4 ms·

Airline Passengers Will Be Forced to Pay for $5T Carbon Cleanup

7 points by mfiguiere 3y ago

eutropia 3y ago
There’s two ways to calculate the carbon cost: - divide the total emissions by the number of passengers - do it by weight or space, and have the airline pick up the cost of the overhead (plane and crew) I can bet that airlines choose the former.
superchroma 3y ago
Good. Planes should always be a luxury transport option so long as they emit. It's outrageous that airlines have got away with pretending their negative externalities aren't real for this long.
spicybright 3y ago
What a weird perspective. Do people expect the airlines to just eat the loss for no reason? It's not like consumers are getting screwed here, we're all used to airline ticket prices because that's what they cost without carbon taxes. Now that we're a bit smarter and have a new regulation, that cost is going to be rolled into the price of the ticket. It's like complaining tickets cost more when fuel is more expensive as if that's unfair. Am I missing anything here?
- supertrope 3y ago
  Some people are engaged in wishful thinking that businesses have massive margins that can be de facto seized, without any adverse effects like price increases or capital flight. There’s a talking point that 100 corporations generate most greenhouse gases implying individuals are not to blame. But if people are asked to use less fuel directly or indirectly or buy less goods they reject the idea of moderating their consumption. Climate change is the ultimate prisoner’s dilemma. Each individual and country directly benefits from higher income, consumption, and GDP through cheap non-renewable energy. The costs of GHG emissions are literally spread across the entire planet.
AtlasBarfed 3y ago
This would be phenomenally good for the environment combined with highway self-driving or driving assisted EVs. It would also drive massive work in aviation efficiency, synthfuels, etc.
- supertrope 3y ago
  Or just trains
HocusLocus 3y ago
"The beatings will continue until morale improves."
tempera 3y ago
Clearly, airline flights should be reduced to 1% of what they are now. A global quota of number of planes in air per hour maybe should be even imposed by the UN and other organizations that care for our environment (I'm looking at you Green Peace) Fighting climate changed should deeply restructure our world and our societies. Carbon footprint measured for each person (even how much CO2 they breath out!) and net zero achieved!
archo 3y ago
https://archive.is/2Fi89 https://archive.is/2Fi89
ZeroGravitas 3y ago
> Cleaning up flying is a mission of improbable scale: Neutralize the carbon emissions of about 25,000 planes in the world’s commercial fleet that typically ferry some 4 billion people a year Pop quiz: how many people fly each year? Hint: the answer is not 4 Billion. It is more like 800 million

7 points by mfiguiere 3y ago

There’s two ways to calculate the carbon cost: - divide the total emissions by the number of passengers - do it by weight or space, and have the airline pick up the cost of the overhead (plane and crew) I can bet that airlines choose the former.

superchroma 3y ago

Good. Planes should always be a luxury transport option so long as they emit. It's outrageous that airlines have got away with pretending their negative externalities aren't real for this long.

spicybright 3y ago

What a weird perspective. Do people expect the airlines to just eat the loss for no reason? It's not like consumers are getting screwed here, we're all used to airline ticket prices because that's what they cost without carbon taxes. Now that we're a bit smarter and have a new regulation, that cost is going to be rolled into the price of the ticket. It's like complaining tickets cost more when fuel is more expensive as if that's unfair. Am I missing anything here?

supertrope 3y ago
Some people are engaged in wishful thinking that businesses have massive margins that can be de facto seized, without any adverse effects like price increases or capital flight. There’s a talking point that 100 corporations generate most greenhouse gases implying individuals are not to blame. But if people are asked to use less fuel directly or indirectly or buy less goods they reject the idea of moderating their consumption. Climate change is the ultimate prisoner’s dilemma. Each individual and country directly benefits from higher income, consumption, and GDP through cheap non-renewable energy. The costs of GHG emissions are literally spread across the entire planet.

AtlasBarfed 3y ago

This would be phenomenally good for the environment combined with highway self-driving or driving assisted EVs. It would also drive massive work in aviation efficiency, synthfuels, etc.

supertrope 3y ago
Or just trains

HocusLocus 3y ago

"The beatings will continue until morale improves."

tempera 3y ago

Clearly, airline flights should be reduced to 1% of what they are now. A global quota of number of planes in air per hour maybe should be even imposed by the UN and other organizations that care for our environment (I'm looking at you Green Peace) Fighting climate changed should deeply restructure our world and our societies. Carbon footprint measured for each person (even how much CO2 they breath out!) and net zero achieved!

archo 3y ago

https://archive.is/2Fi89 https://archive.is/2Fi89

ZeroGravitas 3y ago

> Cleaning up flying is a mission of improbable scale: Neutralize the carbon emissions of about 25,000 planes in the world’s commercial fleet that typically ferry some 4 billion people a year Pop quiz: how many people fly each year? Hint: the answer is not 4 Billion. It is more like 800 million