Richard Branson and Al Gore; did Branson inadvertantly hurt Al?

[Atman]

Did anyone watch the CNN interview with Virgin Airlines' Richard Branson and Al Gore, which just ended? Compelling, excellent interview! Miles O'Solidad was in so far in over his head, and came off sounding like just part of the problem. Superb! But then Branson, sitting right there in this interview with Al Gore, possible presidential candidate in 08 (?!) said "we should tax the airlines out of business." Miles was stunned. I was stunned, but only in the sense that, holy shit, Richard, don't say something like that out loud sense. I can see that bit coming up in every republican campaign spot for the next two years. Miles jumped all over it, and both Branson and Gore gave very, very compelling explanations, inarguable, imho...we need to stop thinking in terms of "peak oil" and drawing out the inevitable, and put all our efforts towards alternative sources of energy. If a train and plane take the same route, the airlines should be heavily taxed to encourage use of the train, which is 90% more environmentally friendly. He explained how a small percentage of humans are poking holes in the atmosphere, endagering the vast majority of the earth's residents below. It was an amazing bit, but I think Branson's comment about "taxing the airlines out of business," while spot-on, might come back to haunt them.

.

[acmejack]

1. The pollution released from jet engines is massive.

Branson knows it.
snip>
Pollutants from more than five million civil and nearly 2,800 military flights each year are destroying Earth’s protective ozone layer and stealing blue skies, while accounting for more than 10% of global greenhouse warming. With 27,000 heavy jetliners scheduled to enter service by 2017—more than doubling the current fleet—a recent British government report calls aerial gridlock a “risk to planet”—and urges travelers to refuse short-haul flights and take the train instead.

http://www.willthomas.net/Convergence/Weekly/Jet_Pollution.htm

[Jackpine Radical]

2. Well, you make two interesting points here.

First, that many proposed, and perhaps necessary, environmental initiatives will be wildly unpopular--such as taxing the airlines.

And second, advocatging for these things may not be good for your political health and viability.

It's clear to me that Al Gore is, above all else, an environmental advocate. As such, he has to know he's going to endorse the swallowing of some bitter pills. Maybe that's why he hasn't come out of the box running. Maybe his attitude is, "I don't want to run for office unless you people are ready for me. Prove you really mean it when you say you're ready to be led into the big changes."

[Atman]

3. And another good point back at'cha!

Al Gore staying out of the race until he knows people are serious. He'll get absolute skewered for some of these positions, and the big fat republican pundits will be out in full force scaring Amurkans with the old chestnuts like "Democrats want you to drive rollerskates!" and "Taxes! They love TAXES! See, Amurkah! They'll tax the air you breathe, next!" Doubtful. I'd expect the Republicans will find a way to charge us for the air we breathe before the democrats tax it, but that's another issue.

[Jackpine Radical]

5. They won't charge us for the air.

They'll just poison it & then charge us for the respirators we'll ned to breathe it.

Pretty much the same scheme is in line for water.

[KoKo]

4. Good point. Sugar Coating isn't what he's about these days...

Thanks ....