If you’re looking to blame someone for global warming, consider Peter Jackson. The director behind the blockbuster The Lord of the Rings movie trilogy used landscapes from his native New Zealand to create some stunning film backdrops — both wowing audiences and inspiring a travel boom to his two-island homeland south of Australia. By the time the final instalment, The Return of the King, came out in 2003, tourism to New Zealand had doubled, replacing dairy farming as the country’s No. 1 industry.

Beyond the fact that the Kiwis must now deal with busloads of gawking travellers from North America and Europe pointing at wildlife and asking “is that a koala bear?”, a recent University of Oregon study uncovered a somewhat startling statistic. In 2005, carbon emissions from the 2.4 million international return air flights by visitors to New Zealand was 7.9 million tonnes: about the same as the total emissions from each and every one of that country’s coal, gas and oil-fired power plants.

Of course this eco-mess isn’t really Peter Jackson’s fault. However, it does highlight a very real dilemma: the link between air travel and global warming.

The environmental consequences of air travel have become a huge issue in recent years. Eco-lobbyists have started pointing out the sins of the travel industry, trying to awaken the public to the fact that all those jumbo jets flitting about our skies are spewing tonnes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

In an ever-shrinking, travel-crazed world, few are exempt from the dilemma over the ecological costs of taking flight. Prince Charles, recently awarded Harvard’s Global Environmental Citizen prize for all the work he’s done over the years to help protect the environment, was lambasted by eco-lobbyists for flying the 5,500 kilometres from England to New York to accept the prize. Stinging from accusations of “green hypocrisy,” the abashed prince later cancelled his annual ski trip to Switzerland to make amends.

Closer to home, An Inconvenient Truth’s Al Gore has taken flack for his carbon-spewing travel itinerary, including the use of a private jet to make promotional appearances. Even Canadian environmental guru David Suzuki hasn’t escaped the notice of the extreme-green lobby, criticized by some for crossing the country in a campaign to encourage greater awareness of environmental issues. To his credit, he took the bus.

The Ugly Facts of Flying

Deborah Carlson, a climate change campaigner for the David Suzuki Foundation, is like many Canadians: someone who both cares about the environment and enjoys seeing the world. But then she did a little research into the environmental effects of air travel. “I was really surprised when I found out the impact of flying. It’s quite an eye-opener,” says Carlson, who adds, “I don’t travel as much as I used to.”

According to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1992 airplane emissions accounted for about 3.5 per cent of the total human contribution to global warming. A more recent study suggests this number is spiraling upwards: a 2005 joint European study estimated the year 2000 figure to be between four and nine per cent, with growth in C02 emissions from international aviation increasing by 83 per cent over 1990 levels. Based on these kinds of figures, various international eco-campaign groups have begun calling aviation the fastest growing cause of climate change.

Part of the problem is that flying is more popular than ever, with the global aviation sector growing by more than four per cent every year. As well, international flights were exempt from the Kyoto Accord, meaning that even as other industry sectors struggled to meet emission-reduction targets, international aviation has remained largely unchecked.

In addition, it turns out airplane emissions are a lot worse than other forms of greenhouse gas creation. Carlson says the problem has to do with altitude. “The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change did a study a number of years back,” says Carlson, “and they found the impact of high-altitude emissions was two to four times greater than the impact of the C02 alone.” What this means is that on a per-passenger, per-kilometre basis, airplanes generate a significantly greater greenhouse effect than trains, buses and boats.

Finally — and here’s the rub for an environmentally conscientious person — decisions about air travel are the ones over which we have the greatest individual control when it comes to greenhouse gas reduction. To put this in perspective, realize that the average Canadian generates about nine tonnes of C02 annually, through activities like using electricity, home heating and commuting to work. Being careful — using energy-efficient compact fluorescent bulbs, riding a bicycle to work and using reusable cloth bags — might reduce that figure by a tonne or two. However, add a single round-trip flight from Calgary to London and you’ve just boosted your total by three tonnes — a more than thirty per cent jump over the average yearly carbon budget.

Door Number 1: Carbon Offsets

It all sounds a bit grim for the environmentally concerned traveller. Though there is a solution designed to allow you to buy your cake in Paris and eat it there, too — and it’s called carbon offsets.

The travel industry has jumped all over this, as have a variety of green and media savvy individuals and organizations. Everyone from Brad Pitt to Jarome Iginla and the Rolling Stones is using carbon offsets. Al Gore and David Suzuki have “offset” their environmental campaign tours, and both the Super Bowl and the FIFA World Cup declared themselves “climate neutral” on the basis of carbon offsets.

So what is this climate wonder drug? The idea is that if you generate greenhouse gases through some activity such as flying, you can “offset” your emissions by investing in a carbon reduction project (for example, reforestation, or the creation of a wind farm). The theory is that your investment will prevent an amount of C02 equal to that which you produced from being generated.

There are now a host of online carbon offset providers offering to “neutralize” the carbon footprint of your next trip with just a few keystrokes, mouse clicks and, of course, your credit card number. Here’s how it works. Prior to your next trip, visit the website of a carbon offset provider (for example, www.planetair.ca, a site recommended by the David Suzuki Foundation). There, simply plug in your departure and arrival airports, let’s say Calgary International to Pearson International in Toronto. An online carbon calculator immediately tells you that your 5,376-kilometre round-trip journey is going to generate 1.18 tonnes of C02 emissions. At the same time, the site tells you that a $27.14 donation (or $40.12 for the Gold Standard — we’ll get to that in a bit) to a wind energy farm in northern Madagascar will eliminate an equivalent 1.18 tonnes of C02 from the atmosphere.

Eager to look green, airlines and travel companies have jumped on the idea. Last May, Air Canada introduced a carbon credits program, whereby flyers have the option to add a carbon offset onto the price of their ticket — with the money going to Toronto-based offset provider Zerofootprint (www.zerofootprint.net). Westjet will actually pay for your carbon offset — if you purchase your ticket by clicking through the website of its offset partner, Offsetters (www.offsetters.ca). Travelocity.ca has a similar program, and internationally, British Airways, Virgin Atlantic, Lufthansa, Continental and Delta are just a few of the carriers who have joined the carbon offsets bandwagon.

The Flight in the Ointment

During his four-minute opinion segment on the CBC’s National, the diligently acerbic Rex Murphy recently went off on carbon offsets. He called out the Brad Pitts and J. Los of the world, suggesting that there is an inherent hypocrisy to maintaining a “prodigal lifestyle” while using carbon offsets simply as a way to “minimize or neuter your environmental guilt.” He wasn’t the only one who felt this way; a write-in viewer added the colourful observation that carbon offsets are “like paying $100 to the SPCA so you can keep kicking your dog.”

Critics of carbon offsets say that they send a message that it’s OK to pollute — so long as you’re rich and can afford to. James Tansey, a University of British Columbia business professor, begs to differ. A couple of years ago, he started a non-profit carbon offset company called Offsetters. He says that “most of the people who purchase offsets from us, in fact all of them, are not rich polluters; they’re just people who care about climate change and want to do something very quickly and very actively about it.”

Proponents of carbon offset programs like Tansey point out that offsets bring environmental issues to the forefront, allowing consumers to understand the scale of their emissions and what they can do about them. At the same time, carbon offsets can actively support projects that produce real C02 reductions in the atmosphere.

The more crucial issue, according to both Tansey and Carlson, is making sure that the offsets are of high quality. This means that the carbon reduction is real, measurable and permanent. It also means that the project being funded fulfils the criteria of additionality — that it would not have happened anyway without the carbon offset investment.

Verifying the quality of offsets, however, is a challenge for the average consumer who can’t simply pop over to Lima to see how those new fuel-efficient wood stoves are doing. According to Dr. Bob Page, a professor of environmental management and sustainability at the University of Calgary, part of the problem is the lack of regulation for carbon offsets. “We have no rules for that in Canada. The difficulty you get into is that you’ve got to take people’s word for [the quality of carbon offsets]. Internationally there are rules, but domestically here in Canada, the federal government has not set up those rules.”

Hence, for those looking to purchase carbon offsets, it’s caveat emptor. “Travellers need to be informed, “says Laura Hickman, co-chair of the Calgary chapter of the Sierra Club. “There’s lots of information on the web now. If you’re looking for offsets, you need to do the research to make sure it’s meaningful.”

But there is help. Carlson suggests looking for companies that offer the Gold Standard designation. Gold Standard is a rigorous UN-accredited independent body that certifies carbon reduction projects in developing countries.

For domestic offset projects (Gold Standard doesn’t manage projects in Kyoto signatory countries like Canada), you’ll need to dig a bit deeper to see how credible an organization’s standards and verification processes are. Tansey, for example, points out that Offsetters’ domestic offsets are high quality because they follow a number of international standards criteria, including the CDM (Clean Development Mechanism) guidelines for greenhouse gas reduction developed under Kyoto, and because they use local engineering firms to provide third party verification. For a general resource evaluating offsets along these kinds of criteria, visit www.cleanair-coolplanet.org and download A Consumer’s Guide to Retail Offset Providers.

Curbing Carbs

Though carbon offsets have their critics, they seem to be generally supported by most mainstream environmental groups. However, Carlson points out that, “Carbon offsets are just one piece of the puzzle. We look at this as part of an overall carbon neutral strategy. It’s definitely important to also make direct reductions in emissions.”

For travellers, Carlson has a few suggestions. “You can fly less. Where there is an alternative form of transit, use it; you can take the train, take the bus; even travelling in a car with four people will still be more friendly to the climate than flying.”

“Another easy idea is simply try to take a vacation a little closer to home,” adds Carlson. “In Canada, most of us live in locations where we have literally hundreds of thousands of tourists coming every year. Often we haven’t seen the things that are in our backyard.”

Finally, travellers can make good environmental decisions when they land, like using public transit systems where possible, and doing a bit of research online to find out if you can rent hybrid vehicles at your destination.

Travel Values

Avril Johnson is a 28-year-old consultant with a postgraduate degree in environmental engineering who supports environmental issues. She is also an avid traveller who last year logged 72 flights. Though many were for work, her trips did include whitewater rafting in Zambia, hiking in Tibet and visiting places as far away as Angola, Pakistan and China.

She’s aware of travel C02 issues and gives a guilty laugh when acknowledging her hefty air mile balance. “I do always offset my carbon when flying personally. But I guess I’m not willing to give up the travel,” says Johnson who feels that it has made her a better, more rounded person.

She might have quoted Mark Twain, who in 1869 wrote “Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one's lifetime.”

No matter how you cut it, travel creates greenhouse gases. Until the invention of Star Trek transporter technology, or at least modes of travel that can run on renewable energy sources, seeing the world will have an ecological cost. However, as Twain pointed out, there is an ineffable benefit to travel, beyond postcards, pictures and souvenirs purchased at the local market. It’s a dilemma to be certain, but armed with some knowledge, a bit of restraint and a few offsets, perhaps it’s one we can learn to live with.

Carb-less Travel

Five Tips to Cutting Back Your Travel C02

1. Stay grounded

Use the train, bus or boat for short distances, such as hopping from country to country in Europe. Because a lot of aircraft emissions are created during take off and landing, short-haul flights are particularly bad for the environment.

2. Avoid night flights

A Leeds University study found that the trails of condensation from aircraft — contrails — which absorb heat from the ground, have a significantly greater warming effect at night than during the day.

3. Pack less

Every kilogram of weight adds to the fuel burned during the flight.

4. Make good decisions after landing

Where possible, use local transit systems or green alternatives such as hybrid rental vehicles.

5. Buy high-quality carbon offsets

Look for carbon offsets adhering to the Gold Standard, or that follow other strong international standards backed up by independent third-party verification.