Madam, - Unlike diesel or petrol, which are taxed heavily, aviation fuel enjoys a low or zero taxation worldwide. This gives air travel an unfair advantage over alternatives such as rail, sea travel or the long-distance coach. It encourages the proliferation of the most environmentally damaging form of transport.
Why are we effectively subsidising something which gobbles up our dwindling fossil fuel reserves and contributes significantly to global greenhouse gas emissions? Only a tiny proportion of the earth's population uses air travel on any sort of regular basis, yet the whole planet suffers the consequences.
At the very least, aviation fuel should be taxed at a rate similar to petrol or diesel. Better still, the level of fuel tax should be in keeping with the fuel efficiency of the mode of transport. While this inevitably will lead to substantially higher fares, it will also bring about a sharp reduction in the volume of air travel (perhaps to the level of 10 years ago) and our environment will be much more the healthier as a result
And perhaps if air travel were to become more expensive, there would be much greater incentive for politicians, governments and transport providers to develop the alternatives and make them more attractive.
A glance at any airport departures board will reveal that the bulk of flights are short hops of 60 minutes or less. Such flights are by far the least efficient in terms of fuel use. Unfortunately, even where alternative land or sea transport exists, it is often much more expensive, not to mention poorly scheduled and inconvenient.
In these circumstances, it is hardly surprising that people choose to fly. - Yours, etc.,
ANDY WILSON, Sandyhill, Westport, Co Mayo.