There is no way to cross the ocean without burning up a lot of fuel,  unless you swim  or row.  That's just the way it is.

All forms of travel (except in your head!) use some energy. But there's no question that flying is by far the worst, in terms of petroleum used up, pollution and human health, impact on the upper atmosphere, energy used per person-mile, etc.

For all these reasons, I've not flown in over 18 months. In fact, I've only flown for a pleasure trip once in the last five years.

Not that I'm bucking for sainthood here. My other reason for not flying is the dehumanizing surrender of civil liberties one encounters in any U.S. airport. The minute you enter an airport (and increasingly a bus terminal or train station), you have left what's left of the United States and entered a full-fledged police state. I guess you can say I'm also protesting our government as well as making a stand for the environment.

My dear brother-in-law works for an airline, and I know that my reluctance to fly will impact his life if his airline goes under -- much as the travel agents in the Guardian article worry about their jobs if there is a mass backlash against flying. But people are irrepressible, and if we can't fly, there will be more trains and boats (I hope!), and more jobs in those industries.

Finally, remember that it's not just the casual vacation flyer who needs to be targeted. Most flying is for business. As we work toward more local, sustainable economies, there should be less reason for all this far-flung business travel. All of our efforts are connected.