Aviation fuel on domestic and international flights should be taxed to combat climatic changes?

Question

Hey this is my topic for a debate competition, I need to speek for the motion........Pl. give me a good start!!!!(A good quotation or a question..)

Answer 1

I coach debate.

You need to be able to argue both sides, if for no other reason that to make sure you understand the opposing arguments and can counter them.

Unfortunately a tax on jet fuel will not combat climactic changes.

I recommend that the tax not be limited to jet fuel but also include all fossil fuels, or at least automotive fuel at the very least if the rules of the debate will permit you to expand the tax to automotive fuel. If not you can still use these arguments for a tax on jet fuel.

What you can argue is that a tax on jet fuel ( or all fossil fuels, not limited to jet fuel if they will permit that orgument ) is necessary to raise money for the purpose of mitigating the effects of climate changes.

You will need the money for mitigating the effects of the climate changes because you cannot stop Global Warming.

For example with Global Warming the sea levels will rise. We will need to build dike systems similar to those in Holland to hold back the sea for coastal communities to protect them from flooding.

Hurricanes will become stronger and more frequent. We will need to spend money to upgrade our disaster preparedness programs and upgrade the disaster preparedness programs of other countries for hurricanes.

Droughts will become more frequent. We will need to help the affected countries with supplemental water supplies and desalination plants.

All of these things will cost money. A tax on airline fuel and all fossil fuels is a rational way to raise money to mitigate the effects of Global Warming.

Opposing arguments against the tax could take several forms.

First your opponents could argue that the tax is not necessary because there is no Global Warming.

However Global Warming is an established fact so I do not consider that to be a credible argument.

Second your opponents could argue that the tax is not necessary because there will be no consequences caused by Global Warming.

That argument is not credible because it is established that Global Warming will cause the sea leves to rise due to the meling of ice locked up in glaciers and will cause weather changes such as stronger and more frequent hurricanes and droughts.

A third argument that your opponents could make is that we will reduce carbon dioxide emissions sufficiently to stop Global Warming so no tax is necessary.

That argument is not realistic because you would have to reduce the world wide carbon dioxide emissions to less than one tenth of what they are today to have any chance of stopping Global Warming. Even that reduction might not be sufficient. there is no demonstrated safe level of carbon dioxide emissions that will not cause Global Warming.

You would need to shut down the economies of all of the countries in the world including The People's Republic of China to accomplish that. There is no chance that you will ever get sufficient cooperation to accomplish that.

To get a reduction of carbon dioxide emissions to less than one tenth of what they are today you would have to shut down all motorized transportation world wide. That means shut down all automobiles, buses, trucks, trains, planes and shipping world wide.

You would need to ban the heating and air conditioning of all homes, offices, and factories world wide.

Next you would have to ban the heating of all water for washing and bathing again, world wide. .

We would all be taking cold showers. ( I would use this as a line to get a laugh from the audience. this will help you get the audience and the judges on your side.)

Next you would have to ban the use of fossil fuels for the generation of electricity world wide..

The People's Republic of China is on record as stating very emphatically they will not reduce their use of fossil fuels and in fact they will increase the use of fossil fuels.

The People's Republic of China alone emits enough carbon dioxide on its own to cause Global Warming even if every other country on the face of this planet reduced its carbon dioxide emissions to zero.

Essentially it is unrealistic to expect that we can stop Global Warming.

What you must do is be prepared to mitigate the effects of Global Warming.

That is where the tax on fossil fuels comes in. The tax will raise the money that you need to mitigate the effects of Global Warming.


I hope this helps. I will be interested to know how you do in your debate.


.

Answer 2

Aviation accounts for a very small part of CO2 emissions. If your goal is to raise money for environmental causes, you could raise 100 times more by taxing automobile fuel. If the goal is to make people conserve by raising the cost of fuel, you could get 100 times more conservation by taxing automobile fuel. In short, aviation is not the main problem.

Answer 3

This wouldn't combat climatic change, it would just keep some people from flying and they would probably drive instead. There are two things (but not only two) in life that are wasted effort - one is battling the oil companies and the other is trying to fix mother nature.

Answer 4

It ALL READY IS, BUT not enoufgh