No Solution Yet: The Unfortunate Environmental Impact of Touring

When I was thinking about a post for blog action day, my thoughts immediately went to a recent Thom Yorke interview I read in the Believer, where the Radiohead frontman discusses the environmental hazards of touring:

THE BELIEVER: You've talked before about the environmentally awful aspects of touring and how Radiohead is trying to find more sustainable options for traveling. Have you come to any conclusions about a touring industry that would be less disastrous for the environment?

THOM YORKE: Well, when we started talking about touring, I had just been reading about David Bowie's Station to Station tour. I'm not sure if this is entirely true, but as far as I can tell, he did actually go station to station. He didn't get on a plane. He even did the Trans-Siberian Railway. And he did it across the US as well. So the first thing that I said, with a sort of pouty lower lip, was "I don't want to fly, I want to go by train." But then it was completely impossible. There was no way to do it. The infrastructure is no longer there. I mean, it wasn't really there then either, but Bowie wasn't taking a great deal of gear. So I don't know. The whole thing has become a massive compromise, and the nature of flying, which is the absolute worst disaster situation... Well, actually, that's not entirely true. The biggest disaster -- 'cause we had this study done -- the biggest disaster is people getting there. People driving.

Attempting to find a solution to this situation has been a goal of Radiohead's for a very long time, but they still haven't figured out any kind of answer. The blame shouldn't be placed on them, though: it should be placed on society as a whole. We're too irresponsible and too ill-equipped for public transportation, for bike use in most cities, that it's damn near impossible to set up an environmentally friendly way to attend concerts or even go on vacation.

Even if the transportation conundrum is somehow solved, it should be noted that most artists shun environmental responsibility in favor of "spectacle." There was a terrific rant recently by David Byrne in which the artist broke down the costly damage done to the planet by U2's massive, over-the-top stage show, and it's a pretty depressing list of statistics. Byrne himself has been perhaps even more active than Radiohead with this cause. When I saw the well-known bike evangelist in Prospect Park over the summer, there were bike valets, which helped solve the bike-parking dilemma that regularly causes people to leave their bikes at home.

Will there be a solution to this in the near future? As much as I'd like to say otherwise, the answer is no. The thing is, this issue has barely entered the conscience of most music fans. While many of us claim to care about climate change, we never really think about the impact our hobbies have on it. Often at shows, after driving God-knows-how-many hours to see a band perform, we're disappointed if the stage show isn't eye-catching enough, if there aren't fireworks or something to go with the music. If there are more than 1,000 people in the crowd, we need energy-wasting big screen TVs to see Eddie Vedder's face.

This isn't a denouncement, but rather a call to arms. Carpool to shows, ride your bikes if you can, ride the subway, and write to your favorite bands asking about their stage shows, about what steps they're taking to cancel out their carbon footprints. It's easy to be jaded or sit around moping about what live music is doing to the enivronment, but if we really care, we'll work towards rocking out in a way that won't make climate change any worse than it already is. Let's get to work, people!