[Coral-List] Stop flying????!

Fri Mar 13 13:17:37 UTC 2020

Francesca:

Well said. I wonder if it would be more useful to gather stories about how
each of us does "small things" to encourage folks who are thinking, "What
can I do if this problem is so big?"  Wouldn't reminding folks that small
things add up be more productive than saying, "but my approach would do so
much more"?

I wonder how much the dire (although probably true) projections are making
average people think, "I just can't do anything that would really make a
difference with such a HUGE problem". It's probably being overly
optimistic, but I wonder whether congratulating each other and projecting
an image that "yes, your tiny piece does matter" might yield more converts
than trying to advocate for our own perceived answers. I know (or, at
least, assume) this is not the intention of anyone in the discussion, but
messaging does matter. Might we be better allocating our cumulative
resources by trying to create a web space that basically says, "I can't fix
it all myself is not an excuse". Do something, however small, and you are
contributing to the solution. Let's celebrate everything that folks are
doing rather than trying to argue that "my way is better". Again, I'm sure
that is not the intent of anyone in this discussion. However, let's think
about someone reading all of this who does not personally know the
integrity of the voices involved here like I do".

Best to all doing anything,

Denny

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 7:21 PM frahome--- via Coral-List <
coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:

>  Indeed, we should embrace ALL of the options at the same time and that
> might not be even enough. There's plenty of calculators around to estimate
> the CO2 equivalent emissions and/or ecological footprint of the different
> aspects of our lifestyle. To stay within planetary boundaries we should get
> asap our per capita footprint down to 3 tons or so of CO2 per year. Current
> western carnivorous  diets alone are in the range of more than 3
> tonnes/year (vegan diets around 1.5 tonnes). Average western emission per
> capita are currently in the range of 8 (EU) to 17 (USA) tonnes per capita.
> Top emitters can add a couple of tonnes for each overseas flight. These are
> rough and high level figures but they give a good idea of the challenge,
> not to mention the overall net zero targets to be achieved in the context
> of the Paris agreement.If we won't do it spontaneously government
> incentives and societal pressure can help change our lifestyle. In the same
> way we were made thinking that driving a big polluting SUV is our utmost
> wish, we could be persuaded on pursuing low impact ones, though the
> resulting generated profit for big players might not be comparable.
> Francesca
>     On Thursday, March 12, 2020, 05:18:39 PM GMT+1, Dennis Hubbard via
> Coral-List <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:
>
>  Good points by ALL....and I disagree with NONE of them. So, an observation
> and a suggestion. Observation: as scientists, we can't resist to cite
> numbers and the assumption that more of them equals a better argument.
> Suggestion: we should stop trying to advocate for our own personal choices
> and EACH OF US should think about what else we might consider, hopefully in
> addition to what we're already doing. I tired quickly of the vegan vs
> no-travel vs chastity vs techno-fix arguments the first time around and
> hope we don't dive down that rabbit hole again. I honestly don't know the
> total benefit (or downside) of one meeting trip per year versus a
> coal-powered home versus local beef compared to long-distance fruits and
> veggies.
>
> So, I'll just urge those in this discussion to applaud ANY effort by anyone
> on the listserve. Arguing that "my solution" is better than "yours" does
> little to help. And... it may cause someone who IS doing something to do
> LESS because "it doesn't really help"). We should be applauding ANYONE's
> effort to reduce their footprint (carbon or otherwise) by whatever means
> they choose.
>
> Just my opinion
>
> Denny
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 1:31 PM Gaétan Morand via Coral-List <
> coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > As we all know, if we want to try and mitigate climate change, we need to
> > base our actions on actual information rather than feelings.
> > I'm hoping I can contribute to this discussion by bringing in a few facts
> > (with sources) on air travel and eating meat.
> >
> > One serving of beef is responsible for about 3kg of CO2 [1]. Most other
> > meats have a lower carbon footprint.
> > One return transatlantic flight is responsible for 1 to 1.6 tonne of CO2
> > [2], which is the same as 330 to 530 beef steaks.
> >
> > This means that just one yearly transatlantic return flight offsets the
> > emissions savings from being vegan.
> >
> > Yes, air transport is only responsible for a small part of global
> > emissions, but only because a small percentage of people actually fly,
> > whereas 90% of people globally eat meat [3].
> > For perspective, if every person in the world took just one return
> > transatlantic flight per year, it would represent a minimum of 7.5
> > Gigatonne of CO2 (the current global emissions are around 36 Gigatonne
> per
> > year [4]).
> >
> > In conclusion, reducing meat consumption is absolutely a priority as it
> is
> > responsible for about 14.5% (7.1 Gigatonne) of global greenhouse gases
> > emissions [5]. But on an individual scale, flying frequently is much
> worse
> > than eating meat.
> >
> > Gaetan Morand
> >
> > [1] http://css.umich.edu/factsheets/carbon-footprint-factsheet
> > [2]
> >
> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2019/jul/19/carbon-calculator-how-taking-one-flight-emits-as-much-as-many-people-do-in-a-year
> > [3]
> >
> https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-09/an_exploration_into_diets_around_the_world.pdf
> > [4] https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions
> > [5] http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/197623/icode/
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Alina Szmant via Coral-List <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
> > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Stop flying????!
> >
> > Great if people want to stop flying. But ALL aviation is only 2 % of
> > global fossil fuel emissions while animal agriculture produces 30 % of
> > global emissions,  and animal agriculture account for 60+% of land use
> > which means deforestation and habitat destruction, lots of pollution and
> > animal suffering.  So go vegan and travel to your heart's content.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> >
> > -------- Original message --------
> > From: Sue Wells via Coral-List <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
> > Date: 3/9/20 9:14 AM (GMT-05:00)
> > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Stop flying????!
> >
> >
> >
> > Well done, Mark.  Yes, we must reduce our travel significantly - once the
> > virus peak is over there is likely to be a rush to take holidays and hold
> > meetings and the skies will be full of planes again.  You rightly
> question
> > whether enough effort is being made to enable "virtual" attendance at
> coral
> > reef meetings.  I know that people are looking into this, and hope that
> > some
> > solutions will soon be on offer.
> >
> >
> >
> > In the meantime, my recent positive experience might be of interest. Over
> > the course of 4 days in February, from the comfort of my office in
> > Cambridge, I dialled into two international meetings, one in Washington
> DC
> > on MPAs and one in Germany on protected areas more generally.  Both were
> > fairly small (DC had 65 participants, with 5 dialling in; Germany
> probably
> > less than 50 with c. 3 dialling in) and involved plenary sessions with
> > break-out discussion groups.  There was a joint session when the two
> > meetings "met" virtually, with others dialling in remotely.  The meeting
> in
> > Germany used "global.gotomeeting.com" and the DC meeting used "webex" -
> > both
> > systems seemed to work fairly well for those dialling in.
> >
> >
> >
> > Overall, the presentations worked well (as is the case with webinars),
> and
> > I
> > could follow the plenary Q&A sessions and for the most part get noticed
> if
> > I
> > wanted to ask a question myself.  Ironically the one session when the
> > presentations did not work was the MPA one on technology, but this turned
> > out to be "human error" rather than anything technical with the
> dialling-in
> > system.
> >
> >
> >
> > One big advantage was that I could attend both meetings, unlike other
> > participants.  With the time zone difference, this led to some long days
> > but
> > it was worth it.  I could provide feedback from one meeting to the other
> -
> > particularly useful for the discussions on the CBD post2020 target for
> > protected areas which evolved as the meetings progressed.
> >
> >
> >
> > So what did I miss? Break-out groups were of course not possible to join,
> > and I did miss the social side (catching up with old friends and making
> new
> > ones) and networking.  I would not want to do it for every meeting.
> >
> >
> >
> > But in some ways I achieved as much as I did by participating in person
> > last
> > year in another meeting on protected areas, held in a mountainous part of
> > Italy.  In line with my aim not to fly when overland transport is
> > available, I used trains and buses.  I spent 2 days and 3 nights (c. 60
> > hrs)
> > at the meeting location, and over 3.5 days and 2 nights (some 70 hrs)
> > travelling.  Admittedly, there were some unusual aspects to the trip,
> which
> > coincided on my way back with temperatures of 40oC in France and a major
> > disruption to train services due to an accident But it gave me some real
> > insight of what travelling will be like once the effects of climate
> change
> > fully take hold.  International conservation meetings should definitely
> no
> > longer be held in remote locations, however beautiful the surroundings,
> > unless absolutely essential.
> >
> >
> >
> > As Mark says, we need to reduce travelling, keep flights to a
> minimum/those
> > that are essential and unavoidable, and use the rapidly developing
> > technology more effectively to keep in touch with each other.
> >
> >
> >
> > Sue Wells
> >
> >
> >
> > Sue Wells
> >
> > 95 Burnside
> >
> > Cambridge CB1 3PA
> >
> > Mob: 07905 715552
> >
> > e-mail:  <mailto:suewells1212 at gmail.com> suewells1212 at gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coral-List mailing list
> > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coral-List mailing list
> > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coral-List mailing list
> > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> >
>
>
> --
> Dennis Hubbard
> Chair, Dept of Geology-Oberlin College Oberlin OH 44074
> (440) 775-8346
>
> * "When you get on the wrong train.... every stop is the wrong stop"*
>  Benjamin Stein: "*Ludes, A Ballad of the Drug and the Dream*"
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list

-- 
Dennis Hubbard
Chair, Dept of Geology-Oberlin College Oberlin OH 44074
(440) 775-8346

* "When you get on the wrong train.... every stop is the wrong stop"*
 Benjamin Stein: "*Ludes, A Ballad of the Drug and the Dream*"