Business travel and climate change

The Pandemic has brought changes that we could never have anticipated. Many are devastating - but some are good for the planet. Fast Company has some interesting things to say about business travel this morning:

• In 2019, employees of the company, Salesforce traveled so much for work that they generated a combined 146,000 metric tons of CO2 emissions. In comparison, 17,500 homes emittted that much over the course of an entire year;

• it would take more than 178,000 acres of forest 12 months to sequester that amount of carbon dioxide - and of course, we are also depleting forests at an alarming rate.

• In its most recent fiscal year, business travel was down 86% - that’s a highly significant reduction

• Salesforce was already prepared to pay for offsets - but recognized that these are not enough.

• Business travel causes huge amounts of air pollution. and business’s carbon footprint is huge. Here is another comparison: one round trip ticket from London to NYC generates more emissions than the average person in 56 countries generates in a full year. Short haul trips are also worse proportionally than longer ones.

• Business travel plays a large role in climate change. But any kind of air travel demands that we consider the impact on the planet.

• Returning to business as usual will immediately create an increase, whether it is for business or holiday travel. It was growing before the pandemic - a 32% increase from 2013 to 2018 - much faster than UN projections.

• 1% of the world’s population accounts for 50% of global aviation emissions, according to a recent study.

• The good news is that companies are waking up to the impact of business travel as they see the difference. It will come back more slowly

Companies have to remember this reality. We live on a planet. We are subjects to its systems. If we destroy the air, we don’t breathe.

That slow pace isn’t because of sustainability concerns, Terry says. Companies may reconsider sending someone abroad for a half day meeting in London because they can save money by doing it virtually. But Evan Konwiser, executive vice president of product and strategy for American Express Global Business Travel (GBT), which oversees corporate travel booking for companies of all sizes, doesn’t see conferences, internal meetings, and even customer meetings staying completely virtual. There have always been costs associated with business travel, not just financial but also in terms of productivity (hello, jet lag). If your company was willing to greenlight travel for conferences, meetings, and so on in 2019, the “vast majority” of those actions, he says, will still be worth a business trip in 2022. In this scenario, companies looking to lower their carbon footprints won’t simply reduce or stop business travel. They’ll focus on lowering travel-related emissions—a distinction that deserves the same scrutiny as broad ‘net zero’ goals.

To Rutherford, the quickest and easiest thing a corporation can do to cut its business-travel emissions (besides keeping employees at home) is to opt for economy over business class. There’s been a lot of resistance to that idea over the years, he acknowledges. People who travel for work like the status that accompanies the front of the plane, and being asked to squeeze into coach for a transatlantic flight just to attend one meeting is unlikely to make someone look fondly on their employer. 

There are other ways to bring down emissions. Rather than purchasing the most economical flight, companies may be more willing to pay a “green premium,” buying a ticket for a more efficient, direct flight over a cheaper, indirect one, or intentionally choosing operators that fly newer, more fuel-efficient aircraft. In June 2020, American Express GBT debuted a feature in its travel management software that lets users filter potential trips by their total emissions. There’s not yet much data on how many companies will opt for the most sustainable trip over the most affordable one, but Nora Lovell Marchant, American Express GBT’s VP of sustainability, thinks it will happen. After all, companies have already shown that they’re willing to pay for carbon offsets, another kind of green premium.   

Changing the mode of travel could also curb emissions. Switching from air to rail could mean a 90% reduction in emissions for that trip, Lovell Marchant says—though she acknowledges that’s easier to do in the European Union than the U.S. (France is one of multiple European countries to recently ban short flights that can be replaced by a train trip, though Rutherford points out there’s a caveat for connecting flights associated with long-haul trips.) 

And finally, there’s Sustainable Aviation Fuels, or SAFs, new fuel innovations that also come with a huge premium. Right now, SAFs aren’t a solution to curbing emissions because usage is so low; less than 0.5% of jet fuels used today are SAFs, Rutherford says, and they can cost as much as four times a typical fuel. But corporations and airlines are beginning to work together to bring down the cost and ramp up use. In October 2020, Microsoft and Alaska Airlines partnered on a SAF deal that involved the tech giant buying SAF credits from a third-party company, which would then supply sustainable fuels to Alaska. Just last month, Microsoft joined with Boeing, Deloitte, Boston Consulting Group, JPMorgan Chase, Netflix, and Salesforce to launch the Sustainable Aviation Buyers Alliance to spur SAF production and technology innovations so these fuels can scale.

THE PANDEMIC PULLED BACK THE CURTAIN ON HOW MUCH OF BUSINESS TRAVEL IS REALLY NECESSARY.

With SAFs comes one big concern: Companies and airlines could “double count” emissions savings. “When you see United or American make an announcement saying ‘we’re going to have a partnership with this corporation and use it to introduce SAFs,’ that’s great,” Rutherford says. “But according to the laws of accounting emissions, that actually means the airline’s greenhouse gas emissions are unchanged. They’ve sold the reduction to a third-party.” The trouble comes if both parties try to claim the reduction. Konwiser recognizes that’s a concern and says American Express GBT is working on solutions.

SAFs could represent a breakthrough solution for future emissions. But the fact remains: We need to make drastic changes right now. “You’re never going to resolve the emissions issue without changes in the system. Technology is not going to cut it,” says Gössling, the sustainable tourism researcher. “We have to really cut down on individual travel and we have to start at the top,” with that 1% of fliers who cause half of all aviation emissions. “It has to start with the very frequent flyers, it has to start with the premium classes, and only then will we stand a chance to manage this through technology.”

To Gössling, the pandemic pulled back the curtain on how much of business travel is really necessary. In the before-times, “People would tell their bosses, ‘Oh I’ve got to fly again because otherwise I’m not really sure we’ll get the deal.’ At the end of the day, maybe that was not really true,” he says.

The world is opening up again and the appeal of business travel is coming back—but the rational arguments against it still exist. It’s just not our own health that’s at risk with every work trip, but our planet’s. 

Innovation in your inboxSign up for the daily newsletter

SIGN UPSee All Newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

Trades transitioning

Here’s an encouraging story published by Fast Company.

“Danish renewable energy giant Ørsted reached an agreement with North America’s Building Trades Unions: The company would hire union members for a series of upcoming U.S. projects. NABTU represents 3 million workers in 14 unions, including electrical, bricklaying, cement, masonry, and more—a group historically skeptical of renewable energy because of its potential to disrupt members’ jobs. “

It deals with three matters that are frequently stumbling blocks. The workers are more than capable of bullding things. They just have to learn how to build something different and have the training provided to do so with proper earnings as they make the transition. The wages that they earn in the new jobs will be comparable to the ones they earned in previous occupations. And to sweeten the deal they will also have added benefits. These transitions are apparently common in Europe. It is time for North American companies to imitate these elements which seem obvious.

Another outstanding site

The Yale Forum on Religion and Ecology is an important site for anyone who sees ecology as a moral and spiritual issue. It has undergone a recent update that makes it even more attractive as a resource for learning. The site tells us this:

“The Mission of the Yale Forum on Religion and Ecology is to inform and inspire people to preserve, protect, and restore the Earth community. The religions of the world transmit ecological and justice perspectives in their scriptures, rituals, and contemplative practices as well as in their moral and ethical commitments.” It goes on to list a number of projects and connections

You can find brief summaries of all the world’s major religions. There are equally impressive materials on climate emergency. Laudato Si, the encylical of Pope Francis, has had considerable impact and these materials have also been collected for reference. There are numerous resources including a regular newsletter. Among the many projects are those relating to to Journey of the Universe project.

For anyone interested in climate change, the foundational information here is of immense value.

Celebrate Earth Day

Happy Earth Day!

Last year was bitter sweet as I had to cancel an arts event, where several artists donated their service to support environmental efforts as part of Earth Day’s 50th anniversary. The earth continues to need our reverence. Thomas Berry suggests the need to reframe our understanding - that humans are subjects along with all the other evolutionary creatures and elements which we have too often thought of as objects for our use and exploitation.

Even in a pandemic there are ways to celebrate:

• Try the quizzes at the Earth Day 2021 site and see what you know: (I’m doing better on climate change than on climate literacy but I have work to do on both.)

• Watch one of these videos:

  • Life in Color With David Attenborough,” on Netflix,

  • “Secrets of the Whales” the project of an even bigger power player, the filmmaker and deep-sea diver James Cameron.

  • Cher and the Loneliest Elephant,” streaming beginning Thursday on Paramount+ and playing on cable May 19 on the Smithsonian Channel,

  • the three hourlong episodes of “A Year to Change the World,” being shown in succession Thursday night on PBS stations. It follows Thunberg, then 16 and 17, as she travels the world in 2019 and 2020, giving speeches at climate conferences and educating herself — and through the documentary, us — i

Working together

This past week was the 10th anniversary of the release of the film, Journey of the Universe. More on that later. The universe consists of a good deal more than the G7 countries - soon to meet later this year. Nevertheless Canada’s academic researchers have recently joined others to encourage the countries of the G7 to work together on key issues. We live on a planet that includes many more countries, but these have some common ground.

The researchers have stressed the need for working together on both health and environmental issues. The latter includes three priorities - climate change, biodiversity and better sharing of health data in emergencies like the current pandemic. Usually such information is provided before meetings, but the recent ones strongly stress the need for collective action. No country can work alone.

Climate change and loss of biodiversity have clear connections. When weather affects the food chain, a global reaction follows and affects health everywhere. The recommendations include better sharing of data and principles of common responses. Reversing biodiversity loss is key. We have to value nature, not exploit it. The effects of doing so affect the health and safety of the most disadvantaged both within and beyond our shores. Proposals need to be concrete.

Talking about net zero emissions from coal, oil and natural gas is not the same thing as implementing the necessary changes. We have learned that putting the economy ahead of global health has consequences that affect us all. But it is not just governments that have to take action on their own. Politicians are elected to lead - but they have to follow the wishes of an informed public committed to the changes that create a better world for all.