Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

wildlife, gardening, environment, Rural living, Pets and Vets
JohnB
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2497
Joined: January 15th, 2017, 9:20 am
Has thanked: 677 times
Been thanked: 997 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#400730

Postby JohnB » April 1st, 2021, 7:02 am

The Government are doing a review of APD (https://www.gov.uk/government/consultat ... tax-reform). It says
A frequent flyer levy would be significantly more complex to administer than
APD, for both airlines and HMRC, on the basis that it could require the
government to collect and store personal information on each passenger.
The government would have to be able to record and identify every flight an
individual took from a UK airport for the purposes of calculating how many
flights they had taken within a given period. This would not only increase
complexity (because of the significant increase in taxpayers) but may also
pose concerns around data processing, handling and privacy. There may be
additional compliance issues, particularly with passengers who were able to
travel under multiple passports. It may also pose challenges for individuals
who have an essential need to fly frequently.
4.17 In addition, it is important to note that airlines ordinarily pass the cost of
APD onto the passenger. Therefore, those passengers who fly more will, in
effect, already pay more under the current system.
174.18
The government is therefore minded to retain APD as the principal tax on the
aviation sector and not introduce a frequent flyer levy as a replacement, and
welcomes views on this position.


I think I agree with them.

88V8
Lemon Half
Posts: 5769
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:22 am
Has thanked: 4098 times
Been thanked: 2560 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#400778

Postby 88V8 » April 1st, 2021, 10:23 am

I do not think that the govt should do anything to dilute APD. I would be happy if APD were increased until it constitutes the majority of the travel cost, in the same way that fuel duty is the greater part of the petrol price.

V8

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6564 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#400855

Postby Lootman » April 1st, 2021, 2:03 pm

swill453 wrote:
Lootman wrote:
scotia wrote:OK - I suspect the original complainant was referring specifically to points awarded by airlines for travelling by air.

But coming back to your £400k bill which would have been due in my rather all-encompassing scheme, I'm sure that would be a flea bite to someone who has spent their working life in the financial community. :)

Agreed, and it was my point that the "original complainant" didn't really understand how the miles/points business works. It is only partially related to flying.

To the other, I think your idea of paying me not to fly is a better bet than punishing me for flying. After all, as I feel sure I mentioned somewhere upthread, I can always book flights to and from other countries if the UK goes out on a limb with a "frequent flyer tax". There is really no way for the UK government to know where i fly unless those flights start or finish in the UK. All it would do is punish BA and Virgin, and reward Air France, Aer Lingus, KLM, Lufthansa and so on.

The original complainant wanted to stop "rewarding frequent flyers for flying more frequently". I don't see any misunderstanding there.

But without defining what that means exactly and how that would be implemented, it is a meaningless desire. And I do not believe he understands how loyalty programmes actually work, since miles and points are fungible across flights and other services. It makes more sense to think of them as an alternate currency.

Also, airlines only allow a few award seats on any one flight, and the way it usually works is that they are seats that would otherwise be vacant. So the incremental emissions cost of an award flight is minimal, limited to the weight of that passenger, his/her bags and some food. It's a rounding error in the big picture.

As for a frequent flyer tax, it won't work for all the reasons I listed. It will just drive traffic to other countries. In fact that happens already given that the UK has the highest air passenger taxes in the world, and Heathrow has the highest airport fees. If the UK loses its status as a major international airline hub, that will relegate the UK further in international standings.

swill453
Lemon Half
Posts: 7962
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
Has thanked: 984 times
Been thanked: 3643 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#400877

Postby swill453 » April 1st, 2021, 3:43 pm

Lootman wrote:
swill453 wrote:The original complainant wanted to stop "rewarding frequent flyers for flying more frequently". I don't see any misunderstanding there.

But without defining what that means exactly and how that would be implemented, it is a meaningless desire. And I do not believe he understands how loyalty programmes actually work, since miles and points are fungible across flights and other services. It makes more sense to think of them as an alternate currency.

Also, airlines only allow a few award seats on any one flight, and the way it usually works is that they are seats that would otherwise be vacant. So the incremental emissions cost of an award flight is minimal, limited to the weight of that passenger, his/her bags and some food. It's a rounding error in the big picture.

As for a frequent flyer tax, it won't work for all the reasons I listed. It will just drive traffic to other countries. In fact that happens already given that the UK has the highest air passenger taxes in the world, and Heathrow has the highest airport fees. If the UK loses its status as a major international airline hub, that will relegate the UK further in international standings.

Again, you're over-complicating the point and throwing in straw men left right and centre. "Stop rewarding frequent flyers for flying more frequently" - what the reward is, and how it's used is irrelevant to the point.

Scott.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6564 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#400885

Postby Lootman » April 1st, 2021, 4:03 pm

swill453 wrote:
Lootman wrote:
swill453 wrote:The original complainant wanted to stop "rewarding frequent flyers for flying more frequently". I don't see any misunderstanding there.

But without defining what that means exactly and how that would be implemented, it is a meaningless desire. And I do not believe he understands how loyalty programmes actually work, since miles and points are fungible across flights and other services. It makes more sense to think of them as an alternate currency.

Also, airlines only allow a few award seats on any one flight, and the way it usually works is that they are seats that would otherwise be vacant. So the incremental emissions cost of an award flight is minimal, limited to the weight of that passenger, his/her bags and some food. It's a rounding error in the big picture.

As for a frequent flyer tax, it won't work for all the reasons I listed. It will just drive traffic to other countries. In fact that happens already given that the UK has the highest air passenger taxes in the world, and Heathrow has the highest airport fees. If the UK loses its status as a major international airline hub, that will relegate the UK further in international standings.

Again, you're over-complicating the point and throwing in straw men left right and centre. "Stop rewarding frequent flyers for flying more frequently" - what the reward is, and how it's used is irrelevant to the point.

Well, you and I always see things differently and this is no exception. I can only assume you come from a very different background than me.

These loyalty programs are increasingly vehicles for credit card companies and not airlines. That is why the cards give large signup bonuses when you apply for an airline card. The card issuer pays the airline for the ability to credit cardholders with their miles, and the pre-purchase of blocks of airline miles by banks provides upfront revenue for the airlines, which then carry the mile debits as liabilities on their books.

Then you earn miles for anything you put on the card which may never include any flights. Then when it is time to cash in the miles, you can use it for hotels, shopping portals, cashback and so on. It really doesn't have much to do with the airlines any more. I recently used airmiles to reduce my grocery shopping bill.

Plus the same schemes are offered for all the major hotels chains and a whole host of other business categories like department stores. Then there are the card points themselves, such as American Express points. The whole business has come so far from airlines rewarding their best customers that the suggestion doesn't make any sense any more. It was just a gut reaction from a single-issue activist who didn't take the time to study the topic before spouting.

It is impossible to unwind the airline part from all the rest of these programmes.

swill453
Lemon Half
Posts: 7962
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
Has thanked: 984 times
Been thanked: 3643 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#400887

Postby swill453 » April 1st, 2021, 4:08 pm

Lootman wrote:These loyalty programs are increasingly vehicles for credit card companies and not airlines. That is why the cards give large signup bonuses when you apply for an airline card. The card issuer pays the airline for the ability to credit cardholders with their miles, and the pre-purchase of blocks of airline miles by banks provides upfront revenue for the airlines, which then carry the mile debits as liabilities on their books.

Then you earn miles for anything you put on the card which may never include any flights.

Well that would be fine, since it's not rewarding for flying more frequently. Therefore irrelevant to the discussion, of course.

Then when it is time to cash in the miles...

Also not relevant to the simple point being made.

Scott.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6564 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#400891

Postby Lootman » April 1st, 2021, 4:12 pm

swill453 wrote:
Lootman wrote:These loyalty programs are increasingly vehicles for credit card companies and not airlines. That is why the cards give large signup bonuses when you apply for an airline card. The card issuer pays the airline for the ability to credit cardholders with their miles, and the pre-purchase of blocks of airline miles by banks provides upfront revenue for the airlines, which then carry the mile debits as liabilities on their books.

Then you earn miles for anything you put on the card which may never include any flights.

Well that would be fine, since it's not rewarding for flying more frequently. Therefore irrelevant to the discussion, of course.

Then when it is time to cash in the miles...

Also not relevant to the simple point being made.

Now you are just gainsaying me for the sake of it, and are making no serious attempt to either understand the topic nor critique the arguments I carefully developed. What you and he are saying makes no sense. The points I made are crucially relevant and I recommend you study the business rather than make shallow generalisations about it.

The idea cannot work as stated.

Howard
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2178
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:26 pm
Has thanked: 885 times
Been thanked: 1017 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#403646

Postby Howard » April 12th, 2021, 3:14 pm

France is planning to ban some domestic flights for environmental reasons. Those where a direct train journey of two and a half hours or less is available.

regards

Howard
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... ention-mps

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6564 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#403648

Postby Lootman » April 12th, 2021, 3:18 pm

Howard wrote:France is planning to ban some domestic flights for environmental reasons. Those where a direct train journey of two and a half hours or less is available.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... ention-mps

The account I read stated that there is an exemption if you are connecting in Paris to or from another flight.

So you cannot fly from Rennes to Paris but you will still be able to fly from Rennes to Paris to Rome.

So at least some of the flights will still operate but for onward connections only.

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4255
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2628 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#404098

Postby Gengulphus » April 14th, 2021, 8:45 am

Lootman wrote:
swill453 wrote:Again, you're over-complicating the point and throwing in straw men left right and centre. "Stop rewarding frequent flyers for flying more frequently" - what the reward is, and how it's used is irrelevant to the point.

Well, you and I always see things differently and this is no exception. I can only assume you come from a very different background than me.

These loyalty programs are increasingly vehicles for credit card companies and not airlines. That is why the cards give large signup bonuses when you apply for an airline card. The card issuer pays the airline for the ability to credit cardholders with their miles, and the pre-purchase of blocks of airline miles by banks provides upfront revenue for the airlines, which then carry the mile debits as liabilities on their books.

Then you earn miles for anything you put on the card which may never include any flights. Then when it is time to cash in the miles, you can use it for hotels, shopping portals, cashback and so on. It really doesn't have much to do with the airlines any more. I recently used airmiles to reduce my grocery shopping bill.

Plus the same schemes are offered for all the major hotels chains and a whole host of other business categories like department stores. Then there are the card points themselves, such as American Express points. The whole business has come so far from airlines rewarding their best customers that the suggestion doesn't make any sense any more. It was just a gut reaction from a single-issue activist who didn't take the time to study the topic before spouting.

It is impossible to unwind the airline part from all the rest of these programmes.

It's not merely possible, it's pretty easy: forbid the airlines from awarding 'air miles' or any similar incentive for flying. Other uses of the 'air miles' schemes can continue - they're no worse than Tesco Clubcard points or points for any of the many other types of 'loyalty' cards. The resulting situation would be rather surreal, in that the one thing you would definitely not be allowed to earn 'air miles' for is travelling miles by air! I suspect that would be resolved after a while, because the 'air miles' companies would grow tired of fielding complaints from customers about not being awarded 'air miles' for their flights (and possibly even of trades description investigations...) and decide that it was time to 'rebrand' themselves...

Note I'm only saying it would be pretty easy to do this - not advocating it!

Gengulphus

scrumpyjack
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4814
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:15 am
Has thanked: 606 times
Been thanked: 2675 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#404104

Postby scrumpyjack » April 14th, 2021, 9:32 am

These schemes are also basically a way of handing benefits to individuals for costs paid by their employers. The employer will have paid for the air fare and paid Amex and Marriott etc etc. But the individual then gets the financial incentives (tax free). Not really a desirable state of affairs. Maybe tax such benefits at 200% as a reverse incentive?

JohnB
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2497
Joined: January 15th, 2017, 9:20 am
Has thanked: 677 times
Been thanked: 997 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#404109

Postby JohnB » April 14th, 2021, 9:46 am

The French plan is to ban domestic only journeys, transfer flights for international passengers will be permitted, as you'd be livid if you arrived at Charles de Gaulle from San Francisco and told you need to go to Gare de Lyon to catch a train to Lyon. This will cause problems with those transfer flights, as while the number of transfer passengers is small percentage, its all part of a much more expensive package, and could make people switch to a hub outside France and avoid Air France.

So while a laudable aim, it could end up with more miles being flown overall.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6564 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#404183

Postby Lootman » April 14th, 2021, 1:41 pm

Gengulphus wrote:
Lootman wrote:
swill453 wrote:Again, you're over-complicating the point and throwing in straw men left right and centre. "Stop rewarding frequent flyers for flying more frequently" - what the reward is, and how it's used is irrelevant to the point.

It is impossible to unwind the airline part from all the rest of these programmes.

It's not merely possible, it's pretty easy: forbid the airlines from awarding 'air miles' or any similar incentive for flying. Other uses of the 'air miles' schemes can continue - they're no worse than Tesco Clubcard points or points for any of the many other types of 'loyalty' cards. The resulting situation would be rather surreal, in that the one thing you would definitely not be allowed to earn 'air miles' for is travelling miles by air! I suspect that would be resolved after a while, because the 'air miles' companies would grow tired of fielding complaints from customers about not being awarded 'air miles' for their flights (and possibly even of trades description investigations...) and decide that it was time to 'rebrand' themselves...

Note I'm only saying it would be pretty easy to do this - not advocating it!

Well OK, it is possible to do, in theory anyway. But a little unfair on people like me who have accumulated about 400,000 air miles on the understanding that I can use them for flights. Valuing them conservatively they are worth about £4,000. I would hope that existing miles could still be used for flights but not newly-earned ones.

I also suspect that there would be some kind of black market in air miles in that case. That already exists in parts of Asia where, apparently, the Alaskan Airlines loyalty scheme is particularly popular, oddly. When my credit card details were fraudulently used, the miscreant in SE Asia bought 150,000 Alaskan miles!

JohnB wrote:The French plan is to ban domestic only journeys, transfer flights for international passengers will be permitted, as you'd be livid if you arrived at Charles de Gaulle from San Francisco and told you need to go to Gare de Lyon to catch a train to Lyon. This will cause problems with those transfer flights, as while the number of transfer passengers is small percentage, its all part of a much more expensive package, and could make people switch to a hub outside France and avoid Air France.

So while a laudable aim, it could end up with more miles being flown overall.

Yes, I read the same thing. And if that means that the domestic flights still happen, just with fewer people on them, then not so much is gained. Or maybe people will fly from Lyon to Paris via Geneva :)

People are always going to want to fly, and air passenger traffic is projected to double by the year 2050. Aviation is only about 2-3% of global energy use. A better solution would be more efficient planes, which of course is already happening.

swill453
Lemon Half
Posts: 7962
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
Has thanked: 984 times
Been thanked: 3643 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#404205

Postby swill453 » April 14th, 2021, 3:10 pm

Lootman wrote:
Gengulphus wrote:
Lootman wrote:It is impossible to unwind the airline part from all the rest of these programmes.

It's not merely possible, it's pretty easy: forbid the airlines from awarding 'air miles' or any similar incentive for flying. Other uses of the 'air miles' schemes can continue - they're no worse than Tesco Clubcard points or points for any of the many other types of 'loyalty' cards. The resulting situation would be rather surreal, in that the one thing you would definitely not be allowed to earn 'air miles' for is travelling miles by air! I suspect that would be resolved after a while, because the 'air miles' companies would grow tired of fielding complaints from customers about not being awarded 'air miles' for their flights (and possibly even of trades description investigations...) and decide that it was time to 'rebrand' themselves...

Note I'm only saying it would be pretty easy to do this - not advocating it!

Well OK, it is possible to do, in theory anyway. But a little unfair on people like me who have accumulated about 400,000 air miles on the understanding that I can use them for flights.

Eh? Nothing was said about preventing you from spending them on flights. It was about preventing one from earning air miles or any similar incentive by flying.

Scott.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6564 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#404211

Postby Lootman » April 14th, 2021, 3:21 pm

swill453 wrote:
Lootman wrote:
Gengulphus wrote:It's not merely possible, it's pretty easy: forbid the airlines from awarding 'air miles' or any similar incentive for flying. Other uses of the 'air miles' schemes can continue - they're no worse than Tesco Clubcard points or points for any of the many other types of 'loyalty' cards. The resulting situation would be rather surreal, in that the one thing you would definitely not be allowed to earn 'air miles' for is travelling miles by air! I suspect that would be resolved after a while, because the 'air miles' companies would grow tired of fielding complaints from customers about not being awarded 'air miles' for their flights (and possibly even of trades description investigations...) and decide that it was time to 'rebrand' themselves...

Note I'm only saying it would be pretty easy to do this - not advocating it!

Well OK, it is possible to do, in theory anyway. But a little unfair on people like me who have accumulated about 400,000 air miles on the understanding that I can use them for flights.

Nothing was said about preventing you from spending them on flights. It was about preventing one from earning air miles or any similar incentive by flying.

If that is the variant you advocate then don't you think that airlines would simply find some other way of rewarding their most lucrative customers?

For instance there is the whole business of "status" within airline loyalty programs. I have been BA Gold for the last 4 years. That means I can use the First Wing dedicated check-in and security at LHR T5, use the First Lounge or Concorde Room whilst I wait for my flight, and get various extras on board. I also get early access to flight sales, enjoy discretionary upgrades, can make seat selections for free, get extra baggage allowances, have priority access to concierge services, and so on.

In some ways those perks are worth more than the miles. Would you ban all that as well?

And couldn't airlines just switch to a cashback scheme? There are so many ways to skin this cat.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6564 times

Re: Half aviation emissions caused by 1% of people

#407109

Postby Lootman » April 26th, 2021, 1:55 pm

If anyone is wondering who the main suspect is for emissions from flights, they might take note of the latest list of the world's busiest airports. Seven of the ten busiest airports were in China last year, including the busiest: Guangzhou (CAN) with about 43 million passengers.

2019's top airport, Atlanta (ATL), was only second in 2020 although it was still top in aircraft takeoffs and landings, with over half a million.

Admittedly this is for 2020 when flights were greatly affected by Covid. But then that just makes the Chinese numbers even more impressive. Maybe the title of this topic should be "half aviation emissions are caused by China"?


Return to “The Natural World”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests