This is a terrible idea. Some people have no choice but to fly. Say what you want but air travel is efficient.
I am reminded of an acquaintance of mine who once told me he had no choice but to drive, because he lived in a little village with one bus a day, but commuted into London. What he had overlooked is that he'd chosen to live in this village.
There'll be time after us.
For example, a round trip flight between NY and London is said to melt 3 cubic meters of arctic ice per passenger. So it wouldn't be unreasonable for airlines to be required to offset that in some way?
If so, then we just disagree on how to structure the tax but mostly agree on the need to reduce damaging flights.
1554 miles / (80 miles/gallon) * 6.8 lbs/gallon = 132 lbs
I was actually a bit surprised how little it is. It gets better in newer aircraft assuming all seats are taken.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft#Mediu...