Me: Holidays will begin in just a couple of days! Southern England is waiting for us – a short flight and we will be there.

Conscience: Hallo! Allow me – your ecological conscience- to get in touch with you Did I get it right? You’re flying there?

Me: Hi, ecological conscience, pleased to hear from you! I’ve got no problems with your question – I stand here with a pure heart. The answer is yes

Conscience: I don‘t quite approve of that. After all you could travel by train if you have to go on holiday to such a far destination.

Me: Don’t give me that! We purposely chose our flat so that I can go to work on foot. A short flight to reach our destination should certainly be permitted.

Conscience: That’s what you think! For myself, as a principle, I always try to get the over-all picture. Accompanying you through your life, I observe that you are constantly on the move. This fact doesn’t make it easier for me as your conscience to monitor you closely, but that’s another thing. Do you know just how many kilometers you travel in the course of one year?

Me: Now that’s an interesting question.

(a short time later)

Me: For the sake of your ecological bookkeeping: over the last year I traveled 27,000 km by plane, 17,000 km by train, 1,000 km by car. This adds up to a total of 45,000 km, or more than one time around the globe! Wow!

Conscience: What about elevators? We both want the balance to be complete!

Me: That adds another 5,000 meters in altitude, that’s more than Mont Blanc.

Conscience: Understandably, I don’t share your enthusiasm.

Me: Listen, as a professor for transport planning I should definitely be allowed to travel.

Conscience: That’s a basic error. On the contrary, as a professor for transport planning you should be sensitive to the external consequences of your behavior, and communicate your acquired ecological consciousness to future generations by being a living example!

Me: By the way, I know lots of people who fly further than I do, for example to climate conferences on the other side of the world!

Conscience: I haven’t been there myself so far, but that’s another issue.

Me: That’s what was to be expected. Whoever has a true and pure conscience enjoys neither food nor drink nor traveling. Abstinence and quiet contemplation are what is called for. There are retreat houses with vacancies, running water and an organic vegetable garden. I’m going to apply for a room.

Conscience: Don’t get on your high horse so easily.

Me: Yes I will, and for a good reason. My joyful anticipation has been spoilt – that was your aim in the first place, wasn’t it? OK: Zurich is especially beautiful in summer. OK: Flying anywhere is nonsense. OK: Let’s stay here. I guess I’ll be able to explain it to my family somehow.

Conscience: Sorry, that wasn’t my intention. Why don’t you fly anyway? I was just joking. I was just arguing at a theoretical level.

Me: I see. For my whole professional life I’ve been working for public transport. I have helped making it even more attractive because I believe in its ecological mission. I haven’t just talked about it, I have even used it myself – even the No. 32 bus, at ten o‘clock when it stinks like a brewery. By the way, in any case I could have earned more than when working for the Swiss Federal Railways (SBB). Looking at it from this angle all this hassle is really unjustified.

Conscience: You would probably prefer if I didn’t exist, wouldn’t you?

Me: Now, that sounds like a constructive approach!

Conscience: Let’s get things straight: should I quit your service? My ethic says that I should not torture people, but support them – in my case in the field of ecological footprints? With you, I evidently don’t seem to be succeeding.

Me: Here’s a counter question: what will happen to you then?

Conscience: I haven’t thought about that yet, I guess I will have to start looking around for a new job, which is rather difficult. There is no real need for a conscience today. One just has to wait for a position to become free. The good jobs are usually arranged on the quiet. This means going back to square one and working damn hard.

Me: What doesn’t kill us makes us stronger.

Conscience: Hahaha – that’s what I call especial subtle cynicism.

Me: What about a deal?

Conscience: Economic instruments have, as is well known, established themselves even in ecology – I don’t fear any contact.

Me: I’ll keep you all the same and, in future, I will try harder. In return, you keep well away from our holiday plans.

Conscience: I have to think it over, but that sounds like a pragmatic approach getting both of us further. (Speaking silently to itself: that’s what you say when you can’t prevail)

Me: I knew we would find a solution both of us can relate to. (Speaking silently to myself: this worked out quite nicely, even though I wasn’t really fair ...)

About the author

Ulrich Weidmann belongs to the team of columnists as representative of the Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering (D-BAUG). Since 1 June 2004 he has been working as a full professor at the Institute for Transport Planning and Systems (IVT). Weidmann was born in 1963, a citizen of Einsiedeln. After his studies in civil engineering at ETH Zurich, from 1988 onwards he worked as research assistant at the IVT where he then wrote his doctoral thesis. Thereafter, he found his way into professional life. Between 1994 and 2004 he worked for the SBB. In this position, he played a significant role in the realignment of regional traffic following its liberalization, as well as in the construction of local transport systems (S-Bahn) in the whole of Switzerland. Between 2001 and 2004 he led the business unit Engineering and, in this position, was responsible for all aspects of railway technology from track construction to environment technology to train safety. In addition, he was in charge of the cab signaling project of the Lötschberg base tunnel, as representative of the authorities. With great experience and practical knowledge he then returned to the IVT at ETH Zurich. His professorship focuses its research on the traffic access and development in agglomerations, freight traffic within the framework of global logistics, the stable operation of highly stressed networks of railway and urban traffic, as well as the processes of pedestrian traffic. His personal primary subject matters are regulatory policies and regulation, corporate strategies, and innovation management.