• bossito@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Aviation is responsible for around 2% of emissions, but it’s also the global connector. While we should refrain from flying when possible just counting on individuals to take the best behavior won’t work.

    What should be done:

    • ban private jets
    • end all the tax perks for aviation, which allow for insanely cheap tickets that promote senseless flying
    • ban short over-land flights
    • simplify ticketing and reduce prices on international trains in Europe, it’s almost always too expensive to cross borders by train in Europe, it makes no sense.

    We need aviation, but we also need it to be sensible in a warming planet.

    • Carlos Solís@communities.azkware.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or, hear me out, make it unnecessary to travel distances beyond a day of walking. Work from home was a blessing during the Pandemic, why can’t we make it the standard?

    • bioemerl@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree with everything there but a ban on short distance flights. If the prices reflect the costs let people fly.

        • quirzle@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think the point he’s making is that our second bullet of your list would make the third bullet unnecessary.

          • bossito@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            There’s some redundancy, but a ban solves the issue instantly and also creates a strong incentive for better ground transport.

            • quirzle@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Fair enough; I wasn’t commenting on the idea one way or another, just trying to clarify what I thought the other commenter meant.

              Personally, I’m almost never in favor of a ban. I’d rather tax heavily and use the income for programs to offset. I’m 20 years removed from optimism about reducing emissions, so I think we should be leaning into technology that can actively pull stuff out of the atmosphere. That could create an incentive to move away from flying but also use the flying that’s still happening to fund figuring out how to reverse the damage that’s already been done.