|
Private Jets: Luxury for the Few, a Disaster for the Rest of Us
Hanscom Field, just outside of Boston, is New England’s largest private jet airfield. You’d like to think that in this time of climate crisis, public awareness would be focused on minimizing emissions, particularly from luxury sources like private jets. Yet private developers are pressing to triple Hanscom’s capacity to serve wealthy private jet travelers.
Private jets release up to 20 times more emissions per passenger than commercial flights. While the carbon emissions of flying are worse than any other form of transportation, private jets are by far the worst, according to Transport & Environment, a European clean-transport group.
The ability to use private air travel is in the realm of extreme wealth. The typical private jet owner has a net worth of $190 million, according to a report from the Institute for Policy Studies. Yet in spite of the negative climate effects, private jet travel hit a record high last year, with a resulting surge in carbon emissions.
While only a minuscule percentage of the population can afford private air travel, private flights in the U.S. emits as much greenhouse gas pollution in a year as all bus travel in the country, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
Private air travel also imposes greater costs on public infrastructure than commercial air travel, without contributing back. Air safety for all flights in the US is the responsibility of the Federal Aviation Administration, which is mainly funded by the fees and taxes paid on commercial flights, including a 7.5% tax on the ticket price and a separate $4.50 per person fee. But only 2% of the FAA's funding comes from private flight passengers, in spite of the fact that they use 16% of the country’s airspace. Private jet owners also benefit from the use of nearly 3,000 airports around the U.S. that don't receive scheduled commercial flights but still receive public funding, largely in the form of taxes and fuel surcharges on those commercial flights. Basically, commercial passengers are subsidizing the carbon and convenience of private jet travelers.
The World Inequality Database (WID) shows that the wealthiest 10% of people in the world are responsible for almost half of individual CO2 emissions globally, while the top 1% contribute close to 17%. The bottom 50% of the population are responsible for only 12% of individual carbon emissions.
So what's the solution? While electric aircraft prototypes are under development, practical use of the technology is decades away. The focus now should be on investing in high-speed rail and other transportation alternatives, which would create good jobs, serve more people, and reduce pollution.
In the meantime, residents near Hanscom Field are organizing against the proposed expansion of the airport to serve more private jets, and the movement has grown state-wide, with over 60 organizations joining the Stop Private Jet Expansion: at Hanscom or Anywhere coalition.
From their website: “This immense expansion project has the potential to single-handedly negate the total combined greenhouse gas reductions that Massachusetts and our cities and towns are working hard to achieve. For this reason alone, it should not go forward at Hanscom--or any other airport.”
For more information, or to get involved in the effort to stop private jet expansion in Massachusetts, please visit https://www.stopprivatejetexpansion.org/
Let’s make 2024 the year of successful fights against climate-destroying emissions and infrastructure in Massachusetts (and everywhere)!
Sources:
| 
