Grist blog: Airlines Impose on Polar Bears While Flying Over Them
Oct 1, 2012, 3:49 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3
Grist blog: Airlines Impose on Polar Bears While Flying Over Them
Hi, I thought MileagePlus members may be interested in reading this blog on Grist about how United and other airlines are fighting efforts to reduce aviation pollution.
United Airlines Screws Polar Bears While Flying Over Them:
http://grist.org/article/united-airl...ing-over-them/
This is very disappointing given the reality that more and more people around the world are flying and climate pollution from aviation is skyrocketing. The EU program is an affordable and effective means of addressing this problem. As United frequent fliers, I think its critical we contact the company and ask them to stop opposing the EU climate law and embrace pollution reduction measures.
United Airlines Screws Polar Bears While Flying Over Them:
http://grist.org/article/united-airl...ing-over-them/
This is very disappointing given the reality that more and more people around the world are flying and climate pollution from aviation is skyrocketing. The EU program is an affordable and effective means of addressing this problem. As United frequent fliers, I think its critical we contact the company and ask them to stop opposing the EU climate law and embrace pollution reduction measures.
Oct 1, 2012, 5:10 pm
#2
Senior Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA
Programs: UA Plat/2MM [23-yr. 1K, now emeritus] clawing way back to WN-A List; MR LT Titanium; HY Whateverist.
Posts: 12,396
As this is not specific to United, please follow the thread as it moves to the TravelBuzz forum. Ocn Vw 1K, Moderator, United and TravelBuzz.
Oct 1, 2012, 6:41 pm
#3
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: SFO
Programs: UA MM, SQ KrisFlyer, SPG/Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,231
I see that the propagandists have made it here to our board...
I for one, oppose the extraterritorial EU tax that has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with creating a revenue stream. In other words, so the EU states can live off non-EU money.
I for one, if I were to contact UA and send kudos, I would do so for opposing this parasitic and expensive tax that serves no purpose other than to prop up the EU states.
I for one, oppose the extraterritorial EU tax that has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with creating a revenue stream. In other words, so the EU states can live off non-EU money.
I for one, if I were to contact UA and send kudos, I would do so for opposing this parasitic and expensive tax that serves no purpose other than to prop up the EU states.
Oct 1, 2012, 7:08 pm
#4
Moderator: Manufactured Spending
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,580
Carbon emissions have nothing to do with the environment?
Like most taxes, isn't it? Funny how the US, UK and every other country have all kinds of taxes on aviation, but this one is somehow different, because it "creates a revenue stream".
Oct 1, 2012, 7:19 pm
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,439
This tax is simply a money grab. If they want to make it simple just charge everyone $5 at immigration. The government can be responsible for the costs of collection, and the airlines would have no arguments. Easy-peasey.
Oct 2, 2012, 12:46 am
#6
Moderator: Manufactured Spending
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,580
I think most people would rather just have it included in the cost of the ticket than having to pay at immigration, especially foreigners who may not have cash in the correct currency at hand.
Oct 2, 2012, 3:05 am
#7
Join Date: Jan 2007
Programs: UA Silv, SPG Gold, Marriott Gold,
Posts: 154
To be effective a carbon tax attempting to curb carbon usage cannot be affordable. It its affordable it won't curb anything.
If it is affordable it's not really going to do anything other then be a tax.
If it is affordable it's not really going to do anything other then be a tax.
Oct 2, 2012, 12:15 pm
#8
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3
If it were a money grab, than why does the EU say it will defer to a global carbon emissions law or exempt national laws that are equivalent? The fact is that the EU acted in the face of inaction at the global level. Besides, airlines can participate without giving a dime to the EU. They can use the ample free pollution allowances they are given by the EU to invest in increased efficiency and actually profit from the scheme. Or they could buy their credits from a country like Germany that has committed to using any minor revenue that comes in from the program for climate purposes, or from the international carbon market.
Oct 2, 2012, 1:38 pm
#9
Moderator: Manufactured Spending
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,580
The same could be said of any "sin tax". According to your logic, a tax on cigarettes, for example, is ineffective because it is affordable, and therefore just a money grab.