Do you fly for work or pleasure? Good news: a UN agency is looking to reduce the “carbon emissions” of airplanes, which will have the effect of making your flights more expensive. If you are a very rich person, this won’t bother your. If you’re a middle or lower class person, it will make the cost to go see your relatives or take the family on a nice vacation all that more expensive. The NY Times Editorial Board doesn’t care
Jets Will No Longer Get a Free Ride on Carbon Emissions
It has been almost 50 years since the federal government began setting standards for automobile emissions. It is also about a half-century since the introduction of wide-body jets set off a runaway expansion of the aviation industry. About 3.8 billion people are expected to fly this year, 50 times as many as 50 years ago — making planes the fastest-growing source of carbon dioxide emissions, although they have faced none of the limits set on cars or trucks. That is, until last week, when the International Civil Aviation Organization, a United Nations agency, finally proposed the first binding limits on aircraft emissions.
Of course, those “binding limits” are not enforceable by law. Yet
This is a welcome development, even if it has left many environmental groups disappointed. They have argued, not unreasonably, that the agency set the bar far too low. Existing planes wouldn’t have to improve their efficiency, and aircraft under development would need do no more than meet the emissions goals set by manufacturers. Automakers in the United States, by contrast, must nearly double their fuel economy by 2025.
These limits are supposed to force airplanes to reduce fuel consumption by 4% from 2015 levels by 2038. It appears as if Warmists do not want to pay the price themselves by giving up their own fossil fueled air travel nor paying more for tickets in the short term.
For now, however, what is important is that an industry that accounts for almost 2 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions — about the same as Germany — and that is projected to double the number of passengers and flights by 2030 will finally join other major sources of greenhouse gas pollution that are subject to international emissions controls.
Isn’t it interesting how Warmists always look to putting government/quasi-government controls in place? The next step will obviously be for the UN to call for a carbon tax on civil aviation. Which will probably exempt small private planes, as these Warmist big wigs love their small private jets.
But the international agreement took more than six years to negotiate, and it still needs approval from the group’s larger council and then its full assembly, followed by laws or regulations in each of the 36 member states. Mr. Obama has the authority to set the standards. That is about all he can hope to achieve on this front in his remaining months, and if it happens, it will be no mean feat.
More rules, more regs. Because Congress will not pass any laws, and Obama, as normal, will not even offer legislation for consideration. He’ll just bloviate about the Republican Congress. Here’s where it gets funny, if we look at the link in the first excerpt that goes to a NY Times article on this subject
But advocates of the deal, including the Obama administration, praised it, saying that it was an important first step and that it tackled one of the most intractable rifts over reducing carbon emissions.
“This is another example of the administration’s deep commitment to working with the international community on policies that will reduce harmful carbon pollution worldwide,†Michael Huerta, head of the Federal Aviation Administration, said in a statement. (snip)
The Obama administration last year issued a legal finding that aviation emissions are a threat to human health because of their contribution to global warming. That finding initiated a requirement under the Clean Air Act that the government release new regulations to curb airplane emissions. (snip)
Limiting aviation emissions remains one of Mr. Obama’s major initiatives to combat global warming…
Let’s not forget the immense amount of fossil fueled air travel Obama takes, often nominally for an official government appearance, which is almost always followed by things like fundraisers and golf outings. His little speech in Illinois the other day was followed by a long fossil fueled plane ride, which included a backup jumbo jet following Air Force 1 just in case, as well as fighter jets, to San Jose, California. He then took a fossil fueled flight from San Jose after a bunch of fundraisers to Los Angeles, where he filmed a segment for Ellen Degeneres’ show, followed by more fundraisers. Then a flight to Palm Springs from L.A., where he played golf on Friday. And Saturday. And will probably play today. And then a plane trip back to Washington.
Yes, hypocrisy matters.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Read: NY Times Is Thrilled With Proposed UN Climate Change Rules For Airplanes »
