From the Daily Skeptic
Chris Morrison
A group of net zero enthusiasts led by the New Economics Foundation (NEF) have proposed a radical new plan to reduce international air travel from Europe to a minimum over the next few years. The impact of proposed huge fees under a “frequent flyer tax” could quickly destroy large parts of the international air transport industry. A portion of the funds raised, or as the case may be, will be sent abroad as “climate aid” to less developed countries forced into poverty by mandated restrictions on the use of hydrocarbons. Needless to say, this work is the product of what Ben Pile recently called “bog-standard Green Blob fronts.” The writing and promotion of NEF publications involves a number of actions heavily funded by the usual suspects such as the European Climate Foundation (ECF) and ClimateWorks.
The fantasy plan calls for substantial European surcharges to be added to fares for multiple annual trips. No financial details were provided in the press release, but the report suggested a charge of 50 euros for medium-distance travel, with an additional 100 euros for long-distance travel and “comfort” cabins. This appears to mean that long-haul business and first class travel will cost an additional €250. George Monbiot guardian He boasted of the report, which was shared exclusively with his newspaper, and wrote that the €100 tax on distance and cabin would be added to each trip. The surcharge is expected to raise €64 billion, said to be equivalent to 30% of the entire EU's annual budget. At least until the golden goose is killed, the funds will be used to accelerate Europe's move towards a “fairer, greener economy”. More good people could be sent to countries to stop them from using hydrocarbons and compensate them for the non-existent climate crisis.
While the report talks about reducing travel by about 25%, from a financial perspective the hit will be even harder. Many airlines rely on high-end travel to keep economy class tickets low, and significant price cuts will affect the economics of the airline industry and ground aviation. Proposed reductions in passenger traffic of 25% or more would require a massive reorganization across the board, including air traffic control, baggage handling, security and border activities, and airport management. However, added to the growing number of net-zero casualties will be more unemployed people.
But that's not the end of the attack. Over the past few decades, air travel has enabled countless people to travel for leisure, vacation, education, business and to connect with family. Eco-enthusiasts tell us that further restrictions are “therefore necessary” in pursuit of insane net-zero policies. These include restrictions on the number of flights, airport slots, night flights, the number of private jets, and “more disruptive restrictions on comfort travel levels.”
Want to know what the net-zero fanatics are planning – look at what their Blob-funded puppets are writing. In this case, stop flying in just a few years.
The New Economics Foundation has been heavily promoting the left for years. No wonder the left's favorite cash cow, the Rowntree Trust, has injected cash, although the Laudes Foundation and ECF are offering much larger sums. As Ben Pile recently stated in ” daily skepticmost organizations active in the UK climate sector are funded directly by the ECF, or by one of ECF's six grant-making charitable foundations. As Pyle also observes, “unfortunate consumers” are trapped by the phantom institutions of the British establishment that represent green ideology.
Perhaps to no one's surprise, the NEF report was co-authored by the Stay Grounded Network, which is funded by the ECF. Magdalena Heuwieser, the agency's aviation campaigner, said travelers on a single flight would pay the same tax as those who made 10 trips. However, people who fly more actually pay 10 times the tax. The left’s budgets are designed to fit the political narrative, but often deviate from reality. In his article, Monbiot noted that most passengers know that air travel is highly taxed but is “heavily subsidized” due to tax exemptions on fuel. In Monbiot's world, the lack of specific taxation is often seen as a “subsidy”, while the £12 billion in annual subsidies that UK electricity consumers actually receive to pay for unreliable renewable energy is passed off as ” invest”. One of the reasons the airline industry doesn't impose a fuel tax is that mobile jets will be “refueled” at cheaper locations.
Monbiot reported the views of Marlene Engelhorn, who stated that “the high-flying private planet-burning clubs where wealthy people like me can ferment in our comfort zones need to be closed down.” Of course, this is easy to say if you're a wealthy heiress who inherits a fortune from BASF's chemicals business. Others who work for a living and need vacation time and some modest comforts while traveling to drum up business may feel differently.
According to Monbiot, the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) reviewed an early draft of the NEF report. Of course, another Green Blob-funded initiative is conducted primarily through ClimateWorks. The massive operation funnels huge amounts of money from other billionaire foundations like Hewlett and Packard. The latter two businesses are also direct funders of ICCT. Zhang Sora, who Monbiot calls an aviation “expert”, said flying less is clearly the most effective solution to reducing emissions. Another study cited by Monbiot, More in Common, found that wealthy people are most affected by a frequent flyer tax because they fly more. Same value, such insight – funders ECF, the George Soros Open Society Foundations and Hewlett will be delighted.
Chris Morrison is daily skepticenvironment editor.
Relevant
