I read in the paper today that:
"The Eddington report highlights the importance of reflecting the external costs of transport in the price paid by users, whether this be for congestion or environmental impacts."
It suggested that travellers, by whatever means they move, should pay the real cost, in environmental terms, to combat global warming.
He says that cars, planes, trains and so on must be charged for their relative emissions of carbon, their relative contributions to climate change.
As the Times put it: "all modes of transport should pay their full environmental costs, including compensating for their contribution to climate change."
So, high polluting forms of transport become more expensive than others.
Much of the transport in this country is to move goods from one place to another. So, should we reinvest in the waterways network; employ thousands of porters to shift millions of items from port to warehouse via public transport?
The increase penalties charged to move goods either inwards or outwards will be passed on to the end consumer ~ that's you and me!
My question is, no matter how much more money I pay, or you pay, I fail to understand how is this will combat, or as the article has it, "compensate" for global warming?