This is idiotic. The EU carbon trading cabal has decided to extort the rest of the air travel world starting in 2012. In a nutshell, they’ll ban flights from landing if the airlines don’t engage in carbon trading. It’s yet another variation of the “Plane Stupid” theme.
Benny Peiser of the GWPF alerts us to the translation of the article in the German magazine Handelsblatt
By Thomas Ludwig
Foreign airlines are threatened with a flight and landing ban from 2012 in the European Union if they do not participate in emissions trading.
The ban is proposed in an internal document by the EU Commission seen by Handelsblatt. Summarised on nine pages, the guidelines describe how such a ban could be implement. The Commission considers a flight and landing ban as a last resort to make the airlines surrender over its Emissions Trading Scheme.
An EU Directive stipulates that airlines from Europe and third countries are mandated to be included in the trading of emissions rights. On their flights to and from Europe, they may then only emit as much CO2 as the CO2 certificates they hold. 85 percent of the certificates are free of charge while 15 percent of the allowances have to bought via auctions.
“The whole project has not been thought through. The EU cannot impose its law on third countries,” Holger Krahmer, environmental spokesman for the German Liberal Party in the EU Parliament told Handelsblatt.
In fact, international resistance against the EU plan is growing. Several American, Asian and African airlines are suing the EU over its emissions trade project. The US Aviation Association ATA is attempting to have the policy suspended by the European Court of Justice. And the Russian government has also voiced its displeasure in Brussels.
Not even critics of the project believe that the European Commission will actually ban flights by American and other foreign airlines. “They will use it as leverage, and accept compensation measures,” estimates Liberal MEP Holger Krahmer. The EU Commission is looking for a face-saving way out: “What remains are the costs of CO2 allowances, which will only burden European airlines and make them uncompetitive” Airlines such as Lufthansa and Air Berlin had already warned of this danger in the legislative process.
“The EU has once again overestimated itself,” said Krahmer. “The project was not thought through. The EU cannot impose its legal authority on third countries.”
At the end of September, the general assembly of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) will take place. Some countries, such as the U.S. want to adopt a resolution, which will make clear that emissions trading systems may only be applied by mutual agreement.
“Greenhouse gas emissions have increased dramatically, particularly in air traffic,” said Social Democrat MEP Matthias Groote. The climate expert warns against granting exemptions to noncompliant airlines from third countries. “If the U.S. and other countries try to suspend the EU emissions trading regime for third countries, it would lead to a huge distortion of competition for European airspace.” It is more important than ever to integrate international aviation into the EU’s emissions trading system. After all, the emissions of greenhouse gases in air traffic have doubled in the past two decades.
The EU Directive, which includes aviation in emissions trading, is part of a package of regulations with which the EU wants to meet its climate protection goals. Emissions of greenhouse gases should fall by a fifth by 2020 under the 1990 level […]
The inclusion of aviation in the Emissions Trading Scheme will impact consumers too. According to calculations by the EU Commission, a ticket for a return flight within the EU could become more expensive by up to nine Euros because of emissions trading. For long-haul flights, larger price increases can be expected, a return ticket to New York could be up to 40 Euros more expensive. [translation by Philipp Mueller]
Full story here: Handelsblatt, 22 September 2010
h/t to Benny Peiser http://www.thegwpf.org
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Lunacy
We had a two week trip to Spain planned. Consider it canceled. We will do the business in North America.
I have no interest in lining the pockets of no-good carbon traders.
It’s about time.
But don’t stop at airplanes…don’t even start the program until all ships, of any size, are included, along with trains, busses, and private cars.
The U.S. should lead the way, California, in fact, and start their own program by stopping traffic at the borders. Just think. You stop at the ag station in Truckee, and instead of being asked if you have any produce, they check your license plate to see if you’re coming from one of those irresponsible CO2-belching states (like Nevada)….
“Sorry, bub. Please use the area to your left to turn around.”
Pure self interest as a non-flyer should make me support this tax. The more tax they can get from activities i don’t indulge in then the less tax they have to get from me. Right.. Some people will take a bath from these carbon credits before too long, and i bet its the usual – the hard-workers and innocent via other taxes. The guilty will be be off to the next scam.
Can not afford to fly anywhere, let alone to Europe. Maybe if I invest in Chicago carbon credits I can parley them into enough for a European tour of say Spain. Maybe I could meet some royalty and have dinner with them. Oh you say they are watching this Email and DHS has been advised. Oh you say FBI has tested for this type of breach? Well I couldn’t go anyway as futures (carbon) look a little dark.
Ok, if they want to play hardball…
All politicians should be charged a carbon & hot air tax. All the poundage of paper, flights, train trips, “service” cars, junkets, power used, heating of gov buildings and the all the hot air spewed when they open their mouths, OF THE ENTIRE BUReaucracy they nominally control should be charged to them, personally.
I expect they will be displeased at having to pay to be a politician, but’s it only fair, and I think in addition that it produced suitable incentive to REDUCE the size of bureaucracies and their assigned tasks.
“The whole project has not been thought through. The EU cannot impose its law on third countries,” Holger Krahmer, environmental spokesman for the German Liberal Party in the EU Parliament told Handelsblatt.
For non-Germans reading the article that may not know, Holger Krahmer is actually with the Free Democrat Party, which is somewhat similar to the American libertarians. Its unfortunate and confusing that in American the left is called liberals and the right is called conservative. It may be because the left tends to be liberal with moral issues and the right tends to be conservative with moral issues. But with everything else, the economy, government, personal freedoms, etc., the right is liberal whereas the left is conservative, wanting to control everyone and everything.
Say goodnight to flight in the EU.
Halt all shipping. The new Iron Curtain?
Who needs friends when you can make more enemies with half the effort.
The solution is simple. Starting today, the Airlines should refuse to carry anyone associated with the EU government. That includes spouse and children of the offending members. It shouldn’t take long before this idea hits the round file.
So, the idjuts imposed a self-inflicted, industry killing mandate upon itself, and now wish to force the world to participate and help pay for it? Worried you girls can’t compete now?
“What remains are the costs of CO2 allowances, which will only burden European airlines and make them uncompetitive”…..and….. “It is more important than ever to integrate international aviation into the EU’s emissions trading system.
To reiterate a famous quote to our would be European masters,……
“Nuts”.
While it isn’t anywhere near the same situation, I believe General McAuliffe wouldn’t mind my borrowing his word for this occasion.
Hold on there. Let’s see what kind of political muscle the tourism industry has. This might get a “Nevermind” in short order if they have any clout.
Else, 2012 might be remembered in Europe as SWAT; the “Summer Without A Tourist.”
Does the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank need to purchase carbon credits from the E.U. before they can print money to send to the E.U. to pay for the carbon credits they need for the offset printing?
Well a counter ban on Euro Airlines that do carbon trade would seem to be a suitable response.
Keep them out of North America and the Middle East.
I smell someone losing money in the carbon trading scam … er … business.
Brent in Calgary
You may have also seen the story about an “International Standard” for stoves….???? Actually, the charitable part of this story doesn’t bother me, tho we don’t have the money, until we borrow it. But some versions of this story talk about an international standard. And after these stoves were provided, where will the fuel come from? hmmmm?
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/money-for-stoves-but-the-other-pledges/
There are a great number of announcements right now about “international agreements” with calls for international taxation and mentions of climate change.
Looks like a segway into the global government and global taxation scheme we all know and love already. Strange how Marxism is the solution to this scientific problem.
Personnaly I’m going to build a Zepplin covered with solar arrays for power. They don’t have night time over there do they? Their energy policies seem to work with a constant wind and solar flux.
So could the airlines meet the EU carbon indugences by buying carbon credits at $o.o5/ton and satify the nitwits . Or whatever the carbon dioxide market has sunk to this month.
It’s a bluff. Call it.
Told ya. All they needed was a pretext to do this. They don’t have to prove it (global warming) and it doesn’t matter how many times you disprove it. The agenda goes on, it’s politics not science.
I don’t know if most of you can afford a trip to Spain.
But, sadly, here in Spain a lot of people is getting to the point of not being able to afford their electricity bills. Wind turbines and solar panels are taking over conventional facilities here. Our newest nuclear plant is 30 years old and new ones are banned by law. As you know, the cost per Mw from these nice green eco-friendly energy sources is HUGE … and now it’s time for us to start paying for it 🙁
Over last 3 years our bills have grown about 30% and we face an additional 5% next month !! … and another 10% over next year !!
http://www.elmundo.es/mundodinero/2010/09/23/economia/1285233437.html
Plane tickets are not a problem for us as long as we’re facing sharp price increases on things we can’t do without. Air travel is for rich people and we’re getting closer to poverty with every new day … it’s the price of ‘trying to become’ eco-friendly.
Regards
I’m so pleased! I despise the Europeans…
Please note: Russia and Ukraine, two countries CLOSE to my heart, are NOT members of the EU. Hallelulia! Frankly, if the EU plunges themselves into a massive and severe depression..because of this foolishness….it will be FITTING PUNISHMENT FOR THE TRAVAIL they have put the UNITED STATES THROUGH in the last 100 years. (Let’s see, WWI, WWII, the Cold War…where the USA spent BILLIONS in an erronous policy of defending their lazy butts against the RUSKIES..who we should have let HAVE Europe.., are there any more things I could name?)
According to a report by Sandbag from September 2010, the EU ETS is not efficient:
“Sandbag’s analysis shows that the ETS is on course to require savings of, at best, a miniscule 32 million tonnes of emissions between 2008-2012, despite covering 12,000 installations and 1.9 billion tonnes of emissions annually”.
That is reduction of 0.3% per year, at best, when assuming “a rapid European economic recovery (to 2008 levels by 2011)”.
Source: http://www.sandbag.org.uk/node/303
Wait ’till the next Icelandic Volcano goes-the least of their worries will be carbon.
Given the cooling that is happening, we are one big eruption away from a little
(hopefully) ice age..
Idiots.
economic sabotage is what it is.
btw this incident happened two days ago, but has yet to be reported in the Murdoch media, even tho Murdoch owns 7 out of 10 newspapers read in australia, and the story has been reported overseas. with the public already angry over the Greens dictating the Govt’s agenda, to the dismay of many, i would have thought this would be headline news. i gather nine of the protesters will face court next month:
27 Sept: Newcastle Herald Australia (owned by Fairfax Media): Activists shut down Newcastle coal exports
Climate activists brought Newcastle’s billion-dollar coal-loaders to a grinding halt yesterday, suspending themselves midair to effectively shut down the world’s largest coal export operation.
Police arrested 41 members of the Rising Tide group, which launched a simultaneous protest at three coal-loader sites at dawn yesterday.
The group said it was staging an “emergency intervention” into the main cause of global warming in Australia….
Yesterday’s protest made international headlines. UK-based news agency Reuters picked up the story, as did Arabic-language broadcaster al-Jazeera and Russian state radio services….
http://www.theherald.com.au/news/local/news/general/activists-shut-down-newcastle-coal-exports/1952319.aspx
‘Greenhouse gas emissions have increased dramatically, particularly in air traffic”
While true, has anyone shown that those gasses are harmful in any way aside from being mentioned in a hypothesis that has not matched actual observations?
So what if there are green house gasses, the onus is on them to show that A: greenhouse gas is harmful in any way and B: that their plan makes any measurable difference in the overall amount of them in the atmosphere.