3 ms·
The cost to pax payers per saved ton of emitted CO2 was EUR 1388 (about the same in USD). That seems very steep. https://www.dw.com/en/germanys-9-ticket-is-it-
by tpmx 4y ago
The cost to pax payers per saved ton of emitted CO2 was EUR 1388 (about the same in USD). That seems very steep.
https://www.dw.com/en/germanys-9-ticket-is-it-here-to-stay/a-62669414 https://www.dw.com/en/germanys-9-ticket-is-it-here-to-stay/a...
The federal government is footing the bill, propping up state and municipal transport companies with an additional €2.5 billion ($2.53 billion).
- ceejayoz 4y agoIf saving CO2 were the only goal, sure.
- tpmx 4y agoRight. I wrote that in the context of the linked article. So don't think of this scheme as a reasonably efficient way of saving CO2 emissions (there are other much more economically efficient ways); at most it's a bonus. It follows that it doesn't make sense to justify the scheme on the CO2 emissions benefit. I've seen a lot of that on European subreddits.
- tomjen3 4y agoBut with global warming, that should be almost the only goal for an environmental policy.
- ceejayoz 4y agoThe nine euro tickets weren't an environmental policy. The environmental effect is a bonus.
- Chabsff 4y agoIf CO2 reduction was the only goal, then yes, that would be a very steep number. That's obviously not the case though.
- ablatner 4y agoThe cost to tax payers isn't a hit to the overall economy though. The government spending replaced fees that would ordinarily be payed by taxpayers and tourists.