photo: Vox Efx via flickr.
It's well ingrained within the green community that frequent flying really is a huge part of your personal carbon emissions. You already probably purchase a carbon offset for all your flights, but would you pay a surcharge of about 1% on long-haul flights if that money would be used to help poor nations adapt to climate change? The Guardian is reporting that's what's being proposed by 50 of the world's least developed countries in the latest round of UN climate change talks in Bonn:The compulsory levy would generate an estimated $10 billion per year, and according to the Danish environment and energy minister would be matched by a surcharge on all international shipping fuel.
Considering that recently China, India and South Africa proposed that the rich nations of the world fork over 0.5% of their GDP ($200 billion globally) to help with climate change adaptation, this $10 billion is slightly more than a drop in the bucket.
Regardless of whether this proposal actually gains traction, what do TreeHugger readers think? Is a 1% green sin tax on flying a good idea? Too little? Too much? Entirely ineffective considering the impact of flying?
via: The Guardian
Flying Carbon Emissions
What the Heck is Radiative Forcing & Why Should My Aviation Carbon Emissions Include It?
Virgin America Becomes First US Airline to Report Its Greenhouse Gas Emissions
84% Reduction in Jet Fuel Carbon Emissions Possible Using Camelina, New Analysis Shows