Main TOM BIHN website
 
emailus@tombihn.com

COMMUNITY FORUMS

Welcome! We're glad you are here. This is the place to ask for bag advice, help other people out, post reviews, and share photos and videos.

x

First, select your desired search engine:

  • Google Search
  • DuckDuckGo
  • Original Forum Search Engine

User Tag List

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 36
  1. #16
    Forum Member haraya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,518
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    She brings food and utensils with her even when flying. Not just bars or granola but, as nsh mentioned above up to and including food that would spoil if she left it in her fridge over an extended trip. Big Grin I find this a bit extreme, but to be fair she has saved us from starving when we arrived late to our hotel and all restaurants/stores were closed. Smilie

    Quote Originally Posted by BWeaves View Post
    I was thinking flying. For car travel, I bring food and utensils, but I don't have to carry it far.

    Hotel Soap and shampoo doesn't get refilled, because they expect you to take it with you.

  2. #17
    Forum Member Rei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Share
    France
    Posts
    289
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by BWeaves View Post
    Being old, I never traveled with a water bottle or wipes or sporks and so I still don't. I only eat or drink when I'm at a restaurant, or I use the water fountain if I want a drink. If I get free plastic bottle of water, I keep it and reuse it until I have to fly somewhere else. I use the shampoo and soaps that are at the hotel. I ask for their toothpaste at the front desk. I can live without my favorite products for the short time I'm traveling.

    For everyday life I use reusuable, washable items (cups, cutlery, washclothes, etc.), but for traveling, I don't bring anything with me.
    I tend to reuse any free/included stuff I get (water bottle to refill, tough plastic cuttlery, hotel soap&disposable, etc.)
    so yes I realise too that I don't need to bring that much stuff
    just a Bihnion here

  3. #18
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Share
    Springfield, MA
    Posts
    360
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Wow, this is a lot of excellent insight. Clarifies for me that my wish is not so much about added weight as bulk. It's not a problem day to day, just flying. I have to travel for work, and changing that would mean overhauling whole aspects of my life, and that's just not an option for me now. But I try to control what I can, and I guess that means remembering I decided carrying reuseable stuff was worth it. So if I have to up the size of my in flight bag from my SE to my PCSB (those bamboo cloths are BULKY! But so soothing.), so be it!

  4. #19
    Forum Member melminimalist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Share
    Alabama
    Posts
    576
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by b1gsky View Post
    Iím not a super frequent flyer, but I always leave my bottle at home when I visit a country where you have to buy bottled water because the tap water isnít safe to drink. It doesnít make sense to bring your own if you have to buy bottled water anyway.
    It may be a pain, but I started to travel with hiking filter when going to countries that need filtered water. My sawyer squeeze weighs 3 oz and allows me to skip purchasing bottled water. On the other hand I do not travel with a traditional refillable water bottle, I take an empty plastic bottle from home and travel with that (empty through security of course) youíd be surprised how many times those can be reused, I have had the same one for about a year, I like that they are lighter and I am not worried about losing it.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    "Not all who wander are lost"
    "Love people, use things, because the opposite never works" - The Minimalists
    Synapse 25 in Olive, Aubergine Side Effect, UV A30 PCBP, Sitka PCSB

  5. #20
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    187
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by b1gsky View Post
    I donít think worrying about a few grams we are taking with us when we do fly is worth the effort. This is a systemic issue and placing the responsibility on the individual is of course convenient. But itís not going to help us. Only radical changes are going to do that. Iím all for living responsibly, but itís not worth much if we donít push for changes on a bigger scale. Just my two cents.
    For the 1 million people flying at any given time, a 1 gram change is 5.4 million cubic meters of carbon dioxide released per year.

  6. #21
    Forum Member b1gsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Share
    Germany
    Posts
    545
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by organicfarmer View Post
    For the 1 million people flying at any given time, a 1 gram change is 5.4 million cubic meters of carbon dioxide released per year.
    That might be true, but call me a pessimist - we’re never going to convince the 1 million people to save that 1 gram when they fly. It’s not going to help if the people already trying their best do even better, it’s going to help (a lot) when the uninformed masses are forced to do a bit better. This is only possible if politics and the economy finally stop burying their heads in the sand.

  7. #22
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Share
    Boise, Idaho
    Posts
    95
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I pack light because I know how to, not because I'm trying to save the world. A child of the sixties, I grew up trying to conserve, recycle, reuse, reduce, respect, and live frugally because I didn't know what I'd need at retirement. I still do, some, but I don't worry about it much these days. Worked for a progressive and environmentally conscious company for forty years.

    You kids take care of what we left you, such as it.

    I'm off to spend my kid's inheritance.

  8. #23
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,171
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by haraya View Post
    She brings food and utensils with her even when flying. Not just bars or granola but, as nsh mentioned above up to and including food that would spoil if she left it in her fridge over an extended trip. Big Grin I find this a bit extreme, but to be fair she has saved us from starving when we arrived late to our hotel and all restaurants/stores were closed. Smilie
    I definitely appreciate this...have had a couple of experiences arriving on a late flight only to find it's past 11 pm and the hotel has no restaurant or room service, and there's nothing nearby to walk to, and have had to rely on the microwave items that can be purchased in the vending area...not fun.

  9. #24
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    4,153
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GoStanford View Post
    I definitely appreciate this...have had a couple of experiences arriving on a late flight only to find it's past 11 pm and the hotel has no restaurant or room service, and there's nothing nearby to walk to, and have had to rely on the microwave items that can be purchased in the vending area...not fun.
    The microwave stuff is not half as bad as "a recommendation" from a front desk person in the form of pizzeria menu from which the ordered items turned to be foul tasting. I didn't even eat dessert, it was that bad.

    In another town, on a prior trip, the recommendation was the same kind of low class place, expensive and not really good. I have a feeling that some front desk people get "incentives" for giving out those menus.


    Don't rely on the hotels brochure, do research online about recommended places that deliver in hotels, the towns above are very popular tourist places, so using online delivery services to get the best of the local cuisine is the way to go, after a long flight.


    I bring a reusable water bottle but, I have yet to solve the cutlery dilemma, most of the places we stay in have a little kitchen with forks, knives, spoons and cups. I don't like sporks and I am afraid a reusable plastic set will be hard to clean thoroughly and might have a fragile and hard to use knife. A metal set of spoon, fork and chopstick might be the solution but do they need special handling at security?
    Last edited by backpack; 12-20-2019 at 01:19 AM.

  10. #25
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,254
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    *I have a feeling that some front desk people get "incentives" for giving out those menus.*

    They do. In the form of free food.

    I carry a set of Lexan cutlery that is very strong and easy to clean. I got it at REI.

    In regards to flying, shaving off a few ounces here and there will make no difference. Airlines assign an average weight to each passenger that includes their personal item. They don't weigh you. Only your checked in luggage and cargo are weighed.



    Sent from my Vivo 8 using Tapatalk
    Editor--One Bag, One World: News, Reviews & Community for Light Travelers. http://www.1bag1world.com

    Aeronaut(2), Tri-Star(2) Cadet , Large Cafe Bag, Travel Tray, Travel Money Belt, Absolute Straps(3), Side Effect, Clear Quarter Packing Cubes (2), 3D Organizer Cubes (4), Aeronaut & Tri-Star Packing Cubes, Clear Organizer Wallet, numerous Organizer Pouches,, Guardian Dual Function Light, Vertical Netbook Cache, Nexus 7 Cache, RFID Passport Pouch, numerous Key Straps.

  11. #26
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    187
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by b1gsky View Post
    That might be true, but call me a pessimist - weíre never going to convince the 1 million people to save that 1 gram when they fly. Itís not going to help if the people already trying their best do even better, itís going to help (a lot) when the uninformed masses are forced to do a bit better. This is only possible if politics and the economy finally stop burying their heads in the sand.
    Every positive change helps, no doubt. Indifference doesn't change anything. Government moves slow and can be bought off. Corporations only change if it affects their bottom line. Affect the corporate bottom line without involving government or political influence that the indifferent can ignore and the positive can rejoice with corrective actions placed to take effect rapidly.

    Wrapping up the topic of 200g water bottle's carbon cost of flying (and really via any means of travel), we know it takes energy to move a mass. Transportation tickets should be cost per unit weight plus the per person fee to cover liability and customer service. It's a freight business. Bottom line, that there should be a monetary cost for moving a 200g water bottle because there is a monetary cost and a pollution cost and a carbon dioxide cost and a global temperature cost that are all ignored now because it doesn't noticeably affect the consumer's wallet.

  12. #27
    Forum Member b1gsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Share
    Germany
    Posts
    545
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by organicfarmer View Post
    Every positive change helps, no doubt. Indifference doesn't change anything. Government moves slow and can be bought off. Corporations only change if it affects their bottom line. Affect the corporate bottom line without involving government or political influence that the indifferent can ignore and the positive can rejoice with corrective actions placed to take effect rapidly.

    Wrapping up the topic of 200g water bottle's carbon cost of flying (and really via any means of travel), we know it takes energy to move a mass. Transportation tickets should be cost per unit weight plus the per person fee to cover liability and customer service. It's a freight business. Bottom line, that there should be a monetary cost for moving a 200g water bottle because there is a monetary cost and a pollution cost and a carbon dioxide cost and a global temperature cost that are all ignored now because it doesn't noticeably affect the consumer's wallet.
    Iím with you that things should be priced truthfully according to what they really cost our planet and our societies in the long run - thatís not just true for transportation but also for a lot of other things. We subsidise flights, commercial road vehicles, coal mining, conventional agriculture etc pp... Our view about the true cost of things is totally skewed.

    Iím not indifferent at all. I try to do my best and vote with my money whenever itís possible to support those companies that want to do better. But I also see that Iím living in a kind of awareness bubble when it comes to these issues. Iím privileged that I have the means to spend time researching an issue and to spend more money on items from companies that I want to support. But a lot of people have other problems or they simply just donít care (that much). And you need to get these people to make better decisions as well, whether they want to or not. Thatís all I wanted to say.

  13. #28
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Share
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    48
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by organicfarmer View Post
    Transportation tickets should be cost per unit weight
    That can be quite problematic.

    1. Imagine a short, fat man who weighs less than a tall, lean man. Many would argue that the fat man should pay more because his weight is excessive whereas the tall man was born that way and is not carrying any excess weight.
    2. Should a person carting around an oxygen tank (or any other heavy medical equipment) be charged more for their ticket than a comparable-sized person without any apparatus?
    3. Imagine a tall, lanky woman compared to a short, fat woman who weighs more. Shouldn't the tall woman pay more because she needs more legroom, more headroom, and general doesn't fit into the vessel as compactly?


    etc etc

  14. #29
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Share
    Springfield, MA
    Posts
    360
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Ellsass View Post
    Many would argue that the fat man should pay more because his weight is excessive whereas the tall man was born that way and is not carrying any excess weight.

    Your point about problems is excellent. Charging by weight is not the solution.

    Would it help the environment? Is my 6g travel spork really more costly to the environment than the disposables I'd need if I didn't carry it? If I pack my heavy, 10-year-old 100% cotton jeans, does that cause more pollution than me buying a new pair of ultra light travel trousers? If I carry a giant hardback book from the library instead of buying a Kindle? What if no one packed anything, and we all just bought new stuff at our destination, then threw it away before we went home. Much less jet fuel burned but...

    Would it help people? This happens to overlap with my area of professional expertise, so I can tell you that these kinds of policies perpetuate harmful myths like this one, and stigmatize people of size and thus harm their health as well as the health of the general population who freak out and do dangerous things to make themselves weigh less.

    Does it help airlines? It might.

    The interconnected systems are complicated. All we can do is our best. And sometimes what seems logical on the surface isn't the most humane answer.

  15. #30
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    187
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Ellsass View Post
    That can be quite problematic.

    1. Imagine a short, fat man who weighs less than a tall, lean man. Many would argue that the fat man should pay more because his weight is excessive whereas the tall man was born that way and is not carrying any excess weight.
    2. Should a person carting around an oxygen tank (or any other heavy medical equipment) be charged more for their ticket than a comparable-sized person without any apparatus?
    3. Imagine a tall, lanky woman compared to a short, fat woman who weighs more. Shouldn't the tall woman pay more because she needs more legroom, more headroom, and general doesn't fit into the vessel as compactly?


    etc etc
    Item 1. Yes, true to my statement. I am not short, but overweight. It was sitting on a plane I thought about this topic. Not in my wallet's best self interest, but in fairness to all. I was carrying a small one bag with no luggage. Had I used my luggage allocation, I would have been under the average assumed weight of ticketed airfare. So conclusion was whether a skinnier me with luggage or fat me without luggage should pay the same and that is close to equal, though a skinny me with no luggage and fat me with full luggage also would pay the exact same airfare under current fare system for the same seat and transport to same destination.

    Item 2. Yes, as inhumane as that sounds. My backhand math shows about $0.10/lb/flight hour for any air freight. My point here is only to show weight moved produces carbon emissions. Now should the fat man paying more in item 1 or the health apparatus carrying person in item 2 be given additional on-board space, yes, in the context more weight occupies more volume with human density in cabin space maintained equal would allow this via stable airline economics.

    Item 3. I am glad this point in made because I could not have thought a better one myself. So a lightweight tall person. Under my concept, they would pay a lower fare to "be moved", but options for more legroom would only cost for the square footage per seat and may balance out cost wise.

    Bonus item. Now we have to weigh everyone going onto a plane and the privacy concerns. Best answer, maybe. With the precision of facial recognition from AI, I suspect algorithms exist to calculate body mass and weight from a video camera in any public space so an airport would be no different except it would have a stated objective. One step further, the TSA body scanner probably collect this visual data without physically weighing a person. In theory if you walked in public with a camera, AI may exist that not only your face is recognized, but also height, build, and bodyweight.


    Quote Originally Posted by Lia View Post
    Your point about problems is excellent. Charging by weight is not the solution.

    Would it help the environment? Is my 6g travel spork really more costly to the environment than the disposables I'd need if I didn't carry it? If I pack my heavy, 10-year-old 100% cotton jeans, does that cause more pollution than me buying a new pair of ultra light travel trousers? If I carry a giant hardback book from the library instead of buying a Kindle? What if no one packed anything, and we all just bought new stuff at our destination, then threw it away before we went home. Much less jet fuel burned but...

    Would it help people? This happens to overlap with my area of professional expertise, so I can tell you that these kinds of policies perpetuate harmful myths like this one, and stigmatize people of size and thus harm their health as well as the health of the general population who freak out and do dangerous things to make themselves weigh less.

    Does it help airlines? It might.

    The interconnected systems are complicated. All we can do is our best. And sometimes what seems logical on the surface isn't the most humane answer.
    Would it help the environment? Today's airfare process is select flight, select class, receive a luggage allocation with fare class, and a fixed price per those selections (absent change options). Pricing indifferent to light, heavy, luggage, or no luggage. So flyer's perspective is to bring whatever is desired. Shift pricing to one where flyer pays by weight thus carbon emissions produced. Now the penny pincher and the environmentalist will shift that decision of those weight benefits because it affects their bottom line. The mindless spender and the environmentally indifferent will continue on while possibly notice a change and only complain to themselves if price gets too high as they need to lose weight. Bottom line, the environmental cost be felt in their pocketbooks based on their own actions thus create incentive to change for the better. Placing a firm number dollar value to take or not to take is one more data point to use to decide. I consider dollar cost a direct correlation to energy/carbon expense as if the dollar isn't purchasing energy directly, any profit is spent on an energy consumptive activity. We can outlaw all flying or the more palatable option of people aware of their own environmental cost with a dollar amount.

    Will it help people? Your mention of your profession and person of size. The airlines now sell tickets per person in seat and if you can't fit then buy a second seat. I, and many others, could benefit ourselves and our seatmates with an extra 1-3 inches width, not a full seat required. There doesn't seem to be an incentive to airlines to give an economy seat row class with such seat width - 'economy wide' if you will. Their incentive is to cram everyone in the same size seat or upsell to a premium class. Shift the pricing to weight and the economically justified thing to do for a ticket that paid more is allow more seat space. Airlines can keep dollars per square foot constant.

    Will it help airlines? Simplifying my view on airlines as this. They fly freight (perishable, fragile, cranky humans) from point A to point B. They own airplanes. They pay airports to take off and land. They have a fixed number of flight attendant per passengers per FFA regulations plus a specified number of pilot crew per aircraft type. They have maintenance staff for airplanes and customer service for people. Their variables are the fuel they burn and the amount of cargo carried (people). The plane weight : cargo capacity is 2:1.They have a known square footage per aircraft. Ultimately, the seat class covers the square footage (fixed costs/sq. ft.) and the flyer directly pays the fuel they caused to be burned in my theory. It will make air travel more financially accessible to lighter people whom fly lightly. It will shift cost to those who don't. It would appear to lower carbon emissions per passenger through something that would look to solely favor airlines. Win-win in theory?

    It is complicated and far more complicated than I wanted to make a point that moving a 200g bottle has an environmental cost. Shift any cost into a realized cost for people to have a reason to change. We can keep doing the same thing so I like to think of what else and how. It's better to light one candle than to curse the darkness.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •