Verified by 
Environment
How We Destroy the Environment by Flying
Tourists commit an environmental crime every time they fly.
Posted January 24, 2024 Reviewed by Lybi Ma
Long-distance flights add considerably to the carbon footprint. Yet, keen environmentalists continue to fly and affluent people are flying ever more often. How can psychologists account for this inconsistency?
Certainly, the lifestyles of the rich and famous are admired as symbols of success but they also leave huge carbon footprints.
Carbon Footprints of the Affluent
According to an Oxfam report, the top 10 percent of people, by income, are responsible for 60 percent of climate change. Similarly, climate change is mostly caused by the economies of affluent countries. If it were not for wealthy countries, there would be no climate problem. This point is highlighted by analyzing the low carbon footprint of any developing country. Take the case of Tonga.
Sitting in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, the southernmost part of Polynesia Tonga has a tropical climate having minimal need for energy, heating or cooling. Its 70 islands are covered with trees that remove carbon from the atmosphere while providing shade from the warm sun.
Life in Tonga
Residents of affluent countries have correspondingly large carbon footprints. Americans generate around 15 tons of carbon dioxide each year. In the island nation of Tonga, the carbon footprint is just a single ton per person per year (1.1 tons). Tonga has little manufacturing industry and the main source of wealth is from agriculture, forestry, and fishing, with a notable handicrafts industry. Otherwise, much of Tonga's foreign currency comes from remittances sent by Tongans working in Australia.
If a person lives in the U.S., they have little choice but to have a big carbon footprint. With high temperatures in summer and low temperatures in winter, residents use a lot of energy to heat and cool their generally oversized homes.
Most workers drive to work each day because public transportation is patchy at best. It is a car-based economy. An American generates a heavy carbon footprint just to survive. Then there is the substantial carbon footprint associated with industry, infrastructure, and home construction. Add on any conspicuous consumption, including long-distance flying, and you get to 15 tons of carbon dioxide per person.
A Tongan's low carbon footprint is partly determined by the low level of development of the country. They are unlikely to own a car because there are few paved roads. It is easy to walk around most of the small islands and travel is otherwise by small fishing boats, many of which have gasoline engines. There is little heavy industry.
Just as an American's carbon footprint is largely determined by the structure of the American economy. the low carbon footprint of Tongans is due to the structure of their island economy. Tongans do not need to use nearly as much energy as Americans do. Half of their needs are provided by renewable sources. The Tongan GDP is just a tenth that of America's. When foreign remittances are subtracted, it is only around a twentieth.
Just by living in Tonga, a person's carbon footprint declines to less than a ton at least if they are not frequent fliers. Tonga offers a template for how to live in tune with nature.
Leisure travel offers a clear counter example of environmental irresponsibility considering that a single long-distance trip by air produces substantially more carbon than the entire footprint of an average Tongan.
Given the significant climate cost of air travel, why are consumers so willing to make many unnecessary long-distance flights? The primary motive appears to be social competition—keeping up with the Joneses.
Conspicuous Consumption
Early sociologist Thorstein Veblen was a student of the elite and their wasteful spending. These habits are spreading throughout contemporary affluent societies given the popularity of luxury goods. Veblen concluded that the primary enjoyment from money was spending it in ways that impressed others. In his time, this meant stately homes, lavish dress, an army of domestic servants, or throwing away a fortune on a hand of cards. In our time, foreign travel is one of the most popular extravagances.
In developed countries, about three-fourths of the economy is driven by consumer spending. Much of this is discretionary spending. It goes to expensive items like brand-name clothes, or luxury cars that are unnecessary or wasteful. All of this has a heavy carbon footprint that helps explain why rich people are doing so much damage to the environment. Air travel is different only because the connection between luxury spending and carbon pollution is so direct and incontrovertible.
Long-distance tourism is socially reinforced. (Of course, some remote locations, like Hawaii, also rely on tourist revenues). The desire to keep up with our peers is a powerful incentive. On the other hand, there is no obvious cost to having a large carbon footprint. Indeed, the people who are most admired in our global society are wealthy, maintain an opulent lifestyle, and therefore create a large carbon footprint.
