- 15 Mar 2008 11:20
#1478029
source
Go Europe!, Go Europe!, Go Europe!
This story neatly puts the difference between the US and Europe into the spotlight. The US is all about doing nothing that might endanger the ability of the rich airline owners to line their pockets, and a power-crazed attitude to 'security'. Europe is more interested in reducing the environmental damage posed by air-travel, and (sadly) free-trade.
US told to go green on carbon emissions or lose EU flights
* Dan Milmo, transport correspondent
* The Guardian,
* Saturday March 15 2008
US airlines must pay for their carbon dioxide emissions or face a curb on flights to the European Union, the EU transport commissioner warned yesterday.
The green ultimatum was issued by Jacques Barrot as the transatlantic airline market undergoes its biggest shakeup in 30 years when limits on flights between the EU and US are lifted this month. Barrot said negotiations on a second phase for the treaty will include a demand that US carriers join the EU emissions trading scheme or an equivalent system in the US.
He added that requests by Washington for data on passengers overflying the US are disproportionate and will not be accepted by the EU, which fears that security measures across the Atlantic are becoming too draconian.
However, the environmental dispute with the US, which is refusing to let airlines join a carbon trading scheme, is likely to escalate following Barrot's comments on "open skies" negotiations.
Discussions on a second phase with the US department of transportation begin in May and Barrot said the EU had the power to withdraw flying rights if a deal is not reached.
"It's always possible to imagine reducing the number of flights or suspending certain rights," he said, adding that a member of the US Congress environment committee believed a deal will be possible once the Bush administration ends.
"He told me that attitudes are changing. Particularly with Bush and Cheney gone, there is a real hope of things moving on. The new administration will be under pressure to take new measures."
EU airlines must join the emissions trading scheme in 2012, which could add up to £13 to the price of a return flight as carriers buy "carbon credits".
All airlines flying in and out of the EU must subscribe to the scheme but the International Air Transport Association has warned that 170 countries oppose the move.
European carriers want foreign rivals coopted on to the scheme because airlines who refuse to buy carbon credits will offer lower fares. The transport secretary, Ruth Kelly, also waded into the argument last year, accusing the UN's International Civil Aviation Organisation of committing a "very great failing" in not setting up a global emissions scheme for airlines.
Barrot will also demand that the US government lift restrictions on foreign ownership of airlines and accept EU security procedures. Under the open skies terms, EU states can suspend flights from the US to Europe if insufficient progress is made on a second phase by 2010. The suspensions can take place from 2012.
Barrot described a request for data on all passengers flying over the US as excessive. "Any demand has to be a proportionate response to existing security problems."
source
Go Europe!, Go Europe!, Go Europe!
This story neatly puts the difference between the US and Europe into the spotlight. The US is all about doing nothing that might endanger the ability of the rich airline owners to line their pockets, and a power-crazed attitude to 'security'. Europe is more interested in reducing the environmental damage posed by air-travel, and (sadly) free-trade.
- By SpecialOlympian
- By Unthinking Majority
- By Saeko
- By Tainari88