carbon offset train travel

Carbon offsetting: How to calculate your carbon footprint when you travel

Editor's Note

Whether at home or on a trip, your actions consume energy and create carbon emissions.

While you may already know that you can calculate your emissions for everyday activities, you might not realize that you can also calculate them for a specific trip or event.

To help you better understand the process, we've created this guide focusing on carbon emissions from travel. In addition to delving into the details of how to calculate your footprint for lodging and various modes of transportation, we'll take a closer look at what purchasing an offset entails, including which services are the most reputable.

Sign up for our daily newsletter for more TPG news delivered each morning to your inbox.

How to calculate the carbon footprint of a trip

Tourism creates about 8% of the world's carbon emissions, according to Sustainable Travel International , a nonprofit organization that works with travelers, businesses and destinations to apply innovative conservation solutions to tourism.

You can calculate your emissions for both everyday life and trips using a carbon footprint calculator. For travel, these calculators consider the average carbon emissions of various travel types. Sustainable Travel International's calculator, for example, assumes that a passenger will emit 0.14 to 0.55 kilograms (0.31 to 1.21 pounds) of carbon emissions per kilometer (which equals a little more than half a mile) flown, depending on cabin class and flight distance.

But aircraft type and loads also play a role. For other types of transportation, fuel type is important, too. Some calculators even include emissions from vehicle manufacturing, which may increase based on the vehicle's age.

In short, different calculators will yield different results based on their underlying assumptions. As such, it's worth checking out several different options when figuring out your emissions.

For example, the Environmental Protection Agency has a carbon footprint calculator , but it unfortunately only calculates your footprint in three household areas: home energy, transportation and waste. So, although this calculator can help you determine your household's carbon emissions, it won't help you calculate your emissions from travel.

If you want to calculate your annual household and travel emissions all at once, Conservation International, a nonprofit organization that focuses on finding solutions to environmental issues, has a carbon footprint calculator that you may want to try.

Conservation International's calculator also shows the math behind its results. So, you could use these numbers (admittedly based on energy use data from 2013 and 2015) to calculate your travel emissions separately from your household emissions.

The calculator assumes one night in an accommodation produces about 0.0383 metric tons of carbon emissions per occupied room. For passenger transport, it assumes the following:

• Flights less than 300 miles: 0.00025 metric tons of carbon emissions are produced per passenger mile.
• Flights of 300 to 2,299 miles: 0.00014 metric tons of carbon emissions are produced per passenger mile.
• Flights of 2,300 miles or more: 0.00017 metric tons of carbon emissions are produced per passenger mile.
• Intercity rail: 0.00014 metric tons of carbon emissions are produced per passenger mile.
• Commuter rail: 0.00017 metric tons of carbon emissions are produced per passenger mile.
• Subway, metro and trams: 0.00012 metric tons of carbon emissions are produced per passenger mile.
• Bus: 0.00006 metric tons of carbon emissions are produced per passenger mile.

Related: This travel company will plant trees for every flight and hotel room booked

Other calculators can help you determine your emissions from a specific flight in more detail.

For example, Atmosfair's calculator totals your flight emissions based on route, cabin and aircraft type. However, this calculator can be tedious to use if you have a lot of flights to offset, as it only lets you calculate one at a time.

If you're traveling by boat or car, you may want to use Sustainable Travel International's calculator since most other travel calculators don't specifically consider these modes of transportation. And if you want to calculate your carbon emissions based on miles flown, BlueSkyModel's air-mile model provides a simple calculation broken down by airline, aircraft and plane manufacturer.

There's also the Toitu Envirocare Household Calculator . This calculator's assumptions are based on average emissions in New Zealand , so the calculator will be most accurate when traveling in New Zealand. But you can use the calculator to estimate emissions from various lodging types, vehicles, public transport and flights in other places, too. As such, it may still be worth using when traveling outside New Zealand, especially if you tend to stay at less conventional lodging options.

Related: What your favorite airlines and hotels are doing to fight climate change

Which carbon footprint calculator should you use?

You should use the carbon footprint calculator or method that makes sense for your plans and that will be easiest for you to do the math with.

For example, Atmosfair's calculator is likely the most accurate for flights out of all the calculators discussed, but I use BlueSkyModel's air-mile model since it allows me to quickly determine my carbon emissions for all of the flights I take each year based on the mileage I've flown.

While I haven't tried offsetting carbon emissions from hotel stays, if I did, I'd likely use a calculator that walks me through the math used to determine its results, such as the one offered by Conservation International or the Toitu Envirocare Household Calculator.

After all, you don't have to calculate your carbon emissions exactly for your offset to make a difference.

How to offset your carbon footprint from traveling

Regardless of which carbon emissions calculator or calculation method you use, know that you don't have to buy carbon offsets through the calculator. You can opt to purchase carbon offsets via your chosen calculator, of course, but there are other options available, too.

Once I know the total amount of metric tons of carbon emissions that I want to offset, I like to buy them separately through an independent third-party organization that lists certified carbon offsetting projects that meet rigorous standards for monitoring, reporting, verification and certification. Abiding by these standards ensures the projects recommended are ones that will have the most impact once implemented.

Most offset programs create their own standards to define the requirements for projects within their program. However, there are some international standards to consider, such as the Verified Carbon Standard developed by the Climate Group and the International Emissions Trading Association.

Even after you find a standard that you like, it can be difficult to figure out how to support projects that follow that standard as an individual consumer. That's why I recommend turning to a third-party organization that lists certified projects that meet specific standards. Three highly regarded organizations that provide such listings are Gold Standard , Green-e and Climate Action Reserve .

You can browse carbon offsetting projects on each organization's website. However, Gold Standard makes it easy to donate to a particular project on their website , while Green-e and Climate Action Reserve refer you to individual projects.

Some airlines also allow you to offset carbon emissions from flights . Many only facilitate carbon offsetting when you purchase a ticket, while others will allow you to offset any flight (including on routes the airline doesn't operate). A few airlines, including British Airways and JetBlue Airways , even pay to offset at least some of their flights. So if you fly with an airline frequently, it may be worth looking into the carbon offsetting options available through your carrier.

While you can offset your carbon emissions after each flight, I like to do it in bulk for all of my flights at the end of each year. Once I've determined how many miles I flew, I'll buy carbon offsets through Gold Standard, which are coded as gifts and donations on my credit card statements.

But remember, not all carbon offsets are categorized this way by credit card companies. When I purchased lump sum carbon offsets through Cathay Pacific's Fly Greener program back in 2019, my purchase coded as airfare. So, be sure to factor where you're buying your carbon offsets into your payment strategy.

Related: How one travel platform enables travelers to book carbon offset trips

Reducing vs. offsetting emissions

Offsetting your carbon emissions from a trip is great, but reducing your carbon footprint is even better.

For example, consider traveling by train or bus instead of by plane for shorter distances. Traveling by intercity rail typically produces about half of a short-haul flight's carbon emissions per passenger mile, based on Conservation International's calculator. Buses are even more environmentally friendly, commonly generating just a quarter of a short-haul flight's carbon emissions per passenger mile, according to Conservation International's calculator.

Or, instead of taking a trip around the world, opt for a vacation close to home that requires less use of transportation.

You don't need to avoid long trips to be more environmentally conscious, though.

If flying to your destination, choose a nonstop route on a fuel-efficient aircraft. Once in your chosen location, pick a hybrid or electric rental car (instead of a regular vehicle) to get around.

Also consider staying at a hotel that's committed to sustainable practices — or, at the very least, keep your use of air conditioning in your hotel room to a minimum. You might even want to try eating vegan or vegetarian meals during your trip. After all, beef, lamb and mutton all have large carbon footprints compared to plant-based proteins due to the amount of cleared land required to raise them, methane they produce as they digest food and animal feed they consume, among other factors.

Related: How train travel can be good for the environment

Bottom line

When it comes to leisure travel, many travelers may find themselves hesitant to trade their dream vacation for a more environmentally friendly alternative.

While a trip to a nearby Caribbean country can be full of fun, few would argue it rivals a trip to the far-flung Maldives . Similarly, many would find it hard to bypass a comfortable business-class seat in favor of flying in the more eco-friendly economy cabin .

You don't have to feel guilty about enjoying that dream getaway in style, so long as you take a closer look at how you can lessen your impact on the environment. By offsetting your carbon emissions and considering other ways to reduce your carbon footprint when you travel, you can do your part to lessen the harm being done to our planet.

Think of the former as a tax you're choosing to pay to help offset the effects of your travels.

Which form of transport has the smallest carbon footprint?

How can individuals reduce their emissions from transport.

This article was first published in 2020. It was updated in 2023 with more recent data.

Transport accounts for around one-quarter of global carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions from energy. 1 In some countries – often richer countries with populations that travel often – transport can be one of the largest segments of an individual’s carbon footprint.

If you need to travel – either locally or abroad – what is the lowest-carbon way to do so?

In the chart here we see the comparison of travel modes by their carbon footprint. These are measured by the amount of greenhouse gases emitted per person to travel one kilometer .

This data comes from the UK Government’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero. It’s the emission factors used by companies to quantify and report their emissions. While the overall rankings of transport modes will probably be the same, there may be some differences across countries based on their own electricity mix, vehicle stock, and public transport network.

Greenhouse gases are measured in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO 2 eq), and they account for non-CO 2 greenhouse gases and the increased warming effects of aviation emissions at high altitudes. 2

Walk, bike or take the train for the lowest footprint

Over short to medium distances, walking or cycling are nearly always the lowest carbon way to travel. While they’re not in the chart, the carbon footprint of cycling one kilometer is usually in the range of 16 to 50 grams CO 2 eq per km depending on how efficiently you cycle and what you eat. 3

Using a bike instead of a car for short trips would reduce your travel emissions by around 75%.

If you can’t walk or cycle, then public transport is usually your best option. Trains are particularly low-carbon ways to travel. Taking a train instead of a car for medium-length distances would cut your emissions by around 80%. 4 Using a train instead of a domestic flight would reduce your emissions by around 86%. 5

In fact, if you If you took the Eurostar in France instead of a short-haul flight, you’d cut your journey’s footprint by around 97%. 6

What if you can’t walk or cycle, and have no public transport links?

If none of the above are options, what can you do?

Driving an electric vehicle (EV) is your best mode of private transport. It emits less than a petrol or diesel car, even in countries where the electricity mix is fairly high-carbon. Of course, powering it from low-carbon grid offers the greatest benefits.

The chart above only considers emissions of EV during its use phase – when you’re driving it. It doesn’t include emissions from the manufacturing of the car. There have been concerns that when we account for the energy needed to produce the battery, an EV is actually worse for the climate than a petrol car. This is not true – while an EV does have higher emissions during its production, it quickly ‘pays back’ once you start driving it. 7

Next best is a plug-in hybrid car.

Then, where you take a petrol car or fly depends on the distance. For journeys less than 1000 kilometers, flying has a higher carbon footprint than a medium-sized car. For longer journeys, flying would actually have a slightly lower carbon footprint per kilometer than driving alone over the same distance.

Let’s say you were to drive from Edinburgh to London, which is a distance of around 500 kilometers. You’d emit close to 85 kilograms CO 2 eq. 8 If you were to fly, this would be 123 kilograms – an increase of almost one-third. 9

Some general takeaways on how you can reduce the carbon footprint of travel:

• Walk, cycle or run when possible – this comes with many other benefits such as lower local air pollution and better health;
• Trains are nearly always the winning option over moderate-to-long distances;
• If travelling internationally, going by train or boat is lower-carbon than flying;
• Electric vehicles are nearly always lower-carbon than petrol or diesel cars. The reductions are greatest for countries with a cleaner electricity mix;
• If travelling domestically, driving – even if it’s alone – is usually better than flying;
• Car-sharing will massively reduce your footprint – it also helps to reduce local air pollution and congestion.

Appendix: Why is the carbon footprint per kilometer higher for domestic flight than long-haul flights?

You will notice that the CO 2 emissions per passenger-kilometer are higher for domestic flights than short-haul international flights; and long-haul flights are slightly lower still. Why is this the case?

In its report on the CO 2 Emissions from Commercial Aviation , the International Council on Clean Transportation provides a nice breakdown of how the carbon intensity (grams CO 2 emitted per passenger kilometer) varies depending on flight distance. 10

This chart is shown here – with carbon intensity given as the red line. It shows that at very short flight distances (less than 1,000 km), the carbon intensity is very high; it falls with distance until around 1,500 to 2,000 km; then levels out and changes very little with  increasing  distance.

This is because take-off requires much more energy input than the ‘cruise’ phase of a flight. So, for very short flights, this extra fuel needed for take-off is large compared to the more efficient cruise phase of the journey. The ICCT also notes that often less fuel-efficient  planes are used for the shortest flights.

The IEA  looks at CO 2  emissions  from energy production alone – in 2018 it reported 33.5 billion tonnes of energy-related CO 2  [hence, transport accounted for 8 billion / 33.5 billion = 24% of energy-related emissions.

Aviation creates a number of complex atmospheric reactions at altitude – such as vapour contrails – which create an enhanced warming effect. In the UK’s Greenhouse gas methodology paper , a ‘multiplier’ of 1.9 is applied to aviation emissions to account for this. This is reflected in the CO 2 eq factors provided in this analysis.

Researchers – David Lee et al. (2020) – estimate that aviation accounts for around 2.5% of global CO 2 emissions, but 3.5% of radiative forcing/warming due to these altitude effects.

Lee, D. S., Fahey, D. W., Skowron, A., Allen, M. R., Burkhardt, U., Chen, Q., ... & Gettelman, A. (2020). The contribution of global aviation to anthropogenic climate forcing for 2000 to 2018 .  Atmospheric Environment , 117834.

Finding a figure for the carbon footprint of cycling seems like it should be straightforward, but it can vary quite a lot. It depends on a number of factors: what size you are (bigger people tend to burn more energy cycling); how fit you are (fitter people are more efficient); the type of bike you’re pedalling; and what you eat (if you eat a primarily plant-based diet, the emissions are likely to be lower than if you get most of your calories from cheeseburgers and milk). People often also raise the question of whether you actually eat more if you cycle to work rather than driving i.e. whether those calories are actually ‘additional’ to your normal diet.

Estimates on the footprint of cycling therefore vary. Some estimates put this figure at around 16 grams CO 2 e per kilometer based on the average European diet. In his book ‘ How bad are bananas: the carbon footprint of everything ’, Mike Berners-Lee estimates the footprint based on specific food types. He estimates 25 grams CO 2 e when powered by bananas; 43 grams CO 2 e from cereal and cow’s milk; 190 grams CO 2 e from bacon; or as high as 310 grams CO 2 e if powered exclusively by cheeseburgers.

National rail emits around 35 grams per kilometer. The average petrol car emits 170 grams. So the footprint of taking the train is around 20% of taking a car: [ 35 / 170 * 100 = 20%].

National rail emits around 35 grams per kilometer. A domestic flight emits 246 grams. So the footprint of taking the train is around 14% of a flight: [ 35 / 246 * 100 = 14%].

Taking the Eurostar emits around 4 grams of CO 2 per passenger kilometer, compared to 154 grams from a short-haul flight. So the footprint of  Eurostar is around 4% of a  flight: [ 4 / 154 * 100 = 3%].

The ‘carbon payback time’ for an average driver is around 2 years.

An average petrol car emits 170 grams per kilometer. Multiply this by 500, and we get 85,000 grams (which is 85 kilograms).

A domestic flight emits 246 grams per kilometer. Multiply this by 500, and we get 123,000 grams (which is 123 kilograms).

Graver, B., Zhang, K. & Rutherford, D. (2018). CO2 emissions from commercial aviation, 2018 . International Council on Clean Transportation.

Cite this work

Our articles and data visualizations rely on work from many different people and organizations. When citing this article, please also cite the underlying data sources. This article can be cited as:

BibTeX citation

Reuse this work freely

All visualizations, data, and code produced by Our World in Data are completely open access under the Creative Commons BY license . You have the permission to use, distribute, and reproduce these in any medium, provided the source and authors are credited.

The data produced by third parties and made available by Our World in Data is subject to the license terms from the original third-party authors. We will always indicate the original source of the data in our documentation, so you should always check the license of any such third-party data before use and redistribution.

All of our charts can be embedded in any site.

Our World in Data is free and accessible for everyone.

Help us do this work by making a donation.

• Get involved
• News and stories

Good news: traveling is back! The bad news: our travel leaves a trail of greenhouse gas footprints. Fortunately, you can lighten your travel impacts in three simple steps: reduce, calculate, offset .

Reduce what you can

• Avoid travel through video conferencing.
• Choose trains over planes.
• Choose a carrier that uses fuel-efficient planes or vehicles.
• Use ride-sharing
• Stay in LEED-certified hotels.
• Use vendors that monitor and mitigate their greenhouse gas emissions.

Calculate what you can't reduce

• In the following boxes, enter the estimated number or your flights, car miles, rail trips and hotel stays per year .
• The subtotal emissions for each category, along with TOTAL Tco2/e * , will be automatically calculated.

Ready to do your calculations? Use these handy tools:

Offset Your calculated total footprint

You can reduce your own climate impact by supporting one of many emissions reduction programs. While EDF cannot endorse or recommend any particular calculator, reduction project or provider, here are three you could explore:

Thank you for doing your part!

Curious about transforming aviation to help the climate?

* Explanation of Carbon Footprint Terms: The carbon dioxide equivalence (tCO2e) with a 100-year time horizon (CO2e-100) is used for emissions estimates when non-CO2 pollutants are included in addition to CO2. For shorthand purposes we use the abbreviation CO2e. Non-CO2 emissions for air travel are mostly nitrogen oxide emissions from aircraft flying over 9,000 meters. The emissions factors employed for air travel are provided by our source using an average Radiative Forcing Index of approximately 2.7. Non-CO2 emissions for hotel stays include N2O and CH4. We note that the inclusion of non-CO2 emissions undervalues their potency in the near-term, and that alternatively using a GWP-20/CO2e-20 would undervalue CO2’s potency in the long-term. Given that the majority of emissions reported here are CO2, a 100-year time horizon is reasonable for this assessment.

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share on LinkedIn

13 ways to reduce your carbon emissions when traveling

Nov 20, 2020 • 3 min read

Use public transport or, even better, a local bike-share scheme © Giorgio Fochesato / Getty Images

With the travel industry responsible for 8% of total global emissions, every action you take to curb your carbon is worthwhile. Here are some things to consider ahead of your next trip.

1. Fly smart

If you fly, reduce in-flight emissions by choosing a carbon-efficient airline, a direct flight and a seat in coach (economy) class instead of business. Other tactics include lowering window shades (to help keep the plane cool), bringing your own amenities and food (or, failing that, pre-ordering a plant-based meal).

2. Pack light

No matter what type of transport you’ll be taking to reach your destination, or once you get there, a lighter suitcase requires less energy to transport.

3. Use public transport

Taking public transport (or even better, a cycle rickshaw) won’t only help to reduce emissions, but you’ll also tick off a classic local experience. Many global cities are now equipped with affordable bike-, e-bike or scooter-share facilities.

4. Use electric vehicles or e-taxis

Electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure is improving around the world every year. And while major ride-share apps Uber and Lyft have yet to introduce EVbooking systems, both companies are currently incentivizing drivers to make the switch over to electric vehicles.

5. Sleep green

Low-carbon hotels generally run on renewable energy, use energy-saving lights and other appliances, recover rainwater, recycle and use local products. Slash more emissions by foregoing housekeeping and minimizing your electricity and water usage.

6. Choose low-carbon activities

From walking and cycling tours to non-motorized snorkeling and diving excursions, carbon-light activities are better for your health as well as the health of the planet.

7. Skip the tourist tat

Typical tourist souvenirs create a triple emissions whammy: they’re made from plastic or chemically modified fabrics, in emissions-belching factories, and are transported in gas-guzzling trucks, ships or planes. 

8. Eat local

Sampling regional delicacies at local-run stalls and restaurants is one of the great joys of travel, and choosing foods that are grown and produced locally helps to reduce food miles (emissions created by transporting food). Small farms are also more likely to adopt eco-friendly practices like avoiding toxic pesticides – ask for info before you buy.

9. Eat less meat

With greenhouse gas emissions from agribusiness on track to surpass that of all other sectors, including energy, transport and industry, the single best way of reducing emissions on the road (aside from not flying) is to lower your intake of meat, particularly red meat, which creates the most livestock emissions.

10. Embrace zero-waste travel

Every product you use on your trip requires energy to manufacture, more energy to recycle, and releases emissions when it breaks down. By curbing waste whenever possible, you’ll also curb emissions.

11. Skip the long showers

From Cape Town to Kathmandu , many travel hotspots around the world struggle with water shortages. By using less water, we can not only help to reduce pressure on the local water supply, but also help to slash the emissions created by treating and pumping water.

12. Carbon-offset all journeys

Planes aren’t the only form of transport that spew out carbon. US-based offCents tracks and offsets car, train and plane trips, while Swiss non-profit MyClimate  also offsets car journeys, cruises, events and more. Several subscription-based apps offer a one-stop-shop approach to carbon offsetting. Wren  calculates a monthly offset fee based on your lifestyle (including travel); you can choose which carbon-reducing project to donate the cash to each month. 

13. Line-dry all your travel clothes

There’s not always time to line-dry travel gear when you’re on the move, but with one dryer load using five times more electricity than washing, it’s worth packing a travel clothes line to use when you can.

This excerpt is from  The Sustainable Travel Handbook: Practical advice and inspiration for the conscientious traveller , published by Lonely Planet in November 2020. Order your copy at the online shop .

You might also like:

How to be a responsible wildlife tourist    Innovative sustainable tourism attractions around the world    What a sustainable restart to travel could look like   

Explore related stories

Photography

Apr 16, 2024 • 13 min read

There are as few as 3900 tigers left in the wild. Here’s where and how to spot one of them.

Apr 4, 2022 • 5 min read

Mar 16, 2022 • 7 min read

Jan 10, 2022 • 9 min read

Jan 3, 2021 • 4 min read

Nov 18, 2020 • 2 min read

Dec 22, 2019 • 8 min read

Oct 4, 2019 • 2 min read

Apr 10, 2018 • 2 min read

Jan 13, 2016 • 7 min read

Travelling Without a Passport

Your Travel Carbon Footprint: Train vs. Plane

Now more than ever it’s crucial to consider your impact on the planet. While most of us are trying to limit our plastic use or cutting back on meat, an unfortunate side-effect of travel is that it can have a negative impact on the earth. With all the news about climate change, should we even still be travelling?

The answer, of course, is yes – there’s much to learn about conservation through travel, and what better way to appreciate the earth than to see all it has to offer? However, savvy travellers are always looking for ways to decrease their carbon footprint on their adventures. Often, the biggest contributor to your carbon footprint while you’re travelling is your transportation – and if you’re planning a journey across the world, you can be limited in your options for getting there in a way that serves the planet as much as it does you. 

See Also: The Best Eco-Friendly Tours in Vietnam

The two most common ways of reaching long distances are trains and planes – both have pros and cons for both your travel and the earth. If you’re curious about the differences in your carbon footprint when you travel via train vs. plane, read on!

Your carbon footprint with train travel

While it may seem like a no-brainer that train travel is the more sustainable option when it comes to travel, there are actually many considerations travellers should make before booking that train ticket! 

While over the course of a train’s lifetime it will generally produce fewer carbon emissions than a plane would, the infrastructure needed for a rail system – including things like parking lots, train stations, and the rails themselves – can badly damage their environments. However, when travelling shorter distances on an established rail line, such as the Eurostar or Japan’s high-speed rail network, travellers are usually able to cut their CO2 emissions by up to 90% versus travelling the same distance on a plane.

Ways to lower your carbon footprint with train travel

• Make sure you’re travelling with a reputable train line. Many train companies recognize their environmental impact and encourage travellers to make adjustments to their itineraries to reduce their carbon footprint. However, other companies take it a step further – Amtrack in the USA, for example, has managed to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by 17% since 2010.
• Consider offsetting your emissions. By paying a small fee (usually up to about $20 USD) to an organization that uses the money for things like reforestation efforts and research into sustainable technology.

See Also: Eco-Friendly Travel Accessories: From Luggage to Toiletries

Your carbon footprint with plane travel

Air travel is a contentious area – experts agree that it’s the most harmful way to travel, but often there are very few other ways travellers can reach their destination. One long-haul flight can emit the same amount of CO2 as the average person in many countries will emit over the course of a year! If there are alternatives to flying, such as train travel, buses, or even travelling via boat or another creative method, it can be beneficial to consider them before flying. 

However, it’s understandable that some plane travel is inevitable! Don’t fear if you can’t exactly get from New York to Bali by boat – there are always ways to decrease your impact on the planet when you’re travelling via plane. 

Ways to lower your carbon footprint with plane travel

• Take longer vacations. Taking longer vacations means maximizing your time in your destination, which means you’ll have put your carbon emissions to good use rather than taking several smaller trips via plane.
• Use public transportation. Once you arrive at your destination, there are many ways to limit your CO2 emissions during your travels! One of the best ways to do this is via public transportation to get around, as opposed to taxis or rental cars.
• Fly smart. Where possible, take direct flights and fly economy – in first-class or business class, fewer people are sitting in more space, which makes their individual carbon footprints larger.
• Offset your emissions. Just like with train travel, there are always options to donate to causes that will contribute to green initiatives.

Low-impact travel

There are ways to offset your carbon footprint before you even leave for your trip! Think carefully about what you pack – instead of buying bottled water at your destination, bring a reusable bottle (or, if you’re travelling to an area in which the tap water isn’t safe to drink, consider investing in a portable water purifier), for example. 

Group tours are a great way to reduce your carbon footprint while you travel. Often, tour operators take extra care to make sure their itineraries and excursions are sustainable and serve and support the locals in your destination. Always make sure to think twice before reusing towels in hotels, or leave your campsites as clean as possible – leave nothing but footprints, take nothing but photos!

See Also: Make Human Connections While Travelling and the World Becomes Your Oyster

The first step of lowering your carbon footprint while you travel is to acknowledge that you leave one behind in the first place! A little bit of thought and consideration can go a long way when it comes to the environment – while corporations, and not individual people, are the leading cause of climate change, help can begin with you. 

Whether you’re thinking about embarking on a cross-country road trip or an epic journey around the world, there are always ways to decrease your carbon footprint and leave the world a little better off than you found it. 

How do you protect the earth while you travel?

Maggie Soares

Maggie is a life-long traveller with a special affinity for the United Kingdom. When she's not reading, writing, or dreaming about her next trip, you can find her talking at length about her dog to anyone who'll listen.

Related Articles

• Tips & Tricks

Best Destinations for People with Disabilities

The world and its wonders should be available to one and...

• Destination Guide

Where to See the Northern Lights in February

If you hope to see the Northern Lights in February, you’re...

• North America

Cheap Places to Travel in the US

From California’s shimmering coast and Colorado’s snow-dusted peaks to Louisiana’s steamy...

Five Ways to Experience Peru Without Machu Picchu

Get unlimited access to the world's best travel stories. subscribe now., privacy overview.

Travel, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Carbon Offsets

Carbon footprint for travel.

The carbon footprint, or total greenhouse gas emissions, of a travel experience derives from several factors. Often, the largest of these factors is the transportation to, at, and from the destination.

The calculator below estimates the greenhouse gas emissions associated with university-related transportation. The calculator works in alignment with methodologies used to calculate UW–Madison’s full greenhouse gas emissions inventory.

Emissions estimates are based on miles travelled. If travel miles are not provided by your transportation provider, you can estimate with publicly available mapping tools such as Google Maps  for bus / car miles and TravelMath for air miles.

How do I reduce my travel impact?

The calculator on this page helps you to determine your approximate greenhouse gas emissions impact when you travel. In addition, you can follow the link above (or scroll to the bottom of this page) to learn about how you "offset" your impact and to consider the positive impacts of travel.

Carbon Calculator for Travel

Use this tool to estimate Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. Results will display automatically as you input information. If you are definitely taking this trip, be sure to submit your results so that you can contribute to UW–Madison's GHG emissions inventory.

Shared Data

Train travel, greenhouse gas equivalencies.

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Carbon Dioxide Equivalents

Greenhouse gas emissions are often reported in units of carbon dioxide equivalents, or CO2e. CO2e is the number of units of CO2 emissions with the same global warming potential as one unit of another greenhouse gas. This calculator reports estimated greenhouse gas emissions in two units:

• MTCO2e: Metric Tons of CO2e
• 1,000 lbs CO2e: 1,000 pounds of CO2e

These are the most common units used for reporting and purchasing carbon offsets.

Calculator Assumptions

Greenhouse gas emissions are estimated following the emission factors and assumptions used in the Sustainability Indicator Management & Analysis Platform . This platform is designed for higher education institutions and is used by the Office of Sustainability to complete the UW–Madison Greenhouse Gas Inventory. Specific calculation details on the emission factors can be found here: https://unhsimap.org/2019table .

Greenhouse gas equivalencies are calculated from the latest UW-Madison Greenhouse Gas Inventory and the EPA Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator .

Expanded Carbon Footprint

Want to learn more about your personal carbon footprint? Consider checking out the Household Carbon Calculator developed by the Dane Count Office of Energy & Climate Change.

Carbon Offsets

Now that you know the greenhouse gas emissions of your travel, you can reduce your carbon impact by purchasing carbon offsets. Carbon offsets support projects that reduce greenhouse gases in the atmosphere by:

• Capturing and destroying a greenhouse gas that would otherwise be emitted into the atmosphere. For example: a methane gas capture project at a landfill.
• Capturing and storing (or “sequestering”) greenhouse gases to prevent their release into the atmosphere. For example: a project that promotes the healthy growth and maintenance of existing forests, or planting new trees that will capture or “sequester” carbon over the course of their lives.
• Producing energy using a clean, renewable resource that eliminates the need to produce that same energy from fossil fuels. For example: a project that produces wind or solar power.

We encourage you to consider offsetting your air travel by purchasing carbon offsets through one of these vetted providers:

• Cool Effect
• Second Nature  Offset Network

Note: carbon offsets do not solve the complex problem of greenhouse gas emissions and there is debate over the best way to utilize them, but they offer a method for countering climate change that is accessible to individuals.

Beyond Offsets and Carbon Handprint

In addition to carbon offsets, there are a number of other ways to make your travel more sustainable, including:

• Eat locally sourced, plant-based food and purchase locally made goods
• Walk, bike, or take public transportation within your destination when possible
• For study abroad participants, get tips on how to make the most of Staying Local and Engaging with Your Local Community
• Carry a refillable water bottle, travel mug for hot drinks, and reusable silverware
• Turn off lights/heat/AC, and unplug devices when not in use

While understanding the greenhouse gas emissions associated with travel is important, it is equally important to consider the personal, local, or global benefits of travel. Travel can accelerate learning and research that advances the global conversation and understanding of climate change or be combined with service projects that enrich local communities. Travel can also be an integral part of the UW – Madison learning experience extending the Wisconsin Idea across the world.

The beginner’s guide to carbon offsetting your flights

Posted on Last updated: January 12, 2023

A beginner’s guide to carbon offsetting flights for air travellers, including what carbon offsets are, how they work, how to choose the best offset scheme and ways to reduce your environmental impact.

* This site contains affiliate links , where I get a small commission from purchases at no extra cost to you.

I have a love-hate relationship with air travel. I love the places flying takes me, but I’m not a fan of the actual plane bit. But as well as worrying about being up in the air, I’ve started worrying more about the environmental impact of flying, and especially the way it contributes to climate change. Carbon offsetting flights is often mentioned as a partial solution to the problem, but what is offsetting and how does it work, if at all?

The environmental impact of flying

Flights account for around 2.5% of global carbon dioxide production at the moment, but the industry is expanding. And because planes fly high the atmosphere, the greenhouse gases they emit do more damage than on the ground. New technologies like biofuels or electric planes are in the pipeline which could reduce flying’s environmental impact. But they’re a huge investment and need years of safety testing, so it’s a slow process.

Until then airlines are trying to increase efficiency by reducing weight, carrying more passengers, using tailwinds and reducing distances through air traffic control (though cynics might say that’s more about saving money than the environment).

Regulations are starting to put pressure on airlines to reduce their impact, but the rising demand for flights is outstripping any reduction in emissions. There’s a crazy statistic that only 6% of the world’s population has ever flown, so there’s huge potential growth.

I’m trying to cut down on flights and take the train where I can, but there are so many places I’d love to visit where I’ve got no choice but to fly. So is there anything we can do?

Carbon offsetting your flights

One of the ways it’s been suggested air travellers can reduce the impact they have on the environment is through carbon offsetting their flights. Carbon offsets are voluntary schemes where people pay to ‘offset’ or make up for the emissions their flights produce.

It sounds good in practice, but not a lot of people use them. Many passengers don’t know they exist, but even more are confused (or dubious) about which schemes to use.

Offsets aren’t straightforward and they’ve often been controversial – some of the schemes are run by profit-making companies and there’s no standard certification to show which are worthwhile. There are also moral questions about whether paying to pollute makes people less likely to change their behaviour. So what’s the truth about carbon offsetting?

How does carbon offsetting work?

Aircraft engines produces greenhouses gases, particles and water vapour which are released into the atmosphere. It’s this mixture that makes them so polluting, but the focus of offsetting is on carbon dioxide (CO2) as it’s the most common greenhouse gas.

Carbon offsetting flights doesn’t get rid of the carbon dioxide which is produced when you fly – that still goes into the atmosphere. What it does do is try and make up for your share of the CO2 which gets released by reducing it somewhere else instead, which will slow help to down the overall global increase in carbon dioxide levels.

This is usually based on measuring how many tonnes of CO2 are produced by each flight and investing in a project which reduces CO2 levels by the same amount.

There are two main types of offset project. First forestry projects, which either stop existing trees being cut down or plant new ones. The trees act as a ‘biological sink’ by taking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. And secondly energy projects, which reduce the amount of fossil fuels used by investing in energy-efficient products or renewable technology. Often these projects have social and sustainability benefits for the countries involved too.

Sounds simple but any carbon offset project has to meet three criteria to be effective. There has to be additionality – which means the project wouldn’t have happened if it hadn’t been funded by the money from the carbon offsets. There has to be no leakage – so you can’t reduce emissions in one place if it means they’re increased somewhere else instead.

It also has to be permanent – so it won’t be reversed in the future (which can be a challenge for forestry projects, as how can you guarantee trees will never be cut down?).

How are carbon offsets calculated?

Various calculators have been developed to work out how much carbon dioxide you produce on a flight. The most basic just look at how many miles you’ve flown. Better offset schemes also take into consideration the class of travel you’re flying in, the type of aircraft and how fuel efficient it is, the number of passengers it holds and the occupancy rate.

But if you wanted to be super-accurate you’d also need to take into account the time of day and weather conditions too, which affect how much fuel is used. Every carbon offset scheme calculates things differently – and some are a lot more comprehensive than others.

How much does carbon offsetting cost?

Because the calculators all work differently, the amount you pay varies too. I tested out a couple of the big calculators by looking at the amount of carbon I produced in a year.

Two long-haul return flights from the UK to the Caribbean and four short-haul return flights in Europe came to 7.5 tonnes. A short European flight (London to Geneva) is around €10, a longer one (London to Malta ) €20 and the UK to the Caribbean €60.

It was interesting to see that making a stopover increases the amount of carbon you produce. As does flying in business or first class instead of economy – the lower passenger numbers in these classes mean they’re a less efficient use of space.

A flight from London to Dubai would cost €50 to offset if you were in economy versus €95 in business class and €145 in first class. With a lot of people at the front end of the plane travelling for work, I wonder how many companies use offsets?

Which scheme should I use?

If you decide to carbon offset flights, the big issue is choosing which scheme to use. There are a baffling number, most of which make impressive claims and have websites covered in pictures of forests. But they’re not all regulated and how some are funded is a bit fuzzy.

Sussing out the good from the bad is a full-time job, so it’s usually a case of taking advice from environmental organisations who’ve examined them and certified the best.

Carbon offsetting with your airline

The easiest option is to offset directly with the airline when you book your flight. You just pay an extra fee on top of the flight cost which is donated to a carbon offset scheme. Around a third of airlines have some sort of carbon offset programme, but how they work varies.

Some have their own schemes and others are enrolled in other people’s. Some are upfront about their offset programmes and others hide them away. Some give you the option to offset before booking and some only after (so you can’t see the cost until you’ve booked).

Among the airlines doing good things with offsets are Qantas, whose Fly Carbon Neutral scheme claims to be the largest airline offsetter. They offset staff travel and offer frequent flyer points to passengers buying offsets. Other verified schemes include Air Canada’s with Less Emissions , KLM’s CO2ZERO and Austrian Airlines with Climate Austria .

If your airline has a carbon offset scheme, take a look at their website before buy to see if it’s worthwhile, or whether you’re better off spending your money elsewhere.

Things to look at include how offsets are calculated (is it just mileage-based or more comprehensive?), the type of projects they fund, what percentage of the money is used in admin and whether they’re certified by a verified scheme like Gold or Carbon Standard.

Carbon offsetting directly

Some airlines like Emirates choose not to offer offsets. Or you might want to offset flights you’ve already taken. And if you want to choose which type of project – or even which specific project – you fund, it’s usually best to offset directly. Gold Standard is one of the most widely recommended bodies and the name I kept coming across.

Gold Standard is a Swiss non-profit organisation which was founded by a group of environmental groups and NGOs including the WWF. Their projects are based in developing countries and combine reducing CO2 with sustainable development.

They don’t have their own calculator but they do have links to a couple where you can work out the amount of carbon you’ve used then choose a project to donate to. Otherwise they have various partners who run Gold Standard certified projects around the world:

• Atmosfair in Germany (who have a particularly good calculator which rates airline efficiency and includes other greenhouses gases as well as CO2)
• MyClimate in Switzerland
• Climate Care in the UK
• Terrapass in the US.

So is it worth carbon offsetting flights?

Does carbon offsetting really make a difference? The same amount of carbon dioxide is going to be released on that flight whether you offset or not. And it’s been argued that offsetting is just a way for people to feel less guilty without having to change their behaviour, and the only way to really reduce emissions is to stop flying entirely.

But at present flying is a part of life – from seeing family abroad to supporting the economy in destinations like the Maldives. And if you do have to (or want to) fly, then I would argue that offsetting has got to be better than doing nothing. My year’s flights came in at €175 to offset – enough to make me think about my flying habits and cut down since.

Environmental group Ethical Consumer advise choosing an individual project to fund rather than letting the company pick, so you know where your money’s going. And that energy efficiency projects are better than forestry as they directly reduce fossil fuel usage. They also recommend wind and solar over biomass as it’s less likely to be misused.

Choosing a specific project does usually mean you pay more but it means you know you’re getting the maximum benefit. Otherwise you can just create your own offset by working out what you would have spent and donating it to an environmental charity.

What else can I do to reduce my impact?

Well obviously the best way to reduce your impact is not to fly at all! That’s not going to be practical for most people, but it’s often possible to cut down or change how you fly.

Reduce short-haul flights

Short-haul flights under 500km are comparatively the worst polluters because it takes a lot of energy for the plane to get up and down. So could you take a train or bus instead sometimes? This can massively reduce the amount of carbon you produce – a return trip from London to Paris produces 110kg of CO2 by plane versus 6.6kg by train.

There’s often the idea that flying is a lot quicker but when you add in time getting to and waiting at the airport it often doesn’t make much difference. 80% of flights from the UK to Europe are to destinations which you could reach by train within a day.

Looking at my year’s travels, the trips to the Alps and Munich could have been pretty easily done by train and I’ve cut right down on short-haul flights since. Rail travel through multiple countries in Europe has been made more difficult by pandemic travel restrictions but hopefully this is only temporary and it’ll be possible again soon.

Choose a more efficient airline

The airline you fly with makes a big difference to your emissions. Lower impact airlines usually have more modern, fuel-efficient planes and carry more passengers.

Atmosfair have some helpful rankings to help you decide which airline to choose – surprisingly charter airlines like TUI are among the best, as well as Jet2, Air Transat, KLM and Air New Zealand. And worst are US carriers United and Delta’s regional networks.

Choose a more efficient flight

The flight you choose can also have an impact. Because take off and landing are when the largest amount of emissions are produced, it’s better to fly direct rather than with a stopover as you only have to do it once. Flying economy instead of business or first-class also reduces your carbon emissions (sadly not a choice I often need to make!).

Apply some pressure

I said the same thing when talking about cruises , but pressure from consumers is so important in getting businesses to act in a more environmentally responsible way. The more people who ask about airline emissions – whether it’s an airline’s carbon offset policies or what technology they’re investing in – the more airlines will take things seriously if they think it’s having an impact on who we spend our money with.

Save for later

You might also like

How can we make tourism more sustainable?

Sustainable travel swaps: 10 ways to travel more sustainably

How to minimise your environmental impact on a cruise

Bruce Murdoch

Saturday 4th of February 2023

Objective and well written.

In reading up on this subject, I saw one article coming out against it because it does nothing to reduce carbon emissions. Silly argument really because that is why they are called "offsets", they are intended to neutralize the carbon, not reduce it. (Airlines should have a reduction option)

Like yourself, I am now a lot more circumspect about flying and happily pay the carbon offset fee when I do....hoping that the funds aren't wasted by the airline.

Lucy Dodsworth

Monday 6th of February 2023

Thanks, it's a difficult subject as ideally people would fly less as that's the only way to reduce carbon emissions, but if people do fly then hopefully the offsets can compensate at least a bit.

Wednesday 2nd of November 2022

Really useful article, thank you. I didn't know about atmosfair and their platform could be perfect for a project I'm working on.

Thanks Liam, great to hear it was useful!

Friday 14th of January 2022

Good article..it’s a hard balance, but yes I would recommend to others not to use airlines schemes but to do it individually, even if it’s more work it’s more rewarding and money is used better. I’ve done some research...the organisation mentioned atmospher is what I think the best but it over estimates considerably (not a bad thing of course) the amount of Co2 you emit on its calculator- the best way is to go on the ICAO carbon emission calculator website and put the data in as it has more precise measurements and get the amount of co2 you would emit and then go back to the the German atmospher and pay a fixed amount in line with the co2 you would emit on that flight. Both websites are easy to use. That’s just my opinion. Very good overall article though.

Soeren Thomsen

Sunday 20th of December 2020

Dear Lucy, I must say that I appreciate your effort but I simply don't agree with most of your argumentation. Demand reduction is the only why to make sure the travel industry will comply with the Paris Agreement. Please have a lot at this recent comment on myths related to offsetting by 41 scientists.

https://www.climatechangenews.com/2020/12/11/10-myths-net-zero-targets-carbon-offsetting-busted/

It is sad to still in 2020 read that offsetting is seen as a solution for sustainable travel.

Kind regards Soeren Thomsen Ocean and climate scientists, LOCEAN, IPSL, CNRS, Sorbonne University, Paris, France

Monday 29th of January 2024

@Lucy Dodsworth, yes i would agree. Carbon offsetting and demand reduction are not incompatible. My wife and have developed a strong eco-guilt to air travel and especially long haul. We have cut down a lot but still wish on occasion to fly. Your article is credible and well constructed. If you’d simply written “just don’t fly” it would have been less useful. I guess the risk is that i’ll find a credible carbon offset scheme and suddenly start flying a lot again. I doubt it. For now i see no harm in you continuing to raise awareness about legitimate effective options.

Wednesday 27th of January 2021

Hi Soren, thanks for commenting and the link to the article – some interesting points there and I agree that offsetting isn't a solution for sustainable travel, that needs much bigger changes through society. But right now people are flying (look at the numbers even during a pandemic year!) and while they do then I would argue that offsets are better than doing nothing, it does at least make a small contribution and help raise the profile of the environmental impact.

Sunday 5th of July 2020

Thank you for this article! I was feeling pretty lost about where to start with carbon offsetting, but this really helped! Now trying to convince my family to take the train London- Paris instead of flying :)

Thursday 23rd of July 2020

The Eurostar from London to Paris a really good place to start – such an easy and quick journey it's often quicker than flying once you factor in getting to the airport and security etc.

National Geographic content straight to your inbox—sign up for our popular newsletters here

Should you buy carbon offsets for your air travel?

More than a third of Americans would pay extra to offset their flights’ CO2 emissions, a new National Geographic survey finds.

Humans spew more than 44 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. Tourism contributes up to 11 percent of those emissions, with flying making up the largest share, according to a 2018 study published in Nature Climate Change . It’s led to a reckoning for many travelers, who are rethinking how and why they fly—and seeking ways to reduce their carbon footprint when they do take to the skies.

One solution? Purchasing carbon offsets—an investment into a project or action, like planting trees or building solar panels, to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions. Airlines such as Delta, United, and British Airways have options to pay a small surcharge (in one case the charge was $13) to offset carbon emissions for seats on the flight. However, this market-based approach to reducing emissions is not without criticism.

We asked readers in a January 2022 National Geographic and Morning Consult poll if they have or would pay an optional surcharge some airlines offer to offset the carbon emissions of their ride. Thirty-eight percent of Americans surveyed think it would be a fine idea, with the percentage rising to 48 percent among millennials. But some want more information on the actual benefits of it—and where the money goes. Some experts say the focus on individual actions distracts from the more impactful improvements that happen when the industry is regulated.

The good news is that, in many parts of the world, the offsetting question is finally being addressed by the planet’s biggest polluters . In 2021, airlines that fly internationally were required to offset their CO2 emissions based on the carbon they produced under the UN agreement Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation . In the same year, more than 200 companies and 100 countries have pledged to become carbon-neutral by 2050, or earlier.

If you’re looking to purchase an offset to feel a little less guilty about flying, here’s what you should know.

What are carbon offsets?

With carbon dioxide emissions increasing by 400 percent since 1950, and coal-generated electricity producing nearly a billion metric tons of carbon emissions in 2020 alone, the impact of an individual flight on a global scale is marginal.

But in a person’s daily life, flying is by far one of the most carbon-intensive activities. One flight can produce as much carbon as driving for more than 2,000 miles. To combat flygskam or flight-shaming, third-party companies sell voluntary offsets—different from compliance offsets, which are used to meet legally binding caps. Marisa de Belloy, CEO of carbon offset vendor Cool Effect says one purchase “is equal to one [metric] ton of carbon emissions that were not emitted. The term offset just means you’re using that ton to offset a ton you have put into the atmosphere.”

For example, a consumer could pay $8.50 to a program in Honduras that replaces open fire cooking pits with custom-built brick-and-mortar stoves that require less wood to cook meals and funnel smoke outdoors via a chimney. Cool Effect estimates one new stove could reduce three metric tons of carbon emissions per year.

Cool Effect’s de Belloy credits a growing discontent with the government and private industry’s failure to deal with climate change for motivating individuals to take personal action. Many travelers and companies are invested. The market for voluntary offsets hit a record $1 billion in 2021, according to Ecosystem Marketplace .

Do they make a difference?  

Still, many travelers wonder: Is buying carbon offsets a long-term solution? Maybe.  

“Offsets shouldn’t be seen as an alternative to regulatory requirements,” says Peter Miller, an expert in carbon offsets at the National Resources Defense Council . In the United States, there’s no federal regulation over the carbon offsets purchased by individuals.

( Carbon offset sales are on the rise—but not all of them are created equal .)

“Consumers and companies should look first to reducing their emissions before looking to source offsets for those emissions reductions that are not possible or are not cost effective in the near term,” Kelley Kizzier, an expert in carbon markets at the Environmental Defense Fund , told National Geographic in 2019 . “There are a lot of questionable offsets out there, and it can be difficult to navigate the sometimes-murky world of offsets.” One reader learned that the surcharge he paid went to a conservation NGO that later hit him up with unwanted fundraising mail.

To make a real difference in carbon emissions, de Belloy says offset programs should provide an additional benefit that would not have occurred without money from the carbon offset group, a concept called “additionality.”

For example, paying someone to preserve a forest would count as an offset if that forest was slated for development. Instead of being paid to cut down the trees, a landowner would be paid to keep them standing. If there was never a threat to the forest, your payment to the landowner wouldn’t count as an offset because your money would have provided no additional benefit—the forest would have remained regardless.

There’s also no guarantee for how long a project bought with a carbon offset will last. A 2019 investigation by ProPublica found numerous examples of carbon credit programs failing to protect tropical forests.

To protect a forest from deforestation, revenue from carbon offsets need to be more competitive than the oft-lucrative industries that lead to deforestation, like cattle ranching and soy production. Reforestation offsets also are complicated by the wildfires surging around the world , which can release sequestered carbon back into the atmosphere. Lands sustainably managed one year could fall under new political will or management the next.

Carbon capture vs. offsets

Purchasing traditional carbon offsets can be helpful, but their impact is hard to quantify. By removing carbon from the atmosphere and storing it in the earth, direct air capture (DAC) may offer a more concrete solution.

A specific type of carbon capture, DAC is the focus of companies such as Swiss-based Climeworks , Carbon Engineering in Canada , and Global Thermostat based in the U.S. Its modular machines use a fan to draw air into a collector, which catches the carbon with a filter made of organic compounds. Once the filter is full, the collector is closed and heated to 100°C (212°F), releasing pure carbon dioxide. The carbon is then combined with water and piped underground. Natural basalt formations in the earth react with the carbon, turning it into stone over several years.

( Can carbon capture make flying more sustainable? )

In DAC projects where the captured carbon is not stored in the ground, it can be recycled and used as a raw material. At Climeworks’ Hinwil plant, for instance, the carbon is used to fertilize greenhouses and add fizz to Valser, Swiss mineral water. Norsk e-Fuel combines carbon with hydrogen to create a sustainable aviation fuel.

One way to think of a direct air capture facility is as a super-forest. While real forests remove carbon naturally, most experts acknowledge that the process is too slow to make the dramatic impact our planet needs.

“The terrestrial biosphere and the ocean only collectively uptake half of what we dump into the atmosphere every year,” says Jennifer Wilcox, an energy policy expert at the University of Pennsylvania, who was just appointed to a leadership position at the U.S. Department of Energy.

Not only do we need to accelerate carbon removal, but we also need to consider ocean health (absorption of carbon dioxide by the ocean causes acidification) and land use when looking at different removal methods.

“A direct air capture plant can be up to a hundred times more efficient than a forest per given land area,” says Wilcox. “Land is a limited resource … the benefit of direct air capture is you don’t need arable land, so that’s why I think of [the direct air capture plants] as a synthetic forest.”

At Climeworks, each collector captures the equivalent of what 2,000 trees would, and because the carbon concentration is the same everywhere in the world, these facilities are location independent.

While this application doesn’t permanently remove carbon from the air, it is creating a circular economy, as well as a market for carbon removal that might allow the technology to scale up to a level that has a real impact.

How travelers can help

Encouraging travelers to see the value in carbon removal could help create more meaningful journeys.

“The real difference is when you buy an offset, you are verifiably reducing carbon emissions,” says de Belloy. “When you donate to a big environmental nonprofit, you don’t know exactly what the impact has been.”

Demand for captured carbon offsets from consumers and corporations might also help to drive down the cost of the technology—which is still incredibly high. Microsoft, for instance, recently pledged to be carbon negative by 2030 through the use of various capture and storage technologies. In December 2020, the U.S. Congress reserved $447 million to research and develop large-scale carbon removal. President Joe Biden’s goal to have a net-zero-emissions economy by 2050 includes upping federal investments and tax incentives for carbon capture technology.

Christina Beckmann, founder of Tomorrow’s Air , a collective of globe-trotters that has partnered with Climeworks, adds: “There’s a lot of potential for individual travelers being able to take climate action into their own hands.”

If flying is the only option, booking large commercial airliners , which seat more people and therefore have lower carbon emissions per person, instead of smaller planes like private jets, is an oft-mentioned idea for combating greenhouse gas emissions. Traveling on a full plane also helps to lower overall emissions.

Airline passengers can offset their emissions by donating to carbon capture monthly, while receiving perks from affiliated tour companies, such as Tierra Del Volcan and Natural Habitat Adventures .

With additional reporting from Chloe Berge, Sarah Gibbens, and Starlight Williams.

Related Topics

• CARBON FOOTPRINT
• AIR POLLUTION
• CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE

You May Also Like

6 tips to make your next beach trip more sustainable

Some U.S. national parks are trying to go carbon-free. What does that mean for visitors?

For hungry minds.

From renewable energy to backing communities: how hotels can make a difference

6 eco-conscious alpine resorts around the world

Here are the hotels we love for 2024

Rail travel to the Arctic: all aboard Norway's slow train under the midnight sun

Where to travel in March

• Environment

History & Culture

• History & Culture
• History Magazine
• Mind, Body, Wonder
• Coronavirus Coverage
• Paid Content
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Children's Online Privacy Policy
• Interest-Based Ads
• About Nielsen Measurement
• Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
• Nat Geo Home
• Attend a Live Event
• Book a Trip
• Inspire Your Kids
• Shop Nat Geo
• Visit the D.C. Museum
• Learn About Our Impact
• Support Our Mission
• Advertise With Us
• Customer Service
• Renew Subscription
• Manage Your Subscription
• Work at Nat Geo
• Sign Up for Our Newsletters
• Contribute to Protect the Planet

Copyright © 1996-2015 National Geographic Society Copyright © 2015-2024 National Geographic Partners, LLC. All rights reserved

Carbon Offsets vs Carbon Capture Technology: Which Choice Is Best?

A s the impacts of climate change grow increasingly severe, more and more products and services are being marketed to travelers to help offset one’s carbon footprint.

Among the most common is carbon offsets - which allow individual travelers to invest in environmental projects designed to help lower carbon emissions pollution . Common examples of projects that can be funded through carbon offset purchases include reforestation work and the construction of renewable energy sources.

While these purchases can seem helpful, there’s also a great deal of debate about whether they really have a meaningful impact in the fight to slow and reverse climate change. At their worst, carbon offset projects have been labeled a form of greenwashing that does not truly help reduce CO2 emissions. Though some experts argue that the benefits of purchasing offsets may outweigh the challenges identified by critics.

There are also other steps travelers can take to reduce carbon emissions that some travel industry leaders say are more effective than offset purchases. One of the leading options in this camp is investing in the next-gen approach of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) - or technology that eliminates CO2 from the atmosphere and stores it permanently. 

The variety of options - not to mention their pros and cons - can be daunting for the average traveler to sift through and make sense of when planning a trip.  

With that in mind, TravelPulse took a deeper dive into carbon offsets and carbon capture technology. Here’s what travelers need to know.

Carbon offsets: How they work and the sources of criticism 

Each year, planes emit more than 850 million tons of carbon dioxide, according to the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF). And that pollution is on track to triple by 2050. If it were a country, aviation would be one of the world’s top 10 emitters, says EDF.

To break that down even further, a one-way flight from San Francisco to Paris can produce about 1.25 metric tons of carbon emissions per passenger, according to the organization Sustainable Travel International. That’s more than a quarter of the amount of carbon that the average person worldwide produces per year – just from one round-trip flight.

One of the most popular products being marketed to travelers to help address this problem are carbon offsets, which theoretically offset the greenhouse gas emissions associated with a traveler’s flight. Offsets are sold by a variety of standalone companies including Sustainable Travel International , Cool Effect , and Terrapass , to name a few. It’s also possible to purchase offsets directly from some airlines and even online booking sites.

Carbon offsets can be bought in very affordable increments and the transaction takes just a few minutes online, all of which can make this approach incredibly appealing to travelers concerned about the impact of flying.

But there are wildly different opinions on whether offsets actually work. The World Wildlife Fund (WWF), for instance, says they’re not an effective resolution to the problem of carbon emissions associated with flying.

“You will have heard a lot of mention of offsetting emissions as a way of reducing your carbon footprint. Unfortunately, there has been a rise in greenwashing in this area, with schemes making misleading claims and false promises. Carbon offsetting does not reduce emissions at the source and purchasing offsets should be a last resort, after other measures to reduce or avoid emissions have been explored,” says the WWF website.

One of the primary criticisms of carbon offsetting is that there’s no way to prove whether projects being funded by offset purchases are effective or have the promised benefits.

“One of the most common offsetting schemes is tree planting. But there’s no guarantee a forest will be permanent or well-managed, or that native species will be planted in the right areas with proper consideration of nature,” explains the WWF website.

The website Carbon Brief, a UK-based platform that covers the latest developments in climate science, climate policy and energy policy, says climate offset projects may be making claims about the benefits of their projects that don’t prove true. "There is mounting evidence that offset projects, from clean-cooking initiatives to forest protection schemes, have been overstating their ability to cut emissions. One yet-to-be published study suggests that just 12 percent of offsets being sold result in ‘real emissions reductions’” says the website.

Christina Beckmann, head of Tomorrow’s Air, a collective focused on cleaning up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, says while there is some value to carbon offsets, the impact of such projects can be hard to prove.

“Credible carbon offsets are important. They do help fund conservation in places where it’s important,” she tells TravelPulse. “These things are all true. And at the same time, they can be very hard to validate.”

A lot of times, continues Beckmann, carbon offsets are based on claims that may be less than factual such as: "If it weren’t for your spending, this forest would be cut down.”

“That kind of thing can be tricky to prove,” Beckmann points out. “And the average person is not going to be able to do a deep investigation on every project and its claims.”

Best practices for carbon offset purchasing 

For travelers who want to purchase carbon offsets, there are some basic due diligence steps that can help ensure dollars spent are having maximum impact, says Scott McDougall, director of sustainability for Adventure Canada.

Third-party certification

Looking for third-party certifications when selecting carbon offset projects and companies to work with is an important first step.

“Ensuring offsets do what they’re intended to is complicated. Thankfully several excellent third-party certifiers have emerged to make the selection process easier,” explains McDougall, who recommends that travelers choose offsets certified by at least one of the following programs administered by not-for-profit organizations:

• Gold Standard
• Verified Carbon Standard
• Climate Action Reserve
• American Carbon Registry

Consider relevance

It's also a good idea to select or support offset projects that align with your travel in some way - such as opting to fund an effort that benefits the destination you plan to visit, says McDougall.

“In our case, for example, while we search to find or create projects in the Arctic, we have chosen to support the Great Bear Forest carbon offset project because it is Canadian, Indigenous-owned, and in an area we sometimes voyage,” explains McDougall. “Choosing projects that align with your values and that will have a tangible impact on the place you travel may be important to you, and if so, relevance is something critical to consider.”

Look for financial transparency

As with any purchase, make sure you understand in advance exactly how your money will be spent. In the case of carbon offsets, find out what percentage of the money you contribute will be used for its intended purpose, says Hilary Matson, founder of the sustainable travel company Yugen Earthside .

“Look for transparency about how much of your funds are going to carbon projects,” explains Matson. “This could include information on what percent of your payment is going towards the projects themselves.”

Project type matters

There are many different types of projects that can be supported by carbon offsets. Tree planting is a popular option, but can also represent a "weak effort," explains Matson “if the project doesn’t carefully ensure trees can grow to maturity, accurately report progress, and avoid the land being deforested [later]."

Other projects, such as wind and solar energy implementation, may have a more significant or long-lasting payoff, depending on the organization and the management of the project itself.

Carbon capture technology: An emerging option 

When it comes to the impact of our travels, Beckmann is working to encourage a broader mindset among the public - one that encompasses not just offsetting carbon emissions, but actively removing carbon from the atmosphere through the process of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS).

As the Carbon Offset Guide explains, CCS projects “capture CO2 emissions from emissions sources, or directly from the air (direct air capture) and inject them into an underground geologic formation such as active and abandoned oil and gas reservoirs, saline aquifers, or un-minable coal seams where they are stored.”

In some cases the CO2 may be mixed with water and injected into basalt rock, a type of rock that underlies more of the Earth’s surface than anything else, explains Beckmann.

“This fizzy CO2 finds it’s way into the fissures of the basalt rock,” explains Beckmann. “You can think of it as cleaning up carbon dioxide from atmosphere and storing it permanently.”

These types of projects, which are taking place in countries like Iceland and Oman, offer some of the latest innovations in addressing carbon emissions and make up a large part of the work conducted by Tomorrow’s Air.

Travelers wanting to help address the impacts of their carbon footprint by supporting the development of CCS technologies can make contributions to Tomorrow’s Air in increments as little as $10.

Demand more from travel providers

Between trains, planes, automobiles, tours, hotels, currencies, and restaurants travel is complicated. When you add carbon quantification and offsetting into the mix, it can be a headache for the average individual.

To that end, all the experts interviewed said the best long-term solution is for travel providers to step up and incorporate such carbon offsetting into their business models. Some industry leaders are already doing that, but they remain in the minority. Travelers can help pressure more providers to do their part - whether it's an airline, a travel advisor or a hotel - calling upon such companies to actively solve the carbon offset problem for customers, says McDougall.

“Not only does this make the offsetting a breeze, it tells the industry that they need to anticipate and provide this for guests,” McDougall explains.

Beckmann offers similar insight, suggesting that it’s not realistic to expect travelers to do all the legwork when it comes to supporting carbon offsets or carbon capture efforts. And only when the travel industry begins to move in the direction of incorporating these types of expenses into their booking or pricing models, will we experience the sea change that’s so desperately required at this juncture.

“On the grand scale, these things should all become embedded in the cost of travel, in the same way a banana in the grocery store is inappropriately expensive in order to accommodate for cost of shipping it,” says Beckmann.

Whether it comes from the consumer or the industry itself - or some combination of both - these types of carbon offsetting, capture and storage efforts have never been more critical, Beckmann adds.

“If all emissions stopped today, we’re still on a warming trend for the next 1,000 years,” says Beckmann. “We waited too long to reduce our emissions. Nature can’t do this job alone anymore.”

ICAO Carbon Emissions Calculator (ICEC)   //

ICAO has developed a methodology to calculate the carbon dioxide emissions from air travel for use in offset programmes. The methodology applies the best publicly available industry data to account for various factors such as aircraft types, route-specific data, passenger load factors and cargo carried.

The ICAO Carbon Emissions Calculator allows passengers to estimate the emissions attributed to their air travel. It is simple to use and requires only a limited amount of information from the user. ICEC is the only internationally approved tool to estimate carbon emissions from air travel.

Please  contact us  or refer  FAQ  or see the accompanying  methodology to the ICAO Carbon Emissions Calculator  for additional information.

clock This article was published more than  4 years ago

6 questions about carbon offsets for flights, answered

People today are flying more than ever, and that trend is set to continue: Last year, the International Air Transport Association reported that airline passenger numbers could almost double worldwide by 2037, to 8.2 billion annually.

But while more flying is great news for people who love to travel, it’s bad news for the environment. Flights were responsible for 2.4 percent of global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in 2018 — a figure expected to grow more than threefold by 2050.

In the face of aviation’s rising emissions problem, the United Nations created the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation ( CORSIA ). The initiative aims to help airlines cancel out the environmental impact of growth in international flights after 2020, by making airlines buy carbon emissions reduction offsets.

However, it’s not just on airlines to make a difference. If you want to be an eco-friendly traveler, carbon offsets are a top option for you, too. Here’s what you need to know.

1. What are carbon offsets, and how do they work?

Carbon offsets offer a way to balance out your pollution by investing in projects that reduce emissions of carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. If you’re taking a long-haul flight from New York City to Paris , for example, you can purchase a carbon offset to account for that specific environmental impact.

Such offset projects can vary widely.

“It ranges from things like planting trees to improved forest management, where a timber company will allow trees to grow longer and increase the amount of carbon sequestered in the forest,” says Peter Miller, a program director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, a nonprofit environmental advocacy group. “It can be capturing of greenhouse gas emissions coming out of a landfill. It could be paying a rice farmer to adopt different practices that reduce the amount of methane coming out of their rice paddies."

United wants Gen Z customers. Gen Z wants discounts and carbon offsets.

Offsets are measured in metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent. You can figure out how much carbon dioxide-equivalent you’re on the hook for by using online calculators, either from an independent source or a project’s website. Next, you would find a carbon offset project to support to essentially cancel out your pollution.

Some projects directly help the environment and humans simultaneously, such as building cookstoves in rural communities abroad that only require half the amount of wood as a traditional stove. Less wood means less toxic smoke in the house, as well as reduced carbon emission and spared forests.

As far as accounting for your carbon pollution goes, it doesn’t matter what the carbon offset project is as long as it matches your carbon output.

“By developing projects and investing in these projects to reduce emissions or increase sequestration, there’s a benefit to the climate,” Miller says.

2. Why should travelers buy carbon offsets?

You don’t have to be traveling to be concerned about your carbon dioxide emissions — anyone can buy a carbon offset. But because travel is particularly toxic to the environment, travelers may feel more compelled to account for their participation in the pollution.

“People underestimate how much emissions are associated with air travel,” says Seth Wynes, a climate change researcher at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver and the author of a forthcoming book on climate change.

“It’s easy on a global level to say, ‘Okay, air travel is only a small portion of global emissions depending on how you look at it, and therefore it’s not a giant contributor.’ But if you do fly, then each flight that you take is likely to be a large chunk of your personal carbon footprint in a year.”

In terms of carbon emissions, Wynes says, flying is a really inefficient way to travel, and prolific flying should be seen as a precious resource — not a necessity. But canceling your honeymoon to Greece or missing that board meeting in Arkansas is not always an option. So, when flights are unavoidable, buying carbon offsets is an easy, low-cost way to negate your impact.

“Offsets can be an important and valuable part of an overall carbon emission reduction strategy,” Miller says. “We all have a collective responsibility to avoid the looming climate crisis. Some people have chosen to not fly anymore as a way to avoid contributing to emissions in the first place. That’s not the answer that many people will adopt.”

This giant hotel chain is getting rid of single-use toiletries to cut plastic waste

3. How can travelers determine which programs are legitimate?

While buying carbon offsets to make up for your travel pollution is a noble effort, it can be pointless if you’re supporting the wrong program. And there are bad ones out there. It’s smart to be skeptical of an industry that has very little regulation and a major lack of transparency.

“Anybody or their brother can say, ‘I’m doing an offset project in my backyard to reduce emissions’ and go out there and sell people credits for their reduced emissions,” Miller says. “You have a willing buyer and a willing seller. And there may be zero credibility there.”

Don’t get duped. Before you get your credit card out, make sure the project is transparent and clearly defines how the emission reduction works and how it’s accounted for.

“It’s hard to ensure that emissions that get reduced by these projects are verifiable and are forever,” Wynes says.

To combat that issue, a carbon offset project should have reserves to account for future reversals. (For example, if you’re paying to plant a tree and the tree dies, the program should have a plan to make up for the carbon deficit.) The program also needs an objective regulatory body.

“A credible, fair project will have third-party verification,” Miller says. “You have a project implementer who does the project according to the protocol and an independent third party who reviews the implementation, reviews the project and ensures it is compliant with the requirements.”

Emission reductions should be tagged so that each metric ton gets a unique serial number — without one, the same emissions reductions could get sold over and over. You also need to look for projects that are truly additional, meaning it wasn’t some already-existing effort now being advertised as a carbon offset.

“An additional project means that the only way the project would exist is because of the funding from the carbon markets,” says Marisa de Belloy, the chief executive of Cool Effect, a San Francisco Bay area 501(c) (3) nonprofit organization. “If I’m legally required to capture methane in my landfill site, I can’t sell carbon projects because I had to do it anyway, so it wouldn’t be an additional project.”

What is ‘green travel,’ anyway? A beginner’s guide to eco-friendly vacation planning.

4. How do I buy carbon offsets?

Once you’ve decided that you would like to buy a carbon offset, browse sites such as Green-e , Gold Standard and de Belloy’s Cool Effect to find a reputable project to support. There are a lot of programs out there to choose from, so pick one that strikes you personally. Do you want to support a program in a place you like to visit? Or maybe one in your home state? Once you’ve narrowed down your options, refer to the above advice on what to look for to guarantee a quality purchase.

To assure more bang for your buck, consider a project that does more than just reduce greenhouse gas emissions. You may be paying for the environmental side of the project, but it can have humanitarian benefits at the same time.

“There’s a whole range of forest projects that can have tremendous benefits in terms of the local ecosystem, native species or water storage,” Miller says. “An urban forestry project can be really helpful in terms of quality of life or jobs for disadvantaged communities."

5. Are carbon offsets tax-deductible?

Yes. If you’re supporting a project that’s registered as a 501(c) (3) nonprofit organization, you can make your purchase tax-deductible. That means you get to reduce your impact on the environment and maybe ease your tax burden at the same time.

6. Are carbon offsets the only way to be a greener traveler?

Not at all. There are many small steps that you can take to nibble at the edges of the problem, including choosing direct flights and avoiding sitting in first or business class, as those spacious seats take up room that could have fit more passengers. You can also encourage your company to invest in videoconferencing options to replace expensive and environmentally taxing business flights.

In the end, though, “really the best thing that you can do is not fly and find good alternatives to that,” Wynes says. “Take a vacation or staycation around where you live, or a local vacation where you take a trip by train is great.”

This igloo-themed hotel is set to open at the North Pole — for $100,000 per person

‘Green’ travel stunts by airlines can’t erase the environmental impact of flying

Europe’s ‘flight shame’ movement doesn’t stand a chance in the U.S.

• Share full article

Ask NYT Climate

Are Flight Offsets Worth It?

A lot of them don’t work and some might even be harmful. But there are things you can do if you really have to fly.

Credit... Naomi Anderson-Subryan

Supported by

By Susan Shain

• Published May 6, 2024 Updated May 8, 2024, 7:07 a.m. ET

Q: Should I buy offsets to cover my air travel?

In recent years, research has shown that many offset projects are ineffective or worse. But last we checked, people are still flying . A lot. And the planet is still warming. A lot.

So you may still be wondering: Should I offset my air travel? If so, how?

What are offsets, exactly?

A carbon offset is a credit that you can buy to make up for your emissions. So if you fly from New York to San Francisco, releasing around 1,000 pounds of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, you can purchase an offset, funding a project that will remove or store that same amount of carbon dioxide elsewhere, often by planting or preserving trees.

At least that’s the idea. But many scientists object to the principle, on the grounds that we need to sharply reduce emissions, not just try to cancel them out.

“Offsetting is a misnomer,” said Barbara Haya, director of the Berkeley Carbon Trading Project at the University of California, Berkeley. “It creates a fiction that you can fly and emit greenhouse gasses and just pay for these cheap credits and it erases your impact.”

Last year, an estimated $1.7 billion of carbon credits were issued worldwide, according to an analysis from the global accounting firm KPMG.

OK. But do they work?

Companies are working on ways to improve the credibility of carbon credits. But Dr. Haya has been studying offsets for more than 20 years and so far, she said, the results have been grim . “Most credits don’t represent the amount of emissions reductions that they claim,” she said. Others have had no measurable climate benefit at all.

That’s because measuring the carbon captured by, say, planting a new tree is hard. Would that tree have been planted anyway? What happens if that tree later burns in a wildfire?

John Sterman, a professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management and director of the MIT Climate Pathways Project , compared carbon credits to the magical healing elixirs of the Old West. “I could put anything into that bottle. And it isn’t just that it might not work — it could be downright harmful . That’s where we’re at with carbon offsets,” he said. “They’re fooling people.”

In order for an offset to be legitimate, Dr. Sterman said a project’s results must be verifiable, immediate and durable . They must also be “additional,” meaning they wouldn’t have happened without funding from the offset. Very few projects, he said, meet all of these criteria.

The aviation industry seems to be catching on. United’s chief executive has called the majority of offsets “fraud,” and the head of sustainability at Delta has said the company had “shifted away” from offsets . Both companies have committed to sustainable aviation fuel (which has its own set of challenges ) and other means of decarbonization instead.

What are the alternatives?

The best solution, according to the experts: Fly less.

And when you do fly, choose economy. Since premium seats take up more space, passengers in first or business class account for up to four times the emissions of passengers in the back.

On the rare occasions she flies, Dr. Haya has committed to donating $1,000 per ton emitted to environmental organizations, such as Unite to Light , the San Francisco Estuary Institute and others. “It helps me sort of understand the impact of my choices,” she said.

If you decide to take this approach, there are lots of ways to make your climate donations count .

Instead of purchasing offsets, Dr. Sterman has invested in reducing his everyday carbon footprint by adding insulation and solar panels to his house and buying an electric car. “It may seem like it’s more expensive to do that or more difficult, but it’s really not,” he said. “Because the money you’re wasting on offsets isn’t really doing any good.”

Voting also matters, said Lauren Gifford, associate director of the Soil Carbon Solutions Center at Colorado State University. And, she said, it’s important to tell your representatives that solving climate change matters to you.

Carbon offsets are “basically a permit to pay to pollute,” Ms. Gifford said. “And what we need to do is not pollute.”

Have a question for reporters covering climate and the environment?

We might answer your question in a future column. We won’t publish your submission without contacting you, and may use your contact information to follow up with you.

Susan Shain is a reporting fellow for Headway, a section of The Times that explores the world's challenges through the lens of progress. More about Susan Shain

Learn More About Climate Change

Have questions about climate change? Our F.A.Q. will tackle your climate questions, big and small .

Cattle ranches have ruled the Amazon for decades. Now, new companies are selling something else: the ability of trees to lock away  planet-warming carbon.

Paris is becoming a city of bikes. Across China, people are snapping up $5,000 electric cars. Here’s a look at a few bright spots  for emission reductions.

In theory, online shopping can be more efficient  than driving to the store. But you may still want to think before you add to cart.

“Buying Time,” a new series from The New York Times, looks at the risky ways  humans are starting to manipulate nature  to fight climate change.

Did you know the ♻ symbol doesn’t mean something is actually recyclable ? Read on about how we got here, and what can be done.

Advertisement

Biden looks to lower the carbon footprint of business travel

As the aviation industry lobbies for sustainable jet fuel, new tax breaks could help lower the carbon footprint of business travel.

By Elsa Wenzel

May 6, 2024

Illustration of a jet's shadow over a field sunflowers. Credit: Shutterstock/Scharfsinn

U.S. airlines use sustainable fuel in less than 0.1 percent of flights . Yet the government wants 10 percent of the industry to run on sustainable fuel by 2030, and to reach 100 percent by 2050 .

The scale of the challenge is massive: United Airlines used 7 million gallons of sustainable fuel last year, according to company spokesman Sam Coleman. "That was a threefold increase from the year before, which is great, except that United Airlines burns between 3 and 4 billion — with a B — gallons of fuel every year."

Air travel creates 2 percent of the world’s CO2 emissions and 12 percent of transportation emissions, according to the Department of Energy. There will be a projected 40.1 million flights in 2024 , up from 36.8 million the year before.

The carbon footprint of business travel could get lower

Put simply, air travel simply isn’t anywhere close to being sustainable.

Yet chief sustainability officers — looking to reduce the carbon footprint of their business travel operations — would dearly love it to be.

The Biden administration sought to change that April 30 when it announced that producers of corn- and soy-based jet fuel who use "climate-smart" farming practices will be eligible for new tax credits. 

The administration’s guidance, which isn’t final, could help other businesses reduce the carbon footprint of their employees’ travel. Salesforce, for one, plans to buy sustainable fuel certificates for 5 percent of its Scope 3 emissions for air travel.

The move came after the launch April 29 of the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Coalition (SAFC), a lobby group of 40 aviation businesses including American Airlines and United Airlines. The group will push for increased investment in sustainable fuel.

SAF makes up more than two-thirds of the emissions reductions needed by International Air Transport Association members to reach net zero carbon by 2050. Credit: IATA

"Sustainable" is a relative term when it comes to jet fuel. It is typically blended with regular jet fuel in a ratio of between 10 to 50 percent . It can reduce carbon emissions by up to 85 percent over its lifecycle, according to Boeing Aerospace, even though by its nature it still involves burning fossil fuel and producing CO2.

Sustainable jet fuel is expensive

Sustainable fuel costs two to four times more than fossil fuel. That "green premium" hampers adoption, and demand outstrips the supply, according to the International Air Transport Association .

That’s where the new government subsidies come in. Producers using corn for ethanol or soy for biodiesel can now qualify for tax credits of between $1.25 to $1.75 per gallon of fuel produced. They must be able to demonstrate that they used regenerative agriculture: cover crops, energy-efficient fertilizer and did not till their soil to make the fuel.

Critics want crops for food, not fuel

The cost — and the continued use of petroleum — are why many in the airline industry regard crop-based fuel as a "bridge" that will eventually lead to "third-generation fuels" from hydrogen and carbon capture.

"While some may view this announcement as being too stringent or too lenient for crop-based fuels, we believe that it strikes the right balance between getting the science right and incentivizing lower carbon fuel production with the feedstocks and production processes that we have available today," said John Hebert, senior policy adviser for transportation at think tank Third Way.

Environmental groups expressed wariness over the plan to grow crops for fuel instead of food. "U.S. airlines should align with their European counterparts in demanding sustainable aviation fuel made from feedstocks that don’t compete with food production," Dan Lashof, World Resources Institute director , told GreenBiz.

That’s not part of the administration’s vision, however. It’s all about jet fuel: The new tax breaks are "a big step forward for American farmers, for American innovation, for American jobs and America's ability to cut carbon pollution for our transportation sector and to protect our planet," said John Podesta, the senior clean energy advisor to Biden who oversees spending under the Inflation Reduction Act, at a press event Monday.

New laws require sustainable fuel

But governments the world over seem intent on forcing a market for sustainable fuel into existence. Among them:

• As of April 24, a new Nebraska law offers a tax credit of 75 cents per gallon to SAF producers. After Iowa, the state is the second biggest producer of ethanol .
• Illinois, the third largest U.S. ethanol producer , is offering a tax credit of $1.50 per gallon for those who purchase sustainable fuel. Washington state will offer a credit of up to $2 per gallon, once facilities there pump up at least 20 million gallons per year.
• In 2025, the European Union will begin requiring its airports to use a minimum of 2 percent sustainable fuel, reaching 63 percent in 2050.
• All flights originating in the U.K. will be required to run on 10 percent sustainable fuel by 2030 , under its sustainable aviation fuel mandate published in April . The target includes supplying 1.2 million metric tons of fuel annually.

"SAF will enhance domestic energy security, create new markets for American farmers, reduce aviation emissions and drive next-generation technology development," said Alison Graab, executive director of the SAF Coalition and a transport industry lobbyist.

[Continue the conversation on climate policy at Circularity 24 (May 22-24, Chicago), the leading conference for professionals building the circular economy.]

View the discussion thread.

More on this topic

• Renewable Energy
• Transportation & Mobility
• Policy & Politics

Share this article

Elsa Wenzel

More by this author.

Asics designed a sneaker that’s made to be torn apart

No more funding forests in Cambodia: Interface is ending offsets to go carbon-negative

How Dr. Martens got past the ick factor of second-hand shoes

Fashion brands should treat water stress as a material risk to their finances, study says

Why H&M is turning away from polyester recycled from bottles

Get articles like this delivered to your inbox

• Circularity 24

Join 2,000+ professionals advancing the circular economy at Circularity 24 (May 22-24, Chicago). Save 10% on your registration with code C24WPU10.

• Climate Tech
• Circularity
• ESG/Finance
• Sustainability Strategy
• UPCOMING EVENTS:
• GreenFin 24
• GreenBiz 25

DP World Tour Launches New Fan Travel Emissions Tracker 

The DP World Tour is calling on fans to help play their part in tackling the climate crisis by launching a new tool that allows spectators to calculate and offset their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions when travelling to and from tournaments.

The easy-to-use tool is being customised and deployed in collaboration with AQ Green TeC, a Hamburg based carbon management solutions provider. Ticket Holders at 12 tournaments in 2024 will automatically receive an email link to a new portal, where they can input their event travel-related information, including flights, accommodation and ground transportation and then purchase verified carbon credits to offset their calculated GHG emissions. Carbon credits in the tool are all from Gold Standard accredited projects that support a range of United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. The tool will also be promoted at tournaments via QR codes across the site and on DP World Tour digital platforms.

Helping spectators mitigate their GHG emissions when travelling to tournaments is an important part of the Tour’s wider Green Drive programme, which is committed to achieving a 50% reduction in emissions by 2030 and net zero carbon by 2040. The Tour has just released its first summary Impact Report, following a comprehensive audit of 10 events and its operations and venues in 2023, completed in collaboration with the GEO Sustainable Golf Foundation. The report highlights that spectator travel accounts for an average of 45% of greenhouse gas emissions per tournament - the largest single emissions source.

To help drive engagement with the new tool, the DP World Tour will be running a series of competitions for fans who choose to offset their travel, with once in a lifetime prizes on offer.

A range of initiatives are already in place and being expanded to encourage lower carbon transport options at many events including free shuttle services from local train stations such as the BMW PGA Championship and Genesis Scottish Open, free bike parking at all events, encouraging carpooling, and priority parking for spectators using electric vehicles. Measurements are also being undertaken to quantify the impact on carbon emissions of the new structure of the 2024 DP World Tour season, which has seen events clustered together into regional “Swings”.

Maria Grandinetti-Milton, Head of Sustainability at the European Tour group, said: “There will always be unavoidable emissions when staging golf tournaments that attract thousands of fans over multiple days. We have a responsibility to start the dialogue with our fans and to help connect the impact of actions onsite to the future of our sport, supporting climate mitigation projects where we can all work together to invest back into the planet.

“Ultimately, we want to make it easier for fans to make cleaner travel choices in the first place, whether that’s using public transport, carpooling or cycling. At present, 20.5% of our spectator’s travel using lower carbon methods, and we want to increase this percentage. This new tool will help raise awareness of this issue amongst our fan base and provide a simple means of understanding the impact different modes of transport have on our climate. If we are going to achieve net zero by 2040, then everyone needs to pull together and play their part.”

David Grundlingh, CEO of AQ Green TeC, added: “It has been our long-held belief that sport has immense influence and thereby opportunity to drive positive change and deliver #SharedResponsibility and #CollectiveAction for meaningful climate action. We are therefore extremely excited to be making such a significant move into sport with the team at the European Tour group and look forward to showing the rest of the live-event industry how to take their biggest environmental challenge, namely fan-travel and turn this into an opportunity for climate change mitigation.”

Through its strategic collaboration with the GEO Sustainable Golf Foundation, the DP World Tour has undertaken a wide range of measures to make its tournaments and operations as sustainable as possible. These are centred on resource efficiency; climate action; community engagement and the promotion of nature. Supporting Gold Standard accredited climate projects is also complemented by onset investments across the sector, and an increasing emphasis on local community-based ecosystem restoration projects at individual events.

McKibbin delighted to play part in NI Open at Galgorm

The NI Open, presented by Tom McKibbin, was officially launched today as one of the elevated events on this year’s European Challenge Tour schedule and will be played once more at Galgorm from July 23-28, 2024.

DP World Tour Partners

• Search Please fill out this field.
• Manage Your Subscription
• Give a Gift Subscription
• Newsletters
• Sweepstakes

Pamela Anderson Is a Serene Beauty Prepping for the 2024 Met Gala in Behind-the-Scenes Video (Exclusive)

The star wore nearly 200 carats of white and pink lab-grown diamonds by Pandora

Pamela Anderson made a dazzling Met Gala debut .

For her very first appearance at the Metropolitan Museum of Art's annual Costume Institute Gala, the '90s icon, author and activist looked ethereal in a chiffon gown by Oscar de la Renta, Noel Stewart faux leather headpiece and glittering Pandora jewels.

The pink and white diamond accessories contained nearly 200 carats, marking Pandora's debut of pink diamonds. Her necklace was the standout element of the look, as the double chain draped down her back.

Theo Wargo/GA/The Hollywood Reporter via Getty

The rest of Anderson's look was also designed with the icon's unique style in mind. Her glam, courtesy of legendary makeup artist Pat McGrath herself, broke her recent makeup-free streak while still being fresh, glowy and natural.

Her long, blonde hair was styled into an effortless '90s-style updo done by hairstylist Orlando Pita.

See all of PEOPLE’s Star-Studded Met Gala Coverage in One Place!

In a behind-the-scenes video shared with PEOPLE, the Baywatch alum initially has three diamond necklaces around her neck before the Pandora team switches things up by draping two strands of diamonds over her shoulder for a chic, unexpected twist.

Courtesy of Pandora

In a close-up shot of her makeup application, Anderson has a pinky nude lip color dabbed onto her lips with a finger to create a soft blotted look. She also has a smattering of glitter freckles across her face, adding to the fairy-like vibe.

Unsurprisingly, Anderson's ensemble ties into a cause she's passionate about — sustainability. Her jewelry was made with lab-grown diamonds, showcasing Pandora's commitment to reducing their carbon footprint.

“I'm in a very freeing space right now where I have the opportunity to enjoy beauty and fashion on my own terms in pieces created with Pandora especially for me,” Anderson said via a press release shared with PEOPLE. “There is always an allure in finding new ways to approach style while reducing harm to our environment - to be adorned in diamonds is opulent, and for these diamonds to be produced sustainably, it is innovative and exciting, so I get the best of both worlds.”

Additionally, the statement shares that Anderson's custom jewelry "evoked the freshness of the morning dew in her garden, with its organic mix of solid settings, a modern chain layer, and varying cuts and sizes of excellent cut white and pink lab-grown diamonds."

If the subtle playfulness of Anderson's look wasn't apparent on the red carpet, it certainly was in the videos the star later shared to Instagram. In two separate clips, she frolics through the Met Museum and then what appears to be Central Park, the flowy train of her gown billowing around her.

Related Articles