Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
ScottB
Posts: 6921
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:20 pm

parapente wrote:
This is also true with some US airlines who use 20+ years old aircaft. Clearly using old rust buckets outweighs the fuel Penalty.So simply tax them to sharpen their thought process'!
Side benefit -build more new aircaft!


Except that building new aircraft doesn't exactly come with zero impact on the environment -- from carbon dioxide emissions created by aluminum production to emissions from planes which carry fuselage parts around the world.

dtw2hyd wrote:
Still, we want to classify Tesla Model 3 as a luxury car.


A $50,000 vehicle is a luxury car. Perhaps if they ever bring the $30,000 version to market, we can start to talk about it not being a luxury car.

dtw2hyd wrote:
Not easy for developing countries with 1.2 Billion to feed to join the eco-friendly bandwagon, still they are doing lot more.


Actually, it's really easy for developing countries to "join the eco-friendly bandwagon" by not implementing eco-unfriendly practices to start with. Why don't they? It's cheaper to pollute!

Aesma wrote:
A carbon tax solves two problems simultaneously.


A carbon tax is ultimately unworkable unless it is truly global or very nearly so. Otherwise carbon-intensive industries simply migrate to locations without carbon taxes.

Dieuwer wrote:
If you are concerned with Climate Change re: taxes, then you really should accept that pig farmers in Holland will need to be taxed per pig as well, as pig farming is one of the most warming-gas producing industries on earth.


Perhaps the Dutch also ought to consider outlawing the air shipment of tulips and other agricultural products given the outrageous amount of emissions produced.
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 1186
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:44 pm

Aesma wrote:
Yes bunker fuel must also be taxed. Also ships' emissions should be lowered, a single container ship can pollute as much as 1 million cars.


Sulfur dioxide emissions are a distinct topic from carbon emissions. Maritime sulfur dioxide emissions are a matter that has long been kicked down the road as a lower priority than other sources, and one that is more difficult to address because of the international nature of the issue. It is now in the process of being addressed.

Don't conflate these topics.

While the sulfur dioxide emissions of the maritime industry are currently very high compared to energy uses that occur primarily in closer proximity to where most of us live and work, their carbon emissions are the lowest of any transportation sector, a little bit better than rail, and radically better than road freight transport.

However, this is comparing a freight-dominated industry to a passenger-dominated industry. To stay on topic, there's data on passenger transportation energy efficiency here:
https://www.bts.gov/content/energy-inte ... nger-modes

This is quite relevant to this policy discussion, in my opinion. The airline industry has improved so much since the early jet age that we now move over 4 times as many passengers per unit of fuel! (10,185 BTU / (passenger*mile) in 1970 vs. 2,290 BTU / (passenger*mile) in 2016).

Rail, at least in the US, only beats domestic airline travel for energy intensity by a little over 30%. I would bet the numbers are different in Europe due to higher rail utilization, but airline travel is a lot more efficient than I think most people give credit to.

Highway buses are actually the most efficient current US method to move people long distances. Local transit buses, on the other hand, are barely any better than cars on average, presumably because they spend so much time driving around mostly empty outside of the peak hours.

dtw2hyd wrote:
The number of electric buses produced by BYD in China is amazing.


I'm guessing they don't face a $150,000+ premium for an electric drivetrain, like local transit agency in my area is spending on electric buses compared to diesel counterparts. The transit bus market in the US, whether electric or diesel, puzzles me greatly.

That said, urban bus service is an application that should be well suited to electrification, with lots of start-stop cycles and idle time. It's a very different application from commercial air service.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 9719
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:57 pm

Qqote from ScottB
Perhaps the Dutch also ought to consider outlawing the air shipment of tulips and other agricultural products given the outrageous amount of emissions produced
end of Quote

Growing flowers in Kenia or Columbia is more enviromentally friendly than growing flowers in a glass house in the Netherlands. Taxing Kerosene might Change the bottom line and kill the Jobs where they are more needed. Whichevr way you look at it, a Kerosene tax would be destroying a working and well thought System.

Besides, whatever we do in Europe is outnumbered by Population growth in other regions
Was Erlauben Erdogan!!!
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 4111
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Thu Nov 15, 2018 4:24 pm

ScottB wrote:
Perhaps the Dutch also ought to consider outlawing the air shipment of tulips and other agricultural products given the outrageous amount of emissions produced.


Well, Tax on Kerosene would be a starting point doing just that, wouldn't it . . . ?
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
Oykie
Posts: 1962
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Thu Nov 15, 2018 6:21 pm

I would rather support funding for aviation biofuels, to make that compete with regular kerosene, than to just add some tax. We need to make aviation more environmentally friendly, yes, but remember the great improvements from the first jetliners like the 707 to the 787 and A350. I’m impressed by th technology leaps that have occurred. Adding tax will not help the environment. Finding more eco friendly biofuels and electric hybrid engines is the way forward.
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
tomcat
Posts: 517
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2000 4:14 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:23 am

Interestingly and to my greatest surprise, one of the few countries already taxing kerosene (on domestic flights only?) are the USA, to the tune of $0.244 per gallon. It's not a high rate but it's noticeable and it's a serious blow to what I would now call the myth that kerosene is not taxed anywhere. The US domestic market is a significant market and this tax hasn't obviously hampered the expansion of this market.

Even though this thread is 3 months old, I thought it might be worth mentioning it now that the EU debate about taxing aviation fuel is gaining traction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_taxe ... fuel_taxes
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 13041
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:28 am

Are you sure it applies to commercial aviation ?
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4905
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:36 am

Dutchy wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
This is like taxing labor more, be aware of unintended consequences.


What unintended consequences? Fewer flights, thus people choose more contentiously? How much I love aviation, I think it grows too much and it is unsustainable. So some things much change. And pricing tickets more in line with the rest of society makes a real choice possible. Quite ridiculously that it is cheaper to fly from Manchester to the Costa Brava, have a cocktail on the beach and then fly to London, then to take a train from Manchester to London. Things need to be more in balance and one thing is not to treat aviation like it is a separate thing, but to integrate it and treat it like any other means of transport.

Personal opinion of course and an opinion which seems to grow in popularity.

So? You're in favor of re-regulation and closed skies then?
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3584
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:46 am

Dutchy wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
If you are concerned with Climate Change re: taxes, then you really should accept that pig farmers in Holland will need to be taxed per pig as well, as pig farming is one of the most warming-gas producing industries on earth.

Methane emissions from pig manure represent nearly half of total global farm animal manure emissions.


https://www.humanesociety.org/sites/def ... change.pdf

According to the IPCC, aviation is responsible for around 3.5 percent of anthropogenic climate change. Since pig farming contributes 50% of agricultural emissions (9% of total emissions, see pie chart below), pig farming is more damaging than flying.

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/source ... -emissions


I accept.....

Flying harms because it brings emissions high into the atmosphere where it does more harm. For instance, one trip from AMS to JFK, does as much harm as 3 years of eating meat. And flying does more harm than "just" climate change, it does harm to peoples health. I am not against flying, but too much flying and making it too easy (read: cheap), does more harm than good.

I am in favor of fair pricing. All external cost incorporated in the ticket price.


Really so diesel fuel emissions on the ground do less damage than jet fuel emissions. Try following bus or truck around.
 
Amsterdam
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 12:52 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 2:12 am

Nothing beats not getting children.
If you are serious about climate change etc begin there. Also stop eating meat then.
These two things are in a total different order of polution.

http://www.vhemt.org
Last edited by Amsterdam on Sun Mar 03, 2019 2:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
smflyer
Posts: 249
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 4:44 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 2:26 am

What is tax on kerosine supposed to benefit? I understand gas/petrol tax is used for road repairs/maintenance, but what will kerosene tax be used for? repairing the air? Airports already collect fees for their services and there is already a tax in your ticket to cover other government functions in the airline sector such as security, ATC, etc. So I don't understand what the point of a kerosene tax is for? If the tax is for greenhouse emissions, then how will this tax curb production of such gases? Airline travel is a major component of many of the world's developed countries and taxing it would more than likely be regressive as it could stifle the economy when people and businesses can't efficiently move people/cargo around.
 
Amsterdam
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 12:52 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 2:43 am

smflyer wrote:
What is tax on kerosine supposed to benefit? I understand gas/petrol tax is used for road repairs/maintenance, but what will kerosene tax be used for? repairing the air? Airports already collect fees for their services and there is already a tax in your ticket to cover other government functions in the airline sector such as security, ATC, etc. So I don't understand what the point of a kerosene tax is for? If the tax is for greenhouse emissions, then how will this tax curb production of such gases? Airline travel is a major component of many of the world's developed countries and taxing it would more than likely be regressive as it could stifle the economy when people and businesses can't efficiently move people/cargo around.


It is to make flying more elitist.
Most people proposing these kind of stuff are people that can pay an extra tax and keep flying. They know that the ryanair passengers will fly less.
 
robsaw
Posts: 443
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 7:14 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:22 am

wildwobby wrote:

The chart I posted simply refutes the fact that “China and India are doing more than the west”. The fact is, their emissions continue to grow.. and faster than anywhere else. Meanwhile, in the US, they are falling faster than anywhere else. Your argument is nonsensical!


A graph that only provides comparisons in absolute numbers against vastly different populations and baseline CO2 generation levels without also presenting %'s or per capita smacks of being intentionally misleading; particularly when it is for a single year.

To quote the Union of Concerned Scientists (commenting on a host of data on carbon emissions):
"The picture that emerges from these figures is one where—in general—developed countries and major emerging economy nations lead in total carbon dioxide emissions. Developed nations typically have high carbon dioxide emissions per capita, while some developing countries lead in the growth rate of carbon dioxide emissions. Obviously, these uneven contributions to the climate problem are at the core of the challenges the world community faces in finding effective and equitable solutions."

Sure, the US may have had a declining rate in 2017, which in many respects can be attributed to decreasing use of coal for energy generation but the current US president is advocating policies that would increase coal production (and presumably use). So, the trend could be reversed, and was a 3 yr trend at best, going back 4 and 5 years, emissions were increasing and they've bounded up-and-down based upon multiple factors - weather being a big one. Yes, India is growing rapidly but is also lvery ow on the list per capita carbon emissions. Even China is less than 1/2 of US per capita. So moral indignation against China and India need to be moderated by some introspection from modern-developed countries like Canada, US and Australia that are all up there in per capita carbon emissions.

And, finally, when it comes to taxes - no one likes them. But all this yowling about international implications is somewhat specious given that there are many other industries with similar implications that have simply failed to organize the same political clout and lobbying skill like ICAO has been able to exploit as a legacy of the international regulatory regimes, which had nothing to do with climate change/carbon emissions originally. Taxes are as much about regulating behaviour as they are about regulating gov't finance.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 8:28 am

Dutchy wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
This is like taxing labor more, be aware of unintended consequences.


What unintended consequences? Fewer flights, thus people choose more contentiously? How much I love aviation, I think it grows too much and it is unsustainable. So some things much change. And pricing tickets more in line with the rest of society makes a real choice possible. Quite ridiculously that it is cheaper to fly from Manchester to the Costa Brava, have a cocktail on the beach and then fly to London, then to take a train from Manchester to London. Things need to be more in balance and one thing is not to treat aviation like it is a separate thing, but to integrate it and treat it like any other means of transport.

Personal opinion of course and an opinion which seems to grow in popularity.

The market is pricing airline tickets( which are heavily taxed already) Not a know it all central planner. Thus tickets are not too cheap because there is no massive negative externalities associated with business or leisure travel. I don’t have the source offhand but the travel industry creates something like 3% of the world’s carbon emission but 10% of the world’s gdp. That is pretty efficient.

I do like the suggestion above. If taxes are raised on fuel, then depreciation schedules for aircraft have to be shortened.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9291
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 8:32 am

ScottB wrote:
A carbon tax is ultimately unworkable unless it is truly global or very nearly so. Otherwise carbon-intensive industries simply migrate to locations without carbon taxes.


VAT based Global Carbon Tax.

Just add the "cost of carbon" to any product and have the final user pay for it. Voila.
Americans ( and to a lesser degree Europeans ) will be surprised how much Carbon they
will have to pay for. pet food from China: A dime for the content, $3 for carbon tax.
Murphy is an optimist
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 8:35 am

Amsterdam wrote:
smflyer wrote:
What is tax on kerosine supposed to benefit? I understand gas/petrol tax is used for road repairs/maintenance, but what will kerosene tax be used for? repairing the air? Airports already collect fees for their services and there is already a tax in your ticket to cover other government functions in the airline sector such as security, ATC, etc. So I don't understand what the point of a kerosene tax is for? If the tax is for greenhouse emissions, then how will this tax curb production of such gases? Airline travel is a major component of many of the world's developed countries and taxing it would more than likely be regressive as it could stifle the economy when people and businesses can't efficiently move people/cargo around.


It is to make flying more elitist.
Most people proposing these kind of stuff are people that can pay an extra tax and keep flying. They know that the ryanair passengers will fly less.

People who make suggestions that human travel should be limited to “save” the planet are usually those who jet off to Davos
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 8:38 am

WIederling wrote:
ScottB wrote:
A carbon tax is ultimately unworkable unless it is truly global or very nearly so. Otherwise carbon-intensive industries simply migrate to locations without carbon taxes.


VAT based Global Carbon Tax.

Just add the "cost of carbon" to any product and have the final user pay for it. Voila.
Americans ( and to a lesser degree Europeans ) will be surprised how much Carbon they
will have to pay for. pet food from China: A dime for the content, $3 for carbon tax.

And who imposes this global carbon tax? Someone accountable to the voters? Of course not. This is why the EU and UN are so hated.
 
User avatar
LTU330
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:40 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 8:57 am

wildwobby wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
...
China is becoming a leading nation in sustainability. India much less so. It is unsustainable, so something needs to be done.


Both countries are doing lot more than west with less publicity. The number of electric buses produced by BYD in China is amazing. That will change public transportation throughout the world. Still, we want to classify Tesla Model 3 as a luxury car. India has someone of the world's largest solar farms, plastic carry bags are widely banned and Diesel based public transportation is banned in major cities. Not easy for developing countries with 1.2 Billion to feed to join the eco-friendly bandwagon, still they are doing lot more.


Uhhhhhh, what? Facts really do matter.

Image

This thread is insane and really opened my eyes to the fact that “climate change” is exploited for political reasons so easily and without question. Maybe that was obvious, but I really question the good intentions now.


That graph doesn't make sense. On the reduction side it lists the United Kingdom (which is part of the EU). Then on the other side it shows the EU, which isn't a Country.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 9:46 am

strfyr51 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
This is like taxing labor more, be aware of unintended consequences.


What unintended consequences? Fewer flights, thus people choose more contentiously? How much I love aviation, I think it grows too much and it is unsustainable. So some things much change. And pricing tickets more in line with the rest of society makes a real choice possible. Quite ridiculously that it is cheaper to fly from Manchester to the Costa Brava, have a cocktail on the beach and then fly to London, then to take a train from Manchester to London. Things need to be more in balance and one thing is not to treat aviation like it is a separate thing, but to integrate it and treat it like any other means of transport.

Personal opinion of course and an opinion which seems to grow in popularity.

So? You're in favor of re-regulation and closed skies then?


Did I say that? I said I am in favor or real choices and thus that the cost of aviation includes external cost which it doesn't at the moment. If it would be, then a ticket would cost probably 4 times as much. And before you say something irrational, you are paying these cost anyway, just in taxes and health services.

Or let me put it in a way you can understand, so you are in favor of doing anything you like without any regards of the consequences for yourself, for others and for society at large. 8-)
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 9:56 am

Bobloblaw wrote:
WIederling wrote:
ScottB wrote:
A carbon tax is ultimately unworkable unless it is truly global or very nearly so. Otherwise carbon-intensive industries simply migrate to locations without carbon taxes.


VAT based Global Carbon Tax.

Just add the "cost of carbon" to any product and have the final user pay for it. Voila.
Americans ( and to a lesser degree Europeans ) will be surprised how much Carbon they
will have to pay for. pet food from China: A dime for the content, $3 for carbon tax.

And who imposes this global carbon tax? Someone accountable to the voters? Of course not. This is why the EU and UN are so hated.


Ah, the next level of defense, it doesn't work on a practical level, so you are convinced that it works on a philosophical level, good. So yes, a carbon tax will work. If the EU would do this, it can simply impose tariffs for the amount of carbon tax, and thus create a level playing field. It isn't hard and it does work, simple and efficient. The EU is the largest trading block in the world, so it does have an impact.

BTW the UN can't impose anything, so you are flat wrong about that, it can only impose something if countries agree on them. And the EU is perfectly democratically accountable, to know how, just dive into how the EU actually works, instead of your preconceived ideas.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 10:09 am

Bobloblaw wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
This is like taxing labor more, be aware of unintended consequences.


What unintended consequences? Fewer flights, thus people choose more contentiously? How much I love aviation, I think it grows too much and it is unsustainable. So some things much change. And pricing tickets more in line with the rest of society makes a real choice possible. Quite ridiculously that it is cheaper to fly from Manchester to the Costa Brava, have a cocktail on the beach and then fly to London, then to take a train from Manchester to London. Things need to be more in balance and one thing is not to treat aviation like it is a separate thing, but to integrate it and treat it like any other means of transport.

Personal opinion of course and an opinion which seems to grow in popularity.

The market is pricing airline tickets( which are heavily taxed already) Not a know it all central planner. Thus tickets are not too cheap because there is no massive negative externalities associated with business or leisure travel. I don’t have the source offhand but the travel industry creates something like 3% of the world’s carbon emission but 10% of the world’s gdp. That is pretty efficient.

I do like the suggestion above. If taxes are raised on fuel, then depreciation schedules for aircraft have to be shortened.


International tickets aren't taxed at all, no VAT, no excise duty on kerosene. External cost of airline travel are: (noise) pollution around airports, associated with health risks and thus the cost of healthcare (paid by society at large, not the cost of travel), cost of climate change (massive if we don't do anything and air travel does add to that).

For climate change, the altitude at which it pollutes does matter as well, higher in the sky and it does more harm.

Since we agreed with each other, except for Syria, but they get a pass because their country is in ruins, that we will go for at least 95% reduction in 2050, so if we want to continue to travel by air, we need to change how, simple.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 10:14 am

smflyer wrote:
What is tax on kerosine supposed to benefit? I understand gas/petrol tax is used for road repairs/maintenance, but what will kerosene tax be used for? repairing the air? Airports already collect fees for their services and there is already a tax in your ticket to cover other government functions in the airline sector such as security, ATC, etc. So I don't understand what the point of a kerosene tax is for? If the tax is for greenhouse emissions, then how will this tax curb production of such gases? Airline travel is a major component of many of the world's developed countries and taxing it would more than likely be regressive as it could stifle the economy when people and businesses can't efficiently move people/cargo around.


Covering the external cost of burning fossil fuel emissions.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 10:19 am

Amsterdam wrote:
It is to make flying more elitist.
Most people proposing these kind of stuff are people that can pay an extra tax and keep flying. They know that the ryanair passengers will fly less.


No, give people a fair choice in air travel. The total level of taxation isn't going to increase. The external cost of burning fossil fuels is paid in that way at the moment. So it is a shift in taxation: from general taxation to tax the source of the cost. As with many things, the "elite" will pay less in the current system, because they use airplanes more than less fortunate (literally and figurately speaking) levels of society.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 10:31 am

rbavfan wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
If you are concerned with Climate Change re: taxes, then you really should accept that pig farmers in Holland will need to be taxed per pig as well, as pig farming is one of the most warming-gas producing industries on earth.



https://www.humanesociety.org/sites/def ... change.pdf

According to the IPCC, aviation is responsible for around 3.5 percent of anthropogenic climate change. Since pig farming contributes 50% of agricultural emissions (9% of total emissions, see pie chart below), pig farming is more damaging than flying.

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/source ... -emissions


I accept.....

Flying harms because it brings emissions high into the atmosphere where it does more harm. For instance, one trip from AMS to JFK, does as much harm as 3 years of eating meat. And flying does more harm than "just" climate change, it does harm to peoples health. I am not against flying, but too much flying and making it too easy (read: cheap), does more harm than good.

I am in favor of fair pricing. All external cost incorporated in the ticket price.


Really so diesel fuel emissions on the ground do less damage than jet fuel emissions. Try following bus or truck around.


Pfff, different level of pollutions and different timescales. Anyhow, good point, let's clean up busses and trucks as well. There was a city in China - don't remember which one - which made a degree and within a few weeks, all the diesel powers busses were changed for electric ones. As of 2017, there were more than 385,000 buses on the Chinese roads, which is 17% of China's total bus fleet. So it can be done, there needs to be the political will to do it. For air travel, it is much more difficult of course.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
tomcat
Posts: 517
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2000 4:14 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 11:50 am

Aesma wrote:
tomcat wrote:
Interestingly and to my greatest surprise, one of the few countries already taxing kerosene (on domestic flights only?) are the USA, to the tune of $0.244 per gallon. It's not a high rate but it's noticeable and it's a serious blow to what I would now call the myth that kerosene is not taxed anywhere. The US domestic market is a significant market and this tax hasn't obviously hampered the expansion of this market.

Even though this thread is 3 months old, I thought it might be worth mentioning it now that the EU debate about taxing aviation fuel is gaining traction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_taxe ... fuel_taxes


Are you sure it applies to commercial aviation ?


I've just double-checked, yes, it definitely applies to the US commercial aviation and as I was suspecting, only on the domestic flights. I just don't know how the Wiki article ended up with a tax of $0.244 per gallon. The figures I've found on airlines.org show $0.044 per gallon split in $0.043 for the AIRPORT & AIRWAY TRUST FUND (FAA) and $0.001 for the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA).

Besides these fuel taxes, there are numerous other taxes already applicable on air travel in the USA as shown by airlines.org:
http://airlines.org/dataset/government- ... portation/
 
kalvado
Posts: 2736
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:20 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Flying harms because it brings emissions high into the atmosphere where it does more harm.

Oh, I never knew KLM now flies Concorde!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:24 pm

kalvado wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Flying harms because it brings emissions high into the atmosphere where it does more harm.

Oh, I never knew KLM now flies Concorde!


Oh, I never knew all other airliners drive to their destination.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
kalvado
Posts: 2736
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:33 pm

Dutchy wrote:
kalvado wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Flying harms because it brings emissions high into the atmosphere where it does more harm.

Oh, I never knew KLM now flies Concorde!


Oh, I never knew all other airliners drive to their destination.

I assume you heard such word as "troposphere", "stratosphere", "Ferrel and Hadley cells"?
I suggest that you - while air travel is still affordable - travel to a Dutch territory called Aruba. It is really interesting to experience a desert in the middle of the ocean. It may make you wonder how that is possible, and you may end up learning a thing or two about atmospheric physics... And such understanding may make discussions more informative...
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:42 pm

kalvado wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
kalvado wrote:
Oh, I never knew KLM now flies Concorde!


Oh, I never knew all other airliners drive to their destination.

I assume you heard such word as "troposphere", "stratosphere", "Ferrel and Hadley cells"?
I suggest that you - while air travel is still affordable - travel to a Dutch territory called Aruba. It is really interesting to experience a desert in the middle of the ocean. It may make you wonder how that is possible, and you may end up learning a thing or two about atmospheric physics... And such understanding may make discussions more informative...


Let me understand this correctly: your opinion is that it doesn't matter if you pollute at 0ft or at 35.000ft.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
kalvado
Posts: 2736
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:50 pm

Dutchy wrote:
kalvado wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

Oh, I never knew all other airliners drive to their destination.

I assume you heard such word as "troposphere", "stratosphere", "Ferrel and Hadley cells"?
I suggest that you - while air travel is still affordable - travel to a Dutch territory called Aruba. It is really interesting to experience a desert in the middle of the ocean. It may make you wonder how that is possible, and you may end up learning a thing or two about atmospheric physics... And such understanding may make discussions more informative...


Let me understand this correctly: your opinion is that it doesn't matter if you pollute at 0ft or at 35.000ft.

It is much more nuanced, but let me keep it within the reach:
troposphere mixing times are of the order of weeks. That includes air at ground level and up to the top of circulation cells - where most of the flying occurs. Polar areas in winter may be more interesting, but your JFK-AMS flight doesn't go there.
So, if you fart on your JFK-AMS flight, someone in NRT or LAX will be able to smell that within about 2 weeks. A bit longer for SYD or CPT, as cell interaction is slower.
If you are talking about carbon dioxide emission, with atmospheric lifetime on the scale of years, FL350 and ground level are the same.
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4242
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:56 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Let me understand this correctly: your opinion is that it doesn't matter if you pollute at 0ft or at 35.000ft.


There's no scientific proof for that. On the other hand, there's no scientific proof of the opposite either.

My personal experience is that in the long term it doesn't matter. Pollution on high altitude spreads faster around the globe. Pollution at ground level takes more time to be picked up by the wind, but eventually spreads around the globe just the same. High and low air constantly mix with each other, so pollution at ground level will reach the higher atmosphere as well just like pollution on high altitude will eventually come to ground level.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:16 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Let me understand this correctly: your opinion is that it doesn't matter if you pollute at 0ft or at 35.000ft.


There's no scientific proof for that. On the other hand, there's no scientific proof of the opposite either.


That is not true. There is scientific research done on this and it is more harmful to put certain gasses high into the atmosphere than on ground level.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environme ... on_climate
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4242
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:27 pm

Dutchy wrote:
PatrickZ80 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Let me understand this correctly: your opinion is that it doesn't matter if you pollute at 0ft or at 35.000ft.


There's no scientific proof for that. On the other hand, there's no scientific proof of the opposite either.


That is not true. There is scientific research done on this and it is more harmful to put certain gasses high into the atmosphere than on ground level.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environme ... on_climate


A very doubtful scientific research.

It's true that on short term it is more harmful to put gasses high into the atmosphere than on ground level. For this research they only investigated short term, right after pollution. Should you measure again after several months, you'd get whole other results that are far closer together. But that was never done.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:35 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
A very doubtful scientific research.


That is quite a statement considering whom actually did this research.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
TheDBCooper
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 10:08 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:50 pm

If this tax is to remove the unfair advantage of no tax on fuel for Aviation and Shipping, how about we remove the tax on other fuels to remove said advantage?
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 3:24 pm

TheDBCooper wrote:
If this tax is to remove the unfair advantage of no tax on fuel for Aviation and Shipping, how about we remove the tax on other fuels to remove said advantage?

Lol. He’s a European and big fan of the buearcratic EU. He doesn’t think along those lines. His view is you raise taxes to make all transportation forms equal. And yes the EU buearucrats are undemocratic and unaccountable. Go Brexit, Go Italexit.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 3:26 pm

How much would said tax improve the climate? No one ever asks for the benefits of said tax.
 
747Whale
Posts: 725
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:05 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Rough google translation:

THE HAGUE - The House of Representatives on Tuesday adopted a motion calling on the government to make an international effort to introduce a tax on kerosene. The motion was submitted by D66 and SGP.

The Netherlands can not introduce such a tax itself, because the 1944 Chicago Convention stipulates that kerosene is exempt from tax. This treaty can only be changed by holding a special session of UN air transport organization ICAO and by allowing the participating countries to vote.

To organize such a session, the Netherlands must gather the support of at least one-fifth (39) of the 192 countries that are members of the UN. Now that the motion of D66 and SGP has been adopted, the cabinet must make an effort to do this.

D66 Member of Parliament Jan Paternotte previously explained to NRC why the kerosene tax should come according to him. "This aviation treaty is totally outdated by climate change. Let the Netherlands take the initiative as a green leader, as we do now with a European flight tax. "

If there is a charge on kerosene, flying becomes more expensive and therefore less attractive.



Article in Dutch

Interesting development. Objectively it is quite strange that aviation has a status apparate, no tax on kerosene, no VAT on tickets, etc.


Precisely, because climate change is fixed by earning revenue on fuel.

Also, the appropriate response to leaving the barn door open, is to de-horn all the cows.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:47 pm

747Whale wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Rough google translation:

THE HAGUE - The House of Representatives on Tuesday adopted a motion calling on the government to make an international effort to introduce a tax on kerosene. The motion was submitted by D66 and SGP.

The Netherlands can not introduce such a tax itself, because the 1944 Chicago Convention stipulates that kerosene is exempt from tax. This treaty can only be changed by holding a special session of UN air transport organization ICAO and by allowing the participating countries to vote.

To organize such a session, the Netherlands must gather the support of at least one-fifth (39) of the 192 countries that are members of the UN. Now that the motion of D66 and SGP has been adopted, the cabinet must make an effort to do this.

D66 Member of Parliament Jan Paternotte previously explained to NRC why the kerosene tax should come according to him. "This aviation treaty is totally outdated by climate change. Let the Netherlands take the initiative as a green leader, as we do now with a European flight tax. "

If there is a charge on kerosene, flying becomes more expensive and therefore less attractive.



Article in Dutch

Interesting development. Objectively it is quite strange that aviation has a status apparate, no tax on kerosene, no VAT on tickets, etc.


Precisely, because climate change is fixed by earning revenue on fuel.

Also, the appropriate response to leaving the barn door open, is to de-horn all the cows.


Intelligent response :roll:

But good to see you are on board to limit pollution ;)
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 5664
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Sun Mar 03, 2019 11:04 pm

Bobloblaw wrote:
How much would said tax improve the climate? No one ever asks for the benefits of said tax.


It wouldn’t, but don’t tell that yo those wanting the tax. They’ll spend on their pet projects, friends needing corporate welfare or just waste on junket to Davos or Hawaii.

GF
 
747Whale
Posts: 725
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:37 am

Dutchy wrote:
But good to see you are on board to limit pollution ;)


It's relative, but considerably more comes from the cow.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Caryjack and 25 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos