Personal carbon allowances have been of considerable interest in environmental research in the last decade, yet no policy implementations have been adopted, partly due to uncertainty around the political acceptability of equal allowances. We tackled this issue by surveying public perceptions of fairness in carbon allowance allocation in urban mobility. Qualitative and quantitative inquiry data of 304 respondents were analysed statistically and thematically. Three distributive principles according to equity perceptions of equality, equity by capability, and equity by responsibility, were examined. The distribution of personal carbon allowances, which is sensitive to differing needs and capabilities, was perceived fairer than the other proposed options. The allocation preference differed according to isolationist and integrationist approaches, where both equity by capability and equity by responsibility evoked talk of benefits and burdens that could be produced by emission rights, while those who alluded to equality were interested in the distribution of emission rights as such. Prioritising needs and capabilities demonstrated that questions of managing the daily life still edge ahead of climate questions in many citizens eyes. Therefore, policy propositions should focus more on the shared mobility practices of everyday life and how they could be supported and incentivised towards sustainability. We concluded that due to the lack of absolute distributive consensus, policies gain legitimacy by procedural equity, and including citizens in decision making.