Travel Trade-Offs for Scientists

Abstract

I recently returned from the annual meeting of the Ecological Society of America (ESA), my principal scientific society. This year's conference theme was “Global Warming: The legacy of our past, the challenge for our future.” Roughly 4000 scientists attended from countries around the world to discuss the effects of greenhouse gas emissions on ecosystems and species. In so doing, we likely emitted more than 1000 tons of CO2 ([ 1 ][1]). We are not alone. Other scientific societies, such as the American Geophysical Union and AAAS, also focus on climate change while holding large annual conferences. ESA purchased $5 of carbon offsets for every attendee and implemented other green measures, but these measures do not go far enough. Almost certainly, as individuals, scientists are responsible for an order of magnitude more greenhouse gas emissions than the average global citizen, in large part due to travel associated with our scientific interactions, presentations, and service to the scientific community ([ 2 ][2]). We warn about the serious consequences of “business as usual,” yet we ourselves have failed to make necessary changes. Science funding agencies and scientific societies should be the leaders in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from travel. There is undeniably great value in personal interactions at scientific meetings; scientists should explore ways to facilitate those productive collaborations without requiring travel. Science funding agencies can develop technological solutions to substitute for face-to-face panels and committee meetings. Social scientists can focus on maximizing our effectiveness in scientific interactions over video teleconferencing. Funding agencies can encourage proposals that incorporate videoconferencing equipment, rather than large travel budgets. Scientific societies can develop strategies for less frequent national meetings, perhaps alternating with regional meetings, and advancing Web conferencing models. Scientists must lead the charge against “business as usual” by demonstrating a different way of doing business. The technology is available, and it is time for us to find ways to promote scientific progress without contributing so substantially to the climate change problem we study. 1. [↵][3] Based on the ESA conference attendance list, I estimate that attendees traveled a total of about 8 million miles. I used the [carbonfund.org][4] carbon calculator to convert this estimated mileage to CO2 emissions. 2. [↵][5] American Association for the Advancement of Science, “AAAS Board Statement on Climate Change” (2006); [www.aaas.org/news/press\_room/climate\_change/mtg\_200702/aaas\_climate_statement.pdf][6]. [1]: #ref-1 [2]: #ref-2 [3]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text [4]: http://carbonfund.org [5]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2 in text [6]: http://www.aaas.org/news/press_room/climate_change/mtg_200702/aaas_climate_statement.pdf