Air travel taxation is no solution to climate change
By David Browne
The travel industry has been urged to take on the environment lobby that blames aviation for climate change. Tom Jenkins, executive director of the European Tour Operators Association (ETOA), said the industry must be ready to fight claims by environmentalists that airliners are the main cause of greenhouse gas emissions.
Speaking at the ETOA’s annual conference here, he said that climate change is becoming an ever important issue which the tourism industry cannot afford to ignore. But higher taxes or a forced reduction in air travel is not the answer.
“The problem with so many of the environmental campaigners is that the only solution they see to dealing with climate change is to stop people from traveling, from manufacturing and from undertaking all kinds of commerce that make the world go round,” he said.
“What we need is much more enlightened thinking that simultaneously stimulates reduction in carbon dioxide emissions and productive innovation. The focus should be on technological advancement and alternative sources of fuel rather than punitive taxation that will destroy the economy.”
Jenkins said unlike electricity generation, heavy industry or even rail transport, aviation is the one sector that has no alternative to fossil fuels. Aviation should be the last sector to be targeted, not the first.
In a keynote speech, he told his audience of tour operators, travel agents and suppliers that the contribution of so-called greenhouse gasses from aviation was very small by comparison to other industry sectors. “ETOA does not deny the evidence for climate change; it simply believes there are far better ways to tackle the issue than seeking to drive passengers off planes with punitive taxes.”
He pointed out that the UK Department for Transport had calculated that existing taxes on flight tickets, the air passenger duty, brought in about £900 million (US$1,800m) which already more than offset the cost of aircraft CO2 emissions. “Only three percent of all global CO2 emissions are caused by aviation. If we stopped all flying tomorrow it would not save the planet – it would cause massive disruption,” said Jenkins.
“Curbing aviation would have a severely detrimental impact on the economy and jobs. Increases in the cost of air travel would disproportionately affect high spending long-haul leisure travelers who are particularly valuable to the UK economy,” he said.
The ETOA advocates emissions trading as the best solution to address the impact of industry on global warming and climate change. “This is the most efficient from an economic perspective. It can control emissions much better than taxation ever can and it is preferred by the general public as a way of meeting the environmental costs of air travel,” said Jenkins.
Support for emissions trading was echoed by Willie Walsh, chief executive of British Airways. In a BBC radio interview he said BA had led the way in getting aviation included in emissions trading for the past seven years. “I don’t believe higher taxes will discourage people from flying. It certainly doesn’t discourage people from driving on the roads. So we believe emissions trading is the most efficient and environmentally effective way of dealing with this, and we will continue to promote the inclusion of aviation in emissions trading.”
Walsh rejected the idea that action should be taken to reduce air travel to cut down the emissions that cause global warming. “Air travel is not the biggest single contributor as some people would believe. We are a small part of the man-made CO2 emissions and significantly behind other industries.
“We have to put this debate in context. We recognize that we produce CO2. We recognize that this is likely to grow. But there are steps that can be taken to ensure that it is done in a way that limits the impact on the environment.”
Source: eTurboNews - Travel Wire News