I've stopped flying to conferences for climate change reasons

Re:I've stopped flying to conferences for climate change rea... by hyperbovine on Monday June 03, 2019 @10:52AM (#20083701)

There is no such thing as a 1.5h flight. With security, traffic to and from the airport, "allow extra time for <x>", and actual airtime, you're looking at 4h door to door for pretty much the shortest travel distance that it makes sense to fly (LA to SF or DC to NY). The train compares much more favorably when you factor everything in.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I've stopped flying to conferences for climate change rea... by jdlshore on Monday June 03, 2019 @12:42PM (#20085202)

This is a popular sentiment, but didn't ring true for me as a frequent traveler. I've been taking regular 1h45m flights in the past few months, so I added up my actual travel time for those trips. It did take 4h15m when everything was included... but the part that was unique to air travel (arriving earlier at airport, security) only added up to 40 minutes.

It's true that a 1.5h flight would take me 4h, but most of that extra time is universal to all travel. An equivalent 1h30m train ride would take me 3h20m. Not that much more favorable.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I've stopped flying to conferences for climate change rea... by the8472 on Monday June 03, 2019 @11:44AM (#20084417)

Some of those things don't apply outside america. E.g. in europe or japan congestion-free public transport to the airport exists and internal flights have very low security overhead.

On the other hand those places also have high speed rail.

[ Parent | on HN ]