Beg to differ, but it's been 71 years since Walter Benjamin wrote the article. He died while trying to escape to Spain in WWII.

ciao

John, you are quite accurate in saying that air travel is the single most environmentally damaging activity most of us engage in. Finding a suitable alternative is vital to sustainability, but is also quite antithetical to the way business is done in our world.

As Benjamin said in the work of art [...]

Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be.

It is difficult to see how we will overcome this through any virtual experience, though certainly the art of film can be quite immersive. And broadly democratic and potentially revolutionary, which was Benjamin's primary interest.



An editing note: I believe it has been 73 years, not 25 years, since Benjamin's work was published. Though I may be wrong...

Is it airtravel which is the problem, or is it travel in general? I highly doubt it would be more efficient for 200 passengers on a 737 to drive the same distance in separate vehicles.

However long it's been since Benjamin's paper, I'd love to read your paper John!

In terms of adopting the virtual experience, I can't see mass-adoption without some sort of public policy change. I think it's more about forcing the brain to rewire itself because it simply has no choice. I've seen Robin Chase (of Zipcar/GoLoco fame) speak twice in the past few months. She presents the most compelling case for the need to change our travel habits - and she'll also tell you that 10 years is too late to fend off environmental hazards.

So perhaps, instead of saying that you're committed to reducing your flights by 90% within ten years, a better goal would be to cut your 78 annual flights by one-third in 2008 and then try to turn that 'uncanny valley' into a desirable location.

I said it at DoTT 07 and I'll say it again... there's never been a substitutional relationship between telecommunications and travel. They are complementary technologies for mobility. One getting better drives demand and development of the other. I'm sure there will be advances in videoconferencing and other telepresence technologies over the next decade. But as soon as they become portable (like the mobile phone), the cat's out of the bag, and we have to start all over again.

I do not believe that anyone in the future will prefer interacting with other people through technology rather than flight. In a business setting this might be efficient, but not in personal settings and espeically for vacations!

John,

I hope you'll make the paper available online - it sounds like a really interesting exploration of the issue. There is a clear paradox as to why our interest in dialogue and other rich social processes has intensified as we have also become more engaged in virtual worlds.

Responding to one of the comments above, Hugh Graham is just plain wrong about the comparative ecological impacts of plane and car travel. A single trip from Europe to the US by plane emits 2 tonnes of carbon - the same as the average annual driving distance in the UK. (People drive more than 3,000 miles per year on average).

But, as you observe, the alternative is about reduction, not substitution; quantity has an impact, and so does our speed.

John and all,a couple of remarks,
the problem of air travel, though heavy on the rich westerners conscience, is esoteric in terms of "the other 90%". This doesn"t mean that it need not be addressed, but the discussion seems to me at times disproportionate to the general picture.
In my mind a truly sustainable solution has to involve a completely different technological attitude. A lot of birds travel thousands of kilometers twice a year, that is nature. Could we fly more like them? does that mean catching thermals and gliding? does it mean developing a new type of "engine", does it mean slowing down?
in my opinion virtual meetings and real life meetings will never be interchangeable. A good handwritten letter (especially if it contains a bit of drawing as well)is still more communicative, emotional and intimate than a video conference. We can of course ignore some of our physical and emotional needs, we do that all the time.
Travelling should not be restricted, it is a very basic human drive and need, it has been instrumental in every aspect of human life, from pure survival to agriculture, science,Art and all other aspects of human culture.
It is the vehicle that should be redesigned.