This weeks's QOTW by @ecotrain is a little bit different. Unlike most questions which require a moment of sincere introspection to see how I truly feel about an issue, today's topic is so highly debated that I already have a very clear response formed beforehand. Thanks to numerous discussions in real-time, with people I actually know, as well as with complete strangers on social media, I have played around with this idea a lot, examined it from different sides, so I am quite confident in writing down my opinion regarding this question:
Are 'Eco-warriors' Hypocrites for Flying?
Before answering in detail, I would like to counter with the common extension: It all depends who it is, for what reason they're traveling, when and where they're going, and under which circumstances. Exactly! Things are generally not simply black or white.
What's Wrong With Flying Anyway?
So to back up a bit, the reason why flying is so frowned upon among climate advocates are the high carbon emissions associated with air travel, which is directly related to rising global temperatures. So clearly, if someone is preaching for curbing our emissions globally, they should lead by setting a good example, and hence find other, more environmentally sound travel solutions. Makes sense, right?
Okay, so let me tell you about this guy I once talked to, maybe ten years ago: He was genuinely concerned about some news he had heard regarding carbon footprints, and so he made the decision to skip out on having barbecues that summer. Though he had been looking forward to grilling season, his conscience wouldn't let him fire up the charcoal for a few steaks because of carbon emissions. I hope at least he felt good about saving the climate with his BBQ abstinence.
Now, before we shake our heads and call him a poor fool, let's take a relativist view and consider the big picture. While you might say that one simple charcoal grill doesn't make a huge difference globally, if the millions of barbecuers world wide stopped grilling outdoors it would make have a significant impact on the climate, right?
Okay, I hope now you'd be eager to point out that all the barbecues in the world combined in a year would not add up to one trans-Atlantic flight (Or would it? I don't have the numbers.). Or maybe that cooking those same steaks in an indoor kitchen would still result in the same amount of emission, maybe even worse. Or that it's not just how the steak is cooked, but how the cattle was raised, transported, the grill manufactured, assembled, the raw material for it extracted, etc. which is responsible for way more carbon emissions. Because this is exactly my point here, all of it!
The Problem is Not Just Flying
In my earliest childhood encounters with alleged "eco-warriors" I remember two issues that seemed to define the entire movement, almost to the point where it seemed that's what it was all about, entirely: one was stopping nuclear power, the other one was saving the whales. Clearly, there were other things as well, from acid rain to garbage problem, but to a five-year-old it seemed crystal clear that if we managed to turn off our nuclear power plants, all the whales would be safe, and we could live in a beautiful world.
What must it be like for a five-year-old today? Seeing how all those conscientious adults around them talk about nothing but the warming climate and airplanes, it must seem logical that if we all stopped flying we could soon build a snowman again.
It's All Relative
But of course, things are never that simple, no matter how much we'd like them to be. Let's not forget, the carbon that's affecting today's climate has been emitted... hahaha, probably around the time I first heard about whales and nuclear power. Also, many people like to point out that the carbon emitted by a simple burp of a volcano (such as the one on White Island, New Zealand, only last week) compares to all the flights around the globe in a similar way as the one trans-Atlantic flight to all the barbecues in the world.
Much more importantly, I'd like to point out that the carbon footprint of everything, not just flying, is a lot higher than we normally like to calculate. Let's look at the criticism Greta Thunberg faced for sailing across the Atlantic instead of flying. Critics kept pointing out the high carbon footprint of building the high-tech yacht she traveled on, as well as flying the crew, plus all the media journalists reporting on her, back and forth. Okay, so what would have been the alternative? Say, appearing at the UN via video chat? Certainly possible.
You Can't Please the Booh-sayers
Unfortunately being in the position she is in, she would have received the same criticism no matter what she does. In the case of a video chat, one could point out the infrastructure required to make it possible, including satellites, putting those into orbit, and the technology that's required for all that. Oh, and let's not forget the manufacture of not just the microprocessor in her computer, but the space vehicle for the satellite, as well as all the machinery for manufacturing all those machines. Then there is the extraction of raw materials, transporting them several times around the globe to process them, even before assembly can start. Considering all this, I would not hold it against Greta if she had flown to New York, maybe even in a charter plane, together with her whole media outfit.
If you've followed me so far it should be clear that in the end it's not just about the direct carbon emissions by aircraft engines or garden grills, just as it is not only about whales or polar bears. It's about soil erosion, it's about the acidification of oceans, it's about the disappearance of ancestral hunting grounds, it's about breeding superbugs that are resistant to all antibiotics, it's about poisoning the very food we expect to be nourished from, it's about beating our bright and creative population into submission by dependence on outside forces that may not even be real. Because the problems endangering our environment are just as physical, as they are chemical, biological, social, psychological, and economical, all linked inseparably.
Back to the Question
So in the end, do I think eco-warriors are hypocrites for flying? Sure they are. But in the same way, human rights activist are hypocrites for eating chocolate. In other words, it really doesn't matter, at least not as much as suggested from the attention it's given.
In fact, I would even go as far as saying that making such a big deal about flying is doing a disservice to what actually matters: transforming our exploitative system we find ourselves in, where people have no other option but to exploit themselves, each other, and the natural world around them, only to scrape by. Because by focusing on the two degrees Celsius temperature rise, all we are doing is treating symptoms, while the cause of the ailment continues wrecking havoc on our world.
That's it! This is what I usually like to bring up in passionate climate-related discussions. Thank you for sticking with me till the end. I hope it made some sense.
Please check out these great communities I'm contributing to:
#ecotrain | What is EcoTrain | Discord Community
#tribesteemup |The 8 Pillars of @TribeSteemUp
#team-mexico | Discord Community
#cyclefeed | Introducing CycleFeed | Discord Community
Brilliantly written! I have really enjoyed the way you annalized it and gave a dipper insight on the subject. Sometimes there is more than meets the eye and things are more significant than they seem and sometimes things are just being taken out of proportion.
Right, which is why it's worth the effort to look behind the apparent.
This is one of the best stances I’ve read about eco-activism. Although, I think Greta is only a puppet of a bigger agenda. The rest is dead on.
Thank you! And yes, who can be considered an "eco-warrior" is another question.
You always make sense, and not only that, you write in a logical, clear and well thought out way that i can never manage. I have post envy right now. I'm glad I didn't read yours first or I wouldn't have written! I totally agree - the haters don't make sense, because it doesn't matter in the broader scheme of things. Stop attacking people in general is probably the way to go, and just focus on what you can do personally. Hate never got us anywhere - self reflection, education and deep thinking is a much better way to go. 'They're hypocrites, end of' simply doesn't fly with me. Pun intended.
Awww, thanks for your kind words. And don't worry about post envy. Your posts are also full of deep thought, which you manage to explain rationally, even in a way that's readable and entertaining. So it's all good. And yes, I agree that attacking people for any reason is super weak, especially if whoever does it won't even do as much. The Greta example illustrates it perfectly: Some random dude criticizes her supposedly high-footprint yacht. To the question what he has done for the climate in comparison, the answer is something like "oh, but I'm not an eco-warrior." Exactly!
You’ve been visited by @porters on behalf of Natural Medicine. Well said! The biggest point you bought up is that whether they fly or not is not that important but it is getting to the root of it! Stopping the greed that is so rampant and the self-centeredness that seems to blind folks from being able to live in harmony with the world and people on it! Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Did you know that Natural Medicine now has it's own token, rewarding natural healing and health wisdoms? You can check out our front end, naturalmedicine.io If you've been involved in our community over the last year, check your wallets for LOTUS and stake them to start earning curation rewards!
FYI: Natural Medicine & Inner Blocks are having a Collaborative Challenge - Medicine Blocks Challenge! Win Lotus Tokens & up to 150 Steem! Check out the details by clicking here
PLUS the 12 Days of Natural Medicine Christmas Challenge – Details here
You're right, the biggest problem is that people don't see what's at stake. Otherwise even the most selfish people would stop focusing on themselves.
Excellent approach, @stortebeker. Certainly, everything becomes a media scandal that brings nothing
Yeah, makes you wonder whether the media scandal was the objective to begin with.
wow! beautifully written, and some most excellent points you make, from start to finish! . i would have to say you have nailed it my brother... lets not be extreme in our views and judgements.. else we will all be damned!
Thank you! And yes, an extreme view is always bound to ignore half the truth.
I loved the perspective of your brave BBQ man. And the perspective you were about to give.. Yes, it is the EXPLOITATIVE SYSTEMS we need to be looking at, and how much power we have to change those. Which means being political and maybe not hanging out in an eco-village somewhere.
Should we even be having this discussion on the blockchain when it consumes so much energy? Or are we just drowning in LACK MENTALITY and over-focused on what we perceive to be the finiteness of things?
Leading the curation trail for both @ecotrain & @eco-alex.
Together We’re Making This World A Better Place.
Click Here To Join the manually curated trail "@artemislives" to support quality eco-green content.
I agree, though I think building and maintaining an eco-village one IS being political, as by living a certain lifestyle one is taking a stance for everything that's part of that life.
Of course it's a political act to deselect & model a new paradigm. But it doesn't egage with or change the political systems which control the big environmental issues destroying our planet.
This post was shared in the Curation Collective Discord community for curators, and upvoted and resteemed by the @c-squared community account.
If you are a community leader and/or contest organizer, please join the Discord and let us know you if you would like to promote the posting of your community or contest.
@c-squared runs a community witness. Please consider using one of your witness votes on us here