playing at being green

China Post editorial:

Politicians shouldn't just play the green card

It was not so long ago that Taiwan's High Speed Rail was touted as a “green alternative” that would emit fewer global-warming gases than the packs of airplanes shuttling passengers between northern and southern Taiwan.

Politicians like to cite such examples when wishing to display their environmental credentials. But are they just playing at being green?

After all, successful operation of the HSR — combined with the current economic downturn — has significantly reduced the numbers of Taiwan's domestic flights. Given that flying, particularly the short-haul operations into which all Taiwan's flights fall, produces the most climate-change emissions of all forms of transportation; and since emissions higher in the atmosphere produce effects larger than those at ground level, politicians might be expected to be singing the praises of the recent reduction in air transport.

So why last week did Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu say that her administration would make every effort to increase the number of flights to and from the city's airport? Destinations, she said, would not only include the nation's major trading partners — the United States, Japan and China — but also the nation's capital, Taipei. Moreover, the city government would work to improve the airport's infrastructure, thus enhancing development of local industries and tourism, and raising the volume of passenger and freight traffic.

Presumably this was meant to signal good news to the local business community in advance of the year-end elections. Unfortunately this is bad news for the environment. The costs of building or improving an airport are, like those of buying or maintaining a car, large in comparison to day-to-day operational costs. This means that after the investment is made, it would be financially nonsensical not to make use them. Thus people use their cars for even short trips to the shops where buses would be more economical, and governments and airport authorities promote airplane use even for short domestic routes where trains make much more sense.

Until the environmental costs are somehow included in the price of a ticket, people will not make the right decisions. This is the ridiculous situation in Europe, which has some of the highest rail prices in the world and, due to decades of state support and tax-free fuel, some of the lowest air fares. Similarly even countries that signed up to national emissions targets under the Kyoto Protocol are only required to take into account those emissions produced by domestic flights. Little is being done to limit emissions from international flights, which consequently have almost doubled in less than two decades despite aircraft manufacturers' claims of more efficient fuel consumption and lower emissions.

President Ma Ying-jeou was also in the news last week touting the contribution of five million tourists and cross-strait flights to Taiwan's economy. Unfortunately, given humankind's current understanding of climate change, simple economic calculations of tourists admitted and dollars earned do not tell the whole story.

As an island, especially one that is relatively far from even its closest neighbors, Taiwan is in a difficult position: both visitors to Taiwan and Taiwanese going abroad really have only one transport option.

This is not to say that nothing can be done, however. With regard to air freight, consumers can reflect on the “true costs” of the items in their shopping baskets and buy locally manufactured goods with low carbon footprints and eschew out-of-season fresh produce flown in from overseas.

Domestic journeys taken by bus, train and even private car with multiple occupancy all produce lower emissions than flying. And companies that, out of environmental concerns, have experimented with reducing business flights through the use of video conferencing are reporting additional benefits in efficiency of workers not exhausted by travel. Similarly, individuals can use Web cams to contact distant family and friends.

When choosing a vacation, if five million tourists per year think Taiwan is worth a visit, Taiwanese might also look for destinations nearer home.

And if flights must be taken, more people per plane means that traveling in economy class produces fewer emissions, and flying in the daytime is better as night-time flights have greater impact on the environment. Purchasing so-called carbon offsets — that is, paying a few guilt-easing dollars for trees to be planted elsewhere in the world to soak up the carbon dioxide produced in more affluent countries — may prove to have some value down the line, but since these projects are calculated in terms of 40, 50 or even 60 years, they will be of little help during our own lifetimes.

No, the responsibility lies with the current generation. And since the climate impact of air transport is not adequately regulated under national and international laws, it means that at present the onus is on individuals and private companies to take the initiative and find more sustainable lifestyles and ways of doing business.