviation industry. Airports, airlines and aeroplane manufacturers aim to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide produced by new aircraft over the next 15 years by half.

In 'Fly now, grieve later', a study published by the Aviation Environment Federation, former Treasury adviser Brendon Sewill sets out the hidden cost of flying. He cites Britain as 'the world's worst climate change culprit' after the US as far as aviation was concerned. He says there are a number of ways that the UK could combat aviation pollution and suggests increasing the air passenger duty airport departure tax, imposing VAT on air tickets, abolishing duty-free sales and ending the planning system to discourage airport expansion. The overall message is that we should expect the cost of air travel to increase in coming years. But it hard to see how this will deter most people from flying so we must hope that the additional cash can be invested to stem the environmental damage.

One option is to follow the example set by Future Forests, a UK-based company with a global vision: to protect the earth's climate. They make it quick and easy for people and companies to find out how much carbon dioxide they produce; to provide them with straightforward ways of reducing those emissions, and interesting options for 'neutralising' what can't be reduced. Those options include forestry, and investments into climate friendly technology. Their ultimate target is to get us all to a world where businesses, cars and planes are as benign as trees and cities are as benign as forests. That might involve anything from hydrogen-fuelled cars to solar heating.

Unhappy trails

But pollution and climate change are not the only enemies to our planet. The more you travel the more you could be damaging the world's wonders. From the UK's Hadrian's Wall to Machu Picchu in Peru, the earth is literally crumbling under the weight of armies of tourists.

'Some of the world's most important architectural landscapes have become victims of their own success,' says Colin Amery of the World Monuments Fund (WMF), which produces a Watch List of the 100 Most Endangered Sites every two years. 'Publicity is often used to attract funds for conservation work, but it can be a double-edged sword. From the Great Wall of China to the temples of Angkor in Cambodia, drastic compromises are being made to accommodate swelling visitor numbers.' It would be better for some, says Amery, if they were not visited at all. He says that as far as Easter Island and Shackleton's Hut in Antarctica are concerned, it is better these places exist unvisited than are destroyed by development to accommodate tourists.

The Unesco World Heritage List (www.unesco.org) contains more than 600 cultural sites of which 29 are considered at serious risk. Ironically, the list actually encourages tourists who want the chance of seeing something which may no longer exist in their lifetime. The response has been to limit numbers and proximity and prices may increase in the future.

There are all sorts of ways that we can take more environmentally friendly holidays. Travelling independently - rather than booking a package deal - channels more cash to locals. And more hotels now only wash linen and towels on demand as opposed to every day.

If you want to make a more serious impact then there is a huge range of travel options which encourage conservation or voluntary work. This might include anything from repairing dry stone walls in the Lake District to a diving survey of coral reefs in Madagascar. But it is crucial to book with reputable, well-established organisations. The National Trust, BTCV and Earthwatch can provide further information.

Tourism Concern publishes The Good Alternative Travel Guide (Earthscan, £12.99), which lists green travel companies and the Association of Independent Tour Operators, AITO has an ethical ranking system for its 150 members.