Novacon Carbon Footprint
Aug. 23rd, 2007 12:27 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Getting two of us from Edinburgh to Walsall for Novacon:
By air: circa £120 (air fares and taxis), 3 hrs.
By car: circa £120 (petrol and running costs), 6 hrs.
By rail: circa £200, 6 hrs.
And that is booking ten weeks in advance.
According to the Guardian's carbon-offset website, flying would generate 240 kg of carbon dioxide, which would cost £1.77 to offset. Driving would generate 210 kg, costing £1.58 to offset. No data for trains.
EDIT: Or we could give the GoH a lift and split the costs!
By air: circa £120 (air fares and taxis), 3 hrs.
By car: circa £120 (petrol and running costs), 6 hrs.
By rail: circa £200, 6 hrs.
And that is booking ten weeks in advance.
According to the Guardian's carbon-offset website, flying would generate 240 kg of carbon dioxide, which would cost £1.77 to offset. Driving would generate 210 kg, costing £1.58 to offset. No data for trains.
EDIT: Or we could give the GoH a lift and split the costs!
no subject
Date: 2007-08-24 12:04 pm (UTC)For example, it lists police and court costs of £3bn, based on an unsourced estimate that 25% of police time is spent on such matters, but doesn't deduct from that any estimate of fines against motorists. It's disingenous to attribute extra cost to motoring from the existance of criminals who steal cars / from cars, and one could argue that much of the cost is poor productivity of the police.
Table 10 similarly relies on an unsourced estimate of the proportion of insurance costs that go on administration, and inflates the estimated cost of accidents using the rail "willingness to pay" numbers rather than the road ones (OK, there is a problem with unrealistically high expectations of rail safety).
The real bulk of the alleged subsidy comes from estimates of the land value used by parking (£6bn, much of which is on private land anyway) and asset value of the road network (over £30bn!). I don't think "not charging for asset value" is what most people think of as a subsidy, and it doesn't show up in the public accounts as such. If we were to follow that route, all sorts of things like the NHS and the MOD would look very much more expensive. Arguably it shouldn't be levied against railtrack, and the fact that it is is an artefact of the stupid ownership structure of the railways.
No estimate is made of the inconvenience costs of travelling by rail (including delay, crime, lost possessions, time spent waiting, transfers, noise, etc)