N62NA
Topic Author
Posts: 3984
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 3:18 am

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2256590,00.html

AIR passengers will be charged up to £40 extra for a return ticket within Europe to pay for the environmental impact of their journeys, under plans approved by the European Parliament yesterday.
 
slider
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 3:53 am

There goes the LCC industry in Europe up in smoke....

Er, maybe not smoke, because smoke would mean pollution which is what this tax eliminates. Along with jobs, commerce, economy, etc.

More do-gooding crap.
 
B707Stu
Posts: 893
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 4:15 pm

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 3:58 am

Interesting concept. I'd like to see the allocation of the dollars. If it's to reduce emissions and make Europe greener then it's a good thing. It's sad the US industries are holding so strongly to the past. I'm afraid it will leave the US behind. It would be interesting if the Europeans were funding advanced non-oil-based technologies for engines, now that would be worth all the money! European taxing on tickets have never kept pace with the American taxing of tickets, it's not a surprise.
 
jwenting
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:12 pm

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 4:23 am

It'll all go to line the pockets of politicians Stu. Not only is the entire "global warming" farce just that, a farce, but we're talking politics here.

The only thing this is about is getting more money out of people, with the side effect of making them stay where they're put.

It won't be the end of LCCs though, as their prices would go up by the same amount as all the others.
It WOULD however be the end of European airlines on routes to other continents as airlines from those continents wouldn't be subject to the tax.
They'd therefore loose almost all their competitive position (what's left of it) on say the US market.
I wish I were flying
 
pbottenb
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 5:21 am

Im not that familiar with the EU political structure - Can the EU Parliment do this unilaterally, or will the individual parliments/govts need to agree. Id be surprised if a tax hike can go through in the UK without the UK parliment voting on it...am I wrong?
 
Ken777
Posts: 9020
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 5:34 am

So where is the money going to go? Some of it can go to pay unemployment benefits for those in the airline industry that loose their jobs. Some can offset the tax loss from the airlines that go under. Most will probably go to pet projects the individual politicians want to fund - with little benefits going to those that pay this additional tax.
 
BBADXB
Posts: 777
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2001 11:13 pm

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 5:38 am

The classic EU rubbish... So much for mobility and all that nice talk in the air...
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1936
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 5:54 am

Then all you EU-members must demand that the Environment committee report to you every quarter about what they spend every Euro on, to "keep the bastards honest" and if there is anything that sounds suspicious then you can clamp down on it straight away.
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
katekebo
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 12:02 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 6:11 am

IMHO this has two objectives:

1) Additional source of income for the government to close the growing gap in the budget. Instead of reducing wastefull spending, the government is trying to increase taxes.

2) Shift some of the public from air to rail travel. Most of European rail is government owned and heavily subsidized, so making more people travel by train will help to reduce the financial drain that the rail system represents on public finances.

It has nothing to do with protecting the environment. If EU was serious about protecting the environment, why don't they implement the same emission norms for their cars like US? Most people don't realize that the majority of European cars could not be sold in the US because they have too high emissions to meet EPA standards. Yes, European cars consume less fuel (because on average they are much smaller), yet they emit more CO, HC and NOx than cars sold in the USA. Same goes for air polution norms for the industry, which are much more lax in EU than USA.
 
amberair732
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 8:44 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 6:57 am

Quoting Pbottenb (Reply 4):
Im not that familiar with the EU political structure - Can the EU Parliment do this unilaterally, or will the individual parliments/govts need to agree. Id be surprised if a tax hike can go through in the UK without the UK parliment voting on it...am I wrong?

Good question Pbottenb. As mentioned in the article this motion has been agreed by the MEP's ( mostly retired/minor politicians ) but still has to be agreed by the european comission. I would not assume that these new taxes/charges will be adopted by the European comission, as protacted debate by the european commision will most definitely follow.
If there's any European legal experts out there, I have one question - What's to stop all large European carriers registering their fleet in a non EU country ( Switzerland ? ) and avoiding a large chunk of these charges ?
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6408
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 6:59 am

Funny thing is that this new tax proposal will in fact INCREASE emissions. The reason is that every other journey will begin with a trip to Switzerland - a non-EU member country right in the middle of the EU.

But it won't happen. When Airbus begins talk about laying off dozens of thousands of workers because they have orders for a thousand planes which they have accepted on condition of no such EU tax, then French and German politicians will get cold feet.

In northern and thinly populated regions of countries like Sweden and Finland the businesses and industries are totally dependent upon efficient and payable air transport. In case of such a new tax all activity will move to the more densely populated regions further south. Along with them moves the population to avoid taking part in a near 100% unemployment adventure. What will be left behind up north will be nursing homes for old people.

Spain and Greece are heavily dependent upon their tourist industry. Who the hell will spend three days in a bus going to Spain, and three days back again when they have a week off for a holiday?

So relax. It won't happen.

The so called European Parliament is not a real parliament. It is sort of advisory board for the EU Commission. Former Danish EU commissioner Mrs. Ritt Bjerregaard once called it a Micky Mouse Parliament for which she of course was flamed heavily by the parliament members. But she was right. There are no limits on what crazy ideas they have come up with during the last 30 - 40 years and it seems to never end.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
slider
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 7:06 am

Quoting B707Stu (Reply 2):
European taxing on tickets have never kept pace with the American taxing of tickets, it's not a surprise.

So the theory of "misery loves company" should be applied?

In case you didn't notice, one of the key drivers for the financial misery for US carriers is that the NON-INCOME related taxes and Federal charges amount to 25% of an average fare. It's a higher tax rate than alcohol and tobacco.

I always cite this, but it's worth mentioning again...in 2005, CO lost $366MM net, but paid out $1,052,000,000 in NON income taxes....so you think it's fair to level the playing field with the European carriers?

I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
 
amberair732
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 8:44 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 7:09 am

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 10):
The so called European Parliament is not a real parliament. It is sort of advisory board for the EU Commission. Former Danish EU commissioner Mrs. Ritt Bjerregaard once called it a Micky Mouse Parliament for which she of course was flamed heavily by the parliament members. But she was right. There are no limits on what crazy ideas they have come up with during the last 30 - 40 years and it seems to never end.

 checkmark 

These guys actually pay Neil Kinnock a wage !
 
AlanUK
Posts: 511
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:56 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 7:28 am

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 3):
It'll all go to line the pockets of politicians Stu. Not only is the entire "global warming" farce just that, a farce, but we're talking politics here.

A FARCE???!?!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4969772.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4888946.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5006970.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4771399.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/4755297.stm

Whether we choose to believe it or not, climate change and global warming is a reality...
 ashamed 

We simply cannot carry on living the way we all do on this planet right now. And that's not just for CO2 emissions, but our crazy consumer world, wasting world...

Aviation plays a part in all this, and to jet away for the week-end for £1 on Ryanair simply doesn't match the cost to the environment of this lifestyle extravagenza. I'm still hopeful that the commercial aviation will adapt in time, that is before we run out of oil or choke to death on our own little blue planet.
 
Tango-Bravo
Posts: 2887
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2001 1:04 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 7:31 am

Quoting Slider (Reply 1):
There goes the LCC industry in Europe up in smoke....

How so? The European majors/legacies will be required to charge the same fee as the LCCs, meaning their total ticket prices will increase by a like amount unless they choose to absorb the fee, which they can ill-afford to do.
 
amberair732
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 8:44 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:03 am

Quoting AlanUK (Reply 13):
Whether we choose to believe it or not, climate change and global warming is a reality...

I totally agree with you that climate change is is a reality - although global warming - my house was hit by hailstones the size of golf balls today ! - I remain sceptical about.
Perhaps the EU subsidies which are used to fund wasteful farming/fishing etc. would be better utilised encouraging aircraft manufacturers/airlines to produce more fuel efficient aircraft. Taxes are not the answer sensible investment is.
 
AlanUK
Posts: 511
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:56 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:12 am

Quoting Amberair732 (Reply 15):
my house was hit by hailstones the size of golf balls today ! - I remain sceptical about.

That's irrelevant! It's called GLOBAL warming for a reason, hailstones in Blackpool isn't a global event, is it?

Quoting Amberair732 (Reply 15):
Perhaps the EU subsidies which are used to fund wasteful farming/fishing etc. would be better utilised encouraging aircraft manufacturers/airlines to produce more fuel efficient aircraft. Taxes are not the answer sensible investment is.

Agreed fully.
 
User avatar
WildcatYXU
Posts: 2602
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 2:05 pm

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:59 am

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 8):
why don't they implement the same emission norms for their cars like US?

/flame mode on/
You meant California, didn't you? European standards for emissions are stricter than the ones in most US states and Canada. BTW, you could never sell the north American fuel in Europe because of its huge sulphur content (California is an exception again). Did you know, that if you ever fill a car manufactured for California with non-Californian fuel, your emission system warranty is gone?
BTW, as far as CO2 emissions are concerned, American cars are much worse that the European ones. And why we need bigger cars to haul our a$$es than Europeans?
/flame mode off/
I apologize, couldn't resist...Now my real opinion.

This "environmental" tax is only one of many taxes imposed by EU. EU should be called the "TAX UNION". In my origin, Slovakia, even taxes and duties are taxed...When will Europeans finally say to their governments "Enough of it, go to hell"?
However, Ontaxio, where I live now isn't much better...

As far as global warming goes, yes, it's a fact. But, where is the evidence, that CO2 from cars/airplanes is the reason for it? I mean real evidence, not some junk science reports. Large climate changes aren't rare in history, most of them happened long time before the automobile and airplane was invented.
310, 319, 320, 321, 333, 343, 345, 346, 732, 735, 73G, 738, 744, 752, 762, 763, 77L, 77W, 788, AT4, AT7, BEH, CR2, CRA, CR9, DH1, DH3, DH4, E75, E90, E95, F28, F50, F100, Saab 340, YAK40
 
ozglobal
Posts: 2511
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 7:33 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:07 am

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 8):
If EU was serious about protecting the environment, why don't they implement the same emission norms for their cars like US? Most people don't realize that the majority of European cars could not be sold in the US because they have too high emissions to meet EPA standards. Yes, European cars consume less fuel (because on average they are much smaller), yet they emit more CO, HC and NOx than cars sold in the USA. Same goes for air polution norms for the industry, which are much more lax in EU than USA.

Where did this come from, Fox News? Check you facts on this because I think you're backing a losing horse here. US has 4% of worlds population and generates roughly 30% of green house and other polluting gases.
When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
 
vv701
Posts: 5773
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:26 am

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 3):
It WOULD however be the end of European airlines on routes to other continents as airlines from those continents wouldn't be subject to the tax.
They'd therefore loose almost all their competitive position (what's left of it) on say the US market.

The proposed tax is for £40 to be added to return intra European tickets. Soi it will not effect, for example, trans-Atlantic flights

Quoting Amberair732 (Reply 9):
If there's any European legal experts out there, I have one question - What's to stop all large European carriers registering their fleet in a non EU country ( Switzerland ? ) and avoiding a large chunk of these charges ?

I do not see how the tax could be imposed on tickets purchased in, for example, Switzerland. But I can see how it wouold be imposed on a ticket routed LHR-ZRH-ATH for example. But if you register your fleet in, say Switzerland and offer, for example. a CDG-ARN service I do not see how your passengers could avoid the tax.would save having to pay tax. The tax is on them and not you. However if UA renewed its fifth freedom flights in Europe I do not see how the tax could be applied to a ticket routed JFK-LHR-FRA but can see how it would be applied to a ticket on the second leg only, LHR-FRA.

So the outstanding question is is 'Europe' in fact the EU or is the tax proposed to cover the entire continent.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:41 am

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 18):
Where did this come from, Fox News?

Nice snear/smear.  sarcastic 

Barely anyone in the US buys European cars for fuel economy. With few exceptions, they have poorer ratings than Japanese and US cars. US customers buy them for luxury and prestige.

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 18):

Where did this come from, Fox News? Check you facts on this because I think you're backing a losing horse here. US has 4% of worlds population and generates roughly 30% of green house and other polluting gases.

Where did this 30% figure come from? It's was always been quoted as 25% and that was before the recent large increases in Chinese and Indian fossil fuel consumption, so it is bound to be lower today. Incidentally, the US produces 29% of the world's GDP, and the US population is closer to 5% (and still growing).

[Edited 2006-07-06 02:46:40]
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
Halibut
Posts: 943
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 8:43 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:51 am

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 20):
Where did this 30% figure come from? It's was always been quoted as 25% and that was before the recent large increases in Chinese and Indian fossil fuel consumption, so it is bound to be lower today. Incidentally, the US produces 29% of the world's GDP, and the US population is closer to 5% (and still growing).

I thought it was 25 % as well , not 30 % ! We also give more to the poor in third world countries & Africa !

Halibut
6 million Jews were slaughtered-Do you see Jews flying planes into buildings in Germany to kill 1000s of innocent, NO !
 
longhaulheavy
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 1:52 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:59 am

Quoting AlanUK (Reply 16):
That's irrelevant! It's called GLOBAL warming for a reason, hailstones in Blackpool isn't a global event, is it?

Global warming is interesting only because people who are firmly behind the theory think that anything that ever happens is evidence of it. Hail in Blackpool? Global warming! More rain? Global warming! Droughts? Global warming! See, it doesn't matter, because it's global you see, and any weather anywhere is evidence of the theory. It's kind of entertaining.

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 18):
Where did this come from, Fox News? Check you facts on this because I think you're backing a losing horse here. US has 4% of worlds population and generates roughly 30% of green house and other polluting gases.

That statistic is completely unrelated to the discussion on automobile emissions. Speaking of which, Europe was far behind the US on requiring the use of catalytic converters. The Germans and Swiss actually enacted standards based on the US standards in the 1980s when it became apparent that acid rain was a serious problem.

The real kicker of this whole "less airline travel/less pollution" tax is that if there truly is severe global warming, there is evidence that airline travel actually helps counteract the problems. Daytime airline contrails contribute to a phenomena called global dimming, which tends to reduce the temperature of the earth. This effect was measured in the US after Sept. 11 when the skies were free of contrails, and scientists noticed slight increases in daytime temperatures. As most airline travel occurs during the day, the contrails have a net cooling effect on the surface of the earth.
 
katekebo
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 12:02 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:17 am

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 17):
You meant California, didn't you? European standards for emissions are stricter than the ones in most US states and Canada. BTW, you could never sell the north American fuel in Europe because of its huge sulphur content (California is an exception again). Did you know, that if you ever fill a car manufactured for California with non-Californian fuel, your emission system warranty is gone?
BTW, as far as CO2 emissions are concerned, American cars are much worse that the European ones. And why we need bigger cars to haul our a$$es than Europeans?

I'm sorry, but your completely wrong and your information is outdated. There is no longer distinction between California and non-California cars - this was eliminated long time ago. By the way your comment about voiding car warranty by feeling a California car with non-California fuel is absurd. California registered cars have been always travelling across the whole USA and the warranty of the emissions was never voided by doing so. The only differences now are in fuel specs (California diesel has less sulphur, gasoline is identical to the rest of the country) and California law requires extended emissions warranty from the car manufacturers. In most states, emission systems are warranted for 7 years component life, 3 years performance warranty. In California the performance warranty is extended, if I remember correctly, to 5 years, and component warranty is 8 years. The cars are identical, the only thing that changes is your consumer rights. No European cars are even close to offering this kind of warranty in Europe.

By the way, due to my profession, I have been involved in many environment-control projects for the company I work for, in projects in Europe, USA and Latin America, and have been exposed to different environmental regulations first-hand. Many of the "compromises" that can be negotiated with the authorities in Europe (like dilution of the emission streams to reduce concentration) would be deamed unacceptable in the USA. The general approach in EU is that you have to be good enough to meet the regulations, while in the US you have to proof that you are using best available control technology (BACT). A similar approach is followed by several other countries in locations that have particularly difficult conditions, for example Sao Paulo in Brazil and Mexico City, where the authorities and the company must jointly agree that the proposed solution is the BACT.

To be fair, USA has a big environmental problem - it is a very energy "hungry" country, and serious steps must be taken to increase energy efficiency. But in terms of polution laws, and their strict application it's years ahead of EU (with exception of some specific areas in Germany and Scandinavia).

So before making such statement, get you info straight.
 
bhmbaglock
Posts: 2489
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 7:51 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:31 am

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 17):
You meant California, didn't you? European standards for emissions are stricter than the ones in most US states and Canada. BTW, you could never sell the north American fuel in Europe because of its huge sulphur content (California is an exception again). Did you know, that if you ever fill a car manufactured for California with non-Californian fuel, your emission system warranty is gone?

You need to work on your facts a bit. First, many models are produced with CA emissions only for the US market. The price differential is small enough that it does not make sense to produce two separate models and distribute them separately in many cases. Remember that a number of other states have adopted CA emissions as well.

Regarding sulfur content, we're in the middle of a very aggressive rollout of low sulphur diesel. By law, were at 80% ULSD at the moment with 100% required by the end of the decade. In reality we'll come very close much sooner. btw, ULSD is less than 15 ppm sulfur. So at this point we'll be at 15 vs 10 for Europe vs both at 350-500 just a few years ago. Note that Europe does have the advantage of low sulphur North Sea crude to help out a bit.

How about CO2 emissions regulations? How about aircraft and seagoing ship fuels? The US is the leader in these areas.

As for your asinine statement regarding non-CA fuel, HAHAHAHAHA! CA people have been known to drive their cars outside of the state. Perhaps you are thinking of leaded fuel that has not been available anywhere in the US for quite some time.

FYI, going back to 1998, every car I've bought (in AL) has had CA emissions despite the fact that it's not required by law. My sister moved to CA and once her car(also built with CA emission and purchased here) was tested, she was good to go.
Where are all of my respected members going?
 
katekebo
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 12:02 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:36 am

WildcatYXYU,

For a quick glance, have a look at this document

http://www.cemt.org/online/council/2000/CM0006Fe.pdf

It is comparison between vehicle emission norms of EU, USA, California and Japan, prepared by the Council of Ministers of EU - it shows how USA standards are stricter than EU except for one parameter - particulate emissions for heavy duty trucks.

Off topic, but educative for the people who keep on claiming that EU is so "green" and the USA is bad ugly poluting monster.
 
kanebear
Posts: 852
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 12:06 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:54 am

Another misconception is the European push towards Diesel and it's effects on global warming. While it does cut down on consumption, the increased particulates can increase short-term global warming to a far greater degree than the higher CO2 emissions from a gas/petrol engine. Diesels aren't readily available in several US states due to the particulate emissions. Global warming is about far more than CO2.
 
katekebo
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 12:02 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:59 am

Also, in support to Kanebear, diesels are 10 times more likely to cause lung cancer (as per the same report of Council of Ministers).
 
katekebo
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 12:02 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 1:41 pm

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 18):
Where did this come from, Fox News? Check you facts on this because I think you're backing a losing horse here. US has 4% of worlds population and generates roughly 30% of green house and other polluting gases.

Before making such groundless and speculative statements, check the data

http://www.voka.be/files/bestanden/EU_study_competitiviteit1.pdf

This is an EU study, which naturally favors the European point of view, yet it acknowledges the following facts:

- USA has been in the front line in reducing air pollution, which started with the Clean Air Act in 1970. Europe lagged between 15 and 20 years to start introducing similar legislation.

- While latest industrial EU norms are stricter than US norms, they are just being rolled out with a phase-in period from 2005 to 2010. The US norms has been in effect and enforced over the last 30 years. Also, EU norms allow for specific number of exceedances per year, which offsets the tighter limits.

- The proposed new US legislation (Clean Skies Act) will take the limits to a new level, well below current US and EU standards.

- The US scheme is much more market-based, what reduces the economic burden on the companies while achieving the desired reduction in pollutants. The effect is that the pollution reduction measures are more readily implemented and the norms are strictly enforced (which is not always the case in EU - based on my personal professional experience).

Net, EU is still "chasing" US in terms of pollution standards. The relative measure of emissions per $ (or Euro) of GDP, or per capita, needs to take into account that American economy is much more manufacturing-oriented than Europe, as well as relative size and population distribution. Also, the distance that an average American has to cover everyday to go to work is several times bigger than an average European - it is a much bigger country with much lower population density (with the corresponding advantage that an average American can afford a much bigger house with a much bigger garden than an average European could ever dream about). The same applies to transport of goods.

So before you believe in the Euro-propaganda that tries to brain-wash EU citizen into thinking that EU is the good "green" guy, and US is the "great satan", get your fact straight. By the way, I am EU citizen who currently happens to live in the US, I'm just being objective.
 
AlanUK
Posts: 511
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:56 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 5:50 pm

Quoting Halibut (Reply 21):
We also give more to the poor in third world countries & Africa !

Halibut

Well that's alright then, contribute 25% of the world pollutant, but you give to the poor in third world and Africa! Bless. All is forgiven I guess then...

...Sometimes, it seems American ignorance has no limits!

And I seriously cannot believe some of the stuff I read on here... The US may have more strict rules on some pollutants, but overall, when you consider the fact that most cars in the US are either trucks (I'm sorry - SUV) or gas guzzlers that can achieve up to 30mpg highway, it seems pretty much useless. Most cars in Europe can achieve 30mpg combined easily, pushing at 50mpg motorways, and that's not diesel.

On the bigger pollution picture, there are hardly any states in America that provides recycling incentives or facilities, and I am always amazed to see how much wastage occurs in the USA.

There is hope though... But not until Bush is gone, or the price of oil doubles. That's what it will take for Americans to open their eyes to the real problem that is global warming, and the environment in general.

Hey - safe flying all!
 
ozglobal
Posts: 2511
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 7:33 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:16 pm

Quoting Halibut (Reply 21):
Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 20):
Where did this 30% figure come from? It's was always been quoted as 25% and that was before the recent large increases in Chinese and Indian fossil fuel consumption, so it is bound to be lower today. Incidentally, the US produces 29% of the world's GDP, and the US population is closer to 5% (and still growing).

I thought it was 25 % as well , not 30 % ! We also give more to the poor in third world countries & Africa !

Yes, a common misconception in the US. Current OECD figure on both Government, private and combined aid to developing countries as a % of GDP (only comparable basis) puts the US at 21st out of the top 22 nations surveyed. For a fuller discussion of these OECD figures a quick search will povide many articles, eg:

Discussion of media misreporting: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2676
Actual 2004 OECD figures: http://ocde.p4.siteinternet.com/publ...cations/doifiles/012005061G012.xls
OECD Website (Dev Aid): http://www.oecd.org/topic/0,2686,en_2649_34447_1_1_1_1_37413,00.html
When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
 
User avatar
WildcatYXU
Posts: 2602
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 2:05 pm

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:37 pm

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 23):
By the way your comment about voiding car warranty by feeling a California car with non-California fuel is absurd.

I agree, it is absurd. I was in slight shock, when I saw it in my '02 Alero's user manual. And it wasn't the car warranty, but the emission system's warranty - please pay attention when reading.
However, I can't scan and post it, since I don't have the car anymore.
310, 319, 320, 321, 333, 343, 345, 346, 732, 735, 73G, 738, 744, 752, 762, 763, 77L, 77W, 788, AT4, AT7, BEH, CR2, CRA, CR9, DH1, DH3, DH4, E75, E90, E95, F28, F50, F100, Saab 340, YAK40
 
katekebo
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 12:02 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:48 pm

Quoting AlanUK (Reply 29):
Well that's alright then, contribute 25% of the world pollutant, but you give to the poor in third world and Africa! Bless. All is forgiven I guess then...!



Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 30):
Yes, a common misconception in the US. Current OECD figure on both Government, private and combined aid to developing countries as a % of GDP (only comparable basis) puts the US at 21st out of the top 22 nations surveyed.

And what has Europe given to Africa and the Third World? 200 years of colonialism, ruthless discrimination and exploitation. European foreign aid is just a minuscule payback that does not even cover a small fraction of the riches that the European has stolen from the colonised countries.

Quoting AlanUK (Reply 29):
most cars in the US are either trucks (I'm sorry - SUV)

Americans drive big cars because they can afford it, both from the car and fuel price standpoint. Europeans drive small cars because that's what they can afford. Show me how many Europeans who can afford a full-size BMW or Mercedes will voluntarily switch if for a Fiat Punto or Renault Clio. European car choice is based on economic conditions, not environmental concience.

Quoting AlanUK (Reply 29):
...Sometimes, it seems American ignorance has no limits!

Americans may be poorly educated from your point of view, but European lack of objetivity is pathetic, as shown by a quick glance at some historic facts:
- European foreign aid (mentioned above): European economic growth over the previous two centuries was based on colonialism and exploitation of Africa, South America and South-East Asia, while the American economy grew from within.
- The hipocresy of European pacifism: The two world wars were started by Europeans, no other continent has seen so much bloodshed as Europe (including the recent genocide in Balkans that EU convinently tried to turn a blind eye to), and nobody has killed as many people as Europeans during their colonial expansion. European pacifism is based on the fact that Europe has lost its military significance so now it's covinient for Europe to adopt a pacifist stand. US (and for many years the Soviet Union) are simply filling the void that European decline left behind.

These opinions are from an European who had the opportunity to live (and learn) in Europe, Asia, South and North America.

So don't try to be more Catholic than the Pope, and be a little bit objective. USA is not a saint, but European history and character is equally, if not more, full of dirty facts.
 
ozglobal
Posts: 2511
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 7:33 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:51 pm

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 28):
US has 4% of worlds population and generates roughly 30% of green house and other polluting gases.

Before making such groundless and speculative statements, check the data

http://www.voka.be/files/bestanden/E...1.pdf

Whilst your details on emission standards are technically correct, they do not factor in the 'scale' of relative consumption and pollution:

OECD 2005 figures:

Kg Sulphur Dioxide per capita:

US 48; EU (15 nations): 15

Kg Nitrogen Oxides per capita:

US 65; Eu: 25

Hence, the EU dramatically lower per capita consumption combined with improving emissions controls results in approx 60% lower per capita pollution rate.

http://ocde.p4.siteinternet.com/publ...cations/doifiles/012005061T022.xls
When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
 
Halibut
Posts: 943
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 8:43 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:25 pm

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 30):
Yes, a common misconception in the US. Current OECD figure on both Government, private and combined aid to developing countries as a % of GDP (only comparable basis) puts the US at 21st out of the top 22 nations surveyed. For a fuller discussion of these OECD figures a quick search will povide many articles, eg:

Nice try OzGlobal,
However, you are forgeting a few things ! In total the US gives far more than any other nation . And the US citizens do not need our government to makes us do it either !



http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=3712

U.S. Private International Giving to Developing World Exceeds $62 Billion
Hudson study shows American generosity to poor nations over 3 1/2 times U.S. Government aid
June 29, 2005
by Carol Adelman

Hudson Institute released new private international giving numbers today in a white paper, "America's Total Economic Engagement with the Developing World," by Dr. Carol Adelman, Mr. Jeremiah Norris and Ms. Jeanne Weicher. Updating their research on American generosity, the authors found at least $62.1 billion in U.S. private donations to developing countries in 2003, the last year numbers are available. This philanthropy, from U.S. foundations, corporations, non-profits and volunteerism, universities and colleges, religious organizations and individuals is over three and one-half times U.S. Official Development Assistance (ODA) of $16.3 billion.

While the United States gives the greatest absolute amount of ODA to developing countries, it is routinely criticized for being "stingy" because U.S. Government aid ranks last among donor nations as a percent of Gross National Income (GNI). U.S. official aid is .15 percent of GNI compared to Norway, the highest ranked donor, at .92 percent.

What such criticism ignores, however, is that the measure, developed by the Paris-based Organization for Economic Development and Cooperation (OECD), fails to take into account the primary way in which Americans help others abroad: through the private sector. "ODA is an outdated and inaccurate way of measuring a country's generosity," says Dr. Adelman, Director of the Center for Science in Public Policy, at the Hudson Institute. "Americans prefer to give people to people assistance versus Europeans who give primarily government to government aid."

Nor does the OECD fully measure count U.S. military contributions to peacekeeping and security, U.S. private industry investments that generate the bulk of research and development for better food and medicines, or preferential trade agreements that support imports from developing countries. The measure also excludes the $1.5 billion in foreign aid that the U.S. provides to Israel, Central and Eastern Europe, and Russia since these countries exceed the OECD poverty criterion.

Most importantly, the number does not include $51 billion of U.S. private capital flows to developing countries, consisting of foreign direct investment and net capital markets. This private investment creates jobs and economic growth, the surest way to reducing poverty


Halibut
6 million Jews were slaughtered-Do you see Jews flying planes into buildings in Germany to kill 1000s of innocent, NO !
 
Halibut
Posts: 943
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 8:43 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:29 pm

http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=730652005

US donations to Africa outstrip Europe by 15 to 1


Frasier Nelson

PRIVATE American citizens donated almost 15 times more to the developing world than their European counterparts, research reveals this weekend ahead of the G8 summit. Private US donors also handed over far more aid than the federal government in Washington, revealing that America is much more generous to Africa and poor countries than is claimed by the Make Poverty History and Live 8 campaigns.

Church collections, philanthropists and company-giving amounted to $22bn a year, according to a study by the Hudson Institute think-tank, easily more than the $16.3bn in overseas development sent by the US government. American churches, synagogues and mosques alone gave $7.5bn in 2003 - a figure which exceeds the government totals for France ($7.2bn) and Britain ($6.3bn) - according to numbers from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development which deal a blow to those who claim moral superiority over the US on aid.

Carole Adelman, the author of the Hudson Institute report, has discovered that a further $6.2bn a year is donated by independent US organisations, $2.7bn by US companies and $2.3bn by US universities and colleges, mainly through scholarships, to reach an overall private US donations total of $22bn
.

Adelman said this transforms the picture on aid to the developing world, showing how America's stronger economic growth and lower taxation is giving indirect aid to the Third World which dwarfs the government's donations. The benchmark for state aid is the United Nations goal of devoting 0.7% of Gross National Income (GNI) in government aid to developing countries. Ireland has pledged to do so by 2007; Belgium and Finland by 2010; France by 2012 and the UK by 2013.

Halibut
6 million Jews were slaughtered-Do you see Jews flying planes into buildings in Germany to kill 1000s of innocent, NO !
 
AlanUK
Posts: 511
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:56 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:59 pm

What I think I don't understand here is... Why is it that some Americans believe that you can pollute all you like as long as you give money to help the Third World?
 
User avatar
Buyantukhaa
Posts: 2288
Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 5:33 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:40 pm

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 3):
It won't be the end of LCCs though, as their prices would go up by the same amount as all the others.
It WOULD however be the end of European airlines on routes to other continents as airlines from those continents wouldn't be subject to the tax.

Read again. It says "flights within the EU" and does not specify carrier. The EP an EC would never want to give non-EU carriers a disadvantage.

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 3):
'll all go to line the pockets of politicians Stu. Not only is the entire "global warming" farce just that, a farce, but we're talking politics here.

That's why earmarking exists. "80% of the tax revenue shall be spent on..." This greatly improves the acceptability of a tax or charge. See the French Africa tax. While I think earmarking is a good political instrument, it should alkso make economic sense. Meaning that if you pay for the environmental damage you cause, this revenue should also be used at least partially to repair that damage, or to cross-finance other transport modes that are less polluting but not profitable.

Main thing is that there should be at least a level playing field between the transport modes. It is easy (or at least easier) to be profitable if you're the only mode not paying fuel taxes or VAT (with the exception of domestic flights). That is the main reason for this initiative if you ask me.

Quoting Pbottenb (Reply 4):
Can the EU Parliment do this unilaterally, or will the individual parliments/govts need to agree.

EU Parliament cannot do anything. The European Commission will have to draft a Regulation (which will come into effect in all members immediately) or a Directive (that will have to be imposed into national legislation). In this case a Regulation will be more likely to make sure there are no market imbalances due to various "legislative speeds" in the different Member States. Political consultation rounds are of course common in the drafting process.

Quoting Amberair732 (Reply 9):
If there's any European legal experts out there, I have one question - What's to stop all large European carriers registering their fleet in a non EU country ( Switzerland ? ) and avoiding a large chunk of these charges ?



Quoting Amberair732 (Reply 9):
Funny thing is that this new tax proposal will in fact INCREASE emissions. The reason is that every other journey will begin with a trip to Switzerland - a non-EU member country right in the middle of the EU.

In the case of transport (and other areas too), Switzerland, Iceland and Norway have signed a treaty with the EU (the EEA treaty) obliging them to transpose/implement all relevant EU legislation as if they were EU Member States. In those cases you'll see the line "text with EEA relevance" at the beginning of the document. So Switzerland is a non-issue.

The EEA Agreement is concerned principally with the four fundamental pillars of the Internal Market, “the four freedoms", i.e. freedom of movement of goods (excluding agriculture and fisheries, which are included in the Agreement only to a very limited extent), persons, services and capital. Horizontal provisions relevant to these four freedoms in the areas of social policy, consumer protection, environment, company law and statistics complete the extended internal market. It is in these areas that the EEA- EFTA States take over Community legislation.

As one of the primary obligations under the Agreement is to ensure equal conditions of competition, the substantive competition rules of the Agreement correspond to the Community acquis in this area. This covers the rules concerning cartels, abuse of dominant positions, merger control, state monopolies and state aid. The Agreement also includes areas which have an impact on the competitive position of enterprises, such as consumer protection, environment and certain elements of company law.


http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/eea/index.htm
I scratch my head, therefore I am.
 
katekebo
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 12:02 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:04 am

Quoting AlanUK (Reply 36):
What I think I don't understand here is... Why is it that some Americans believe that you can pollute all you like as long as you give money to help the Third World?

Fair use excerpt from Washington Post, June 25, 2005 article, titled "Greenhouse Hypocrisy":

Quote:
Europe is the citadel of hypocrisy. Considering Europeans' contempt for the United States and George Bush for not embracing the Kyoto Protocol, you'd expect that they would have made major reductions in greenhouse gas emissions -- the purpose of Kyoto. Well, not exactly. From 1990 (Kyoto's base year for measuring changes) to 2002, global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the main greenhouse gas, increased 16.4 percent, reports the International Energy Agency. The U.S. increase was 16.7 percent, and most of Europe hasn't done much better.


Here are some IEA estimates of the increases: France, 6.9 percent; Italy, 8.3 percent; Greece, 28.2 percent; Ireland, 40.3 percent; the Netherlands, 13.2 percent; Portugal, 59 percent; Spain, 46.9 percent. It's true that Germany (down 13.3 percent) and Britain (a 5.5 percent decline) have made big reductions. But their cuts had nothing to do with Kyoto. After reunification in 1990, Germany closed many inefficient coal-fired plants in eastern Germany; that was a huge one-time saving. In Britain, the government had earlier decided to shift electric utilities from coal (high CO2 emissions) to plentiful natural gas (lower CO2 emissions).

On their present courses, many European countries will miss their Kyoto targets for 2008-2012. To reduce emissions significantly, Europeans would have to suppress driving and electricity use; that would depress economic growth and fan popular discontent. It won't happen. Political leaders everywhere deplore global warming -- and then do little.

There is a fundamental difference in the approach how EU and US are addressing the pollution. While EU wants to fight pollution "by decree", the US approach is to do it via economic incentives that will make energy efficiency and reduced emissions an attractive business proposition.

The effectiveness of tight controlls implemented "by decree" has always been very suspicious. EU has it's own history of setting tight limits, and than unilateraly violating them. Just look at the Euro common currency stability pact which calls for severe sanctions against countries which exceed 3% budget deficit. Germany has missed that target for two years in a row and the European Central Bank did nothing.

The same is happening with the Kyoto protocol - it's a nice propaganda slogan, but several EU countries have already warned that they will have hard time meeting their commitments.

Nobody denies that US has a long journey ahead to increase energy efficiency and reduce emissions. The difference is that US is trying to do it in a way that is economically viable and sustainable on the long run. EU is exploiting the subject for political and propaganda purpose.
 
ozglobal
Posts: 2511
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 7:33 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:27 am

Quoting Halibut (Reply 34):
Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 30):
Yes, a common misconception in the US. Current OECD figure on both Government, private and combined aid to developing countries as a % of GDP (only comparable basis) puts the US at 21st out of the top 22 nations surveyed. For a fuller discussion of these OECD figures a quick search will povide many articles, eg:

Nice try OzGlobal,
However, you are forgeting a few things ! In total the US gives far more than any other nation . And the US citizens do not need our government to makes us do it either !

Not at all. You must not have read the sources I supplied which treat this other argument of the US relying on private generosity. It is treated ,with sources cited, in the first link. http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2676

In case you missed it:

"“Private giving is tremendous”

Williams continued with another standard defense of American generosity: “And so it doesn’t properly represent the degree of largess and philanthropy that takes place. Either if you consider just government, or if you consider, in addition, an even larger sector, the private sector. Private giving is tremendous in this country.”

....

While exact figures are impossible to come by, the highest estimates from recent years put individual U.S. donations to overseas aid at 0.16 percent of national income, according to the Center for Global Development’s Steven Radelet. (More conservative estimates suggest that this number may actually be as low as 0.03 percent; an OECD estimate put the number at 0.06 percent.) Add the optimistic 0.16 percent estimate to the 0.16 percent of national income in government donations and you reach a combined 0.32 percent of national income—which is still less than the governmental aid alone of roughly half of the world’s wealthiest nations."
When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
 
User avatar
Buyantukhaa
Posts: 2288
Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 5:33 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:28 am

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 38):
Fair use excerpt from Washington Post, June 25, 2005 article, titled "Greenhouse Hypocrisy":

Interesting figures, but I'd like to know the CO2 emission per capita. A 60% isn't much if you start at an extremely low level, for example.

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 38):
Nobody denies that US has a long journey ahead to increase energy efficiency and reduce emissions. The difference is that US is trying to do it in a way that is economically viable and sustainable on the long run.

Then how does the US deal with it, if not through taxes?

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 38):
EU is exploiting the subject for political and propaganda purpose.

This I would disagree with... I think their concern is genuine.

Edited for typo.

[Edited 2006-07-06 17:43:01]
I scratch my head, therefore I am.
 
CX747
Posts: 5566
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:30 am

Ahh, the lovely EU is at it again. Is there anything this brain child of stupidity can't come up with? How about a "wasting my time tax" that I can collect after listening to politicians tell me how they are going to better my world and then do nothing.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
katekebo
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 12:02 am

RE: Air Fares In Europe To "Double" - Article

Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:24 am

Quoting BuyantUkhaa (Reply 40):
Then how does the US deal with it, if not through taxes?

Dealing with the issue via taxes is going backwards. There are three avenues which are being used to deal with the problem:

- Emissions are a "comodity" than can be purchased, sold and traded/barterred. Let's look at a simple example of the factory I am working at now. We have a annual limit for CO emissions ("x" tons/year). Although our production output is expected to grow over the next years, we are not allowed to increase our CO emissions. Now, instead of trying to meet some arbitrary limit of CO ppm per emission point or process, we have several options. We can reduce emissions in one process area (the one which is easiest / cheapest) and use that as "credit" to increase emissions in another process. Or we can "buy" additional "credits" from a company next door and help them to reduce their emissions, which may be cheaper and easier to control than trying to do it our plant. The net effect is that your production and economic output can grow, while addressing emissions in the areas that are easiest / cheapest to deal with. US is proposing to extend this scheme beyond its national borders allowing everybody to deal with the problem in the most cost effective way, while supporting their growth needs.

- Providing tax incentives for energy efficiency (instead of additional taxations). A simple example is hybrid cars. They are inherently more expensive than conventional cars, but at least part of the purchase price can be offset via income tax credit.

- High fuel prices and energy cost - current oil price of $70/barrel is a "blessing" for the environment. It is forcing everybody to seak more energy efficient solutions via economic incentives. I sincerely hope, for the sake of my children, that oil will reach $100/barrel soon.

Quoting BuyantUkhaa (Reply 40):
This I would disagree with... I think their concern is genuine.

Of course the concern is genuine, however the effectiveness of the proposed solutions via political decrees and propaganda statements is highly questionable. The reality is that money moves the world, and only strong economic incentives will result in effective measures.

Portraying US as a careless evil energy hungry monster is a misconception that EU likes to exploit, but that is far from truth. To understand US energy consuption it has to be put in the context of the country geography, climate, history and overall economic reality. Or do you think it is just a coincidence that Boeing widebody airplanes our outselling Airbus over the last 18 months thanks to, guess what, their fuel efficiency? If US was such a careless place that does not care about environment, do you think Boeing would make fuel economy their top priority and selling point?

Europeans pride themselves for buying fuel efficient cars. The reality is that they don't do it for the sake of environment, but because this is what their economic reality forces them to do. Show me a European family that can afford to buy and fuel a Range Rover, that will voluntarily switch from the gas-guzzling 4x4 to a sub-compact Smart ForFour.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 727LOVER, aadc10137, Alexa [Bot], alfa164, ANZ346, aviatorcraig, azstar, Baidu [Spider], flyeal, Google [Bot], jaybird, jbs2886, juanchito, legacyins, MKIAZ, Pengaea, reality, Stitch, TWA772LR, Vasu and 208 guests