According to a recently published report by travel company Intrepid Travel, in collaboration with trend forecaster The Future Laboratory,the implementation of "personal carbon allowances" in the form of carbon passports would restrict the number of annual trips people can have. It aligns with the global carbon budget set at 750 billion tons until 2050.
The report said climate change-related extreme weather could make favorite vacation spots less enjoyable or even impossible to live in. As temperatures rise, people might stop going to warm places like Greece and Mallorca and instead choose cooler places like Belgium, Slovenia and Poland.
Cold destinations like Lapland, on the other hand, might have trouble keeping their snow, which could mean the end of trips to meet Santa Claus.
Moreover, there will be tools to help travelers go green by choosing high-speed trains rather than planes. A group of innovators called "travel transformers" is set to lead this change in the climate crisis.
Darrell Wade, the co-founder and chairman of Intrepid Travel, emphasized the urgency of this transformation. "The climate crisis is not a competitive advantage. Tourism must evolve and become regenerative as the current model is unsustainable. The future needs to be different from business as usual," said Wade.
Carbon passports threaten people's PRIVACY
But no matter how promising, the introduction of carbon passports still raises series privacy concerns. The implementation of mandatory personal carbon allowances could lead to extensive surveillance of one's travel, heating expenses, and even the food they consume to curb global carbon emissions.
"Could these measures act as precursors to overreaching surveillance, tracking individuals' carbon footprints?" Cristina Maas asked in her article for Reclaim the Net.
The concept of personal carbon allowances is presented as a solution to climate change, but it is Orwellian in nature.
They also say that technology can help track what people eat. If you eat things that are bad for the environment, such as red meat, you could lose your carbon credits. This might encourage people to eat what international groups say is better for the planet, such as bugs and worms.
However, privacy experts really think it could limit personal freedom and let experts make all the rules. It's like a kind of soft control over people in the name of protecting the climate. Wesley Smith, a writer for the Epoch Times, wrote that it is important to use democratic methods and have open discussions about these ideas.
"But if we lack the courage, if we acquiesce – again – to significant liberty constraints in the name of protecting health, the soft totalitarianism we will have facilitated will not be their fault. It will be ours," Smith wrote.
Visit Watched.news for more stories about digital surveillance.