Reading. Multiple Choice. Ecology.

The carbon crime of our future

Our carbon footprint is the estimated amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) given off as we go about our daily lives. In Britain, the carbon footprint of the average person is 9.5t (tonnes) per year. Every time that person takes a return flight to New York, he or she produces about 1.2t of CO2. This means that someone who flies across the Atlantic and back twice a year will use up more than a quarter of their footprint.

Short-haul air travel is not much better. A domestic flight emits 150g of CO2, per passenger kilometre, which means that a 300-km flight, for example a one-way trip from London to Manchester, produces around 63.9kg per passenger, depending on how full the flight is. Compare that to the 19.8kg per passenger produced by a car, the 5.2kg by a train and the 4.3kg by a coach, and it is clear which of the four methods of transport is the least environmentally friendly.

Now that everybody is aware that carbon emissions contribute to climate change, it is hard to understand why air travel is still so common. In response to the problem, the European Union has introduced a programme to try to limit the damage. It is called the European Union Emissions Trading System. The programme requires not only European power plants and manufacturers to pay fees to the European Union if they produce excess emissions, but also airlines. These have to pay for the carbon emissions generated by every plane that flies into or out of an EU airport. That includes flights whose origin or destination is outside of Europe.

While countries like Australia have accepted the scheme, others refuse to cooperate. A spokesperson from the American airline association said that the programme would cost United States airlines about $3.1 billion over a period of eight years. Analysts estimate it would add about $5 to the price of a typical trans-Atlantic flight, which may not seem excessive. However, the airlines say that this amount could be the difference between making a profit or a loss. The EU has given the International Civil Aviation Organization one year to come up with an alternative plan to reduce the industry's carbon footprint. If it fails, the EU will begin collecting emissions fees for all flights in and out of its airports, including those that arrive and depart from non-European airports.

The money airlines have to spend under this scheme will obviously be transferred to passengers at some point, but the extra cost is probably worth it. The price we may ultimately have to pay for climate change is much higher than the amount companies or passengers will ever have to for a flight.

Read the article again and choose the correct answer

1. The average person contributes to his or her carbon footprint...   

The carbon crime of our future

Our carbon footprint is the estimated amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) given off as we go about our daily lives. In Britain, the carbon footprint of the average person is 9.5t (tonnes) per year. Every time that person takes a return flight to New York, he or she produces about 1.2t of CO2. This means that someone who flies across the Atlantic and back twice a year will use up more than a quarter of their footprint.

Short-haul air travel is not much better. A domestic flight emits 150g of CO2, per passenger kilometre, which means that a 300-km flight, for example a one-way trip from London to Manchester, produces around 63.9kg per passenger, depending on how full the flight is. Compare that to the 19.8kg per passenger produced by a car, the 5.2kg by a train and the 4.3kg by a coach, and it is clear which of the four methods of transport is the least environmentally friendly.

Now that everybody is aware that carbon emissions contribute to climate change, it is hard to understand why air travel is still so common. In response to the problem, the European Union has introduced a programme to try to limit the damage. It is called the European Union Emissions Trading System. The programme requires not only European power plants and manufacturers to pay fees to the European Union if they produce excess emissions, but also airlines. These have to pay for the carbon emissions generated by every plane that flies into or out of an EU airport. That includes flights whose origin or destination is outside of Europe.

While countries like Australia have accepted the scheme, others refuse to cooperate. A spokesperson from the American airline association said that the programme would cost United States airlines about $3.1 billion over a period of eight years. Analysts estimate it would add about $5 to the price of a typical trans-Atlantic flight, which may not seem excessive. However, the airlines say that this amount could be the difference between making a profit or a loss. The EU has given the International Civil Aviation Organization one year to come up with an alternative plan to reduce the industry's carbon footprint. If it fails, the EU will begin collecting emissions fees for all flights in and out of its airports, including those that arrive and depart from non-European airports.

The money airlines have to spend under this scheme will obviously be transferred to passengers at some point, but the extra cost is probably worth it. The price we may ultimately have to pay for climate change is much higher than the amount companies or passengers will ever have to for a flight.

Read the article again and choose the correct answer

A rail passenger produces more carbon dioxide than... 

The carbon crime of our future

Our carbon footprint is the estimated amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) given off as we go about our daily lives. In Britain, the carbon footprint of the average person is 9.5t (tonnes) per year. Every time that person takes a return flight to New York, he or she produces about 1.2t of CO2. This means that someone who flies across the Atlantic and back twice a year will use up more than a quarter of their footprint.

Short-haul air travel is not much better. A domestic flight emits 150g of CO2, per passenger kilometre, which means that a 300-km flight, for example a one-way trip from London to Manchester, produces around 63.9kg per passenger, depending on how full the flight is. Compare that to the 19.8kg per passenger produced by a car, the 5.2kg by a train and the 4.3kg by a coach, and it is clear which of the four methods of transport is the least environmentally friendly.

Now that everybody is aware that carbon emissions contribute to climate change, it is hard to understand why air travel is still so common. In response to the problem, the European Union has introduced a programme to try to limit the damage. It is called the European Union Emissions Trading System. The programme requires not only European power plants and manufacturers to pay fees to the European Union if they produce excess emissions, but also airlines. These have to pay for the carbon emissions generated by every plane that flies into or out of an EU airport. That includes flights whose origin or destination is outside of Europe.

While countries like Australia have accepted the scheme, others refuse to cooperate. A spokesperson from the American airline association said that the programme would cost United States airlines about $3.1 billion over a period of eight years. Analysts estimate it would add about $5 to the price of a typical trans-Atlantic flight, which may not seem excessive. However, the airlines say that this amount could be the difference between making a profit or a loss. The EU has given the International Civil Aviation Organization one year to come up with an alternative plan to reduce the industry's carbon footprint. If it fails, the EU will begin collecting emissions fees for all flights in and out of its airports, including those that arrive and depart from non-European airports.

The money airlines have to spend under this scheme will obviously be transferred to passengers at some point, but the extra cost is probably worth it. The price we may ultimately have to pay for climate change is much higher than the amount companies or passengers will ever have to for a flight.

Read the article again and choose the correct answer

The EU programme is aimed at...  

The carbon crime of our future

Our carbon footprint is the estimated amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) given off as we go about our daily lives. In Britain, the carbon footprint of the average person is 9.5t (tonnes) per year. Every time that person takes a return flight to New York, he or she produces about 1.2t of CO2. This means that someone who flies across the Atlantic and back twice a year will use up more than a quarter of their footprint.

Short-haul air travel is not much better. A domestic flight emits 150g of CO2, per passenger kilometre, which means that a 300-km flight, for example a one-way trip from London to Manchester, produces around 63.9kg per passenger, depending on how full the flight is. Compare that to the 19.8kg per passenger produced by a car, the 5.2kg by a train and the 4.3kg by a coach, and it is clear which of the four methods of transport is the least environmentally friendly.

Now that everybody is aware that carbon emissions contribute to climate change, it is hard to understand why air travel is still so common. In response to the problem, the European Union has introduced a programme to try to limit the damage. It is called the European Union Emissions Trading System. The programme requires not only European power plants and manufacturers to pay fees to the European Union if they produce excess emissions, but also airlines. These have to pay for the carbon emissions generated by every plane that flies into or out of an EU airport. That includes flights whose origin or destination is outside of Europe.

While countries like Australia have accepted the scheme, others refuse to cooperate. A spokesperson from the American airline association said that the programme would cost United States airlines about $3.1 billion over a period of eight years. Analysts estimate it would add about $5 to the price of a typical trans-Atlantic flight, which may not seem excessive. However, the airlines say that this amount could be the difference between making a profit or a loss. The EU has given the International Civil Aviation Organization one year to come up with an alternative plan to reduce the industry's carbon footprint. If it fails, the EU will begin collecting emissions fees for all flights in and out of its airports, including those that arrive and depart from non-European airports.

The money airlines have to spend under this scheme will obviously be transferred to passengers at some point, but the extra cost is probably worth it. The price we may ultimately have to pay for climate change is much higher than the amount companies or passengers will ever have to for a flight.

Read the article again and choose the correct answer

Some non-European airlines oppose the EU scheme because... 

The carbon crime of our future

Our carbon footprint is the estimated amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) given off as we go about our daily lives. In Britain, the carbon footprint of the average person is 9.5t (tonnes) per year. Every time that person takes a return flight to New York, he or she produces about 1.2t of CO2. This means that someone who flies across the Atlantic and back twice a year will use up more than a quarter of their footprint.

Short-haul air travel is not much better. A domestic flight emits 150g of CO2, per passenger kilometre, which means that a 300-km flight, for example a one-way trip from London to Manchester, produces around 63.9kg per passenger, depending on how full the flight is. Compare that to the 19.8kg per passenger produced by a car, the 5.2kg by a train and the 4.3kg by a coach, and it is clear which of the four methods of transport is the least environmentally friendly.

Now that everybody is aware that carbon emissions contribute to climate change, it is hard to understand why air travel is still so common. In response to the problem, the European Union has introduced a programme to try to limit the damage. It is called the European Union Emissions Trading System. The programme requires not only European power plants and manufacturers to pay fees to the European Union if they produce excess emissions, but also airlines. These have to pay for the carbon emissions generated by every plane that flies into or out of an EU airport. That includes flights whose origin or destination is outside of Europe.

While countries like Australia have accepted the scheme, others refuse to cooperate. A spokesperson from the American airline association said that the programme would cost United States airlines about $3.1 billion over a period of eight years. Analysts estimate it would add about $5 to the price of a typical trans-Atlantic flight, which may not seem excessive. However, the airlines say that this amount could be the difference between making a profit or a loss. The EU has given the International Civil Aviation Organization one year to come up with an alternative plan to reduce the industry's carbon footprint. If it fails, the EU will begin collecting emissions fees for all flights in and out of its airports, including those that arrive and depart from non-European airports.

The money airlines have to spend under this scheme will obviously be transferred to passengers at some point, but the extra cost is probably worth it. The price we may ultimately have to pay for climate change is much higher than the amount companies or passengers will ever have to for a flight.

Read the article again and choose the correct answer

The writer's conclusion is that...