A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travel Regions » Europe
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old April 3rd, 2007, 04:00 PM posted to rec.travel.europe
Hatunen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,483
Default Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes

On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 15:38:58 +0200, Martin
wrote:

On 03 Apr 2007 13:36:56 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:

(Martin) wrote in
m:

On 3 Apr 2007 05:20:08 -0700, "ocelot"
wrote:

Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes


Is "ten times less" the same as "one tenth"?

Taking into account the CO2 generated during manufacture of the
rails, boring the tunnels and other mundane things that are for
some reason are excluded?


Presumably then, you've made the same accounting for the manufacture
of the aircraft, the construction and maintenance of the airports and
the extraction, distillation and transport of the fuel "and other
mundane things that are for some reason [are] excluded"?


er I'm not the one making silly claims for Eurostar.


But you hhave made the claims addressed above, albeit by
indirection.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
  #12  
Old April 3rd, 2007, 04:02 PM posted to rec.travel.europe
Tim C.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,204
Default Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes

Following up to Martin :

On 3 Apr 2007 05:20:08 -0700, "ocelot" wrote:

Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes


Taking into account the CO2 generated during manufacture of the rails, boring
the tunnels and other mundane things that are for some reason are excluded?

The amount of CO2 generated flying the same route is insignificant.


Adding in the CO2 produced by building the runways, car-parks at the
airports ....
--
Tim C.
  #13  
Old April 3rd, 2007, 04:02 PM posted to rec.travel.europe
Hatunen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,483
Default Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes

On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:04:17 +0200, Martin
wrote:

On 3 Apr 2007 06:52:27 -0700, "ocelot" wrote:

Martin is just being argumentative......again


I was wondering why you cut and paste these articles to rte.


It certainly seems appropriate to travel in Europe.

Do you believe all this crap?


First you need to demonstrate it really is crap instead of doing
all that arm waving.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
  #14  
Old April 3rd, 2007, 04:08 PM posted to rec.travel.europe
Iceman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 877
Default Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes

On Apr 3, 9:02 am, "William Black"
wrote:
"Iceman" wrote in message

I'm all in favour of travelling by train, or even bus.

However I have to travel from the North of England to India once or twice a
year.



Over that distance it is unrealistic to travel any other way besides
plane. But trains should replace most short-distance flights. There
should hardly be any domestic flights anywhere in Western Europe. A
lot of the concern about aviation CO2 emissions is from the very rapid
growth in short-distance flights worldwide. Long-distance flights are
far more polluting but are still a tiny percentage of all flights.

Security at air-ports are so bad these days and so I've considered all the
other possible options:

Travelling by bus, except you can't travel to India by bus any more because
the USA has turned a reasonable proportion of the intervening terrain into a
war zone.



Believe it or not, that was a popular road trip in the 1970's. From
Western Europe to Istanbul, and then to Kathmandu passing through
Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India.

Heathrow is a hell hole run by morons with a security fixation, KLM loses
your luggage so cutting Heathrow out and going via Holland from a UK
provincial air-port is a non starter as well.

Suggestions anyone?



Get a flight from Manchester that stops in an efficient, medium-size
European airport - can you fly SAS through Copenhagen, or Austrian
through Vienna? Lufthansa flies to a couple Indian airports, just
connect through Munich or Dusseldorf instead of Frankfurt if you can
help it.

  #15  
Old April 3rd, 2007, 04:21 PM posted to rec.travel.europe
William Black
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,125
Default Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes


"Iceman" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Apr 3, 9:02 am, "William Black"
wrote:


Travelling by bus, except you can't travel to India by bus any more
because
the USA has turned a reasonable proportion of the intervening terrain
into a
war zone.



Believe it or not, that was a popular road trip in the 1970's.


Which is why I typed 'except you can't travel to India by bus any more'.

Heathrow is a hell hole run by morons with a security fixation, KLM
loses
your luggage so cutting Heathrow out and going via Holland from a UK
provincial air-port is a non starter as well.

Suggestions anyone?



Get a flight from Manchester that stops in an efficient, medium-size
European airport - can you fly SAS through Copenhagen, or Austrian
through Vienna? Lufthansa flies to a couple Indian airports, just
connect through Munich or Dusseldorf instead of Frankfurt if you can
help it.


My sister flew there with Lufthansa from Birmingham.

I'll think about it and if I can get a cheap enough flight I'll try it.

Mind you, she said it was awful, with only one meal provided, and they
didn't turn the lights out for people to sleep.

--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.




  #16  
Old April 3rd, 2007, 04:21 PM posted to rec.travel.europe
Hatunen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,483
Default Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes

On 3 Apr 2007 08:08:59 -0700, "Iceman"
wrote:

On Apr 3, 9:02 am, "William Black"
wrote:
"Iceman" wrote in message

I'm all in favour of travelling by train, or even bus.

However I have to travel from the North of England to India once or twice a
year.



Over that distance it is unrealistic to travel any other way besides
plane. But trains should replace most short-distance flights. There
should hardly be any domestic flights anywhere in Western Europe.


I wonder if the rails have the capacity to carry all the extra
traffic now carried by short-haul airlines?

What do you think should be the deciding distance? What is the
definition of short-haul? I've been on the ICE from Munich to
Berlin and at six or seven hours we began to think perhaps we
should have flown after all.

We did fly from Helsinki to Bonn. What would you suggest as the
train route to have taken? (Of course, if Estonia would develop
passenger service to the south we'd be willing to try that.)


--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
  #17  
Old April 3rd, 2007, 04:26 PM posted to rec.travel.europe
William Black
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,125
Default Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes


"Hatunen" wrote in message
...
On 3 Apr 2007 08:08:59 -0700, "Iceman"
wrote:

On Apr 3, 9:02 am, "William Black"
wrote:
"Iceman" wrote in message

I'm all in favour of travelling by train, or even bus.

However I have to travel from the North of England to India once or
twice a
year.



Over that distance it is unrealistic to travel any other way besides
plane. But trains should replace most short-distance flights. There
should hardly be any domestic flights anywhere in Western Europe.


I wonder if the rails have the capacity to carry all the extra
traffic now carried by short-haul airlines?


Price is an issue as well.

Travelling on the train across borders in Europe is an expensive way to
travel compared to low cost air travel.

I can fly to Prague for £40, I can't get to a UK point of exit for France
on a train for that ...

--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.




  #18  
Old April 3rd, 2007, 04:32 PM posted to rec.travel.europe
Markku Grönroos
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,095
Default Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes


"Iceman" kirjoitti
legroups.com...

Travelling by bus, except you can't travel to India by bus any more
because
the USA has turned a reasonable proportion of the intervening terrain
into a
war zone.



Believe it or not, that was a popular road trip in the 1970's. From
Western Europe to Istanbul, and then to Kathmandu passing through
Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India.

I guess it is rather popular even today. Naturally only foolhardy travellers
try it anywhere in Afghanistan. There aren't too many entry points on ground
for Western travellers between Pakistan and India I assume. Perhaps we
should reach any destination on foot. As far as carbondioxide is concerned,
exhalation naturally emits it. Which way conserves nature better: walking or
running. Man also farts around 300 milliliters of gas per day. In order to
maintain decent digestion we must leak a bit. This should be an excellent
opportunity for tax collection: more energy flows through man's system, more
he pollutes and pays for the "keep the environment tidy" tax.

  #19  
Old April 3rd, 2007, 04:33 PM posted to rec.travel.europe
Iceman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 877
Default Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes

On Apr 3, 10:21 am, Hatunen wrote:
On 3 Apr 2007 08:08:59 -0700, "Iceman"
wrote:

On Apr 3, 9:02 am, "William Black"
wrote:
"Iceman" wrote in message


I'm all in favour of travelling by train, or even bus.


However I have to travel from the North of England to India once or twice a
year.


Over that distance it is unrealistic to travel any other way besides
plane. But trains should replace most short-distance flights. There
should hardly be any domestic flights anywhere in Western Europe.


I wonder if the rails have the capacity to carry all the extra
traffic now carried by short-haul airlines?



Well, if there was more investment in rails there would be.

What do you think should be the deciding distance? What is the
definition of short-haul? I've been on the ICE from Munich to
Berlin and at six or seven hours we began to think perhaps we
should have flown after all.



Isn't that going to be a high-speed route very soon? If there is a
3-4 hour train trip, then there shouldn't need to be a flight.

We did fly from Helsinki to Bonn. What would you suggest as the
train route to have taken? (Of course, if Estonia would develop
passenger service to the south we'd be willing to try that.)



That's why I said "domestic" flights. Obviously Lisbon to Athens is
not a doable rail journey for most people.

  #20  
Old April 3rd, 2007, 04:34 PM posted to rec.travel.europe
Iceman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 877
Default Eurostar generates ten times less CO2 than flying the same routes

On Apr 3, 10:26 am, "William Black"
wrote:
"Hatunen" wrote in message

...



On 3 Apr 2007 08:08:59 -0700, "Iceman"
wrote:


On Apr 3, 9:02 am, "William Black"
wrote:
"Iceman" wrote in message


I'm all in favour of travelling by train, or even bus.


However I have to travel from the North of England to India once or
twice a
year.


Over that distance it is unrealistic to travel any other way besides
plane. But trains should replace most short-distance flights. There
should hardly be any domestic flights anywhere in Western Europe.


I wonder if the rails have the capacity to carry all the extra
traffic now carried by short-haul airlines?


Price is an issue as well.

Travelling on the train across borders in Europe is an expensive way to
travel compared to low cost air travel.

I can fly to Prague for £40, I can't get to a UK point of exit for France
on a train for that ...



Many aspects of air travel are heavily subsidized by governments,
while rail systems are often underfunded and neglected. The plane
really shouldn't be that cheap, nor the train that expensive.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Times: Another danger of flying lies not in air but food sufaud Air travel 3 March 11th, 2005 11:12 PM
LAT: Mexico City's new wave of chefs generates heat Biwah Latin America 0 February 23rd, 2005 06:44 PM
Accessing Sunset Times &Times ghptravel.com Europe 8 October 23rd, 2004 05:04 PM
No more Eurostar ? Nick Fisher Europe 18 April 30th, 2004 02:49 PM
FS: Eurostar tickets / VDS: Billets Eurostar Nick Fisher Europe 2 February 28th, 2004 08:05 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.