Eco Travel: From Royal Speeches to Real Life Decisions

June 12, 2025. Susan Greene
In May 2025, when Prince Harry took the stage in China (bias: uncertain) to deliver a climate-conscious keynote, the irony didn’t go unnoticed: he flew thousands of miles for one speech on sustainability. Critics were quick to highlight the environmental cost of his air travel, while supporters emphasized the importance of global leadership and advocacy. It was a moment that captured the complexity—and contradictions—of eco-travel in today’s world.
It also sparked a conversation I wanted to have closer to home. I asked two long-time friends, each with different political leanings, about their views on climate change and the choices they make (or might make) when it comes to environmentally responsible travel. I asked both friends the same questions, so that there would be no bias, I refrained from asking follow-up questions.
Do you believe in Climate Change?
I started by asking, “Do you believe in climate change, and how did you come to decide on that perspective?” Even though there may be differing political leanings, both believe in climate change, my conservative friend even noted that “humans play a big role.” The source for the perspectives was also similar for both citing the overwhelming consensus among scientists as their main reason for concern. It highlights agreement across the political spectrum that basic science is real,
“Yes, I believe in climate change and that humans play a big role.”
Would You Pay More to Travel Greener by Air?
One of the biggest criticisms of Prince Harry’s speech is that he was espousing the importance of monitoring the emissions of your air travel, but that often means flying direct which can often be more expensive (bias: lean right), and not always financially reasonable. Fewer takeoffs and landings reduce emissions, and it’s often more energy efficient overall. But convenience and cost tend to take the driver’s seat. When I asked my friends, “Would you pay more to travel greener by air?” the responses were similar, environmental considerations were not high on the list from either perspective. Time, budget, and ease of travel all came before environment. Note: I also rank time, budget and ease of travel above environmental concerns when booking air travel. If I manage to save some greenhouse gas emissions it is a nice to have, not a need to have.
Conservative perspective:
“I would take direct flights but for ease of travel. To be honest, climate impact would probably not play a large role in my decision-making process at this point—it would primarily be ease of travel and then budget.”
More liberal perspective:
“I don’t think the answer is black and white. It depends on the price difference and how important it is for me to reach that destination. But yes, I have a bias towards flying direct.”
What About Electric Vehicles (EVs)?
On June 12, 2025, President Trump signed 3 resolutions (bias: lean left) to rollback California’s target to reduce fossil fuel powered vehicles by 2035. In June 2024, Pew Research (bias: center) showed that only 3 in 10 adults in the United States would consider buying an electric vehicle, the numbers varied only slightly between 18-64 year olds, with 65+ averaging that only 1-10 would consider electric. The study also showed that Americans were evenly split on whether it cost more to charge electric than it did for gasoline, but 50% of responders felt gas powered vehicles were more reliable, where only 10% felt EVs would be more reliable. The biggest concern holding people back from purchasing EV was the lack of confidence in infrastructure and charging station availability to support the number of EVs on the road. When it comes to ground travel, I asked if either would consider buying a battery-powered car if it had higher upfront costs but saved money over time through fuel savings. Both, conservative and liberal, would consider purchasing an electric vehicle, but the conservative response included considerations like repair costs, safety, average lifespan, and insurance costs.
So, What Does Eco-Travel Really Look Like?
It turns out that people across the political spectrum are open to more sustainable travel options—if they make practical sense. Cost, convenience, and reliability still carry more weight than emissions for many, but climate-conscious choices are inching their way into the mainstream mindset.
Prince Harry’s speech may have generated debate, but it also highlighted something important: leadership around sustainability doesn’t just happen on stage. It happens in everyday decisions—in how we fly, drive, and factor the planet into our personal budgets.
And maybe, just maybe, the next time we book a flight or buy a car, we’ll consider not just where we’re going—but how we’re getting there.

*AllSides Media Bias Meter is used to measure bias in source materials. AllSides does not focus on reliability or accuracy, only bias.
