Sequestration and De-carbonization No Substitute for Reducing Consumption

I just got done reading an article by Christina Beckmann in Adventure Travel News titled “Carbon Offset Prices Are On the Rise; Adventure Travel Businesses Consider Their Climate Strategies“. The main emphasis of the article is that, due to the increase in demand and clearer guidelines, the price for carbon offsets is increasing. As part of the clearer guidelines, increased demand, as well as a way to differentiate from competitors, there is a greater emphasis on the quality of the carbon offset. Specifically, the article states, in four major measurements:

  • Additionality: would the project have happened anyway, without the revenue received through the purchase of the offset?
  • Uniqueness: is your offset the only offset linked to the carbon dioxide equivalent emissions and not double-counted?
  • Measurability: can the emissions avoided or removed be quantified with recognized standard tools?
  • Permanence: is there an emissions avoidance or sequestration commitment over a set period of time (eg 100 years)?

I am pleased to see that there is greater emphasis on the quality of the carbon offset, as outlined in this article. I have been concerned for years that offsets have been a too-easy way to reduce people’s guilt about traveling, without accountability to know when a company is just green-washing. I agree with Court Whelan, Chief Sustainability Officer at Natural Habitat Adventures, who was quoted in the article about the need for third-party verification systems. I also agree with Court’s statement about de-carbonizing as a type of risk mitigation, versus a strategy to make travel climate-friendly – which it never will do. Just like we need to have a plan for coastal cities and island nations for when seawater rises, our primary focus needs to be on drastically reducing what is causing seawater to rise in the first place. There is a lot more we can and should be doing to prevent the carbon BEFORE it gets into the atmosphere. Even if technology will help us cope or lessen the catastrophe, it won’t save us. Only changing our behavior and reducing our impact will.

Therefore, what I am not pleased with in this article, and in our industry overall, is how little attention is given to reducing our overall footprint (carbon and otherwise). I think this is true in all industries – we love a technology fix that conceals our issues with over-consumption, and gives an entrepreneur (or hedge fund) something they can make money on. But the real issue is, the wealthiest on this planet are consuming WAY too much and this consumption, and the waste that comes with it, is destroying this planet (and the potential extinction of the human species). There is a “net positive” approach that CAN overcompensate for the negative impacts with positive ones. But this needs to be genuinely measured. For example, saying it is a net positive to build a luxury “eco” lodge in a pristine area because the guests’ increased awareness of the nature, culture, etc, will help those causes overall, needs to be measured and held accountable. Otherwise it is greenwashing. Regarding using “eco”, it doesn’t matter if the lodge gets 75% of its energy from solar or wind if the lodge uses 300 times what local people use, and the non renewable energy is coming from diesel generators. 

Technology clearly has a place, but rather than focus so heavily on technology to clean up the mess we have created, such as de-carbonization, we should focus on practices and technology that reduces the carbon and other impacts in the first place. For example, there currently is technology for hybrid boats and ships that run on cleaner burning fuels, versus the bunker fuel most ships currently use. Every tour vehicle (buses and vans) could be electric. We need to push for regulation that fast tracks these technologies, and simultaneously educate the consumer to increase consumer demand.

For the most carbon intensive part of the travel industry, air travel, there are plenty of ways that airplanes could be we way less polluting. We have learned how to do this (albeit not quickly enough) in the regulation of the auto industry. Regulations requiring airline fleets to have an average carbon budget would provide a market for manufacturers to design and build planes with lower emissions. We should be focusing our energy on THIS technology that will reduce the carbon (and other pollution) going into the air NOW.

While I found this article to be informative I feel it falls into the trap of focussing on workarounds, such as sequestration and de-carbonization, rather than focussing on the more effective solutions of reducing our consumption all together. The Adventure Travel Trade Association (ATTA), who publishes Adventure Travel News, has been working since their inception on ways to increase the sustainability of the travel industry, and has had many successes to be celebrated. I am proud to be a member of this organization, which is unafraid to call to task all of us who need to do more, as CEO Shannon Stowell did at the 2018 Adventure Travel World Summit.

But I think ATTA is giving too much attention to the de-carbonizing company, Tomorrow’s Air, which Christina Beckmann is a cofounder, distracting us from the more effective, but harder choices, of reducing our impact in the first place. Yes, humans have waited (and are still waiting) too long to take climate catastrophe serious, so carbon sequestration and removal will be needed as part of the way we cope with the inability for us to be completely carbon free in the near term. But by emphasizing these coping mechanisms without providing double the coverage for why and how we need to reduce carbon (and other impacts) in the first place, I believe is contributing to “business as usual” greenwashing that keeps the travel industry a huge part of the climate problem. I respect that people, like Beckmann, are trying to do something positive while also advocating for reducing carbon emissions. My concern is that we look at de-carbonization as the “easy” fix because we are unwilling to do the harder, and more necessary work, of reducing our consumption in the first place. As Tomorrow’s Air says “The more we cut emissions—by switching to renewable energy, increasing energy efficiency or reducing deforestation, for example—the less we will have to rely on costly carbon removal techniques”. We can and should be talking about reducing our impact first and foremost.

To Fly or Not to Fly – Is that really the question?

I was sitting in an airport in Dubai as I began to write this essay. The irony is not lost on me. I have worked in the travel industry for just over 10 years and currently spend a lot of time on the “road”. My company, Pandion Consulting & Facilitation, strives to raise the standards, quality and sustainability of the travel industry. I meet incredible people from around the world who are excited to share their home and their unique stories. My role is to help communities and travel professionals better harness the benefits of travel, while reducing the negative impacts. 

Recently, one of the most talked about negative impacts of travel is the greenhouse gas emissions from air travel. Cue the powerful speech by Greta Thunberg at the Climate Action Summit. The climate crisis is one of the most severe issues humans have ever faced and it needs to be addressed accordingly. Travel, especially air travel, contributes tremendously to this crisis – estimated to be 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions. So how can someone in good conscience actually encourage people to travel knowing that doing so directly pushes the needle closer to environmental disaster? 

Most of the challenges humans face are not black and white. Just cutting out travel will not solve climate change, and perhaps there are benefits that travel provides that makes the impact justifiable? The climate crisis isn’t the only crisis that humans or the environment face, and travel, when done sustainably, can be an aid to deal with some of these other issues. Issues such as poverty, threatened and endangered species, human trafficking, and environmental degradation are all issues that sectors of the travel industry are addressing directly. 

Another industry forced to evolve

I have believed for some time that the travel industry is going to be forced to dramatically change or risk going extinct. This confrontation is happening faster than I predicted, thanks to groups like Extinction Rebellion and activists like Greta. I have been amazed with the number of my friends who have openly questioned whether they should avoid an international trip and instead take a vacation closer to home. The response I get when I talk about the places I go for work has started to shift to being less impressed and more critical. While certainly not a significant sample size, this abrupt shift should be of concern to anyone in the travel industry. 

Let’s look at another industry that was forced to evolve in order to prevent from going extinct. Imagine you are visiting a zoo in the 1960s or ‘70s. Compare the enclosures and educational information to modern zoos. While still controversial to some people, if zoos did not evolve to incorporate more humane enclosures, as well as increase their focus to education and conservation, zoos would not exist today. Thanks to breeding programs at zoos and patron donations to fund critical habitat restoration, several critically endangered species have been brought back from the brink of extinction. The awareness and genuine love for animals, familiar and exotic, has increased thanks to educational curricula and opportunities to view wild animals up close. Visiting a zoo is not just about having fun. It is about leaving more aware of the diversity of life on this planet and the importance of humans to support (and fund) conservation and research. Travel needs to evolve too. I predict the era of traveling just for fun is coming to an end. 

Is there a Net Positive to Travel?

In considering whether to fly or not, I suggest looking at the net positive of your travel. Not all travel is created equal. There are ways to travel that will add to the positive side of your balance sheet. Incorporating these aspects, while reducing the negatives, are ways to manage the impact you have on climate. 

Life Changing Experiences

The first positive impact of travel is how travel has the power to transform the traveler. There is a growing list of challenges humans are facing – some of which threaten our very survival. Transformational travel strives to put travelers in scenarios that encourage them to examine their role in solving these issues. There is a lot to learn from, and be inspired by, how other communities and cultures live. Getting outside your day-to-day allows you to view the world, and your life in it, in new ways and return home recharged and inspired. Travel is a privilege that not everyone can take part in. To justify this dynamic the traveler must return home with tools and inspiration to tackle important challenges in his / her community. It is unlikely that a weekend getaway at an all-inclusive Caribbean resort will have this effect. More thoughtfully considering where to travel, spending more time in a destination getting to know local people, and incorporating activities that are intended to help you grow are all considerations to take into account. Those with means may be inspired to contribute to social and conservation organizations after they visit protected areas around the globe. For a deeper dive on this subject, The Transformational Travel Council is an organization promoting the deliberate transformational aspects of travel.

Benefitting Local People and Environment

The second important impact from travel has to do with the communities that are receiving the traveler. At nearly 11% of global GDP, travel and tourism is one of the largest industries in the world. Over 300 million people are directly employed in travel related positions, and each day travelers spend over $20 billion. Think about the impact on local people around the globe if a large-scale travel boycott took hold? If not travel, what other industries might local people pursue? Mining? Forestry? Poaching? 

As with most of the challenges humans are confronted with, there is a lot of intersectionality. Global poverty is a serious problem facing humans around the globe. Those without access to clean fuel for cooking contribute to deforestation by cutting down trees for cooking fuel. Lack of access to healthcare and family planning leads to unstable population growth in developing countries, putting pressure on important habitat for endangered species and forests for carbon capture. Economic benefits from tourism have led to incredible conservation efforts all throughout the globe, such as in Namibia where animals, critically endangered in most of Africa, are seeing population increases. Tourism competes with other destructive industries such as mining and logging and helps to make the case that wildlife and ecosystems are more valuable intact than denuded. Additionally, connecting with local people in the travel destination raises awareness to the threats facing people on the front lines of climate change and creates a global community to tackle these issues. 

To support the needs of local people, groups like the Adventure Travel Conservation Fund are working with industry contributions to fund important conservation programs around the globe. The Adventure Travel Trade Association (ATTA) is pushing the industry to increase methods that minimize the negatives and maximize the benefits of travel. This includes local ownership of businesses so more money stays within the destination, less frequent but longer trips to reduce air travel, and promoting sustainable practices such as using local and organic foods. The ATTA has partnered with groups like ECPAT, the group that created The Tourism Child-Protection Code of Conduct (The Code), and the World Animal Protection to provide resources and promote best practices for the tourism industry. 

Cleaning Up Air and Sea Travel

Finally, just because I am making the case that there are important benefits from travel, that doesn’t mean we should sit back and let the most destructive parts of the industry continue on unchecked. While some strides have been made to reduce the emissions of air travel, from lighter planes and more efficient engines, a LOT more urgently has to be done. As was the case with automobile safety in the ‘60’s, consumers need to push for stricter regulation on airplane and cruise ship emissions. Placing fleetwide caps on carbon emissions will force airlines to purchase more efficient planes, and possibly stimulate innovation for next generation electric planes. Additionally, do we need to get everywhere as quickly as possible? Lighter than air technology (blimps, air ships) could provide a lower carbon option combined with a much more enjoyable experience in the air. Without consumer and regulatory pressure, there is little incentive for airplane makers and airlines to get where we need to be with the speed necessary to continue air travel. Cruise ships currently burn some of the dirtiest fuel in existence, and depending on how you measure it, have a similar per person level of emission to air travel. Strict regulations from ports on the types of cruise ships allowed to dock, as well as requiring ships to be plugged in while in port would pressure the cruise industry to clean up its act.  

Maximizing these benefits from travel by choosing the right companies to travel with and pushing yourself to allow travel to inspire you to service, while at the same time reducing your impact by purchasing offsets and choosing more sustainable travel options means that you tip the balance away from unsustainable and towards a net positive. It is not perfect and needs to constantly be questioned. And just choosing not to travel without considering all these other elements is not necessarily moving us in the right direction. 

Can Birding Save the World? – A Review of “Birding Without Borders”

By Dan Moore, CEO of Pandion Consulting & Facilitation

I have always liked the concept of reading. Tons of emotion and information packed into a bunch of words, leading to images formed inside your head using your own imagination. It is incredible to put yourself in someone else’s adventure while making it your own. I still remember reading “Mr. Mysterious and Company” back in 5th grade.
The reality is because I spend so much time savoring all the words it takes me a while to read books and I often lose interest. I’ve tried speed reading, but I end up daydreaming when I am supposed to be comprehending what I’m reading. Stacks of unread books sit on my shelf and half-read books sit next to my bed. So when my in-laws gave me a book for Christmas this year, while the title intrigued me, I wasn’t too excited for yet another book I probably will never get to.
Not sure what motivated me back in February to pick up this book. Probably I was waiting for a friend to play a move in Words with Friends (another reason books remain unread). I started reading Birding Without Borders by Noah Strycker and three chapters in the switch had been flipped. I got up from bed (probably about midnight) and got online to sign up for e-bird and bought a new, more functional, pair of binoculars. When I went back to bed I started listing all the birds I already knew that could get me towards my (very) modest goal of seeing 100 bird species this year. I came up with 80 and then fell asleep.
I have been into wildlife my whole life, and thanks to learning from my incredible colleagues when I worked at Discovery Park, I have also been capable of knowing what many of the birds I am looking at. But I have almost never “gone birding” and certainly didn’t wake up early on a Saturday to go see what was migrating through.
Thanks to a book I have made the switch from “bird enthusiast” to “aspiring birder”. The difference being that I am not only interested in knowing what I’m looking at and appreciating nature, but now I actually seek out these animals and spend time trying to understand the subtleties between species. I am enjoying setting goals to find specific birds, and when you submit a checklist on e-bird your tally gets compiled to an international data base dedicated to bird knowledge and wildlife conservation.
As with all goals, I have now reassessed what is possible now that I have started working towards it. My 100th bird species (a Common Sandpiper) was seen in Italy over a month ago (thanks to the help of bird guide Marco Valtriani). My 100th bird species in the United States, 149th of the year, was fittingly just seen in my in-laws’ back yard (an Evening Grosbeak). Now I am going for 100 species in Washington State. 31 more to go. While the goals are fun to achieve, and quite small for most birders, what I am really loving is getting to know who lives in the places I visit – whether my backyard or a destination I’m traveling to. It is fun to look forward to waking up early on a weekend to go hang out in nature. And it is usually quite peaceful out in parks before most people get there.
Strycker’s insane goal of seeing 5000 species (about half the world’s known bird species) in one year might sound like just another tale about a man trying to add another notch to his belt – not the type of thing that typically interests me. Instead, it was a story about what can be accomplished when humans work together. The power of a global community’s love of nature and wildlife. What I appreciated about this book is the combination of travel story, wildlife watching log, and what is great about humanity. Even with the tally of birds counting in the background, the showcase of the story was the birds being described in incredible detail. And the heroes of the story were the dedicated and knowledgable birders that are now found in almost every corner of the globe. Their passion and knowledge is what helped Strycker surpass his goal by over 1000 species, and they are working hard to help in conservation of these creatures that face enormous pressures from human encroachment and climate change. Can birding save the world? I think it can at least help in conservation of wildlife. I think it also helps connect people around the globe, and better connect people to the places they travel. Most importantly, I think birding opens up our eyes to seeing the beauty and complexity of nature.
You don’t have to be a birder to like this book, but be careful you may want to become one after reading it.
Here is the book that got me interested in birding:
See Noah Strycker giving a Ted Talk in Salem Oregon earlier this year:
Get started with birding by visiting e-bird.