"A tenth of all departure flights in 2019 were by private jets, T&E research found"<p>That's quite a lot more than I expected. Still I'm a bit disappointed there isn't more interest in going for high enough taxation to have it subsidize cleaner emissions elsewhere (e.g. about half the power in France still comes from oil and gas) rather than outright bans. If someone really wants to pay that much to get somewhere let them pay to create net reductions instead of focusing on how much that trip would create.
Will this reduce the popularity of long-haul flights into hubs in France (e.g. CDG), since it won't be possible to get connecting flights to other cities in France?
This would also be great in Germany, but it's impossible to establish, because people want a seat.
In contrast to TGV, tickets for the ICE do not include a seat reservation. And if you pay extra for it, there is this the possibility of unplanned shorter trains, substitute trains without carried-over reservation numbers or any other failure.
If you really want to reduce CO2 emissions, you need to ban cars, buses, and SUVs before you address planes.<p><a href="https://truecostblog.com/2010/05/27/fuel-efficiency-modes-of-transportation-ranked-by-mpg/" rel="nofollow">https://truecostblog.com/2010/05/27/fuel-efficiency-modes-of...</a><p>Flippancy aside, in most cases the transportation mode has a relatively similar rate of emission. The problem is the number of miles travelled.
Not to worry, Steven Spielberg's types will get an exception. And "a Frenchman who is careful in his daily life" won't even know about it, since it will be forbidden/discouraged to write about.
Time to bump the TGV capacity. Last time I tried to buy a ticket for the TGV from Rennes to Bordeaux it was fully booked, which appears to be a common theme.
fantastic to see this type of state intervention. People have choices, but those sometimes the consequences of those choices are too severe and choices need to be removed