17 March 2010 
London - Denouncing rail travel as less useful than air appeared instinctive for Airbus travel buyer Geoff Allwright, who spoke on a green travel panel here last month during the Business Travel and Meetings Show. But Allwright's unsurprising comments--issued against a backdrop of
debates over the use of public funds for rail versus air infrastructure--accompanied less predictable points about another threat to air travel: technology. "We are looking to reduce our spend and to reduce our traveling miles," said the aircraft maker's head of travel expenses. "We use video conferencing and telepresence dramatically. The volume is going up."
"We are not just flying all around the world blindly traveling," said Allwright, noting that Airbus' parent, the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company, reduced travel spend by 10 percent to 20 percent during the past four years by increasing its use of videoconferencing and telepresence.
By implementing reason code queries within its online booking tool, EADS cut unnecessary trips, with the added bonus of reducing carbon emissions. The firm implemented a mandate requiring travelers to book through the travel management company or the booking tool--ultimately leading travelers to answer a travel alternatives questionnaire. Travel booked outside policy is not reimbursed, Allwright said.
"There are links in our online travel booking system and every traveler is challenged, 'Could you do this by videoconference?' and we measure the benefits of that," Allwright said. "We have a project to harmonize the process throughout the company and really drive reasoning to travel; every traveler has to have a reason as to why they are going to travel and that is recorded. Out-of-policy trips are relayed to a manager."
One of the major drivers for this type of mandate was cost cutting, Allwright said, but helping to reduce carbon emissions also played a role in getting the mandate approved.
"As a travel manger you would have to be living in an igloo in the North Pole to not realize that green travel is an issue today and we should be reducing our travel," he said. "Many corporations and travel managers are keyed into the use of videoconferencing, phone systems and WebEx. There should be a reduction in travel and measuring green aspects of travel despite the challenges that are involved.”
'Air(bus) Beats Rail'
Allwright's panel addressed the conventional wisdom that rail is a green alternative. "On a shorthaul trip, air carbon damage is about ten times as much as rail. It doesn't mean that there aren't problems with rail travel--there are--but that’s the situation in terms of carbon impact," said Cait Weston, deputy director of the Aviation Environment Federation.
Allwright charged that measuring carbon emissions is a challenge in most modes of transport. "Rail companies' data is massively flawed; car data is impossible; and hotel data is not there," he said. "Basically, you can't trust the numbers. What is the total carbon footprint of a trip? It is impossible for us to work out as travel managers."
He added some general travel management gripes about rail. "It is extremely difficult for me to control how my travelers are booking rail tickets; it’s just all over the place," said Allwright. "Whereas with air, it's got some sophisticated booking systems and we do not reimburse people who book their air through some other means. We know where they are and what they are doing."
Plus, Allwright reminded peers, air travel is faster than rail: "To go to some locations could take up to four days [by rail]: a day to get there, a day to come back, a day for the meeting and a day to recover. Travel by air to many U.K. and European destinations is possible in a day; therefore, no hotel is required."
