We have seen reports on environmental issues as they relate to travel. We have heard rhetoric, statements of intent, proud boasts, thinly veiled self promotion statements and promises of a ‘greener’ future. There have been board level corporate policies, conferences, business ventures linked to sustainability and a large number of ‘holier than thou’ declarations between competing companies. Strange how many of the leading standard bearers might be viewed as causing the problem like the fuel and energy giants But what has really happened?
I do not think much has happened at all and I am not entirely sure it matters that much if the experts are to be believed. By this I mean that if air travel only represents less than 3% of global emission does reducing this small fraction by an even smaller fraction make the slightest difference in the whole sphere of things? Would a large company not contribute more if they turned their lights and computers off at night? After all if you fly over any city at night the place is ablaze with lights.
I suspect environmental issues are going to become just a matter of travel hype like the exaggerated effect of direct sell, technology and vapour-ware were in the recent past. Perhaps more wistful thinking than worthwhile delivery.
My perception of the apparent state of affairs has been colloured by the way sustainability has been slipped onto the back burner while the global recession has been going on. Regardless of what others may say I believe being ‘sustainable’ costs money as you have to invest in it. You also cannot sell if you ground your salesmen.
The only exception to this is companies that need to reduce their travel budget for financial reasons and use environmental issues as a vehicle to do it.
All this may sound cynical from me and maybe it is. I actually believe passionately that we need to do something about the environment but I feel a bit sour when seeing all the hot air being spouted around over travel when the bigger and more significant winning may possibly be neglected. I also object to this issue being used for point scoring and the creation of another large consultancy sales opportunity.
This world has two global threats which are the economy and the environment. I would rather we did not damage the former in order to make an insignificant contribution to the latter when there are so many better ways to do more good. Besides I would be more convinced of commitment if people turned their TVs off standby at night like I do!
Research by the respected Dutch consultancy CE Delft has shown that carbon dioxide emissions from road transport could be reduced by 30% if motorway speed limits in the Netherlands were set at 80 km/h. (http://www.transportenvironment.org/News/2010/4/30-CO2-reduction-through-80-kmh-speed-limit/)
ReplyDeleteFrance and Germany both allow their citizens to travel at or in excess of 80 mph/130 kms per hour lawfully.
In part this reflects the fact that these two advanced countries build their transport infrastructure to enable long distances to be covered very rapidly. They regard such infrastructure as essential for business to be conducted efficiently.
On Friday, I drove from http://www.chateauofthegreatsun.co.uk to London in (12.5 hours on the motorway in France at an average speed of 65mph and including 1.5 hours in stops).
Once we reached England and the Folkestone exit of the Channel Tunnel and drove on to our God-forsaken neglected road infrastructure it took 2.5 hours to get to the heart of London (69 miles)because of traffic conditions.
The research referred to above suggests that restriction of motorway speed to 80 kms / 50 mph would encourage a switch from vehicles to public transport.
The average speed in the UK because of its poor road infrastructure cannot be much above that target speed. On Friday it was well below! (27.6 mph)
Our rail infrastructure is at capacity and part of air transport policy is designed to reduce short haul travel through pricing - coach travel might expand further, but surely this is not a serious proposition?
Forcing people to drive at or below 50 mph would have serious implications outside the UK.
In France, long distance road travel is essential even with one of the most efficient high speed rail networks in the world.
It ensures that people from other countries come and visit and spend money in France and visit its remote regions.
Without this large areas of France could cease to be viable and property prices could be severely impacted.
Governments' around the world have pledged to meet huge cutbacks in C02 emissions over the next few years with little or no discussion of the true cost implications for aviation, rail, car with their citizens.
We need a serious debate about the full implications for our citizens in terms of jobs, businesses and whole industries like aviation, rail and other transport service providers.
It would appear that the UK Authorities are already imposing a 50 mph speed limitation on the M3.
ReplyDeleteSo will they come clean and tell us if they intend to impose such speed limitations on other UK motorways?