I know I've seen this elsewhere on the boards in the past, but I was just listening to a radio show about the rapid decline of species. At the end of the show, the moderator asked the experts what could individuals do to at least slow the rate of species loss. The answer that they generally seemed to agree on was to reduce consumption and in particular to limit air travel. One person said that she had discovered that her two jet trips per year had the carbon footprint of the rest of her lifestyle combined, so she stopped taking them.I have made similar calculations about my own carbon footprint, but still do fly to see and to please family. Obviously we would need many people to decide not to fly to reduce the number of planes in the sky, but if enough of us did, it would make a difference. It is always a moral dilemma for me, because I am made into the party pooper if I won't travel long distances, but I feel like a destroyer of the environment if I do. To be clear, I am talking about giving up or severely restricting travelling long distances, not just driving instead, which I understand is not better if you drive alone. Also, please do not respond to this thread if you do not believe in anthropogenic climate change, because that is not the debate I wish to have here. Also not really interested in the plane will fly anyway arguments. I'm talking about what if we could reduce the number and/or size of planes in the sky by individually deciding to restrict our own long distance travel?