In 2005, the European Union introduced a plan to slightly increase taxes. They wanted an increase in tax to raise money for a poverty reduction pledge. Millennium Development Goal is the name of the pledge in which there would be a 50 percent poverty reduction and hunger, universal primary eductaion and the reduction od child mortality by two-thirds. Even though this plan has nothing to do with making the environment better, it shows how an increase in tax would affect flyers. With a slight increase of anywhere between $1.20 and $12.40 (depending on the distnace of the flight), between 707.8 million and 3.443 billion dollars would be raised. Now this would raise alot of many to help meet the goals set by the MDGs but it would not have such a decrease in travel. Air travel would only decrease by 3-4 percent in the Euorpean Union.This proves that the only way to lower or stop air travel would be to unbelievably raise the tax which would then hurt the economy.
Development non-governmental organizations say that introducing a greater tax would make it possible both to generate “predictable and stable resources for development”, and to “redress the negative effects of globalization, such as pollution and financial speculation.”
The Secretary General of the Association of European Airlines said “Already, large portions of our cost base are controlled by our suppliers and service providers. To try to squeeze out of our already heavily-taxed industry an additional sum equivalent to eight times the annual profit is wholly inappropriate.”
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
The airlines are ALREADY heavily taxed!!!!
The impact of taxes and fees on service
-passengers are price sensitive(heavy taxes = high gas prices, ticket price increase, close to no one flying, end of airline industry, decrease in economy and being the most heavily taxed industry would really put the economy at risk of as much as a possible depression)
-airlines face a higher tax burden than any other industry on the Federal level
-airlines claim that they are unable to pass such taxes and fees on their customers
-additional taxes are being levied on an industry already collapsing under its current tax burden.
-as it is now, airlines are already in debt. They need support from the government not increase in taxes. They have requested that the government could roll back taxes and fees and/or security costs, governments could also change regulations to allow airlines to publish fares before taxes.
The Aviation industry is the most heavily taxed industry. Plus The currently high gas prices make the airlines have to raise the price of a plane ticket. If airline taxes were increased to an even higher unspeakable amount, the airlines would not make any business becasue people wouldn't fly. Now that might be the point of raising taxes However If no one flies, the environment will not be hurting but the economy will!!! The airline industries would have to shut down creating many unemployed, starving and possibly homeless people. Since the government makes most of their money off of airline taxes, there will be a decrease in the economy and this will pave the road for a possible depression. In Conclusion, must the airline industry in a sense be completely eliminated?!?! Airplane travel is the fastest growing soucre of emissions. However, airplane travel only accounts for 3 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. The creation of a more heavily taxed airline industry would hurt the economy and really would not make such a tragic impact on improving the environment.
-passengers are price sensitive(heavy taxes = high gas prices, ticket price increase, close to no one flying, end of airline industry, decrease in economy and being the most heavily taxed industry would really put the economy at risk of as much as a possible depression)
-airlines face a higher tax burden than any other industry on the Federal level
-airlines claim that they are unable to pass such taxes and fees on their customers
-additional taxes are being levied on an industry already collapsing under its current tax burden.
-as it is now, airlines are already in debt. They need support from the government not increase in taxes. They have requested that the government could roll back taxes and fees and/or security costs, governments could also change regulations to allow airlines to publish fares before taxes.
The Aviation industry is the most heavily taxed industry. Plus The currently high gas prices make the airlines have to raise the price of a plane ticket. If airline taxes were increased to an even higher unspeakable amount, the airlines would not make any business becasue people wouldn't fly. Now that might be the point of raising taxes However If no one flies, the environment will not be hurting but the economy will!!! The airline industries would have to shut down creating many unemployed, starving and possibly homeless people. Since the government makes most of their money off of airline taxes, there will be a decrease in the economy and this will pave the road for a possible depression. In Conclusion, must the airline industry in a sense be completely eliminated?!?! Airplane travel is the fastest growing soucre of emissions. However, airplane travel only accounts for 3 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. The creation of a more heavily taxed airline industry would hurt the economy and really would not make such a tragic impact on improving the environment.
NGO
Environmental groups and concerned NGOs have long advocated for taxes on aviation to offset its environmental damage. Many NGOs call for reform of the global economic system, including debt relief, international aid, and global taxes that can fund development while at the same time curbing carbon emissions or stabilizing the global financial system. They call for a fair international trade system, international regulation of corporate activity to ensure basic labor and human rights and environmental standards, and a stronger role for the UN in global social and economic policy.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Are planes really responsible for any part of global warming?
Many analyist, scientist and special reporters beg to differ that airplanes do not cause global warming and has a bad effect on the enviroment.
The Special Report 'Aviation and the Global Atmosphere', published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is the first by the Panel on a specific industrial sector. It confirms that the world's 16,000 airliners are a major source of the gases that are causing global warming.
The IPCC Special Report Statistics Show that
- Planes are responsible for 3.5 per cent of man-made global warming today;
- They could account for up to 15 per cent of global warming by 2050
Simon McRae, Aviation Campaigner at Friends of the Earth said:
"This report proves aeroplanes are a significant threat to the world's climate. If current trends continue, greenhouse gas emissions from planes will rise, potentially undermining international treaties to protect the world's climate. Only a cut in the forecast use of planes will reduce overall aviation greenhouse gas emissions.”
What about improving airplanes?
It has been said that improving the airplanes would not even make the air cleaner.
Friends of the Earth's aviation campaigner, Richard Dyer, said:
"Cleaner aircraft are certainly needed, but they are not the solution to the rising impact of aviation emissions on our climate. Any benefits gained by building more fuel efficient aircraft will be swamped by the rapid growth in air travel. Government action is urgently required to curb the anticipated rise in flights. This must include ending the £9bn effective subsidy handed to the air industry by UK taxpayers every year, and the scrapping of ludicrous plans for a massive expansion of British airports."
The IPCC specia report says that: More efficient engines, better air traffic control and other operational improvements will not stop emissions rising, as the number of people flying grows. It suggests new taxes on flying and policies to substitute trains for short distance flights should be considered by Governments to cut aircraft emissions.
The Special Report 'Aviation and the Global Atmosphere', published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is the first by the Panel on a specific industrial sector. It confirms that the world's 16,000 airliners are a major source of the gases that are causing global warming.
The IPCC Special Report Statistics Show that
- Planes are responsible for 3.5 per cent of man-made global warming today;
- They could account for up to 15 per cent of global warming by 2050
Simon McRae, Aviation Campaigner at Friends of the Earth said:
"This report proves aeroplanes are a significant threat to the world's climate. If current trends continue, greenhouse gas emissions from planes will rise, potentially undermining international treaties to protect the world's climate. Only a cut in the forecast use of planes will reduce overall aviation greenhouse gas emissions.”
What about improving airplanes?
It has been said that improving the airplanes would not even make the air cleaner.
Friends of the Earth's aviation campaigner, Richard Dyer, said:
"Cleaner aircraft are certainly needed, but they are not the solution to the rising impact of aviation emissions on our climate. Any benefits gained by building more fuel efficient aircraft will be swamped by the rapid growth in air travel. Government action is urgently required to curb the anticipated rise in flights. This must include ending the £9bn effective subsidy handed to the air industry by UK taxpayers every year, and the scrapping of ludicrous plans for a massive expansion of British airports."
The IPCC specia report says that: More efficient engines, better air traffic control and other operational improvements will not stop emissions rising, as the number of people flying grows. It suggests new taxes on flying and policies to substitute trains for short distance flights should be considered by Governments to cut aircraft emissions.
The airlines reaction to an increase in taxes
The Tories A polictal group in Britian proposed to increase aviation taxes In March of 2007 as a weapon to cut greenhouse gas emissions:
-Existing air passenger duty abolished
-Airlines pay new tax aimed at dirtier engines
-Passengers pay VAT (Value added Taxes) on domestic flights
-Each passenger allowed one short-haul flight per year without the higher tax
Those who are aginst the increased tax on arilines that was proposed by the tories feel that a tax for 'climate change' should not just include the airline.
"When you tax cow farts, a greater contribution the the 0.1% air travel in the UK generates to global C02 emissions, yes 0.1% thats all! would I be willing to consider personal omissions." -unknown
British Airways said taxation “was an extremely blunt instrument in terms of reducing carbon emissions”.
Airlines lined up to attack the proposals, with Virgin insisting that the taxes would damage the economy, because they “would make airlines less competitive and shift jobs to other countries in Europe”.
-Existing air passenger duty abolished
-Airlines pay new tax aimed at dirtier engines
-Passengers pay VAT (Value added Taxes) on domestic flights
-Each passenger allowed one short-haul flight per year without the higher tax
Those who are aginst the increased tax on arilines that was proposed by the tories feel that a tax for 'climate change' should not just include the airline.
"When you tax cow farts, a greater contribution the the 0.1% air travel in the UK generates to global C02 emissions, yes 0.1% thats all! would I be willing to consider personal omissions." -unknown
British Airways said taxation “was an extremely blunt instrument in terms of reducing carbon emissions”.
Airlines lined up to attack the proposals, with Virgin insisting that the taxes would damage the economy, because they “would make airlines less competitive and shift jobs to other countries in Europe”.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
The National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
The National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) feels that airplane do not cause such a big deplition in the ozone and enviroment. They feel that there are other factors besides airplanes and it would not be reasonable to increase airplane tax or discontinue the use of airplanes.
Gregory Withee, NOAA assistant administrator for satellite and information services wrote in his Washington Post report "Waters Near Equator Show Alarming Warming Trends"; "... it is by no means clear how an increase of less than 1 percent per year in atmospheric greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide could possibly cause extra warming to raise sea surface temperatures by 0.1 degree per year. Most likely it reflects a combination of several different factors in a complex relationship that is not yet understood."
The carbon dioxide released from jet airplane exhausts will not condense, instead it will disperse at that altitude, and may gradually descend to lower altitudes very slowly, taking several years.
Gregory Withee, NOAA assistant administrator for satellite and information services wrote in his Washington Post report "Waters Near Equator Show Alarming Warming Trends"; "... it is by no means clear how an increase of less than 1 percent per year in atmospheric greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide could possibly cause extra warming to raise sea surface temperatures by 0.1 degree per year. Most likely it reflects a combination of several different factors in a complex relationship that is not yet understood."
The carbon dioxide released from jet airplane exhausts will not condense, instead it will disperse at that altitude, and may gradually descend to lower altitudes very slowly, taking several years.
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Let the investigations begin...
Beginning my investigation...
Is an increase in airline taxes a good idea?
How does airplanes effect the environment?
The increasing volume of jet airline traffic round the clock and around the globe which is contributing to higher concentrations of greenhouse gases in the stratosphere than in the whole atmosphere. This indicates that the increasing volumes of airplane traffic worldwide have serious environmental consequences, perhaps more serious than the ozone hole phenomenon on which the attention of the scientific community is riveted.
If taxes on airplanes increase, then people will be less likely to fly. However they will find other methods of transportation. What affect does other forms of transporation affect the environment negatively. Cars and trains for explain also have negative effects on the environment.
Is an increase in airline taxes a good idea?
How does airplanes effect the environment?
The increasing volume of jet airline traffic round the clock and around the globe which is contributing to higher concentrations of greenhouse gases in the stratosphere than in the whole atmosphere. This indicates that the increasing volumes of airplane traffic worldwide have serious environmental consequences, perhaps more serious than the ozone hole phenomenon on which the attention of the scientific community is riveted.
If taxes on airplanes increase, then people will be less likely to fly. However they will find other methods of transportation. What affect does other forms of transporation affect the environment negatively. Cars and trains for explain also have negative effects on the environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)