Post by account_disabled on Mar 5, 2024 2:04:24 GMT -8
The rich have had too much freedom to design the planet according to their wishes. We should see the crisis as an opportunity to slim down the air transport system.
Stefan Gössling of Linnaeus University in Sweden, who led the new study.
Question of equality
For his part, Dan Rutherford, of the International Council on Clean Transportation and not part of the research team, said the
The benefits of aviation are spread more unequally around the world than probably any other major source of emissions. There is therefore a clear risk that the special treatment airlines enjoy only protects the economic interests of the global rich.
The frequent travelers identified in the study traveled about 35,000 miles (56,000 km) a year, Gössling said, which is equivalent to three long-haul flights a year, one short-haul flight a month, or some combination of both.
The research, published in the journal Global Environmental Change , collated a range of data and found that large proportions of people in all countries did not fly at all each year; 53% in the US, 65% in Germany and 66% in Taiwan. In the UK, separate data shows that 48% of people did not fly abroad in 2018.
Emissions production
The analysis showed that the US Chile Mobile Number List produced the most emissions among wealthy nations. China was the largest among other countries, but has no data available. However, Gössling believes his footprint in aviation is probably only one-fifth of that of the US.
On average, North Americans flew 50 times more kilometers than Africans in 2018, 10 times more than those in the Asia-Pacific region and 7.5 times more than Latin Americans. Europeans and Middle Easterners flew 25 times farther than Africans and five times farther than Asians.
The data also showed huge growth in international flights between 1990 and 2017, with numbers tripling from Australia and doubling from the UK.
Researchers estimated the cost of climate damage caused by aviation emissions at $100 trillion in 2018. The lack of payments to cover these damages " represents a significant subsidy for the richest ," the researchers said. " This highlights the need to examine the sector, and in particular the super emitters ."
The social cost of carbon emissions figure was actually a bit conservative, Rutherford said.
A tax on frequent flyers is a proposal to discourage flying. « Someone will have to pay to decarbonize flying – why shouldn't it be frequent flyers? » Rutherford questioned. But Gössling was less enthusiastic, pointing out that frequent travelers are usually very wealthy, meaning that rising ticket prices cannot deter them.
Perhaps a more productive way is to ask airlines to increase the proportion of the [low-carbon] synthetic fuel mix each year up to 100% by 2050.
Stefan Gössling of Linnaeus University in Sweden, who led the new study.
Question of equality
For his part, Dan Rutherford, of the International Council on Clean Transportation and not part of the research team, said the
The benefits of aviation are spread more unequally around the world than probably any other major source of emissions. There is therefore a clear risk that the special treatment airlines enjoy only protects the economic interests of the global rich.
The frequent travelers identified in the study traveled about 35,000 miles (56,000 km) a year, Gössling said, which is equivalent to three long-haul flights a year, one short-haul flight a month, or some combination of both.
The research, published in the journal Global Environmental Change , collated a range of data and found that large proportions of people in all countries did not fly at all each year; 53% in the US, 65% in Germany and 66% in Taiwan. In the UK, separate data shows that 48% of people did not fly abroad in 2018.
Emissions production
The analysis showed that the US Chile Mobile Number List produced the most emissions among wealthy nations. China was the largest among other countries, but has no data available. However, Gössling believes his footprint in aviation is probably only one-fifth of that of the US.
On average, North Americans flew 50 times more kilometers than Africans in 2018, 10 times more than those in the Asia-Pacific region and 7.5 times more than Latin Americans. Europeans and Middle Easterners flew 25 times farther than Africans and five times farther than Asians.
The data also showed huge growth in international flights between 1990 and 2017, with numbers tripling from Australia and doubling from the UK.
Researchers estimated the cost of climate damage caused by aviation emissions at $100 trillion in 2018. The lack of payments to cover these damages " represents a significant subsidy for the richest ," the researchers said. " This highlights the need to examine the sector, and in particular the super emitters ."
The social cost of carbon emissions figure was actually a bit conservative, Rutherford said.
A tax on frequent flyers is a proposal to discourage flying. « Someone will have to pay to decarbonize flying – why shouldn't it be frequent flyers? » Rutherford questioned. But Gössling was less enthusiastic, pointing out that frequent travelers are usually very wealthy, meaning that rising ticket prices cannot deter them.
Perhaps a more productive way is to ask airlines to increase the proportion of the [low-carbon] synthetic fuel mix each year up to 100% by 2050.