France Bans Short-Haul Flights to Tackle Climate Change – Banning convenience to ‘save the planet’ – get used to it guys, this is just the start if they can get away with it.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65687665
France has banned domestic short-haul flights where train alternatives exist, in a bid to cut carbon emissions.
The law came into force two years after lawmakers had voted to end routes where the same journey could be made by train in under two-and-a-half hours.
The ban all but rules out air travel between Paris and cities including Nantes, Lyon and Bordeaux, while connecting flights are unaffected.
Critics have described the latest measures as “symbolic bans”.
Laurent Donceel, interim head of industry group Airlines for Europe (A4E), told the AFP news agency that “banning these trips will only have minimal effects” on CO2 output.
He added that governments should instead support “real and significant solutions” to the issue.
Airlines around the world have been severely hit by the coronavirus pandemic, with website Flightradar24 reporting that the number of flights last year was down almost 42% from 2019.
The French government had faced calls to introduce even stricter rules.
France’s Citizens’ Convention on Climate, which was created by President Emmanuel Macron in 2019 and included 150 members of the public, had proposed scrapping plane journeys where train journeys of under four hours existed.
But this was reduced to two-and-a-half hours after objections from some regions, as well as the airline Air France-KLM.
French consumer group UFC-Que Choisir had earlier called on lawmakers to retain the four-hour limit.
“On average, the plane emits 77 times more CO2 per passenger than the train on these routes, even though the train is cheaper and the time lost is limited to 40 minutes,” it said.
It also called for “safeguards that [French national railway] SNCF will not seize the opportunity to artificially inflate its prices or degrade the quality of rail service”.
#
#
The idea for the ban originally came from a Citizens’ Assembly.
France’s ban on short-haul domestic flights comes into force 23 May.
Under a government decree, any journeys that are possible in less than two-and-a-half hours by train cannot be taken as a flight.
France is also cracking down on the use of private jets for short journeys in a bid to make transport greener and fairer for the population.
Transport minister Clément Beaune said the country could no longer tolerate the super rich using private planes while the public are making cutbacks to deal with the energy crisis and climate change.
Which flights are now banned in France?
The law will mostly rule out air trips between Paris Orly airport and regional hubs such as Nantes, Lyon and Bordeaux.
Critics have noted that the cutoff point is shy of the roughly three hours it takes to travel from Paris to the Mediterranean port city Marseille by high-speed rail.
As rail services improve, more routes could be added such as those between Paris Charles de Gaulle and Lyon and Rennes as well as journeys between Lyon and Marseille. They currently don’t meet the criteria for the ban because trains to airports in Paris and Lyon don’t allow passengers to arrive early in the morning or late in the evening.
Connecting flights are unaffected by the new law.
Train services must meet certain conditions to replace flights
The new law specifies that train services on the same route must be frequent, timely and well-connected enough to meet the needs of passengers who would otherwise travel by air – and able to absorb the increase in passenger numbers.
#
Could short-haul flights soon be banned in Europe? – In October 2021, Greenpeace demanded an EU-wide ban on any flights where the rail journey would take under six hours. … Germany also has short-haul flights in its sights. While not banning or cutting back on them, the German government recently doubled the amount of tax levied on short flight tickets. Spain, meanwhile, has said it wants to eliminate all short-haul flights by 2050. …Austria has taken a similar tack: when the government bailed out Austrian Airlines during the pandemic, the carrier was ordered to stop operating its Vienna-Salzburg route so that customers could prioritise train travel instead.
In October 2021, Greenpeace demanded an EU-wide ban on any flights where the rail journey would take under six hours.
So how do you persuade people to take trains and coaches over planes? Well, one way is through banning short-haul flights outright, especially when there are valid bus or train alternatives. And that’s a route that several European countries have already taken – but could more follow suit?
A couple of years ago, a poll found that 62 percent of Europeans would support a ban on short-haul flights. In other words, banning them might not just be a good, environmentally-friendly policy. It could also be pretty popular.
#
France bans short-haul domestic flights despite widespread criticism – Travelers will now be forced to use rail alternatives as France seeks to reduce its carbon footprint
#
'A hotter world is a more chaotic and dangerous world.'
Policy researcher Laurie Laybourn supports the idea of Britain following France in banning domestic flights between cities. pic.twitter.com/OYYXGC1Ntw
— GB News (@GBNEWS) May 24, 2023
“[Banning short-haul flights] will wipe out a whole lot of competition on those routes. The train operating companies will then be able to milk the public for as much money as they possibly want and people will be out of pocket.” @aDissentient#CostOfNetZero pic.twitter.com/vTxo3f51Yi
— Net Zero Watch (@NetZeroWatch) May 25, 2023
Related:
Bloomberg News: Airlines must have enough emissions allowances to cover every metric ton of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere on flights starting and ending in the European Economic Area, the UK and Switzerland. … That is effectively going to double their carbon costs over just three years. … Over the next three decades, aviation has to transform itself from a polluting industry — planes are responsible for 2.5% of global CO2 emissions — to a net-zero one. …
Meanwhile, China is still planning to expand its network of airports from 241 (at the end of 2020) to 450 by 2035.
Via Net Zero Watch: “Airlines face an expensive and challenging few decades ahead as climate compliance laws get stricter. … It’s the new reality for flying as airlines face a huge decarbonization challenge and tightening climate-compliance laws… Airlines must have enough emissions allowances to cover every metric ton of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere on flights starting and ending in the European Economic Area, the UK and Switzerland.”
“Are we going to have to give up flying to save the planet? Many climate campaigners have been saying so for years, but now Sustainable Aviation – a trade body which represents the UK aviation industry – seems to agree, at least in the case of less well-off passengers.”
The UK aviation industry seems to have nodded along with the idea that some passengers are going to be priced out of the air…Today, it has published a ‘road map’ showing how the industry intends to decarbonise, in order to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050 – in line with the government’s self-imposed, legally-binding target. It proposes that 14 per cent of emissions cuts will come from ‘demand reduction’ – i.e. potential passengers being put off flying by a rise in the price of airline tickets…The UK aviation industry seems to have nodded along with the idea that some passengers are going to be priced out of the air in order for Britain to reach its net zero target.
#
‘Puritans of the Green Deal’ promote ‘unworkable utopia’ – ‘For the first time since it began, the EU’s agenda is to impoverish Europeans’ – ‘If their crusade succeeds, cars, meat, and seaside holidays will be for the rich, just as they were a hundred years ago’ … The Puritans of the Green Deal intend above all to reduce the consumption, rampant consumerism, and free lifestyle of Europeans. If they really believed we would be baked in twenty years’ time, they would be promoting nuclear power stations.
2021: Watch: COVID lockdowns morphing into climate lockdowns – Morano on Tucker Carlson
Watch: Morano on Tucker Carlson: We Will Go From COVID Lockdowns To ‘Climate Lockdowns’
#
WaPo: A report suggests a novel way of curbing climate pollution from air travel: A global tax on people who fly the most, with the proceeds going toward research and development into sustainable aviation fuels…The report from the nonprofit International Council on Clean Transportation recommends a frequent flier tax that starts on the second flight each person takes per year, at a rate of $9. It would then steadily increase, reaching $177 for the 20th flight in a single year. … Although the authors didn’t attempt to include private jet travel, due to a lack of data, Zheng said that including a similar tax for those using private jets could further shift the burden to the world’s wealthiest consumers. …
Via Oxford Mail: People can drive freely around their own neighbourhood and can apply for a permit to drive through the filters, and into other neighbourhoods, for up to 100 days per year. This equates to an average of two days per week. The alternative is to drive out on to the ring road and then back in to the destination. A maximum of three permits a household will be allowed where there are several adults with cars registered to the address.
#
From the Oxford City Council Consultation page we see the plan is to reduce journeys that you think are necessary but the councilors don’t.
“Why are we introducing trial traffic filters? Across our county, we want to reduce unnecessary journeys by private vehicles and make walking, cycling, public and shared transport the natural first choice. This will help us deliver an affordable, sustainable and inclusive transport system that enables the county to thrive whilst protecting the environment and making Oxfordshire a better place to live for all residents.”
#
Update: Oxford replies to “misinformation” & issues “FAQs to set the record straight”
President-elect Joe Biden in 2020: “Folks, we’re in a crisis. Just like we need to be a unified nation in response to Covid-19, we need a unified national response to climate change.” …
France’s Minister of Transportation, Clement Beaune: Beaune admits intending to spread the ban beyond France’s borders. In an interview with Le Parisien, he said “that the EU must act as one on this matter to ensure that all ‘have the same rules and impact is maximized.’” He also announced plans to promote the agenda at October’s meeting of European transportation ministers. …
The UN-approved book Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet, explained that “effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced.” …
Morano warned Tucker Carlson specifically about travel bans back in 2021: “In my book Green Fraud I detailed two chapters on this, Tucker. This is, the climate activists were first of all jealous when the Covid lockdowns happened. They were beside themselves, saying, “How is this happening?” Everyone from Greta Thunberg to John Kerry, UN officials. And then they started saying, “We need to follow this. If we can shut down for a virus, we can shut down for climate.” And that’s what we’re seeing. There’s even academics in Australia proposing adding climate change to death certificates. And Bill Gates has said the death toll will be greater. So they’re following every step of the way, and it’s not just, you know, a professor here, or someone in academia. We have a major U.K. report coming out, we have an international agency report that came out calling for essentially the same type of lockdowns — everything from restrictions on your thermostat to restrictions [on] moving. You can only fly in a climate emergency, one that’s “morally justifiable.” You know, kinda like a lockdown, you have to justify going to the store for essential services. They’re going after freedom of movement. They’re going after private car ownership. They’re going after everything it means to be a free person and turning it over to the administrative state.”
#
A 2019 report on a ‘1.5C World’: The C40 Cities report also calls for “consumption interventions” to limit short airplane trips to “One short-haul return flight (less than 1500 km) every 3 years per person” by 2030.
Page 90: Aviation: effect of consumption interventions If all residents of C40 cities fly less38 and airlines increase the proportion of sustainable aviation fuel they use as outlined in the progressive target, a cumulative 43% emissions saving can be achieved (Figure 25). The relative contributions of the two consumption interventions are similar, though it should be noted that the adoption of sustainable biofuel is dependent on also limiting the number of flights to avoid potentially negative consequences on other systems (such as land and water required for producing feedstocks, and potential competition with other land uses such as food production).
