4 ms·

An appropriately high tax on jet fuel would price the airline industry out of business. Obviously they’re going to resist that, so what’s the solution?

Retric 4y ago
Taxing carbon would impact airlines much less than you might think. A carbon tax high enough to basically kill off all ICE cars and fossil fuel power plants would modestly impact airfare costs. Airlines are convenient and take very direct routes while getting extreme fuel efficiency per passenger.
- realreality 4y ago
  Airlines are not efficient. The carbon footprint per passenger is about the same as driving a car for the same distance. And airlines have been flying empty planes during the pandemic. That's ridiculously wasteful.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - Retric 4y ago
    Pandemic saw reduced passengers but it also saw vast reductions in flying down to as low as 9% of normal operations. So it had a smaller impact on averages than you might assume. In normal operations they are about 100 passenger miles per gallon of fuel and that’s straight line paths with 80% full aircraft.
    - realreality 4y ago
      Seems like the “ghost flights” were a more recent issue: https://www.wired.com/story/airplanes-empty-slots-covid/ https://www.wired.com/story/airplanes-empty-slots-covid/ As for the fuel efficiency, this says 58mpg. Business class or first class are much worse, of course. And private jets simply shouldn’t exist… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft
      - Retric 4y ago
        Where did you get 58mpg? The only global number was: “In 2018, CO₂ emissions totalled 747 million tonnes for passenger transport, for 8.5 trillion revenue passenger kilometres (RPK), giving an average of 88 gram CO₂ per RPK.[2] A 88 gCO₂/km represents 28 g of fuel per km, or a 3.5 L/100 km (67 mpg‑US) fuel consumption.” Anyway that’s not measuring direct fuel consumption in flight but estimating fuel used by the industry to transport passengers. Sort of like including fuel transportation costs to gas stations as part of a cars fuel efficiency. It’s also using US numbers to do so which likely overstate fuel consumption.
        realreality 4y ago
        It's right on the wikipedia page, under "Operations": > In 2018, the US airlines had a fuel consumption of 58 mpg‑US (4.06 L/100 km) per revenue passenger for domestic flights We should take a system-wide view. The relative efficiency of any particular plane is irrelevant if the entire system depends on other, wasteful aspects. Let's consider the energy required to run an airport, including the infrastructure leading to the airport.
        Retric 4y ago
        First that’s excluding more efficient long haul flights. If you want a system wide view then you also need to include the costs associated with building and maintaining rail/road networks etc. Also just like road, rail, and boats aircraft don’t get to fly hypothetically ideal paths from origin to destination. Actual MPG is distance traveled / fuel used not distance from the origin to destination / fuel used. Not to mention most commercial flights are also moving freight on those same aircraft but that’s secondary.
gruez 4y ago
> An appropriately high tax on jet fuel would price the airline industry out of business. Why would it? Looking around it looks like fuel makes up 30% of airline's expenditures. Disregarding profits, that means $300 of a $1000 plane ticket is for fuel. The current world wide price for jet fuel is $3.76/gal, and burning a gallon of jet fuel produces 9.57kg of co2. One source says carbon needs to be priced at least $100/tonne[3], which is in line with current prices in the EU. With that price, the price of carbon is expected to add $0.96 per gallon, or a 26% increase in fuel costs. However, it would only raise overall expenditures by 7.7%. I doubt that's doubt that's going to bankrupt airlines. Consumers will probably fully absorb the cost. [1] https://www.iata.org/en/publications/economics/fuel-monitor/ https://www.iata.org/en/publications/economics/fuel-monitor/ [2] https://impactful.ninja/the-carbon-footprint-of-aviation-jet-fuel/ https://impactful.ninja/the-carbon-footprint-of-aviation-jet... [3] https://www.reuters.com/business/cop/carbon-needs-cost-least-100tonne-now-reach-net-zero-by-2050-2021-10-25/ https://www.reuters.com/business/cop/carbon-needs-cost-least...
- thehappypm 4y ago
  Airline margins are already razor thin, about 10%, so increasing costs by that much would make them very close to not profitable. Not profitable industries die
  - gruez 4y ago
    You realize that companies can raise prices? That's wha I meant by "Consumers will probably fully absorb the cost" last comment. Supermarket margins are even thinner than 10%, yet they aren't going broke during this inflation spree.
    - thehappypm 4y ago
      Economics 101: raising prices reduces demand. If airlines raise prices less people will fly — demand for flights is fairly elastic — further eating margins. Grocery stores sell food, the ultimate inelastic item.
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
goodpoint 4y ago
The solution is the airline industry would improve efficiency, increase some prices, cut some flights. Unsustainable business are unsustainable and we can't exterminate humanity to make some CEOs happy.
- realreality 4y ago
  Yes, I think airlines should go extinct. They're inherently unsustainable. The problem is, I don't have any say in the matter, while corporations have a lot of power, and rich people depend on airlines. So, it's unlikely that the beneficiaries of an unsustainable industry will voluntarily decide to drive it to extinction.
  - WalterBright 4y ago
    If you look at who actually flies in airliners, it ain't rich people.
    - realreality 4y ago
      According to Oxfam, if you earn more than $30,000 per year, you're in the top 10% of the world's wealthiest.
WalterBright 4y ago
Wouldn't regulating the industry put it out of business? Taxing the fuel allows the industry to evolved towards an optimal solution. Regulating it does not. Just look at how government regulation of the production, distribution, and price of infant formula resulted in mass shortages, as the manufacturers are unable to adapt.

Retric 4y ago

Taxing carbon would impact airlines much less than you might think. A carbon tax high enough to basically kill off all ICE cars and fossil fuel power plants would modestly impact airfare costs. Airlines are convenient and take very direct routes while getting extreme fuel efficiency per passenger.

realreality 4y ago
Airlines are not efficient. The carbon footprint per passenger is about the same as driving a car for the same distance. And airlines have been flying empty planes during the pandemic. That's ridiculously wasteful.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Retric 4y ago
  Pandemic saw reduced passengers but it also saw vast reductions in flying down to as low as 9% of normal operations. So it had a smaller impact on averages than you might assume. In normal operations they are about 100 passenger miles per gallon of fuel and that’s straight line paths with 80% full aircraft.
  - realreality 4y ago
    Seems like the “ghost flights” were a more recent issue: https://www.wired.com/story/airplanes-empty-slots-covid/ https://www.wired.com/story/airplanes-empty-slots-covid/ As for the fuel efficiency, this says 58mpg. Business class or first class are much worse, of course. And private jets simply shouldn’t exist… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft
    - Retric 4y ago
      Where did you get 58mpg? The only global number was: “In 2018, CO₂ emissions totalled 747 million tonnes for passenger transport, for 8.5 trillion revenue passenger kilometres (RPK), giving an average of 88 gram CO₂ per RPK.[2] A 88 gCO₂/km represents 28 g of fuel per km, or a 3.5 L/100 km (67 mpg‑US) fuel consumption.” Anyway that’s not measuring direct fuel consumption in flight but estimating fuel used by the industry to transport passengers. Sort of like including fuel transportation costs to gas stations as part of a cars fuel efficiency. It’s also using US numbers to do so which likely overstate fuel consumption.
      - realreality 4y ago
        It's right on the wikipedia page, under "Operations": > In 2018, the US airlines had a fuel consumption of 58 mpg‑US (4.06 L/100 km) per revenue passenger for domestic flights We should take a system-wide view. The relative efficiency of any particular plane is irrelevant if the entire system depends on other, wasteful aspects. Let's consider the energy required to run an airport, including the infrastructure leading to the airport.
        Retric 4y ago
        First that’s excluding more efficient long haul flights. If you want a system wide view then you also need to include the costs associated with building and maintaining rail/road networks etc. Also just like road, rail, and boats aircraft don’t get to fly hypothetically ideal paths from origin to destination. Actual MPG is distance traveled / fuel used not distance from the origin to destination / fuel used. Not to mention most commercial flights are also moving freight on those same aircraft but that’s secondary.

gruez 4y ago

> An appropriately high tax on jet fuel would price the airline industry out of business. Why would it? Looking around it looks like fuel makes up 30% of airline's expenditures. Disregarding profits, that means $300 of a $1000 plane ticket is for fuel. The current world wide price for jet fuel is $3.76/gal, and burning a gallon of jet fuel produces 9.57kg of co2. One source says carbon needs to be priced at least $100/tonne[3], which is in line with current prices in the EU. With that price, the price of carbon is expected to add $0.96 per gallon, or a 26% increase in fuel costs. However, it would only raise overall expenditures by 7.7%. I doubt that's doubt that's going to bankrupt airlines. Consumers will probably fully absorb the cost. [1] https://www.iata.org/en/publications/economics/fuel-monitor/ https://www.iata.org/en/publications/economics/fuel-monitor/ [2] https://impactful.ninja/the-carbon-footprint-of-aviation-jet-fuel/ https://impactful.ninja/the-carbon-footprint-of-aviation-jet... [3] https://www.reuters.com/business/cop/carbon-needs-cost-least-100tonne-now-reach-net-zero-by-2050-2021-10-25/ https://www.reuters.com/business/cop/carbon-needs-cost-least...

thehappypm 4y ago
Airline margins are already razor thin, about 10%, so increasing costs by that much would make them very close to not profitable. Not profitable industries die
- gruez 4y ago
  You realize that companies can raise prices? That's wha I meant by "Consumers will probably fully absorb the cost" last comment. Supermarket margins are even thinner than 10%, yet they aren't going broke during this inflation spree.
  - thehappypm 4y ago
    Economics 101: raising prices reduces demand. If airlines raise prices less people will fly — demand for flights is fairly elastic — further eating margins. Grocery stores sell food, the ultimate inelastic item.
- throwaway894345 4y ago

goodpoint 4y ago

The solution is the airline industry would improve efficiency, increase some prices, cut some flights. Unsustainable business are unsustainable and we can't exterminate humanity to make some CEOs happy.

realreality 4y ago
Yes, I think airlines should go extinct. They're inherently unsustainable. The problem is, I don't have any say in the matter, while corporations have a lot of power, and rich people depend on airlines. So, it's unlikely that the beneficiaries of an unsustainable industry will voluntarily decide to drive it to extinction.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  If you look at who actually flies in airliners, it ain't rich people.
  - realreality 4y ago
    According to Oxfam, if you earn more than $30,000 per year, you're in the top 10% of the world's wealthiest.

WalterBright 4y ago

Wouldn't regulating the industry put it out of business? Taxing the fuel allows the industry to evolved towards an optimal solution. Regulating it does not. Just look at how government regulation of the production, distribution, and price of infant formula resulted in mass shortages, as the manufacturers are unable to adapt.