Home› Other Music

On Radiohead's Carbon Footprint

whulmefwhulmef Posts: 176
edited May 2008 in Other Music
Radiohead are trying to reduce their carbon footprint by playing certain venues, using certain lights, and I guess traveling less. I went the show in Charlotte which was at a pavillion. As usual at these venues the getting in and going out took forever. This problem, as you have now heard, was amplified in Bristow. Recently I went to the Springsteen show in Greensboro. It was at an arena where parking is all around. Going in and out was a breeze. In pavillions the parking is one way in and out. I have gone to other pavillion and arena shows and this same pattern occurs.

From what I have heard, Radiohead are trying to play venues near major highways. However, having thousands of cars sit around for over two hours has to be a huge factor.

Otherwise, the sound at pavillions are way better than arenas. You are usually closer at arenas though. This is another debate for another time...
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • digsterdigster Posts: 1,293
    Indeed, they are making a big effort (especially with the way they've organized their schedule to involve as few airplanes as possible), and what they're trying to do along with bands like DMB and Pearl Jam is laudable. However, it's going to be hard to change the process when cars still pollute as much as they do, because no matter how you make the venue you're still going to have thousands of people driving to the venue, and traffic jams are byproducts of that. I think for now the best thing is to do what the Dave Matthews Band is doing, where they measure as best they can the damage that their tour will do (including travel pollution by their fans) and offset that as best they can with planting trees, etc. Also, limiting the use of airplanes is necessary. Flying a plane across the Atlantic is like driving a car around the world 300 times (I believe that's the accurate comparison), and it makes no sense when you have a band that lives in London jetsetting to NYC for the weekend to do Letterman and then coming back a month later to do SNL, and then coming back a month later to start their tour. It's little things like that that can help.
  • whulmefwhulmef Posts: 176
    This flying and driving around the world thing I do not understand. Does that take into account how many people are on the plane? I guess if it is 300 times then it is way worse to fly; its too late for math.

    I agree with all of what you said. I just want to know if someone has studied or thought about the whole issue with parking and the carbon footprint.
  • edvedderrocksedvedderrocks Posts: 1,001
    Radiohead is trying...the Bristow situation was horrible ( I was there ) & had the complete opposite effect. Cars idleing for HOURS, our 3 hour trip took 7 and a half hours. Not their fault, the Nissan Pavillion was extremely unprepared for the weather. On top of it, a lot of people did not get in & apparently the are offering tickets in Camden as a consolation. Another 3+ hours of driving. ( the venue in Bristow was way out of reach of publice transportation - was surprised they even played there)

    I know for the concert at Liberty State Park you could only get a parking pass if you have 4+ people in the car. And they did the "satellite" thing on Conan O'Brian because they wouldn't fly over for the one show. (Yet, they travel around in 4 huge tourbuses.....) At least they try to raise awareness.

    BTW...speaking of the carbon footprint, there is a show on A&E (I think) called "The Human Footprint". It is a series about all the resources a single person uses throughout his/her lifetime. It's really interesting.

    I have become aware of lots of enviromental issues..... have you found yourself changing your habits in anyway to do the same? just curious for some ideas...
    "I knew all the rules, but the rules did not know me. Guaranteed."

    1996 Merriweather, MD; 1998 Camden, NJ; 2000 Camden, NJ; 2003 Camden, NJ; 2005 Philly, PA; 2006 Camden, NJ(nights 1 & 2); 2006 Arnhem, NED; 2008 Camden, NJ(nights 1 & 2), Washington DC, MSG(night 2) 2009 Philly Spectrum Shows(nights 1,2,3,4) 2010 Hartford,CT and MSG(night 2)

    ED Solo - 2008 Washington DC, 2009 Philly, PA(nights 1&2)*Met Eddie =)
  • digsterdigster Posts: 1,293
    edvedderrocks wrote:

    I know for the concert at Liberty State Park you could only get a parking pass if you have 4+ people in the car. And they did the "satellite" thing on Conan O'Brian because they wouldn't fly over for the one show. (Yet, they travel around in 4 huge tourbuses.....) At least they try to raise awareness.

    I think what they're doing is better than the alternative, which is to fly everywhere. Before I started reading, I had no idea that bands of that stature used private jets as often as usually happens to tour. I appreciate Radiohead because it's not that they're only raising awareness, but they are making substantial changes in how they operate as a band in order to reduce their footprint. It's not perfect, but they'll no doubt learn from their mistakes. Either way, it's a step forward.
  • edvedderrocksedvedderrocks Posts: 1,001
    agreed.
    "I knew all the rules, but the rules did not know me. Guaranteed."

    1996 Merriweather, MD; 1998 Camden, NJ; 2000 Camden, NJ; 2003 Camden, NJ; 2005 Philly, PA; 2006 Camden, NJ(nights 1 & 2); 2006 Arnhem, NED; 2008 Camden, NJ(nights 1 & 2), Washington DC, MSG(night 2) 2009 Philly Spectrum Shows(nights 1,2,3,4) 2010 Hartford,CT and MSG(night 2)

    ED Solo - 2008 Washington DC, 2009 Philly, PA(nights 1&2)*Met Eddie =)
  • clarefromscotlandclarefromscotland Posts: 154
    digster wrote:
    Flying a plane across the Atlantic is like driving a car around the world 300 times (I believe that's the accurate comparison), and it makes no sense when you have a band that lives in London jetsetting to NYC for the weekend to do Letterman and then coming back a month later to do SNL, and then coming back a month later to start their tour. It's little things like that that can help.

    Maybe I'm just missing something but I never understand the plane thing. I can see that if a band was using a private jet which wouldn't be in the air otherwise, but surely few bands are on that Led Zeppelin sort of level of expenditure now? For the stuff you mention above...surely they'd be in seats on a flight that would still be chugging over the Atantic anyway, full or not? I mean, it's not gonna stay behind just because Radiohead aren't on it. *confused*
    www.myspace.com/clareobrienwright
    www.chriscornell.org.uk
  • DeLukinDeLukin Posts: 2,757
    At this point, I think it's all about awareness. In the grand scheme of things, does it really matter how RH travels? I think not, but if they can lead by example and build awareness about the issue and cause their fans to think about how to reduce their carbon emissions then that can't be a bad thing.
    I smile, but who am I kidding...
  • DeLukinDeLukin Posts: 2,757
    At this point, I think it's all about awareness. In the grand scheme of things, does it really matter how RH travels? I think not, but if they can lead by example and build awareness about the issue and cause their fans to think about how to reduce their carbon emissions then that can't be a bad thing.

    EDIT: WTF with the double-post?
    I smile, but who am I kidding...
  • whulmefwhulmef Posts: 176
    I agree that the awareness part is the most important. However, the plane thing is very confusing.
  • LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSunLikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun Posts: 6,097
    well, i guess they made the world about .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 percent less polluted. good for them.
  • digsterdigster Posts: 1,293
    MrSmith wrote:
    well, i guess they made the world about .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 percent less polluted. good for them.

    If you're not a policy-maker or an advocate (which they are by raising an awareness and setting the standard that hopefully other bands of their stature will follow), what else can they do? I don't know if they use private planes, but I know Pearl Jam used private planes alot, R.E.M., Radiohead, the list goes on. I think recently there's been a move away from using private planes, which is good. In terms of trying not to take as many public flights; yes, the plane would take off anyway. But it's akin to being anti-tobacco and not buying any cigarettes; yeah, the next guy and the guy after that are still going to buy them and the cigarette company is still going to make a profit, but over time if enough people become aware and stop buying cigarettes, the market will either have to collapse or change the way it does business. Maybe if less people fly there will be less need for so many flights, which equals less fuel polluting the environment, etc.

    Plus, Radiohead is trying to walk the walk in addition to talking the talk. If they ran all over the place on planes, private or otherwise, how would their calls for change in policy hold any water? That was the ultimate irony of Live Earth; everyone clamoring about global warming and they all traveled in their private planes to get there. It ended up being an extremely polluting event.
Sign In or Register to comment.