Institute for Policy Studies

‘Time to Do It for Real,’ Advocates Say as Biden Claims He’s ‘Practically’ Declared Climate Emergency

Spread the love
Extinction Rebellion protest, banner reads NO MORE PLANET WRECKING FOSSIL FUELS DEMAND RENEWABLE ENERGY
Extinction Rebellion protest, banner reads NO MORE PLANET WRECKING FOSSIL FUELS DEMAND RENEWABLE ENERGY

Original article by Julia Conley republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

“There’s nothing more important than what happens today,” said one environmental lawyer. “And there’s no person in the world with more power to do good than Joe Biden.”

In an interview with The Weather Channel Wednesday, U.S. President Joe Biden signaled he has no plans to formally declare a climate emergency, claiming that his climate policies are sufficient and that, “practically speaking,” a national emergency has already been declared.

When asked if he will take the unprecedented step in order to unlock executive powers to drastically cut fossil fuel emissions, Biden told correspondent Stephanie Abrams, “I’ve already done that.”

The president pointed to $368 billion that was included in the Inflation Reduction Act to invest in clean energy production, actions being taken to conserve land, and his decision to rejoin the Paris climate agreement as evidence that he is taking all the steps that experts have said are necessary to fight the climate crisis.

“We’re moving,” Biden said.

The interview aired days after a reporter asked White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre about the status of Biden’s reported climate emergency deliberations, noting that NASA climate scientist Peter Kalmus recently wrote in an op-ed that not declaring an emergency is “anti-science.”

Jean-Pierre did not directly address the question but defended Biden’s record, saying he “believes in science” and “talks about climate change.”

“And, you know, it is such a difference to what we see from Republicans who don’t even acknowledge climate change,” she added. “We’re going to continue to move forward to do everything that we can not just here in America, but globally, to be a leader in fighting climate change.”

Kalmus called Jean-Pierre’s response “barely coherent” and demanded to know why the White House won’t declare a climate emergency.

“It’s not enough for Biden to ‘practically’ declare a climate emergency,” said the Institute for Policy Studies on Wednesday after Biden’s interview aired. “It’s time to officially announce one.”

Last summer, Biden reportedly began considering declaring a climate emergency as extreme heat overtook much of the country.

As numerous climate action groups have outlined, a climate emergency declaration would be far from a symbolic gesture. The action, taken under the National Emergencies Act, would allow the White House to:

  • Reinstate the federal ban on crude oil exports—lifted by Congress in 2015—which could slash fossil fuel emissions by as much as 165 million metric tons per year;
  • End oil and gas drilling in more than 11 million acres of federal waters;
  • Halt the investment of hundreds of billions of dollars in fossil fuel projects abroad; and
  • Unlock federal funds that could be used to construct renewable energy infrastructure in communities that are especially vulnerable to climate disasters.

Biden’s comments came weeks after scientists said last month was the hottest month on record, with millions of people from Asia to Western Europe and the United States facing temperatures close to 130°F. The World Weather Attribution said in late July that the extreme heat would have been “virtually impossible” without the climate crisis and continued emissions of heat-trapping gases by the fossil fuel industry.

“As we suffer through these fossil fuel heatwaves, megafires, and floods, [Biden]’s leaving immense powers on the shelf for combating the crisis,” Kassie Siegel, director of the Climate Law Institute of the Center for Biological Diversity, told Common Dreams. “But now is the time for him to actually declare a climate emergency under the National Emergencies Act.”

Siegel added that by dismissing direct questions about an official climate emergency declaration, the White House appears to be employing “the oldest strategy in the book,” long used by administrations that have denied the climate crisis and the need to shift the renewable energy.

“The unfortunate reality is that doing some good things is simply not enough, because we are in a physical climate emergency,” Siegel said. “It is a question of survival and every day counts. There’s nothing more important than what happens today… And there’s no person in the world with more power to do good than Joe Biden.”

While the president has taken some steps to undo harm done to communities by extractive industries—announcing protections from uranium mining for one million acres near the Grand Canyon on Tuesday and launching a $20 billion initiative to invest private capital into clean technology projects last month—he also infuriated climate advocates and experts earlier this year when he approved the Willow drilling project in Alaska. The project could produce more than 600 million barrels of crude oil over three decades and lead to roughly 280 million metric tons of carbon emissions.

The White House also drew criticism last month for its announcement of new regulations for fossil fuel leasing, despite Biden’s campaign promise to ban oil and gas leases on federal lands.

“The truth is, the Biden administration has devastated communities and wildlife by backing disastrous fossil fuel projects from Alaska to Appalachia,” Siegel told Common Dreams. “And what he does today is going to make a huge difference for how much devastation comes in the future.”

Siegel added that with the United Nations set to convene a Climate Ambition Summit on September 20 in New York, “there has never been a better time for Biden to actually declare a climate emergency.”

At the summit, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres aims to “accelerate action by governments, business, finance, local authorities, and civil society.”

The People vs. Fossil Fuels coalition, comprised of more than 1,200 advocacy groups, said it plans to mobilize ahead of the summit for a March to End Fossil Fuels in New York, aiming to “push President Biden to make a climate emergency declaration official and stop approving these deadly fossil fuel projects once and for all.”

“Now that President Biden says he’s ‘practically’ declared a climate emergency, it’s time to do it for real,” said the coalition. “The president should follow through on his rhetoric and immediately declare a national emergency that would unlock new executive powers to speed up the deployment of clean energy and halt fossil fuel expansion.”

Original article by Julia Conley republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Continue Reading‘Time to Do It for Real,’ Advocates Say as Biden Claims He’s ‘Practically’ Declared Climate Emergency

Here’s How the ‘Jet-Owning Oligarchy’ Harms Both Planet and Workers

Spread the love

Original article by KENNY STANCIL republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

A new analysis catalogs alarming facts about the destructive private jet industry, which is emblematic of runaway economic and carbon inequality.

Research published Monday details how the working class is paying the price, in more ways than one, for the “jet-owning oligarchy” to hop around the globe in their personal luxury planes.

It’s well-established that private jet travel by the super-rich is worsening the fossil fuel-driven climate crisis. Adding insult to injury, this conspicuously carbon-intensive consumption is being subsidized by ordinary taxpayers, as the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and Patriotic Millionaires make clear in their new analysis.

Entitled High Flyers 2023: How Ultra-Rich Private Jet Travel Costs the Rest of Us and Burns Up Our Planet, the report catalogs alarming facts about the private jet industry and makes recommendations about how to rein in this potent symbol and manifestation of escalating inequality.

To begin with, “private jets emit at least 10 times more pollutants than commercial planes per passenger,” the report notes. “Unsurprisingly, approximately 1% of people are believed to be responsible for about half of all aviation carbon emissions.”

Amid a surge in wealth inequality since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, “private jet use has increased by about a fifth, and private jet emissions have increased more than 23%,” the report points out. “The private jet sector set industry records with regards to transaction and dollar volume in 2021 and 2022.”

While a coronavirus-era boom is evident, the industry has been growing steadily alongside wealth inequality since the turn of the century. As the report states: “The size of the global fleet has increased 133% in the last two decades from 9,895 in 2000 to 23,133 in mid-2022. This bonanza was accompanied by an unprecedented number of business jet operations, 5.3 million in 2022.”

“If we can’t ban private jets, we should at least tax them and require them to pay to offset their environmental damage and subsidies.”

According to the report, “The median net worth of a full and fractional private jet owner is $190 million and $140 million respectively.” A minuscule 0.0008% of the global population belongs to the jet-owning class, which consists mostly of financial and real estate tycoons.

Last year, billionaire Elon Musk, “the most active high flyer in the United States,” bought a new jet and took 171 private flights, or about one every other day, the report notes.

In so doing, he single-handedly “contributed to the consumption of 837,934 liters of jet fuel,” states the report, and he “was responsible for 2,112 tons of carbon emissions”—132 times more than the entire carbon footprint of an average person in the United States.

In a statement, report co-author Kalena Thomhave, a researcher with the Program on Inequality and the Common Good at IPS, called private jets “a microcosm of our system of wealth inequality even beyond their image of extravagance.”

“Private flyers pay just 2% of the taxes that primarily fund the Federal Aviation Administration, yet nearly 17% of flights handled by the FAA are private,” said Thomhave. “Meanwhile, private jets contribute disproportionately to carbon emissions while often representing significant tax savings for their wealthy owners.”

As the report observes: “Thousands of municipal airports in the U.S. are funded by the public, but many primarily serve private and corporate jets. These airports may not offer scheduled passenger service, but they still offer airport runways subsidized by taxes.”

Such regressive taxation is the product of industry lobbying, the report explains:

The largest player in the private jet lobby, the National Business Aviation Association, has spent an average $2.4 million each year since 2008 lobbying the federal government, primarily for tax giveaways. During the Covid-19 pandemic, the industry specifically lobbied for Covid relief, particularly “medium to long-term liquidity assistance and relief from air transportation excise taxes,” even though industry demand was quickly climbing.

As wealth inequality soars, so too does the value of the private jet market, which grew from $32.3 billion in 2021 to $34.1 billion in 2022, the report notes. With wealth being concentrated in fewer and fewer hands and little to no downward redistribution on the horizon, the private jet industry is projected to expand further in the coming years.

Report co-author Omar Ocampo, a researcher with the Program on Inequality and the Common Good at IPS, said that the private jet industry’s expected growth this decade “provides us with a great opportunity to levy a luxury transfer tax on private jet sales.” He added that “the revenue raised from this tax can be invested towards developing a green transportation system.”

According to the report, “A 10% and 5% transfer fee on pre-owned and new private aircraft would have raised $2.4 billion in 2021 and $2.6 billion in 2022.”

In addition to imposing a transfer tax on all private jet sales, IPS and Patriotic Millionaires recommend the following steps be taken:

  • Levy a private jet fuel tax;
  • Institute a “short hop” surcharge;
  • Resist efforts to increase passenger facility charges until private jet owners pay their fair share;
  • Create a sustainable transportation equity trust fund;
  • Increase TSA security oversight of private jets; and
  • Pass the Aircraft Ownership Transparency Act.

According to the report, Musk would have paid nearly $4 million in additional taxes last year if a transfer fee and jet fuel tax had been in place.

“Private jet travel by billionaires and the ultra-wealthy imposes a tremendous cost on the rest of us,” said Chuck Collins, another co-author of the report.

“Not only do ordinary travelers and taxpayers subsidize the air space for private jets, but the high flyers also contribute considerably more pollution than other passengers,” said Collins. “If we can’t ban private jets, we should at least tax them and require them to pay to offset their environmental damage and subsidies.”

Original article by KENNY STANCIL republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Continue ReadingHere’s How the ‘Jet-Owning Oligarchy’ Harms Both Planet and Workers

Ultra-rich private jet travel has soared since the pandemic – and emissions followed

Spread the love

https://www.energymonitor.ai/policy/ultra-rich-private-jet-travel-has-soared-since-the-pandemic-and-emissions-followed/

The private jet sector has boomed since the start of the pandemic, reveals a report from the progressive think tank Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and nonpartisan organisation Patriotic Millionaires. While there was a drop in private flights in 2020, the sector picked up quickly again and saw an unprecedented number of 5.3 million business jet operations in 2022.

Compared to 2019, the number of flights globally and in the US increased by around a fifth last year. A 2022 study found that because of the increased flights, private jet emissions have increased by 23%. In the last two decades, the global private jet fleet size increased 133% – from 9,895 in 2000 to 23,122 in mid-2022.

Private jet travel is reserved for the few. The typical private jet owner has a net worth of $190m, according to the report. Since private jets emit at least ten times more than commercial planes per passenger, these ultra-rich private flyers are causing a disproportionate amount of emissions.

Awareness about the environmental costs of private jets has been increasing, putting frequent flyers under scrutiny. Celebrity Kylie Jenner made headlines last summer when she used her private jet for a short hop of just 17 minutes, a trip that would have taken less than an hour by car. A Twitter account tracking private jet flights of celebrities – since suspended, together with a similar account tracking Elon Musk’s flights – showed that this trip was far from unusual for the rich and famous.

…

https://www.energymonitor.ai/policy/ultra-rich-private-jet-travel-has-soared-since-the-pandemic-and-emissions-followed/

Continue ReadingUltra-rich private jet travel has soared since the pandemic – and emissions followed