Why Private Jets Are a Big Problem for Our Planet

A black private jet parked on a runway under a clear blue sky.
Private jets like this one may carry only a handful of passengers—but their environmental footprint is massive. A single private jet can emit as much carbon dioxide in a year as 177 cars.

When we think about pollution from flying, most of us picture big commercial planes taking off from crowded airports. But there’s a smaller, more exclusive kind of flying that’s creating a surprisingly big impact on our planet: private jets.

Private jets may seem like a luxury issue, but they’re a climate concern that affects everyone. While only a small group of people use them, their environmental impact is outsized. A recent study by the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) looked at just how much pollution private jets cause—and what we can do about it.

What is a private jet?

A private jet is a small airplane, usually owned or rented by individuals or companies, that flies with only a few passengers. Unlike commercial airplanes that carry hundreds of people at a time, private jets often fly nearly empty.

Because they carry fewer passengers, private jets release much more pollution per person than regular flights. And unlike buses or trains that are available to the general public, these flights are mainly used by the wealthy for convenience.

Why we’re talking about them

You might wonder—if there are so few private jets compared to commercial flights, why focus on them?

It turns out, these jets are some of the most polluting forms of transportation per passenger. And their use is growing fast. The study found that private jet emissions increased 25% over the last decade, and they now account for nearly 4% of all aviation pollution worldwide.

Even though they’re used by a tiny fraction of people, private jets are contributing a lot to climate change—and avoiding accountability in the process.

What the Study Found

Private jets pollute much more than commercial flights

  • On average, a single private jet emits 810 tons of greenhouse gases (GHGs) each year.
  • That’s equal to the yearly emissions of 177 passenger cars or 9 large trucks.
  • Private jet passengers cause 5 to 14 times more emissions per person than commercial airline passengers.

The U.S. leads the world in private jet pollution

  • In 2023, 64.6% of all private jet flights started from the U.S.
  • Florida and Texas alone had more private jet flights than the entire European Union.
  • The U.S. was responsible for over half of global private jet emissions.

Most private jet trips are short and avoidable

  • Half of private jet flights were under 900 kilometers (about 560 miles).
  • These are trips that could often be replaced by high-speed trains or more efficient planes called turboprops.
  • Many private flights are for convenience, not necessity.

The Bigger Problem

Health risks from air pollution

Private jets don’t just release carbon dioxide—they also emit air pollutants like nitrogen oxides (NOx) and fine particles called PM2.5.

These pollutants:

  • Harm air quality near airports
  • Increase the risk of asthma, heart disease, and early death
  • Disproportionately affect low-income communities who live near major airports

Climate change and who it affects most

Even though private jet travel benefits a wealthy few, the pollution they cause harms everyone—especially people in vulnerable regions. Rising temperatures, stronger storms, wildfires, and droughts are all linked to climate change fueled by greenhouse gas emissions.

What Can Be Done

We don’t have to accept this as the cost of modern travel. The study suggested a few realistic steps:

Taxing private jet fuel

  • A proposed fuel tax of $1.59 per gallon could raise up to $3 billion a year.
  • This money could fund climate solutions or support public transit.
  • Right now, many private jets pay little or no fuel tax, giving them an unfair advantage.

Switching to cleaner alternatives

  • Turboprop planes, which use less fuel, could replace jets on short routes.
  • High-speed trains can be even cleaner, especially in regions like Europe.
  • Avoiding unnecessary flights—or replacing them with remote meetings—also helps.

Why policies matter

Private jets often fly under the radar—literally and legally. Many are exempt from emissions trading programs, escape higher taxes, and aren’t required to improve efficiency. Stronger laws can help level the playing field.

What You Can Do

You don’t need to fly a private jet to make a difference.

Talk about it

  • Share what you’ve learned with friends and family.
  • Challenge the idea that private jets are just a personal choice—they have public consequences.

Support better climate laws

  • Vote for leaders who take climate and pollution seriously.
  • Support policies that make polluters pay their fair share.
  • Encourage investment in cleaner transportation options like rail and electric buses.

Summing Up

Private jets may seem like a small part of a big problem—but they’re a high-impact example of climate inequality. A few people benefit, while the rest of the world shares the cost.

The good news is that we have clear data, real solutions, and growing public awareness. If we take smart action now—through policies, taxes, and cleaner options—we can reduce these emissions and build a future that works for everyone.

It’s not about stopping travel. It’s about making sure travel doesn’t cost us the planet.


Source: Sitompul, D., & Rutherford, D. (2025). Air and greenhouse gas pollution from private jets, 2023. International Council on Clean Transportation. Retrieved from

Opinion: The Messy Truth About Carbon Footprints

Photo by Dima Pechurin on Unsplash
Photo by Dima Pechurin on Unsplash

How much attention should each of us be paying to our individual carbon footprint?

September 9, 2021 by Sami Grover

How much attention should each of us be paying to our individual carbon footprint? That question is the subject of a contentious debate that’s been raging in climate circles for quite some time.

In one camp stand folks like author Rebecca Solnit, whose recent op-ed for The Guardian argued that Big Oil invented carbon footprints as a deliberate attempt to “blame us for their greed.” The goal, she wrote, was to use relatively ineffectual calls for voluntary abstinence to distract the public from demanding systems-level interventions — like new taxes or the phasing out of gas-powered cars — that might meaningfully reduce society’s reliance on fossil fuels as a whole.

In the other camp are people like Polish researcher Michał Czepkiewicz, who assert that the concept of carbon footprints was simply co-opted by fossil fuel interests, and that it still has value in illuminating the vast inequality that exists between low- and high-carbon lifestyles. (A recent report from the anti-poverty organization Oxfam found that the wealthiest 10 percent of the global population — which includes the vast majority of people reading this op-ed — were responsible for more than 50 percent of global emissions between 1990 and 2015.)

The real truth, as is so often the case, is that more than one thing can be true at once.

For far too long, media discussions around climate change have focused primarily on the individual scale. And too often, those discussions have shifted attention away from holding the powerful to account. Say one word about the need to reduce carbon emissions or divest from fossil fuels, and you’ll soon be met with a question about how you traveled to work today, or where the electricity powering your computer comes from. And if you are just starting out on the journey to climate awareness, chances are you’ve received more advice on changing your diet or refusing straws than you have on activism, advocacy, or organizing. In other words, you’ve been told how to contribute less to the problem, but not necessarily how you can be most effective in actually fixing it.

Yet lifestyle choices do matter. They just matter for entirely different reasons than we’ve been told.

Whether we’re biking to work or reducing our meat intake, skipping flights or buying green power, our lifestyle choices should be viewed as acts of strategic mass mobilization. And they should be considered as one part of a broader toolbox of tactics that also includes advocacy, organizing, and protest. Using this lens, we can build a diverse movement that accepts that few of us can do everything, but that all of us can do something. Together, we can move forward with the recognition that each of us is working — however imperfectly — toward a shared common goal.

This approach has worked before. As author Pete Jordan recounted in “In the City of Bikes,” the now-bike-filled streets of Amsterdam were once clogged by cars, until citizens decided, both at the ballot box and in the bike lanes, to reclaim the soul of the city. Individual cyclists were central to achieving those victories. So too, however, was a broad coalition of Amsterdammers that included road safety advocates, historic preservationists, business interests, and ordinary families who were sick of the traffic on their streets.

Similarly, in 2018 when school climate strikes led by Swedish activist Greta Thunberg and other young people elevated debates around “flight shame” in Europe, traveler preferences shifted as a result. Swedish airports reported a 9 percent drop in intercity domestic travelers between 2018 and 2019 and German airports witnessed a sharp 12 percent fall in domestic air travel too. This change in consumer behavior — combined with a lively and prominent civic debate among flyers and non-flyers alike, and exacerbated by the catastrophic impact of the pandemic on the industry — was soon followed by systems level changes. Swedish railway operator Snälltåget announced a new sleeper train service between Stockholm and Berlin, French policymakers made moves to ban short-haul flights, and Norway’s aviation authorities announced they’d aim for all-electric domestic flights by 2040. In other words, the choices of thousands of individual travelers contributed to a broader societal discussion, and we’re now beginning to see systems-level changes that make lower-carbon travel easier for everyone.

Our lifestyle choices should be viewed as acts of strategic mass mobilization. And they should be considered as one part of a broader toolbox of tactics that also includes advocacy, organizing, and protest.

Carbon footprints can help us to focus our efforts. Their primary value, however, is not in highlighting where each of us falls short. Instead, they provide a metric for both measuring which individual actions are significant enough to meaningfully reduce emissions, and also for identifying where policy-level interventions might be most needed.

That’s the thinking behind Flying Less, a petition and campaign started by Vassar College professor Joseph Nevins and Tufts University professor Parke Wilde that asks institutions, research funders, and individual scientists alike to reduce the need for academics to fly. While some supporters are contributing by voluntarily giving up on air travel, the campaign welcomes everyone — regardless of how they currently move around the world. And as their website makes clear, the ultimate goal has little to do with personal virtue: “This initiative is focused on institutional change in civil society (academia) as part of a coherent theory of social change, contributing to transformation of bigger economic sectors with greater influence over powerful political decision-makers. We do not care about individual non-flying purity.”

So by all means, skip that next beef burger, or take a pass on that cheap flight to Cancún. But then ask yourself how you can magnify the impact of what you do. Are there campaigns or advocacy groups you can join? Can you talk to friends or family about the shifts you are making? Can you influence policy or practices at your place of work or study? Can you identify barriers to action that are preventing others from joining in?

In so doing, remember to cut yourself, and those around you, some slack. We are not each on an individual journey to slash our footprint to zero. We are on a collective mission to shift the only true footprint that matters: that of society as a whole.


Sami Grover is an environmental writer, branding specialist, and author of “We’re All Climate Hypocrites Now: How Embracing Our Limitations Can Unlock the Power of a Movement.”

This article was originally published on Undark. Read the original article.