I start sweating nervously every time I read about how air travel impacts the environment.

Having lived abroad for more than 20 years, I take a plane as if it were a city bus, worrying only about how to get from A to B as quickly as possible.

And yet I know there are very valid arguments for why we should substantially reduce aeroplane journeys, or stop flying altogether.

After living overseas for 20 years, I take a plane as if it were a city bus. ( Marchcattle )

A very guilty pleasure

Without doubt I am responsible for the emission of hundreds of tonnes of CO2.

As I write the flight confirmations for my next holiday are ticking in.

Brace yourselves for an itinerary that is a slap in the face for the environment: Beijing, China (where I live) to Brussels, Belgium (where I lived for 13 years) to Aalborg, Denmark (where my parents live) to Atlanta, USA (where my son lives) and back to Beijing.

On the Beijing-to-Brussels flight alone, I will produce about 1.5 tonnes of CO2, and according to myclimate.org if we want a chance of stopping global warming then that trip will generate twice as much as I should be producing in an entire year.

There are ways of compensating for a lifestyle like mine.

My conscience was temporarily relieved when I made a donation through myclimate.org and invested in some new stoves for a group of women in Kenya. These stoves use about 50 per cent less firewood than the stove these women currently use, and are made by local artisans. I had read that the best way of compensating for CO2 emissions is by saving the forests and this seemed to be an ideal answer to my dilemma.

Yet in the eyes of a Stay Grounded activist, I remain a champion of "unnecessary flying".

In the eyes of a climate change activist I remain a champion of unnecessary flying. ( Reuters: Simon Dawson )

How should we define unnecessary flying?

If I were to fly home to an important family event or if my boss sent me on a business trip, would that be defined as necessary flying?

Would unnecessary flying be going to Cambodia for a week to experience the temples of Angkor Wat?

Modern-day technology means that business meetings can be held via Skype or video conference and we can visit any place in the world just by going on YouTube or putting on our virtual reality glasses.

But perhaps flying offers something even more important. Could it be that flying is necessary for the soul?

Does aircraft pollution mean we should stop travelling? ( unsplash.com )

The power of 'being there'

Nothing can replace experiencing another country in real life, with all its culture shock and emotion.

Now more than ever, we need to find ways to understand our world. Flying may actually be required for us to experience the world with open eyes and without prejudice.

Flying in order to "be there" has taught me about many things.

With tears in my eyes, I have seen thousands of acres of palm oil plantations in Asia from the air — and their impact on wildlife from the ground.

Travel has shown me the damage palm oil plantations create for wildlife. ( Facebook: Ernest Zacharevic )

I have witnessed the struggles of Muslim minorities in Western China and tried to say something positive when my godchildren in Nicaragua showed me their humble shantytown homes.

Flying has taught me to see my own, sometimes narrow-minded culture, with different eyes. Thanks to flying, I know that even though I am fluent in five different languages that has little value if I never get to practise in the countries where they are spoken.

Could you commit to a flight-free lifestyle?

A large number of bloggers and activists have promoted a flight-free lifestyle. Many of them, like Maja Rosen, are Europeans.

But Ms Rosen, from Sweden, still has the option of travelling easily through Europe by train. Even car travel would produce a fraction of the pollution of a plane flight.

In Europe the cultural and linguistic diversity that I crave is easily within reach without taking to the air.

For most Europeans the choice not to fly is often not difficult. But they live thousands of kilometres away from a very different reality.

In Australia this choice would create a very different set of problems.

A train ride from Adelaide to Darwin, for example, takes two days and is scheduled only once a week. A road trip from Brisbane to Melbourne turns a one-and-a-half hour flight into an 18-hour odyssey.

Australia is a long way from anywhere. ( Supplied: Norm Morgan )

So what is the solution?

In my opinion it is not sustainable to give up flying. I believe we should all be allowed to discover every continent of the world and visit friends and family living far away from us without being frowned upon — and without necessarily turning to climate compensation as we know it today.

Perhaps there is a sustainable solution — with greater impact than investing in a new stove — that can make travellers happy and offer much-needed relief for the environment?

What about investing in technology?

Plane designers and manufacturers must be encouraged to continue, full speed ahead, with the development of solar, electric and fuel-efficient planes.

Just so I can enjoy my next holiday, my eyes are on you, Airbus and Boeing.

Lise Floris is a Beijing-based writer.