In Denmark there seems to be two schools of thought among "traditional environmentalists," to use your term. One is to tax and ban based on environmental impact and then separately compensate the lower incomes if the tax or ban is regressive in nature. The other school is to tax and ban primarily stuff based on its pollution relative to its usefulness - which is usually progressive in nature, given that the people who consume most useless crap are, all other things being equal, usually the rich.

Under the second scheme, taxing cars and car fuel higher than heating is perfectly reasonable (for personal vehicles, at least). Cars, after all, are completely unnecessary for at least half the adult population - namely the half that lives in areas with a population density greater than roughly 250 people pr. square km.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.