Members of the public and campaigners from Hastings and St Leonards Clean Water Action, protest against raw sewage release incidents on the beach in St Leonards, Sussex, August 26, 2022
SIX private water companies across England are facing landmark legal action over allegations of under-reporting pollution incidents and overcharging customers.
Severn Trent Water, Thames Water, United Utilities, Anglian Water, Yorkshire Water and Northumbrian Water could end up forking out more than £800 million in compensation to over 20 million customers if the cases are successful.
Environmental and water consultant Professor Carolyn Roberts, who is being represented by Leigh Day Solicitors, claimed that the firms have broken competition laws by misleading the Environment Agency and regulator Ofwat.
She alleges they have been under-reporting the number of sewage discharges, resulting in customers being “unfairly overcharged” for wastewater services, and that had sewage discharge reporting been accurate it would have lowered customer bills.
The British government’s current policies are about as far from being consistent with Britain’s net zero plan as it is possible to be, argues RICHARD HEBBERT
…
Last week Sunak announced that his government is granting over 100 new licences for oil and gas exploration in the North Sea, claiming in a peculiarly Orwellian statement that to do so is “consistent with the UK’s net zero plan.”
It isn’t. How could it possibly be?
Nor should we forget that the Tory government has approved the opening of a new coalmine in Cumbria and effectively banned on-shore windfarms — one of the quickest, cheapest and cleanest forms of renewable energy.
The British government cannot be ignorant of the manifest signs that the Earth’s climate is racing towards catastrophe, even quicker than has been previously forecast and yet it wilfully looks the other way.
THE Scottish Greens have called on the SNP-Green Scottish government to levy a “super-tax” on private jets.
The demand for a £1,000 per passenger levy on the more than 10,000 Scottish private flights, comes as carbon emissions in the sector have been rising in recent years.
…
dizzy: The article continues saying that the powers to impose such a tax are not devolved. Perhaps Scotland could refuse permission to land or divert them to the Faroe Islands instead? Permission to land please Edinburgh. Sorry, can’t do it, you’ll have to divert to Faroe, Norway or Scilly Isles or maintain a holding position for 16 hours ;)
Tesla CEO Elon Musk boards his private jet before departing from Beijing Capital International Airport on May 31, 2023.
“Billionaires and the ultra-wealthy are getting a bargain, paying less in taxes each year to fly private and contribute more pollution than millions of drivers combined on the roads below.”
U.S. Sen. Ed Markey announced legislation on Wednesday that would hike fuel taxes for private jet travel and transfer the revenue to a new federal fund aimed at bolstering clean public transportation and other climate initiatives.
The bill, titled the Fueling Alternative Transportation With a Carbon Aviation Tax (FATCAT) Act, would add a $1.73-per-gallon surcharge to the current fuel tax for private jet travel, which is around $0.22 per gallon. Markey’s new surcharge would amount to the equivalent of roughly $200 per metric ton of a private jet’s carbon emissions, according to the senator’s office.
Private jet flights—a significantly more polluting form of travel than commercial flights or trains—surged during the coronavirus pandemic. One recent study by the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and the Patriotic Millionaires estimated that private jets’ planet-warming emissions jumped by more than 23% during the Covid-19 crisis.
Elon Musk, Tesla’s billionaire CEO, is the most frequent private jet flyer in the U.S., helping produce more than 2,100 tons of carbon emissions last year while paying minimal taxes, according to IPS and the Patriotic Millionaires. The groups pointed to research showing that just 1% of the world’s population is responsible for half of all aviation emissions.
“The 1 percent can’t free ride on our environment and our infrastructure at a discount,” Markey (D-Mass.) said in a statement. “Billionaires and the ultra-wealthy are getting a bargain, paying less in taxes each year to fly private and contribute more pollution than millions of drivers combined on the roads below. It’s time to ground these fat cats and make them pay their fair share so that we can invest in building public transportation that communities across the country and our economy desperately need.”
Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.) introduced companion legislation in the House.
“Working families shouldn’t subsidize the ultra-wealthy to fly private and destroy our environment,” said Velázquez. “If billionaires want to travel on private jets, they should pay similar taxes to those flying commercial. It’s time for the rich to pay for their pollution so we can fund environmental justice initiatives and affordable public transportation across the country.”
Climate campaigners have been targeting private jets with growing frequency in recent years as research has more closely examined their impacts on the planet. The European group Transport & Environment found that private jets are five to 14 times more polluting than commercial planes and 50 times more polluting than trains.
In May, dozens of climate activists and scientists disrupted Europe’s largest private jet sales fair to demand a total ban on the planes. IPS and the Patriotic Millionaires estimated that the median net worth of a full private jet owner is $190 million.
“Sales of private jets are skyrocketing, and with them the one percent’s hugely unfair contribution to the climate crisis—while the most vulnerable people deal with the damage,” Klara Maria Schenk of Greenpeace’s Mobility for All campaign said during the May protest. “It is high time for politicians to put a stop to this unjust and excessive pollution and ban private jets.”
This story has been updated with additional details about the bill.
In a report published in September 2020, the Stockholm Environment Institute estimated that the richest 10% of people, globally, contributed to roughly 50% of worldwide carbon emissions in the years 1995 and 2015 — the timeframe in which the institute conducted its study. By comparison, the poorest 50% were responsible for 7% or 8% of emissions.
Citing portions of that study in its own report on greenhouse gases and climate change, the International Energy Agency noted that the world’s richest 0.1% contribute more to global carbon emissions each year than the rest of the wealthiest 10% combined, with the richest 1% polluting roughly 1,000 times more than the poorest 1%. Another report by Oxfam last November suggested that just 125 of the world’s wealthiest billionaires emit 3 million tons of carbon dioxide per person, on average, each year, which is about a million times higher than the average annual emissions of the bottom 90%.
