[mononcqc]

I'm aware of this. I'm living in a place where power is over 99% renewable and makes use of no gas for utilities, work from home and drive fewer than 5,000km/y as a household, and eat a low-meat diet.

The biggest gains to be had are obviously systemic, and what I do as a consumer is far more limited in its scope and impact. I still limit my flights, no longer attend in-person conferences, try to travel more local, because what else am I going to do? I'm aware this is like putting out a cigarette when the whole town's already on fire, but I can't deal with the dissonance otherwise. It's still an individual luxury that can have an oversized impact compared to everything else I do.

Advocating for it is not going to be sufficient at all, but it's still the most impact I can have when all the big stakeholders who have to fix their powergrid are not even in countries I live in.

[andrekandre]

  > It's still an individual luxury that can have an oversized impact compared to everything else I do.

as an individual, isnt that plane going to fly wether im on it or not...?

ive ridden on many long intercontinental flights where a huge amount (almost half) of seats were unfilled..

[api]

The unit of capital allocation in airlines is one plane, and cancelling a flight or adding a new one probably requires some advance notice to airports and other agencies not to mention time for maintenance, flight crews, etc. to ready it or take it out of operation. Then there's pilots' unions etc.

So no, your decision does not immediately affect the number of planes flying, but if many people fly less the net effect will be fewer planes in the air after some time delay.