Three new briefings ask “Can the UK build a new runway, and stay within the aviation carbon cap?”
The Airports Commission gives the impression that the issue of carbon emissions has been fully considered, and that a new runway can be accommodated within UK carbon targets. However, that is far from the truth. It is by no means clear that the UK aviation could stay within the 37.5 MtCO2 cap that is needed, in order for the UK as a whole to meet its legal climate obligations. Indeed, the Airports Commission itself is aware of this problem, and its own figures show the carbon emissions from UK aviation far exceeding the cap, over many years. For the clearest view of this, see the Commission’s interim report, Technical Appendix, December 2013, Pages 71 & 72. Though there will be carbon efficiencies in coming decades, in CO2 per passenger kilometre, the scale of those improvements is unknown and many are just hypothetical. The widely accepted assumption has been that the matter is just which airport gets a runway – rather than whether a runway could be built at all. The carbon situation makes it clear that the debate is still very much “IF” a runway should be built, and not merely “WHERE?” Three new briefings help set out the facts, and show that building a new runway would mean UK aviation exceeds its carbon cap.
.
Tweet
1. AEF (Aviation Environment Federation)
“The carbon gap in the Airports Commission’s new runway analysis”
AEF has 3 major concerns about the Commission’s approach to analysing the climate change implications of airport expansion. These are set out, with their recommendations on what the Airports Commission needs to do before publishing its final report.
AEF is urging everybody responding to the Airports Commission’s consultation, to include these 3 recommendations in their response.
2. Short briefing from AirportWatch
“Airports Commission’s Recommendations Inconsistent with Climate Target”
The briefing shows how the Airports Commission’s recommendations would not be consistent with the CO2 target for UK aviation, unless there is major change in aviation policy. The Commission will do further work on theoretical increases in the price of carbon, to attempt to keep aviation emissions at 37.5 MtCO2. However, if this is done, the net economic benefit of a runway would become negative, fatally undermining the Commission’s runway recommendation
3. Longer briefing from AirportWatch
“Aviation carbon emissions, a new runway and the Airports Commission”
The briefing looks at the actual carbon figures, of current and forecast carbon emissions by the UK aviation industry, and anticipated carbon efficiencies in future decades. It assesses whether these can be kept below the 37.5 MtCO2 cap, without a new runway – and with one. The briefing takes the form of questions and answers, so dividing the issue into sections, for clarity. The data shows that building new runway in the South East is very likely to be incompatible with the UK’s carbon targets, and sets out why.
Can the UK build a new runway, and stay within the aviation carbon cap?
28.1.2015 (AirportWatch)
The Airports Commission gives the impression that the issue of carbon emissions has been fully considered, and that a new runway can be accommodated within UK carbon targets.
However, that is not the case. It is by no means clear that the UK aviation could stay within the 37.5 MtCO2 that is needed, in order for the UK as a whole to meet its legal climate obligations.
Indeed, the Airports Commission itself is aware of this problem, and its own figures show the carbon emissions from UK aviation far exceeding the cap, over many years. For the clearest view of this, see the Commission’s interim report, Technical Appendix, December 2013, Pages 71 and 72
Of course, there will be improvements in efficiency, and reductions in carbon emissions per passenger kilometre. The scale of those improvements is unknown. Carbon efficiencies are postulated from future generations of aircraft that are not yet on the drawing board, let alone nearing production. Biofuels that are, frankly, unlikely to be commercially viable are anticipated. Carbon trading systems of which there is no prospect at present are presumed.
The widely accepted assumption has been that the matter is merely of which airport gets a runway – rather than whether a runway could be built at all. The carbon situation makes it clear that the debate is still very much “IF” a runway should be built, and not merely “WHERE?”
The Airports Commission has not yet set out with meaningful detail what future policies would be needed, in order to limit emissions to the aviation cap – while adding new runway capacity.
If UK aviation cannot keep within its carbon cap, it is likely that the growth of regional airports would need to be constrained – or alternatively the new runway could only be partly used. Neither would be popular, or easy to achieve.
If UK aviation exceeds its carbon cap, it would be necessary for other sectors of the economy to make even steeper cuts in emissions (they are already having to make reductions in carbon emissions of 85% on their 1990 level, by 2050, in order to allow the aviation sector to effectively double its emissions over the same period).
In a nutshell, the carbon emissions from UK aviation are likely to exceed the 37.5 MtCO2 cap by 2050, even without a new runway.
With a new runway, the emissions from UK aviation will exceed it by even more.
The simplest and cheapest (as well as most effective) way to prevent UK aviation from exceeding its carbon limit is not to build another runway.
As one AirportWatch member put it:
The thinking seems to have gone like this:
Responding to the Airports Commission consultation:
People may find some of this information useful, in writing responses to the Airports Commission consultation (ends 3rd February). The Commission has asked for information on what they have got wrong, and what they have missed out. The carbon issues fit into both those categories.
Responses can be made by email to airports.consultation@
.
.
.