Western Friend logo

Search

A search result that only shows a person’s name often links to a list of articles written by that person.

Air Travel

Dear Editor: I observe faithful Quakers often desire to travel to far countries by jet to follow their leadings. Surely there is merit in this, but how does that merit weigh against the harm to our atmosphere caused by jet emissions? Air travel harms our Earth, and jet emissions will contribute to the destruction of this world, which is not ours to harm. Please be mindful in the accomplishment of leadings. Look at transportation alternatives. Work locally or remotely if possible. Finally, if you must fly, here are tips to reduce the impacts: "Air Pollution and Global Warming," New York Times, 7/27/2027.

On Water (March 2019)

Carbon Offsets for Western Friend

Many new initiatives to promote "carbon offsets" have emerged since the letter below was published.

On Flesh (November 2016)

Seeking Right Relationship with Our Earth

Shelley Tanenbaum serves as clerk of Quaker Earthcare Witness and Quaker Institute for the Future.  She is a member of Strawberry Creek Meeting in Berkeley, CA. Shelley and her husband run a consulting company, ENVAIR, which conducts research on regional air quality trends, with an emphasis on ozone and particulates.

On Consumption (May 2013)

Absurd

Dear Editor: Regarding your attempt at calculating the carbon offset amount mandated by your and others’ air travel (WF, Nov./Dec.,’16) I am somewhat puzzled by the whole enterprise. Yes, we all participate in the machinery of ongoing environmental degradation and the apparently accelerating pace of climate catastrophe. But isn’t it misleading, even absurd to try to calculate this out in dollars-and-cents terms as if we could pay out toward our fiscal responsibility at an imaginary teller window somewhere? Really, how could mere humans have any real conception of the actual load placed on the biosphere by our various collective activities? And doesn’t reducing that responsibility to a dollar amount imply that we can simply pay for it, in whatever amount we reckon the damage to be, and then go back to our usual practices without another thought?

On Balance (May 2017)