France to impose green tax on plane tickets

The government said that the funds from tickets for flights originating in France would be used to create less-polluting transport options as concerns grow about carbon emissions from planes.

Bollocks.

Just like the carbon tax on new and imported cars (up to 10,000€) - it is just another new tax-a-thon for the failed socialist experiment.

Yep, another ripoff of the ordinary people to prop up a corrupt and dysfunctional government.

It is more a rip-off to pay for the slackers living on the social tit and obviously, the bloated army of inept government "workers".

a corrupt and dysfunctional government.

Sounds more like the United States. The government here functions pretty well for taxing us to death.

France announced Tuesday it would impose new taxes on plane tickets of up to 18 euros per flight, joining other EU states seeking to limit the environmental impact of air travel.

Money grab.

Crazy.., Green is not just by controling emmissions.

Apparently France needs to get more money to fund their government at the expense of the entire world that go their and spend money.

Theres an army of unemployed "migrants" to pay for.

Macron is aware he needs to tread carefully on climate issues after rising fuel taxes -- which aimed to help France meet its Paris climate accord goals -- helped spark the yellow vest street protests against his government last year.

Such a shame and so short term in outlook. This is the future of the planet.

Theres an army of unemployed "migrants" to pay for.

What does this have to do with the article?

The government said that the funds from tickets for flights originating in France would be used to create less-polluting transport options as concerns grow about carbon emissions from planes.

Pure propaganda. They've twisted this so that black is white, up is down and CO2 is now a pollutant. CO2 is plant food. How can it be a pollutant?

I mentioned before that water vapour is the biggest greenhouse gas, and there is plenty of it being ejected from jet engines. It can be seen with the condensed water vapour forming short cloud-like trails aka contrails behind planes. The politicians would have a hard time justifying a tax on water and the sun so it's CO2, the gas of life which is the target. Some links below just so people don't think I'm making this up ...

The Water Vapor Feedback

Water vapor is one of the most important elements of the climate system. A greenhouse gas, like carbon dioxide, it represents around 80 percent of total greenhouse gas mass in the atmosphere and 90 percent of greenhouse gas volume.

https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2008/02/common-climate-misconceptions-the-water-vapor-feedback-2/

Greenhouse Gases: Water Vapor

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/greenhouse-gases.php?section=watervapor

Even the alarmist, end-of-the-world Guardian admits this.

It's true that water vapour is the biggest overall contributor to the greenhouse effect and that humans are not responsible for directly emitting this gas in quantities sufficient to change its concentration in the atmosphere.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/jan/28/water-vapour-greenhouse-gas

There is no need to 'impose new taxes on plane tickets' because of concerns about carbon emissions. As noted above, it's a money grab and further clampdown on people's freedom.

@Toasted Heretic,

Do I need to spell it out? Im stating that the French govt needs money to pay for the huge army of "migrants" living off state funds in France. You see, it has relevance to the article.

Do I need to spell it out? Im stating that the French govt needs money to pay for the huge army of "migrants" living off state funds in France. You see, it has relevance to the article.

Nah, it's a blatant dog whistle. You don't have to spell out your obvious bigotry, Kestrel.

> KestrelToday  05:38 pm JST

Theres an army of unemployed "migrants" to pay for.

Nah again. They are in transit roaming the jungle in Calais waiting to suck on the British tit.

There is no need to 'impose new taxes on plane tickets' because of concerns about carbon emissions. As noted above, it's a money grab and further clampdown on people's freedom.

Exactly. Simply another stealth tax on the middle class.

You don't have to spell out your obvious bigotry, Kestrel.

Independent Republicans from the U.S. always show their ignorance opining on European issues. It's usually serrano's baby, kestrel your probably owe him some droit d'auteur or something .

Kestrel is right. Immigrants cost a leg, and using a green tax makes it more white than white. It is pure money grab indeed. And I am French.

This tax on any plane ticket is in no way helping the planet. People will travel, just making more miles and polluting by goint to cheaper destination. All specialists in plane transportation say so, not me.

Cost à leg ? Un bras tu veux dire.

French ?

Politicians are consistent everywhere in the world, they are driven by abject greed and will use any scam or excuse to get money.

Sweden has seen the development of a movement called "flight shaming" (flygskam) spearheaded by 16-year-old schoolgirl Greta Thunberg who has become a symbol of the fight against climate change.

Green is Marxism in disguise. Just like a water melon, green on the outside, red on the inside. I suppose many people like the girl mentioned above mean well with their activism to "save the planet" from CO2 emissions but they're being misled.

I suppose many people like the girl mentioned above mean well with their activism to "save the planet" from CO2 emissions but they're being misled.

By the same people who are promoting the ‘myth’ of a moon landing?

The airline and travel industries are not going to like this.

Shares in Air France fell sharply, down almost 4 percent to trade at 8.54 euros. Its German competitor Lufthansa also traded lower

Thanks a lot, French gov't.

Independent Republicans from the U.S. always show their ignorance opining on European issues. It's usually serrano's baby

You know, Madverts, these insults of other posters is really uncalled for.

JimizoToday 10:37 pm JST

By the same people who are promoting the ‘myth’ of a moon landing?

From the person with the "scientific background" who says "I tend to go with scientific consensus" (snigger). If people went by your reasoning then we'd still be on a flat earth and the sun would be revolving around the earth. Copernicus, Galileo and others challenged the scientific consensus of the day and humanity is the better for it.

As for the moon landing, I don't promote it (your word), I question it. Is that a problem?

Since when do governments ‘invent’?

Why not limit flights?

Start with regulating Macron’s jet-setting?

Easy to do and environmentally friendly.

Money doesn’t stop pollution!

@ weedkila

What about reading the article you put link to ?

They clearly explain than water vapor in itself is not sufficient to explain temperature rise. It because of the other greenhouse gas that the amount of water vapor increase. Water vapor can not do it by itself.

The government said that the funds from tickets for flights originating in France would be used to create less-polluting transport options as concerns grow about carbon emissions from planes.

Pure propaganda. They've twisted this so that black is white, up is down and CO2 is now a pollutant. CO2 is plant food.

Who are "they" ? You seems to refer to the government, there is no citation in that part. It is journalist phrasing.

the "less-polluting option" and the "CO2" references are quite far apart so the journalist did not make the direct link : Plane pollute a lot. Plane's emission of CO2 are really high. - No "because", no causality, just concomitant.

CO2 is not only plant food (and it can not do it alone), it also can cause suffocation, acidify-cation, ....

All depend of which definition of "pollutant" you refer too : https://www.wunderground.com/resources/climate/cei.asp

Conclusion : CO2 can be seen as a pollutant, since it has a negative impact on an environment, by the reader, the journalist, the government, ...

There is no need to 'impose new taxes on plane tickets' because of concerns about carbon emissions

Because, they are far too low to have an effect ? Because, it would be better to adjust the amount regarding the necessity of the trip ? Because, they should just forbid some line if a more ecofriendly option exist ?

Flute

They clearly explain than water vapor in itself is not sufficient to explain temperature rise.

That's right. Water vapor does not explain temperature rise, but it does regulate it. Think of the difference in temperature between night and day in a dry desert setting and night and day in a humid tropical setting.

The temperature rise can be explained by the Sun and it's cycles. When it's quiet (a small number of, or zero sunspots, ie Maunder Minimum) then it's cold on earth. When it's very active (ie; Medieval warming period) then the solar wind is stronger which means less cloud cover and warmer global temperatures. Clouds are formed by water droplets forming around particulates. The earth is constantly being bombarded by these cosmic particles and the solar wind influences how many enter Earth's atmosphere. A Danish researcher discovered this.

These cycles can also be seen in ice core samples taken from Antarctica and Greenland. The earth has been much warmer (and cooler) in the past when there was no industry or cars to affect the climate one way or another. There are plenty of other factors which determine climate but it's mostly due to the Sun.

Who are "they" ? You seems to refer to the government, there is no citation in that part.

Yes, governments, government and corporate funded scientists, the IPCC etc.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) wasn’t designed to improve the uncertainty. Rather, it was mandated, designed and operated to isolate human effects. The IPCC let the public believe they are examining the entire climate system. From a climate mechanism perspective, they only look at one or two very minor components. It is like describing a car and how it operates by ignoring the engine, transmission, and wheels while focusing on one nut on the right rear wheel. They are only looking at one thread on the nut, human CO2.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/02/08/thanks-to-the-ipcc-the-public-doesnt-know-water-vapor-is-most-important-greenhouse-gas/

All depend of which definition of "pollutant" you refer too : https://www.wunderground.com/resources/climate/cei.asp

Conclusion : CO2 can be seen as a pollutant, since it has a negative impact on an environment, by the reader, the journalist, the government, ...

I read some of the article you quoted. In one part it says:

"One need only look at our sister planet, Venus, to see that too much "life" can be a bad thing. There, an atmosphere of 96% carbon dioxide has created a hellish greenhouse effect. The temperatures of 860 F at the surface are hot enough to melt lead. There's not too much life there!"

What the author failed to say is that Venus' "hellish greenhouse effect" is due to the fact that it is much closer to the Sun!!!! Same with Mercury. Has Venus ever had an atmosphere like Earth's?

There was also this ...

Carbon dioxide is a waste gas produced by fossil fuel combustion, so can be classified as man-made waste. One can also make the case that carbon dioxide is contaminating the environment, since increased CO2 from burning fossil fuels has already harmed sea life.

Again, this is nonsense. Yes, carbon dioxide is emitted by fossil fuel combustion but the author is conflating it with other toxic substances to have you believe that CO2 is also a toxin. So if you take what he says as true then that would mean that CO2 emissions from volcanoes, decaying plant life, animals and insects (way more than man produces) is also harming sea life. Which would mean that CO2 from natural sources has been harming sea life for billions of years!

FYI, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is about 400ppm (0.04%) and man's contribution is only 10% of the total when you include nature. The reason it is a trace gas is because it is denser than air and stays aloft for a relatively short time. Anyway don't believe me, pls check for yourself what I've said.

BTW, there was a recent interview with an astrophysicist and mathematician at Northumbria University who claims that the Earth may be now entering a cooling period. She bases her theory on the study of the sun and its history. I keep an open mind but if she is correct then we should be preparing for cooler temps since this will have a negative influence on crops and so on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clKMz1-C-Kk

that's the French politician solution to anything, tax it... You're taxed on everything there.

Green is Marxism in disguise. Just like a water melon, green on the outside, red on the inside. I suppose many people like the girl mentioned above mean well with their activism to "save the planet" from CO2 emissions but they're being misled.

There you go, folks. Trying to avert catastrophe for the planet and its inhabitants is a political ideology and must be avoided at all costs.

You know, Madverts, these insults of other posters is really uncalled for.

Much like your regular use of bigoted epithets and anti-Semitic tropes, come to think of it.

Oh my!

Wrong move , tax the airline company. Pls do bully the tourists.

weedkila

Once again : read the stuff you are referring to :

"The effect from Forbush decreases on clouds is too brief to have any impact on long-term temperature changes."

water vapour is the biggest greenhouse gas [...]The politicians would have a hard time justifying a tax on water and the sun so it's CO2

Water vapor does not explain temperature rise, but it does regulate it.

So you agree that the temperature rise is not due to water vapor so why do seems to find it so surprising that the politicians are not taxing it ?

There are plenty of other factors which determine climate but it's mostly due to the Sun.

Short answer : no : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change#Life

Long answer : ask the dinosaurs : if you change earth atmosphere blocking sun ray that will have an effect over the climate. The sun stay the same so saying it is mostly due to the sun is fallacious.

I read some of the article you quoted.

That is the biggest problem here I guess. The article is in response to people claiming CO2 is the gas of life : answer : no. For where it come from, it seems to still be looked over by scientist.

Has Venus ever had an atmosphere like Earth's?

Yes, seems the upper atmosphere is also thought as a good place for colonization since temperature and pressure is similar to Earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Venus

that would mean that CO2 emissions from volcanoes, decaying plant life, animals and insects is also harming sea life

Yes, it is. But in the same time nature absorb the CO2 it produce. Human do not do it. We produce more and more CO2 but do not get rid of it. So it just accumulate and is reaching never see before level.

https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/

the Earth may be now entering a cooling period

Yet again, read what you are referring to. Professor Valentina Zharkova study the sun. Then anticipate that the sun activity will drop as it dropped (Maunder minimum). The drop was of around 1 degree and the temperature where already lower than now and it is going to be limited at half a century.

I guess it is nice of the sun to help reduce temperature increase but that doesn't look like it will be sufficient. But still, Suns, thanks any help is welcome, unfortunately, it seems it is going to be counter productive since people are already planning to use it to feed their belief than there is no problem.