3 ms·
That's not how it would work. If an airline company plans to emit X amount of CO2, they need to buy the right to do so. The cost would only be indirectly paid b
by olalonde 3y ago
That's not how it would work. If an airline company plans to emit X amount of CO2, they need to buy the right to do so. The cost would only be indirectly paid by consumers through the cost of their ticket. You can think of it like a currency that polluters need to spend (or more accurately, eliminate, since there is no recipient) when they pollute.
Capping and trading is the more simple solution. Instead of putting various restrictions and limits on a ad hoc basis (often influenced by lobbyists and special interest groups) for dozens and dozens of activities, you have just one unified system.
- criddell 3y agoI like the idea that I, as a consumer, have a quota that I can sell. Burying it in the price of the ticket hides it too much IMHO. I also think it would be an easier thing to sell politically. Most people don't fly every year and giving them an easy way to turn their lack of travel into a small bonus is appealing. A cap-and-trade program has the double whammy of being a tax / regulation and pro-environment. Two things the right and much of the center are going to say "no" to.