underbank
Established Member
Firstly any kind of travel rationing will almost always hit the poorer in society, which in turn will lead to more of a social division, which in turn will lead to malcontent, which will eventually lead to violence, possibly even war.
Only if the "rationing" is based on cost/money. That's the trouble with carbon trading - those with money can just "buy" more. Same with high taxes/duty on fuel, tobacco, alcohol, etc - those with money don't care and carry on regardless. Those without either suffer or turn to crime to pay for it.
How about some "absolute" rationing on miles travelled, based and operated via passports. No opportunity for buying/selling personal "miles". Everyone gets a annual allowance. If you don't use it, you just carry it forward to future years. Set it at a reasonable level for each person to have a foreign trip per year, say UK to America. People then have a choice to fly to America once, or to Europe twice, or if they want to go to Australia or Far East, they have to build it up by not having a foreign holiday for a year or two.
Have some kind of dispensation for those with genuine reasons for needing more allowance, such as leading politicians (ministers etc), embassy staff, aid workers, etc. Topped up with the ability for a company to "buy" extra allowances for their staff, but at a ridiculously high cost, to concentrate their minds on whether they really "need" to travel or not - certainly not just a few percent tax on flights which a company would barely notice.