Following up to AREDAY and some good recent environmentally themed blogs by Michael Conniff (who coined “Code Green”) and alpha 6, I wanted to put forward an initiative.

It’s so simple and logical, I apologize if someone has proposed this before. Regardless, when you look at the data and see our community’s stated priorities, it needs to be done.

Recently, I read the Canary Initiative’s Aspen Emissions Inventory to look at the impact of Rick Magnuson’s proposal to change the Sheriff fleet to hybrids and biodiesel.

I found that the total savings would be on the order of ~90 tons a year. Nothing to sneeze at, but only a tiny fraction of a percentage of Aspen’s total emissions.

What shocked me was the impact of private air travel.

Compared to the 180 tons a year total emitted by the Sheriff’s fleet, private air travel emits 157,000 tons.

That’s right, let me say it again: one-hundred-fifty-seven thousand tons of CO2.

That is almost one-fifth of Aspen’s total emissions. For perspective, it has the equivalent global warming footprint of:

• All of the electricity used in both residential and commercial buildings in the community
• All of our (non tourists) driving on highway-82 and around town

I’m still in shock. We could literally as a community sell all of our cars and trucks and walk everywhere, or play “18th century house” and disconnect all of our appliances, lighting, computers, AC, etc. to save the CO2 emitted just by those who fly privately into Sardy Field.

And who fly privately? The elite of the elite. Don’t believe me? Check out this New York Times article. If you haven’t read it, it will open your eyes.

Reading it, and then reading the Aspen emissions inventory in succession, will burn your eyes.

For one, the “private aircraft” coming into Aspen are not the simple single-engine Cessnas flown by amateur pilots over the weekend. According to the Times,

“By aircraft [Aspen private jet airport manager] Mr. Farischon is referring not to self-piloted two-seaters but to multimillion-dollar machines like an Embraer Lineage 1000, a Citation X, or a Gulfstream IV or Gulfstream V, respectively the aeronautic versions of a Lexus or Mercedes-Benz. At least one of each was parked, chevron-fashion, on the tarmac one quiet recent Monday, as was a Boeing 727 retrofitted for private use.”
A typical rationale to fly private came from Gavin Polone, a former Hollywood agent:

“In North America, I only fly privately,” he explained. “For me what’s important is excluding myself from people who might bum me out.” (my emphasis)

Sorry, but let me rant for a second: We as a community are busting our humps, installing compact-flourescent lightbulbs, scrimping to afford our Prius payments, sealing our houses, et. al., so Hollywood agents don’t have to fly with people “who might bum them out”?

Are you kidding me?!?

To me, there is a simple answer to the private-air travel conundrum. It may not be so simple to implement, but if we are serious about the Canary Initiative, Code Green, etc., this one is a no brainer.

Implement a revenue-neutral, county- carbon-tax on all incoming private flights into Aspen.

First, this tax will be geared not to raise revenue for the county, but merely to offset the enormous emissions output by the private jets. Taxes could be priced at fair market value (e.g., on the EU or Chicago carbon emissions markets). Revenues would be used to either buy carbon offsets, or put the money into local programs that will help consumers and businesses implement efficient technologies. Think local subsidies for hybrid or efficient appliance purchases, or maybe an Aspen solar roof initiative.

I haven’t done the analysis, but this tax would likely have little to no negative economic impact on Aspen in the conventional sense. High-end air traffic is highly inelastic–meaning a small price increase is not likely to affect consumption.

Even if taxes were to go to, say $250 or more per flight, at a private jet cost (wheels up to touch down) of $5000-15000 per hour, this tax would be less as a percentage than the 9/11 TSA security fees we average Joes pay on our roundtrips out of Denver.

The demand, in fact, is so high, that according to the NYT “Jan. 2 this year, [Aspen] had 150 aircraft that didn’t get in.”

Seriously, do we really think this tax would curb demand? Would we reallly feel bad about implementing a tax on elite, uber-wealthy flyers that would merely pay to offset their own carbon emissions?

Maybe more to the point: are we serious as a community to put some teeth into our Canary?