We gain much when we travel responsibly
The thing about not flying is that it forces you to slow down (Greta expectations: the power of not flying, 10 May). Travelling slowly helps you to love the world, to take it more seriously. By train you experience the tremendous variety of physical landscapes and the multiplicity of peoples who inhabit them; by sea you are awed by the wonder and ever-changing moods of the oceans and the vastness of the skies. How could we not treat with care this thing that sustains us so abundantly?
When we fly, we treat the space below us as something to get through as quickly as possible. But travelling slowly gives you that most blessed thing in this frantic age of busyness - time to ponder. It takes away the urgency of life. It helps you to see what is important.
And there’s the bonus of knowing that we are leaving a smaller carbon footprint. What’s not to like?
Clive Wilkinson
Rothbury, UK
• It should come as no surprise to Europeans that their cities are connected by an extensive rail network. But the idea of “saving” CO2 is a fallacy, and Greta Thunberg has said as much herself. For people who don’t fly, the question is not how much one “reduces” one’s carbon footprint by taking the train, but rather whether one should travel at all.
Of course, Thunberg is no ordinary traveller, and she probably calculated that her influence would more than offset the CO2 emissions incurred by her rail travel. We don’t know whether Thunberg’s travels will result in negative net emissions or whether she is using up resources in vain. To me, a non-flying Guardian Weekly reader in Canada, it doesn’t matter whether Thunberg is holding up a placard in her home city of Stockholm, giving a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos or addressing British MPs in London. The type is just as legible, the picture just as focused and the message just as clear.
Xander I Selene
Outremont, Quebec, Canada
• However laudable it was for the Thunbergs to travel by train, it is totally misleading to claim that they thus saved 400kg of CO2. The planes still took off without them, as they do every day. Or were the flights cancelled because of the Thunbergs’ non-appearance? The actual CO2 saving was zero!
Stephen King-Beck
Wedel, Germany
Lessons learned from story on Cancer Town
I came to three conclusions after reading the article Cancer Town USA (10 May):
1) Black lives don’t matter in the US.
2) Big corporations can’t be trusted not to kill people in pursuit of profit.
3) America is a sick country headed by a sick president.
This has implications for us in Australia.
1) We need to distance ourselves from the toxic influence of the US.
2) We need more regulation of corporations.
3) We need to stand up and be counted when it comes to prejudice.
John Hillel
Mount Waverley, Victoria, Australia
Nothing whimsical about conspiracy theories
The gloomy Edward Gorey suggested that life is “boring and dangerous at the same time”, and that if nothing happens we’re back to boring again. I have a hunch that conspiracy theorists are similarly at their wits’ end if they go on such voyages whimsically called the “Conspira-Sea Cruise” (The truth is out there, 10 May).
But on a more serious note, let us not forget that conspiracy theories are the wobbly stilts that rightwing dictatorships stand on, and that all the ogling over Hillary Clinton’s so-called traitorous emails helped to put a confirmed conspiracy theorist into the White House.
Richard Orlando
Westmount, Quebec, Canada
For rural residents, it’s harder to shun cars
One of your letter writers (17 May) suggests that our dependency upon cars could be limited by taxing them highly or restricting them to one per family.
For city dwellers, that’s perfectly understandable; but could this really be possible in rural Canada, where distances are vast, winter temperatures can drop to -40C, bus services are practically non-existent and the disappearance of hitchhikers has led to a stretch of road being designated as the Highway of Tears?
Anthony Walter
Surrey, British Columbia, Canada
