4 ms·

I also support a ban on personal air travel. Even a partial ban; say, allowing only air travel for family medical reasons or as a refugee. If we're to be at al

I also support a ban on personal air travel. Even a partial ban; say, allowing only air travel for family medical reasons or as a refugee. If we're to be at all serious about this being an existential threat to humanity, then personal air travel is an easy win in reducing emissions.

briandear 3y ago
It’s not an existential threat.
chmod600 3y ago
The great thing about that idea is that I don't care about personal air travel, so a ban costs me nothing. I can feel good about myself without needing to think about my own excesses.
avalys 3y ago
Why not a ban on personal travel outright? No one needs to take a vacation, and you don’t strictly need to see your family either. Maybe we could have some kind of a permitting system where you could apply for permission to travel to see, for instance, your dying parent. But you would need to submit a letter from a doctor stating they are likely to die in the next 7-14 days, of course. How about a ban on recreational activities like hiking and skiing? If we’re serious about this being an existential threat, this should be an easy decision. Maybe a ban on human existence altogether.
- dleslie 3y ago
  Or we could build high speed electric rail, and return to slow travel for intercontinental journeys.
iamawacko 3y ago
People will still travel long distances, and because American passenger trains aren't of very high quality, they will be driving. The gallons per seat per mile of airliners are way better than basically any car, for example the 747 has 91 Passenger-miles/US gallon. Even some of the better gas cars struggle to get above 30 miles per gallon. Additionally, its not really a massive win. Air traffic only makes up 8% of less than 30% of American emissions. Cars, on the other hand, make up more than 75% of that same 30%[0]. Switching to aircraft might actually make more sense for the environment. [0] https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-greenhouse-gas-emissions https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-...
- dleslie 3y ago
  I wouldn't expect the ban to occur in isolation of other actions. If we're at the point where personal air travel is being axed, then fuel taxes for automobiles would likely also be prohibitive. But here in Canada our carbon tax is facing strong opposition from populists, and I expect that the next Government is likely to axe it. The current Government is already putting in place boutique exclusions; for instance, home heating fuel is excluded for the next three years. As an alternative, to discourage a major common form of driving, we should consider ways in which to make businesses find operating office space impossibly expensive.

briandear 3y ago

It’s not an existential threat.

chmod600 3y ago

The great thing about that idea is that I don't care about personal air travel, so a ban costs me nothing. I can feel good about myself without needing to think about my own excesses.

avalys 3y ago

Why not a ban on personal travel outright? No one needs to take a vacation, and you don’t strictly need to see your family either. Maybe we could have some kind of a permitting system where you could apply for permission to travel to see, for instance, your dying parent. But you would need to submit a letter from a doctor stating they are likely to die in the next 7-14 days, of course. How about a ban on recreational activities like hiking and skiing? If we’re serious about this being an existential threat, this should be an easy decision. Maybe a ban on human existence altogether.

dleslie 3y ago
Or we could build high speed electric rail, and return to slow travel for intercontinental journeys.

iamawacko 3y ago

People will still travel long distances, and because American passenger trains aren't of very high quality, they will be driving. The gallons per seat per mile of airliners are way better than basically any car, for example the 747 has 91 Passenger-miles/US gallon. Even some of the better gas cars struggle to get above 30 miles per gallon. Additionally, its not really a massive win. Air traffic only makes up 8% of less than 30% of American emissions. Cars, on the other hand, make up more than 75% of that same 30%[0]. Switching to aircraft might actually make more sense for the environment. [0] https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-greenhouse-gas-emissions https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-...

dleslie 3y ago
I wouldn't expect the ban to occur in isolation of other actions. If we're at the point where personal air travel is being axed, then fuel taxes for automobiles would likely also be prohibitive. But here in Canada our carbon tax is facing strong opposition from populists, and I expect that the next Government is likely to axe it. The current Government is already putting in place boutique exclusions; for instance, home heating fuel is excluded for the next three years. As an alternative, to discourage a major common form of driving, we should consider ways in which to make businesses find operating office space impossibly expensive.