Guardians or Looters?

Fly to NZ from anywhere then rent a Prius to offset the carbon. More likely they fly here from anywhere and hire a cheap run down campervan then shun all the places that have rubbish and sewage collection or efficient heating opting for a spade(optional) and open fire next to the van.

A prius increases your carbon footprint, the energy taken to ship the raw materials and make the batteries and the fact that the batteries are toxic waste after twelve years and have to be replaced and disposed of using a lot of energy and shipped back to where they originated from.

The batteries can be recycled fairly simply although Im not sure it is being done very efficiently. Reality still is though that humanity is using 5 to 10 times the energy that the planet can regenerate from the sun via various means. Renewable power stations are part of the answer but even when we hit peak renewables I doubt we will be matching our greed to whats available. Humanity hasnt lived sustainably for the last 50 years and we all know what happens to populations of other species that overpopulate there habitat. We could reduce our reliance on energy (all types) which would buy us a few more years but the reality is there are too many of us. Even if we took drastic measures now to reduce population we may of left it too late. Drastic measures would include a version of chinas 1 child policy It would have to include no medicine for over 70s (yes that not that far away) it would have to include the deletion of all people unlikely to breed. Those measures would have to stay in place until the population got back under 3 billion. No government could ever bring such policies in which basically means we are all doomed

Jet travel is not just about carbon. Hi altitude flights inject water vapour into the upper atmosphere. This is a nasty greenhouse gas. I have pledged not to fly jet engines, just little planes and helicopters. I held this pledge for 8 years then broke it to attend a niece's wedding in Auckland. Not sure if the planes get that high in the air from Chch to Akld of course. Back on my pledge though. I won't stop driving around the S.I. to go tramping though as I would go nuts if I didn't get out into the wilderness as opposed to rehabilitated cocksfoot pastures in the back yard of Banks Peninsula. Meantime, no one seems to know about the water vapour effect and my colleagues are popping over to Aussie to go shopping and see a show for $100. I agree we are all doomed but since I have no children to fret over and the ones with kids don't give a stuff, I don't see why I should get too upset either. We arrived and then we were gone and the world was a better place for our going.

The other point with high altitude engine use is that different reactions occur up there resulting in ozone as a byproduct ... another greenhouse gas. Seen a graph somewhere: jet travel came out about twice as bad per kg carried than any other transport. Sea freight was very low ... though other pollutants should also be considered, not just climate change. Eg. the brown streak in the air off the east coast of aus above the shipping lane. Contrails ... lucky our pet conspiracy theorists have all got themselves blocked from the forum ... thats worse than 54x20 for getting them stirred up. Back to original subject: the counter side is the flow-on benefits of people getting out and acquiring an appreciation for nature. If everyone stayed at home in towns we'd have noone who cared: no predator trapping groups, no protests iver mining, no votes for conservation, noone ensuring we look after our backcountry. Everything in life is a compromise.

battery powered cars and solar power panels use up rare earth minerals that are getting scarcer and cant be replaced, they are a temporary answer, and if you have a dedicated electric engine and you recharge it , in a lot of countries, fossil fuel power stations are recharging the cars

sea freight would be more efficient than air freight, but i doubt it would be for ocean liners transporting people, you cant pack the people in a boat as you can freight and you cant pack people the same as you can on a jet, and the extra infrastructure and supplies required for people on a boat makes them far less efficient, to transport people long distances, hence it costs more to take a boat long distance than planes...

modern societies function in a way where its perceived that if you have disposable income, you can do what you like with it.. plenty of big business people with massive carbon footprints are rewarded with honors for their "service to business" knighthoods, etc... it sends a message that its ok to make lots of money and do what you like with it regardless of how it affects the environment.. what matters is being "successful" in your profession... we're surrounded by people who happily do whatever they want with their disposable income and they arent really seriously questioning each other about the environmental impact its having. but thats not easy to do with friends. few people i know express any sort of concern about the environment, its not seriously affecting their lifestyles yet , so it doesnt feature in their concerns...

@waynowski's last 2 lines sums it up pretty well. We all know we are in it, it's just the depth that varies and until it gets to the depth where it will impede us doing what we wish to do we wont give a damn. Me and many like me included. You just can't beat the 1% that controls the other 99%, which is the reality of it.

Rare earth elements are not really that rare. Its the extractying them from ore that is the issue big time. Mongolia features highly as a source and something like 80% of neobidium which is a powerful magnet used in computer hard drives windmills and electric vehicle motors comes from there. Processing facilities are poorly regulated and the waste has resulted in entire towns being moved and life expectancy in those townd dropping below 40 years due to all sorts of cancer