Obama's words not followed by actions to curb aviation emissions

[wtmusic]

"Barack Obama must act fast to avoid a trade war over Europe's efforts to curb airlines' carbon pollution, a key member of the European parliament has warned.

Peter Liese, a Christian Democrat in Germany who has led Europe's efforts to curb airline carbon emissions, urged Obama to live up to his sweeping promises to act on climate change, and help advance stalled negotiations for a global aviation deal.

<>

He now saw a 50-50 chance the talks would fail to produce a deal by the early September meetings of the International Civil Aviation Organisation, triggering a transatlantic trade and diplomatic crisis.

'For me and I think for the European parliament this is a test case: how serious is Obama on climate change? Is it only a speech, or is it serious?' Liese said."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jul/19/barack-obama-climate-change

[cantbeserious]

1. This Administration Seems To Be Dragging Its Feet On This Issue

eom

[wtmusic]

2. Obama is very serious about climate change

when there is no financial penalty to pay for dealing with it.

I.e., never.

[cantbeserious]

3. Yes - There Does Seem To Be A Desire For Everything To Be Accomplished At Minimal Cost

One wonders how much of that is due to his campaign contributors demanding concessions.

[limpyhobbler]

4. This really seems like the result of some narrow, special interest lobbying by the campaign funders.

Someone from the airlines or from the manufacturer probably made a call to the government to stop this.

[kristopher]

5. So now you are for a carbon trading scheme?

If you can use it to malign the President, then it suddenly something you like?

wtmusic What it means is that emissions trading is a scam.
In every circumstance where emissions trading schemes have been enacted carbon output has gone up.
Smoke and mirrors (mostly smoke).
http://www.democraticunderground.com/112749397#post9

The EU proposed a cap and trade system that was designed to encourage the airlines to increase efficiency by gradually tightening the limits on emissions, thereby making it more expensive to emit carbon. This approach has the effect of encouraging innovation in efficiency by the emitters and effectively raising the price of carbon based fuels, thereby making alternatives more economically attractive.

The EU has delayed implementation of the tax but it is already a law. If Obama does nothing the tax will STILL take effect and airlines flying through EU airspace will be subject to paying it. The US law is not going to do US airlines a lick of good when they try to use EU airports while in violation of EU law. They will have to pay or else give up doing business in Europe.

But hey, you were able to badmouth a Dem President, so what do you care, right NukeMan?

[quadrature]

6. EU's behavior is immoral

suppose there was an airline that
flew between East Canada and Ireland.

the EU is claiming that ALL the carbon emitted
(both ways) is subject to their fee.

[Nihil]

8. Bullshit.

> suppose there was an airline that
> flew between East Canada and Ireland.
>
> the EU is claiming that ALL the carbon emitted
> (both ways) is subject to their fee.

Correct. If a flight takes off from or lands at any European airport
then that flight is liable for the tax.

> EU's behavior is immoral

If the EU tax manages to cut even one of the ridiculous number of pathetic
and unnecessary flights then it is worth it and the fact that you consider
environmentally-sound actions to be "immoral" speaks volumes about you.

[wtmusic]

9. Agree

The EU has every right to apply levies they deem necessary to protect the atmosphere which we all share.

Once in a while it would be extremely refreshing to see the U.S. step up to the plate as they have.

[Heywood J]

7. Here, I thought the thread was going to be about leaded AVGAS emissions. (NT)