Marianne Loof column
Headlines last week: “Paris climate goals unattainable due to air traffic.” In his promotional research, Paul Peeters from the TU Delft shows that in the year 2100 global air-miles will have increased nine-fold, causing enough CO2-emissions to make the Paris agreements an absolute fantasy.
It is an alarming and confronting vision. Especially because I find myself flying more frequently and further away every year; not for holidays, which apparently accounts for ninety percent of flights, but for business. That makes it slightly less of a burden on my conscience, but still: how do I weigh my decisions? Namely, the issue exposes a paradox between our wish to contribute to large questions in other parts of the world and the environmental consequences of this work.
When do our ambitions and efforts justify the seemingly necessary international travels? Perhaps working on a circular neighborhood in Luxembourg still weighs out against regular visits to our southern partners. But how about flying to Africa to work on desert-greening, or to build schools that contribute to the preservation of local heritage and the creation of new economic opportunities? What to think of working in Russia, for which we make long flights far into Siberia? I am absolutely convinced that our integral approach of architecture, urban- and landscape design is of great added value to sustainable housing. But meanwhile I am flying ever more frequently.
Isolating ourselves and simply not flying anymore does not seem like a sensible solution. International collaboration, and the exchange of knowledge, experience and vision that comes with it, are crucial ingredients for saving our planet. For now, flying is a necessary evil.
I guess, in the meantime, I will muffle my conscience with holidays close to home in an electric car.
November 2017, Cobouw.nl