Canada considers imposing climate fees on air travel
The Canadian government is considering slapping air travelers with a climate surcharge, a recent federal poll suggests.
Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), the Trudeau administration’s environmental department, commissioned an internal survey to gauge whether Canadians who book flights would be willing to pay extra money for climate change.
When asked if they would “pay an additional fee so airlines can purchase sustainable aviation fuel,” 63% of respondents said they were opposed to the idea. When asked if they would “pay an additional fee so airlines can purchase carbon emissions offsets,” 65% said they were opposed.
The poll also asked respondents if they would pay a surcharge of up to $50 on flights costing $500 or more. Only thirty percent said they would support the measure, according to a report from Rebel News.
When asked “How likely are you to consider actions to reduce your flight’s impact on the environment?” 41% said they were willing to conduct more business meetings virtually.
The survey appears to be testing the waters and see whether government plans to reduce air travel by 15%, which the Trudeau administration announced last year, will meet strong resistance.
Globalists aim to reduce air travel
A reduction in air travel has been a major objective set by globalist leaders under the pretext of “climate change.” The C40, a conglomerate of mayors throughout the world who have pledged to implement the World Health Organization’s Air Quality Guidelines, has pegged aviation as one of six key categories that require “consumption intervention.”
“Reducing flights and adopting sustainable aviation fuels could collectively avoid $70 million in damages from air pollution that would impact human health, buildings, infrastructure and agricultural production,” explains a C40 proposal.
The C40 syndicate is backed by Google, the World Bank, George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, and many other corporations, non-governmental organizations and various government government entities, including the UK.
C40: Residents should be limited to one flight every three years
Reducing flights is significantly more effective at cutting carbon emissions than substituting sustainable fuels, says the C40 report, which is why getting people to fly less is the more “ambitious” objective.
“In the ambitious scenario, reducing flights is more effective at cutting emissions than further increasing the use of sustainable aviation fuels; the former reduces emissions by 11% and the latter by just 1%.”
Therefore, “46% of C40 cities’ residents would need to reduce the number of trips compared to their 2017 levels” to have the desired effect on the climate. Municipal governments should reduce air travel by 26% by the year 2030 and 55% by 2050, says the C40. To achieve this, residents should be limited to one flight every two years, which the proposal refers to as the “progressive target for 2030.” The “ambitious target” for 2030 limits flights to one every three years, with each flight limited to a distance of no more than 1,500 km (932 miles).
