As a law student, I have been trained to interrogate weak arguments. So before departing for my year abroad at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, I put my own travel plans in the witness box.
Q: You are flying across the Atlantic. How is that sustainable?
It isn’t — not by itself, and I won’t pretend otherwise. A return transatlantic flight emits roughly 1.5 tonnes of CO₂. My defence rests not on denying that cost, but on how I amortise it. I will fly once, directly, in economy — no multi-leg routing, no Christmas dash home, no weekend hops back for birthdays. One flight, twelve months of value. The most unsustainable exchange is the one treated as a series of short trips; mine is a single, committed migration.
Q: And once you land?
The prosecution will find my Canadian life almost suspiciously low-carbon. Kingston is a compact city; I will live within walking distance of campus and travel on two feet or two wheels. For longer journeys — Toronto, Montréal, Ottawa — I will take VIA Rail along the corridor rather than fly or drive, cutting emissions per journey by up to 90%. Exploring Canada by train is not a sacrifice; it is the point.
Q: What about consumption?
Canadian winters demand serious kit, and fast fashion demands serious scrutiny. My parka, boots and layers will come second-hand from Kingston’s thrift stores — warmth without waste, aligned with SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production). I will cook plant-forward meals from local produce, carry a refillable bottle and keep-cup, and furnish my room through student swap groups rather than shipping belongings across an ocean.
Q: Anything beyond personal habits?
Sustainability that stops at the individual is a plea in mitigation, not a strategy. I intend to join Queen’s sustainability and environmental law societies, bringing my interest in regulation to bear on SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 16 (Strong Institutions) — because durable environmental progress is written in policy, not just packed in a rucksack. I will also share what I learn: publishing reflections on my legal commentary website so that the knowledge exchange of my exchange (SDG 4) outlasts the year itself.
Q: Closing statement?
Travel and sustainability are not opposing counsel; they are co-counsel, badly briefed. The answer to an imperfect flight is not paralysis but proportion: travel less often, stay longer, move overland, consume second-hand, and invest in the institutions that make green choices the default. My year in Canada will cost the atmosphere one flight. In return, I intend to repay it in slower trains, warmer second-hand coats, sharper environmental advocacy — and the habit, carried home to Scotland, of cross-examining every journey before I take it.
Verdict: departure approved — conditions attached.
