Prof Jim Hansen, who is leading climate scientist at NASA, says that the way in which our society now is storing up expensive and destructive consequences for society in future – by altering their climate – is an “injustice of one generation to others”. Current generations have an over-riding moral duty to their children and grandchildren to take immediate action. He is also calling for a worldwide, flat rate tax on all carbon emissions to force immediate cuts in fossil fuel use, and this tax would rise each year. It would promote a dramatic increase in the investment and development of low-carbon energy sources and technologies. He says the latest climate models had shown the planet was on the brink of an emergency, with repeated natural disasters from extreme weather events which would affect large areas of the planet.
Nasa scientist: climate change is a moral issue on a par with slavery
Prof Jim Hansen to use lecture at Edinburgh International Science Festival to call for worldwide tax on all carbon emissions
Prof Jim Hansen: ‘We’re handing future generations a climate system which is potentially out of their control’. Photograph: Melanie Patterson/AP
by Severin Carrell
Averting the worst consequences of human-induced climate change is a “great moral issue” on a par with slavery, according to the leading Nasa climate scientist Prof Jim Hansen.
He argues that storing up expensive and destructive consequences for society in future is an “injustice of one generation to others”.
In his lecture, Hansen will argue that the challenge facing future generations from climate change is so urgent that a flat-rate global tax is needed to force immediate cuts in fossil fuel use. Ahead of receiving the award – which has previously been given to Sir David Attenborough, the ecologist James Lovelock, and the economist Amartya Sen – Hansen told the Guardian that the latest climate models had shown the planet was on the brink of an emergency. He said humanity faces repeated natural disasters from extreme weather events which would affect large areas of the planet.
“The situation we’re creating for young people and future generations is that we’re handing them a climate system which is potentially out of their control,” he said. “We’re in an emergency: you can see what’s on the horizon over the next few decades with the effects it will have on ecosystems, sea level and species extinction.”
Now 70, Hansen is regarded as one of the most influential figures in climate science; the creator of one of the first global climate models, his pioneering role in warning about global warming is frequently cited by climate campaigners such as former US vice president Al Gore and in earlier science prizes, including the
$1m Dan David prize. He has been arrested more than once for his role in protests against coal energy.
Hansen will argue in his lecture that current generations have an over-riding moral duty to their children and grandchildren to take immediate action. Describing this as an issue of inter-generational justice on a par with ending slavery, Hansen said: “Our parents didn’t know that they were causing a problem for future generations but we can only pretend we don’t know because the science is now crystal clear.
“We understand the carbon cycle: the CO2 we put in the air will stay in surface reservoirs and won’t go back into the solid earth for millennia. What the Earth’s history tells us is that there’s a limit on how much we can put in the air without guaranteeing disastrous consequences for future generations. We cannot pretend that we did not know.”
Hansen said his proposal for a global carbon tax was based on the latest analysis of CO2 levels in the atmosphere and their impact on global temperatures and weather patterns. He has co-authored a scientific paper with 17 other experts, including climate scientists, biologists and economists, which calls for an immediate 6% annual cut in CO2 emissions, and a substantial growth in global forest cover, to avoid catastrophic climate change by the end of the century.
The paper, which has passed peer review and is in the final stages of publication by the US journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, argues that a global levy on fossil fuels is the strongest tool for forcing energy firms and consumers to switch quickly to zero carbon and green energy sources. In larger countries, that would include nuclear power.
Under this proposal, the carbon levy would increase year on year, with the tax income paid directly back to the public as a dividend, shared equally, rather than put into government coffers. Because the tax would greatly increase the cost of fossil fuel energy, consumers relying on green or low carbon sources of power would benefit the most as this dividend would come on top of cheaper fuel bills. It would promote a dramatic increase in the investment and development of low-carbon energy sources and technologies.
The very rich and most profligate energy users, people with several homes, or private jets and fuel-hungry cars, would also be forced into dramatically changing their energy use. In the new paper,
Hansen, director of Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and his colleagues warn that failing to cut CO2 emissions by 6% now will mean that by 2022, the annual cuts would need to reach a more drastic level of 15% a year.
Had similar action been taken in 2005, when the Kyoto protocol on climate change came into force, the CO2 emission reductions would have been at a more manageable 3% a year. The target was to return CO2 levels in the atmosphere to 350 parts per million, down from its current level of 392ppm. The paper, the “Scientific case for avoiding dangerous climate change to protect young people and nature”, also argues that the challenge is growing because of the accelerating rush to find new, harder–to-reach sources of oil, gas and coal in the deep ocean, the Arctic and from shale gas reserves.
Hansen said current attempts to limit carbon emissions, particularly the European Union’s emissions trading mechanism introduced under the Kyoto protocol which restricts how much CO2 an industry can emit before it has to pay a fee for higher emissions, were “completely ineffectual”. Under the global carbon tax proposal, the mechanisms for controlling fossil fuel use would be taken out of the hands of individual states influenced by energy companies, and politicians anxious about winning elections.
“It can’t be fixed by individual specific changes; it has to be an across-the-board rising fee on carbon emissions,” said Hansen. “We can’t simply say that there’s a climate problem, and leave it to the politicians. They’re so clearly under the influence of the fossil fuel industry that they’re coming up with cockamamie solutions which aren’t solutions. That is the bottom line.”
Posted: Tuesday, April 10th, 2012. Filed in Climate Change News, General News, Recent News.
Read more »
The Committee on Climate change has produced its long awaited statement on how aviation should be included in the UK’s 5-year carbon budgets. The Climate Act currently omits international aviation and shipping, but while setting budgets, the CCC has to “take account” of’ these emissions. The government must decide by the end of 2012 on whether to include them in the Act. The CCC recommends that international aviation and shipping should now be included on the basis of the EU ETS cap, and that actualUK international aviation emissions should be back at the level they were in 2005 by 2050.
The CCC has recommended against including the non-CO2 effects of aviation for the time being, though these NOx etc impacts of other sectors are included, and it presumes – optimistically – that technology may be able to reduce the problem in coming decades.
The CCC says international aviation emissions should be added to currently legislated budgets, based on the UK share of the EU ETS cap. This would be 31 MtCO2e per year – which is 155 MtCO2e over the three 5 year budgets, taking us up to 2027. The 31 MtCO2e figure is 97% of the level of UK aviation emissions between 2004 and 2006. In 2005 UK aviation emissions as estimated on the basis of bunker fuel sales were 35 million tonnes.
So 31 million tonnes would be the level of aviation emissions that were entered into theUK’s carbon accounts for the purpose of the Climate Act, which is perhaps a bit below what it is now. However, it would not stop UK aviation emissions from rising. The airlines would just have to buy more permits for any emissions over this level, so they can continue to grow, if conditions permit.
On this, the CCC thinks that, if the recession ends, the price of carbon will rise and the number of permits will become more scarce, particularly after 2030, and so it will become much more expensive for aviation to expand. Market forces will prevail. The CCC therefore thinks that the UK should plan its infrastructure and investment on the assumption that actual emissions from international aviation from the UK will be no higher in 2050 than in 2005 – around 35 Mt CO2.
The emissions level of 31 Mt would not take account of the problem with biofuels, which are currently zero rated for CO2 emissions purposes under the EU ETS, which is manifestly not correct, and will be changed eventually.
UK aviation emissions grew around 120% between 1990 and 2005. Due to the inclusion in the 5 year budget targets of aviation & shipping, in order to meet the overall cut in UK carbon emissions of 80% by 2050, the CO2 emissions of all other sectors have to be cut by around 90% of the 1990 level by 2050.
Aviation would therefore, under these recommendations, be getting a very generous deal indeed. But in order to impose stricter limits on UK aviation, there would need to be restrictions that are tougher than those in other European countries, and this government has repeatedly said it is not prepared to disadvantage UK business.
5.4.2012
CCC report, slides etc are at
http://www.theccc.org.uk/reports/international-aviation-a-shipping
Report “Scope of Carbon Budgets – Statutory advice on inclusion of international aviation and shipping” is at
http://hmccc.s3.amazonaws.com/IA&S/CCC_IAS_Core_ScopeOfBudgets_April2012.pdf
Aviation should be included in the UK’s carbon budgets, Government advisers recommend
April 5 2012 (Aviation Environment Federation)
See also the AEF press statement below.
The Committee on Climate Change (CCC) has today recommended that emissions from international aviation be formally included in the UK’s carbon budgets.
The Climate Act 2008 commits the UK to cutting emissions by 80% of 1990 levels by 2050, with a system of annual carbon budgets ensuring that the target is delivered. The Act currently omits emissions from international aviation and shipping but requires the Government to reconsider whether they should be included in 2012, with advice from the Committee on Climate Change.
Already the Committee is required under the Act to ‘take account of’ these emissions when setting the carbon budgets for other sectors, so formal inclusion of aviation and shipping should not in fact have any impact on the carbon budgets that have already been set for other sectors.
2009 report: some aviation growth compatible with emissions stabilisation
In 2009 the Labour Government asked the CCC to advise on how aviation emissions could be returned to 2005 levels by 2050. The Committee concluded that after taking account of likely improvements in aircraft technology and air traffic management, and allowing for the possibility of 10% of aircraft fuel by 2050 being from sustainable sources, the ‘stabilisation’ target could allow for a 60% growth in passengers.
Even allowing for the introduction of carbon prices through the EU Emissions Trading System, however, the CCC predicted a growth in aviation demand of 115%, or 105% if no new runways were built anywhere in the UK before 2050. In other words, demand would need to be restrained if it was to keep to the 60% growth increase that would be compatible with the target.
Today, for the first time, the CCC formally recommended that the Government assume a long term scenario for aviation based on aviation emissions getting back to around 2005 levels in 2050 – the default level assumed by the Committee in its emissions modelling up till now, and the basis for their 2009 report.
The Committee has not analysed the CO2 impacts of any particular airport proposals and makes no specific recommendations in relation to airport expansion.
Nevertheless, its recommendations underline the importance of ensuring that realistic climate change considerations are among the framing conditions for the new airports policy, the draft of which will be published this summer.
A good deal for airlines
If adopted by Government, this emissions ‘scenario’ would give aviation very significant advantages over other sectors in terms of emissions abatement.
Firstly, UK aviation emissions grew around 120% between 1990 and 2005, so constraining 2050 emissions to 2005 levels means that aviation would be allowed to grow 120% over 1990 levels by 2050. Meanwhile, other sectors are expected to cut their emissions by more than 80% over the same period.
And secondly, the Climate Act takes account of the impact on global warming of emissions other than carbon dioxide (CO2), which are significant for some sectors. But the act omits the very important impacts of NOx and water vapour emitted by aircraft in the upper atmosphere.
AEF’s view
AEF strongly supports the inclusion of aviation emissions in the UK’s carbon targets and budgets, to support action which we are actively engaged in progressing at European and international levels.
The sector’s emissions have historically grown rapidly, and the only reason for their being omitted when the Climate Act was agreed in 2008 was a technicality about how to account for them – an issue that can now be easily addressed using data collected through the EU Emissions Trading System.
People in the UK fly more than anyone else in the world, so it is right that the UK takes a leading role in tackling aviation emissions growth.
The Committee’s recommendations would give aviation considerable leeway compared with other sectors but would ensure that aviation in future participates transparently in the UK’s efforts to bring our economy within sustainable limits.
For the CCC’s report, released today, see the CCC website
http://www.aef.org.uk/?p=1406
AEF press statement:
Time to square the circle and bring aviation inside the carbon budget
Apr 5 2012
The time has come for aviation emissions to be brought within the UK’s carbon budgets, the Government’s official climate advisers said today. The 2008 Climate Act omitted emissions from international aviation and shipping because of debate about how account for them, but the data now exists – including, for aviation, emissions information collected through the EU Emissions Trading System – to make this possible, says the Committee on Climate Change.
The Committee is already required by the 2008 Act to ‘take account of’ these emissions when setting the carbon budgets for other sectors, so formal inclusion of aviation and shipping should not in fact have any impact on the carbon budgets that have already been approved by Government for other sectors, and for the UK as a whole.
AEF Deputy Director Cait Hewitt said:
“People in the UK fly more than anyone else in the world so it is right for us to take the lead in tackling the growth in aviation emissions.
“If the Government accepts the advice of its climate change advisers, aviation will be included on much more generous terms than those agreed for other sectors, with aviation allowed to increase its emissions by 120% of 1990 levels by 2050 while other sectors are expected to make cuts of 80% by then. But by including aviation in the carbon budgets we can make sure that the books balance and that steps to move the UK towards a greener economy aren’t scuppered by runaway aviation growth.
“If people and businesses want to carry on flying, we need to plan the future in a way that takes account of emissions from aircraft.”
http://www.aef.org.uk/?p=1407
The Committee on Climate Change’s (CCC) press release is at
http://www.theccc.org.uk/news/press-releases/1168-ccc-recommends-formalising-existing-approaches-to-include-international-aviation-and-shipping-emissions-in-carbon-budgets
5.4.2012 (CCC)
CCC recommends formalising existing approaches to include international aviation and shipping emissions in carbon budgets
There is no longer any reason to exclude international aviation and shipping emissions from carbon budgets according to the Committee on Climate Change. This was the conclusion in the Committee’s report “Scope of carbon budgets – Statutory advice on inclusion of international aviation and shipping”.
Emissions from international aviation and shipping were initially left out of carbon budgets and the 2050 target when the Climate Change Act became Law in 2008, with the decision on inclusion delayed to 2012.
In the meantime, the Committee and the Government have acted as though international aviation and shipping emissions are in the 2050 target, based on a certain interpretation of the legislation. The risk is that a new Government would not adopt the same interpretation.
In order to mitigate this risk, the Committee recommends that the current approach should be formalised through including international aviation and shipping emissions in carbon budgets and the 2050 target, therefore providing more certainty that it will be continued in future. Moreover, inclusion would provide the most transparent, comprehensive and flexible accounting framework under the Climate Change Act.
To implement the new approach the Committee recommends that currently legislated budgets are increased to allow for international aviation and shipping emissions:
- International aviation emissions should be added to currently legislated budgets budgets based on the UK share of the EU ETS cap (i.e. 31 MtCO2e per year).
- International shipping emissions should be added at around 9 MtCO2e per year, based on a projection of UK emissions which reflects current international policy (i.e. the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) adopted by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO)).
The implication of inclusion on this basis is that there would be no new commitments or costs in aviation, shipping or other sectors of the economy. For example, commitments and costs relating to aviation have already been made in the EU context, and would simply be reflected in carbon budgets.
The Committee’s report also shows how a 2050 target including aviation and shipping emissions could be achieved, building on its own previous work and that of the Government in the November 2011 Carbon Plan.
The analysis in the report reinforces other studies which suggest the 2050 target [for the UK as a whole] can be achieved at a cost of 1-2% of GDP. This cost was previously accepted by Parliament when the Climate Change Act was first legislated, given the much higher costs and consequences from not acting to reduce emissions.
The long-term emissions pathways in the report highlight the need for deep cuts in emissions from the power, surface transport, and buildings sectors. They justify the current policy approach which is aimed at developing and deploying a range of low-carbon power technologies (i.e. nuclear, renewables, CCS), improving energy efficiency in buildings and supporting renewable heat investment, improving fuel efficiency of conventional vehicles and catalysing development of the electric vehicle market.
On the long-term path for aviation emissions, the Committee recommends that the aim should be for emissions in 2050 that are no higher than 2005 levels. Given scope for increased fuel and carbon efficiency of flying, this would allow some demand growth over the next four decades. The Committee suggests that this path should be delivered through EU and global policies rather than a unilateral UK approach, in order to avoid competitiveness impacts that could otherwise ensue.
Lord Adair Turner, Chair of the CCC said:
“Including international aviation and shipping emissions in UK carbon budgets has an importance which goes beyond the specific issue of international aviation and shipping. This report makes a recommendation which, if now accepted by government and Parliament, will complete the UK statutory framework.
http://www.theccc.org.uk/news/press-releases/1168-ccc-recommends-formalising-existing-approaches-to-include-international-aviation-and-shipping-emissions-in-carbon-budgets
From the CCC report Presentation Slides – Page 15.
http://hmccc.s3.amazonaws.com/IA&S/2012%20IAS%20report%20launch%20FINAL.pdf
This shows the UK international aviation emissions at 31 MtCO2e per year (155 MtCO2e over the 5 year carbon budget period).
CCC report Presentation Slides Page 17.
http://hmccc.s3.amazonaws.com/IA&S/2012%20IAS%20report%20launch%20FINAL.pdf
International aviation and shipping have the same limit over three carbon budget periods, while other sectors have to make steep cuts in emissions. (155 is 5 x 31 MtCO2e. If the 1990 figure was taken instead, it would be 5 x 16 = 80 MtCO2e, rather than the 155).
CCC report Presentation Slides Page 34
Induced cirrus cloud is only shown by dotted lines, rather than a red block, due to “high uncertainty”.
Below are a few extracts from the CCC Presentation Slides:
The CCC Presentation Slides show the CO2 emissions from all UK sectors to have been around 695 million tonnes CO2 equivalent in 2006, (excluding embodied energy in imports) and they expect this to be down to 159 MtCO2e by 2050. Of this, in 2006, international aviation and shipping accounted for 42 MtCO2e.
Page 5 of http://hmccc.s3.amazonaws.com/IA&S/2012%20IAS%20report%20launch%20FINAL.pdf
On Page 6, the CCC shows international aviation and shipping being 6% of total UK emissions (excluding embodied energy in imports) in 2006, and 30% by 2050.
On Page 11, the CCC says that if IA&S was not included in UK total CO2 targets, the target of an 80% cut by 2050 would need to be increased to an 85% cut, and it would be less transparent and more difficult to manage.
On Page 14, the CCC says that other sectors of the UK economy will have to make considerably more effort to manage the cuts, when aviation in included, and it allowed not to make carbon cuts. Other sectors have to find cuts of 70 MtCO2e in 2020, due to the inclusion of international aviation.
Below are a few extracts from the CCC Report:
http://hmccc.s3.amazonaws.com/IA&S/CCC_IAS_Core_ScopeOfBudgets_April2012.pdf
Page 33
Contrails and induced cirrus.
Contrails are lines of cloud caused by aircraft flying through supersaturated air. Induced cirrus cloud comes from spreading contrails, or from aircraft aerosol emissions. At the level aircraft fly, both have a significant warming effect but this only lasts up to a few hours. The actual extent of aircraft induced cirrus cloud and the magnitude of the current warming associated with the increased cloud is very uncertain. The best estimate is that it is comparable to the CO2 impact of aviation, but it could be a small fraction of it or up to three times as large. There is scope to reduce these along with CO2 emissions through flight path optimisation (e.g. routing of aircraft to avoid or make use of certain weather systems) although in some cases there may be a trade-off between CO2 and cloud reduction.
Page 34
Applying a multiplier to aviation CO2 emissions has been suggested in order to reflect total
aviation effects on the climate. However this would not provide a direct incentive to reduce
the non-CO2 effects, and may instead lead to CO2 measures being taken which actually
increase NOx or contrails and induced cirrus.
Page 35
Therefore the appropriate approach is to develop scientific understanding, and to ensure that options to markedly reduce contrails and induced cirrus are developed over the next decade.
Depending on progress made, there may be a need for a future adjustment to carbon
budgets. For example, if there were still to be significant NOx emissions or production of
contrails and induced cirrus in several decades, this would be a cause for concern, and could require that carbon budgets are tightened in order that the climate objective is achieved.
This is something that we will monitor in the context of our annual reports to Parliament and advice on setting carbon budgets.
============
Page 13
As for other key sectors, there should be planning assumptions for longer-term emissions from aviation and shipping. These should be to keep aviation emissions in
2050 broadly at 2005 levels and for shipping emissions around a third below current levels in 2050.
Page 19
(In 2009) The Government also announced a new target for aviation emissions in 2050 to be capped at or below 2005 levels, and requested that the Committee on Climate Change advise on how best to meet this target.
In December 2009, the Committee published its advice, concluding that given likely developments in technology and biofuels, demand growth should not exceed 60% between 2005 and 2050 in order to meet the target.
An 80% emissions reduction excluding international aviation and shipping emissions implies emissions from other sectors of 2.2 tCO2e per capita in 2050 in the UK. This increases to 2.7 tCO2e per capita when emissions from international aviation and shipping are added, assuming these are around 2005 levels for aviation and around a third below current levels for shipping.
This level of per capita emissions, if replicated globally, would increase the risk of dangerous climate change (e.g. increasing the probability of exceeding 2°C by around 10%, see Figure 1.4).
Page 20
If international aviation and shipping emissions were to be excluded from the 2050 target,
this would suggest scope for higher levels of CO2 emissions in other sectors (Figure 1.5),
and could result in carbon budgets being insufficiently ambitious.
==============
Page 57
2050 at 2005 levels (i.e. 35 MtCO2 e)
Until longer-term global or EU agreements limiting emissions from international aviation and shipping are agreed, the emissions pathways in section 3 above should be regarded as proxies for outcomes under international agreements, and should be used as the basis for planning assumptions. These imply international aviation emissions in 2050 at around 2005 levels, and 2050 international shipping emissions roughly a third below 2010 reported levels.
=============
On Biofuel:
Page 57
Aviation. Continue to support implementation of the EU ETS, which will provide
increasing incentives to reduce emissions as the carbon price rises and involves minimal
competitiveness risks. Building on this, the Government should work with other countries
in ICAO to agree a global mechanism for reduction of aviation emissions. In its technology
policy, the Government should support development of more efficient airframe and engine
designs and advanced biofuels.
===============
Page 39
Our review of aviation emissions in 2009 showed that there are various options for meeting
this target, including fuel efficiency improvement, operational efficiency improvement,
use of biofuels, modal shift and constraints on demand growth (Figure 3.1). We presented
scenarios with baseline demand growth of 150% from 2005 to 2050, falling to 115% when
exposed to a carbon price that reaches £200/tCO2 in 2050; in our ‘Likely’ scenario, emissions reductions were delivered through a 0.8% annual improvement in fuel efficiency, by meeting 10% of fuel demand with biofuels and by constraining demand growth to 60% from 2005 (a 75% increase from 2010 given that demand fell during the recession).
Page 40
More recently, our Bioenergy Review suggested potentially limited biofuels use in aviation
where CCS is available as an option to generate negative emissions elsewhere in the
economy, and up to around 20% biofuels use if CCS is not available.
and
Achieving 2050 emissions at 2005 levels can then be achieved through a 1.2% annual improvement in fuel efficiency of planes, 10% biofuels use and a moderation of demand growth to 90% on 2010 levels.
and
Sustainable Aviation, an industry group, has proposed a trajectory under
which emissions return to 2005 levels in 2050.19 Their scenario assumes demand increases in line with DfT’s 2011 analysis (i.e. a 125% increase from 2010), with offsetting savings based on a combination of improvements in engine and aircraft efficiency, improvements in aircraft operations and air traffic management (combining to give a 1.2% annual carbon intensity improvement), and an 18% emissions saving from use of biofuels (Figure 3.3).
and
On Page 41 is a chart showing models with 10% , 20% and 40% use of biofuels in aviation by 2050.
BBC report on the CCC recommendations:
Action urged on carbon emissions from ships and flights
International flight emissions are not currently included in carbon budgets
5 April 2012 (BBC)
Greenhouse gas emissions from international flights and shipping should be included in the UK’s carbon budgets, the Committee of Climate Change has advised.
The government’s independent advisory group says aviation and shipping were major sources of pollution.
Therefore the carbon budgets up to 2027 should be increased to allow for those emissions.
The government must decide by the end of 2012 on whether to include them.
Under the Climate Change Act, the UK is committed to cutting all its climate-changing emissions by 80%, based on 1990 levels, by 2050.
However, international flights and shipping are not included in the targets.
Future risk
If the government agrees to the CCC’s recommendation, it will mean tighter targets for other sectors such as motoring and electricity generation.
The committee has recommended – and the government has already adopted – a series of carbon budgets setting down the maximum scale of greenhouse gas emissions that the UK can emit over successive five-year periods.
These have been agreed up to 2027, and assume that aviation and shipping will be included.
The committee’s chief executive David Kennedy said there was a “risk” the current – or future – government would not continue to make that assumption and the goals for cutting overall emissions would become less ambitious.
Mr Kennedy said: “There’s a risk this government or a future government will not continue to act in the way we have done up until now.
“At the moment there’s uncertainty over how aviation or shipping emissions will be treated in the future.
“There isn’t any valid reason why the government should reject the advice we’re giving, and if they were to do so, that would be a rolling back in terms of commitments on building a low-carbon economy.”
‘No draconian policies’
He [David Kennedy] also said the UK should not try to unilaterally reduce emissions from the two international sectors, which could hit its competitiveness.
“If you have draconian policies, people will take a short-haul flight to Holland, France or Germany and get on their long-haul flight.
“There wouldn’t be a very well-connected economy and will you get inward investment from international companies?” he said.
The latest report from the committee also confirms that it is possible to achieve the 2050 target, including aviation and shipping, at the expected cost of 1%-2% of GDP.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17620638
“Meeting the UK aviation target – options for reducing emissions to 2050 “
Committee on Climate Change – December 2009
The December 2009 report from the CCC on including international aviation emissions in UK carbon targets is at
http://downloads.theccc.org.uk/Aviation%20Report%2009/21667B%20CCC%20Aviation%20AW%20COMP%20v8.pdf
http://www.theccc.org.uk/reports/aviation-report
September 2009 letter from the CCC to Rt Hon Lord Andrew Adonis, Secretary of State for Transport and Rt Hon Ed Miliband, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change
“CCC advice on a framework for reducing global aviation emissions”
http://downloads.theccc.org.uk/CCCAviationLetterSoS%2009.09.09.pdf
Committee on Climate Change page on Aviation is at
http://www.theccc.org.uk/sectors/aviation
Posted: Thursday, April 5th, 2012. Filed in Climate Change News, General News, Recent News.
Read more »
Mar 29 2012 (Aviation Environment Federation, AEF)
This week Tim Yeo MP announced that he had changed his mind about Heathrow expansion and now supported the idea of building a third runway. He had two reasons: that the economic case in favour has changed, he says, and that aviation is now part of the EU ETS. He didn’t mention noise, air pollution, or destruction of local villages.
But even on his own terms he’s wrong – on both counts. AEF’s new 2-page briefing Runways, emissions and the EU ETS explains why.
Posted: Thursday, March 29th, 2012. Filed in Climate Change News, General News, Recent News.
Read more »
Air China Ltd has not cut or cancelled any Airbus orders and is sticking to the delivery plan for the aircraft. China has suspended the purchase of a total 55 Airbus jets, including 45 long-haul A330s and 10 Airbus A380 superjumbos worth a total of $14 billion amid a trade row over the ETS. Air China’s chairman said the stand of China’s central government is to oppose firmly the EU’s unilateral move to impose a carbon tax and Air China is doing the same. Air China would stick to its plan to take delivery of 35 new aircraft this year, including fourteen A320/A310 and six A330 from Airbus. China wants the EU to conduct bilateral talks with the Chinese government to solve the dispute. Air China wants to expand passenger capacity by 8% percent on domestic routes and 12%t on international routes this year.
By Alison Leung
HONG KONG/TAIPEI | Thu Mar 29, 2012
(Reuters) – Air China Ltd has not cut or cancelled any Airbus orders and is sticking to the delivery plan for the aircraft, it said on Thursday, adding that it plans to expand capacity.
China has suspended the purchase of a total 55 Airbus jets, including 45 long-haul A330s and 10 Airbus A380 superjumbos worth a total of $14 billion amid a trade row over European Union airline emissions charges.
“The stand of our central government is consistent, that is to oppose firmly the EU’s unilateral move to impose a carbon tax. The attitude of Air China is the same as our government,” Wang Changshun, chairman of the national flag carrier, told reporters at a results briefing.
“Until now I have not received any formal information,” Wang said when asked if Air China had cancelled any Airbus orders.
Air China would stick to its plan to take delivery of 35 new aircraft this year, including 14 A320/A310 and 6 A330 from Airbus, board secretary Rao Xinyu said.
The company called for negotiations to resolve a row over the European Union carbon scheme.
“We hope the EU can conduct bilateral talks with the Chinese government to solve the dispute,” Wang said.
The row is over a cap-and-trade scheme which could levy charges for carbon emissions for flights into and out of Europe. The scheme has angered countries including China, India and the United States.
The charge would increase Air China’s costs by 200-300 million yuan ($32-48 million) a year, and the cost for the entire Chinese airline industry could reach $100 million a year, Air China Senior Vice President Zhao Xiaohang said at an industry event in Taipei.
The EU aims to reduce emissions via the ETS but it would not achieve this goal, Zhao said earlier on Thursday.
“It won’t raise social awareness of the issue or lead to more action, it will only increase the burden on airlines and travelers,” he added.
EXPANDING
Air China plans to expand its capacity and rebalance its domestic and international network amid challenges ahead.
“We will expand (passenger) capacity by 8 percent on domestic routes and 12 percent on international routes this year,” Wang said.
Looking ahead, steady economy growth in China would bring new opportunities in the aviation industry but slowing growth in the United States, a continued debt crisis in Europe and rising fuel costs would put pressure on Air China, he said.
Earlier this month, industry group the International Air Transport Association cut its forecast for global airline profits this year due to a sharp rise in oil prices, saying a spike to $150 per barrel could lead to losses as high as $5.3 billion.
Jet fuel costs rose 44 percent in 2011 and accounted for more than a third of Air China’s operating expenses.
The carrier reported a 41 percent drop in 2011 net profit to 7.08 billion yuan ($1.12 billion) on rising costs, a continuing recession in the international air passenger market and a significant decline in air cargo operations.
At the end of 2011, its fleet comprised 432 aircraft with an average age of 6.77 years.
Air China has orders for a total of 51 Airbus planes to be delivered by 2014, including 30 A320/310 and 21 A330, the company said.
($1 = 6.3060 Chinese yuan)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/29/us-airchina-idUSBRE82S07620120329
US lawmakers press Obama admin. on EU emission law
Wed, Mar 28 2012
Posted: Thursday, March 29th, 2012. Filed in Climate Change News, Recent News.
Read more »
The New York Times says many airlines like Emirates could make significant amounts of money out of the EU ETS. It could make a modest profit of €1.5 million from a small surplus of permits, each representing a ton of carbon dioxide, that airlines can trade as part of the system. So far more than 20 countries have agreed on a basket of retaliatory measures that will penalize European carriers unless the system is suspended. As the current price of carbon is so very low, the cost is about €3 on the price of a round-trip ticket between Brussels and Washington, or about €4 for a round trip between Brussels and Beijing. Significant price increases are only expected after 2020. Airlines get 80% of their permits free, but many charge passengers anyway.
Carbon Plan Could Pay Off for Airlines
By JAMES KANTER
Published: March 21, 2012 (New York Times)
LONDON — Emirates, an airline based in wealthy Dubai, has been among the outspoken opponents of a system making airlines account for their pollution on all flights using E.U. airports.
Yet Emirates could make a modest profit of €1.5 million, or $2 million, from a small surplus of permits, each representing a ton of carbon dioxide, that airlines can trade as part of the system.
The E.U. Emissions Trading System already applies to about 11,000 factories and utilities across theEuropean Union. Since the start of the year, airlines have had to obtain enough permits to offset their emissions along the entire length of round-trip journeys.
Despite the ease with which many airlines like Emirates should be able to comply — at least at first — the system has turned into one the most contested environmental initiatives ever undertaken.
More than 20 countries have agreed on a basket of retaliatory measures that will penalize European carriers unless the system is suspended.
The Europeans have stood firm and have said failure to comply would result in steep fines and possible exclusion from their airports.
Connie Hedegaard, the E.U. climate commissioner, has said that Europe tried for more than a decade to achieve a global solution before adopting its own system.
She has also insisted that the cost is manageable — about €3 on the price of a round-trip ticket between Brussels and Washington, or about €4 for a round trip between Brussels and Beijing.
Last month, the International Air Transport Association, an industry body, said that the majority of carriers had grown since the Union had made its calculations of the volume of emissions and that airlines would face costs of $1.2 billion in 2012 to pay for permits, rising to $3.6 billion in 2020.
Analysts like Trevor Sikorski at Barclays Capital have said the bill should be far less — about €300 million, with non-European airlines paying about €75 million of that.
“With more significant price increases only expected after 2020, the remainder of the decade will see compliance costs remain relatively low for the airlines,” he said.
Some airlines may even profit in the near term — though Emirates said it would not be among them.
Emirates still would need to buy “a considerable number” of permits despite its surplus of nearly 200,000, because it has been flying more.
Emirates “will certainly not be making moneys from these emission allowances, as they are insufficient to cover our overall emissions” this year, and “onwards when the financial burden increases,” the company said in a statement.
DHL Air U.K., a unit of the giant German postal company Deutsche Post DHL, also could make a small profit of about €1 million from the system by selling surplus permits corresponding to about 131,000 tons of carbon dioxide.
But Deutsche Post DHL said that any surplus for that subsidiary would be transferred to help offset shortfalls in other aviation units operating in its express delivery business in Europe. Over all, it said, its emissions would match the number of permits it had acquired.
Cases involving an outright surplus are exceptional.
Still, many other carriers, like Japan Airlines or Jet Airways of India, are very close to getting all they need from Britain, which regulates hundreds of airlines, including Emirates and DHL Air U.K., in the system, which is administered by E.U. member states.
The British Department of Energy and Climate Change said it had awarded some airlines a surplus compared with their historic emissions because those carriers emitted less carbon dioxide or carried more passengers than less-efficient airlines flying similar routes.
In fact, airlines also should receive more than 80 percent of the permits they need for free until the end of the decade — part of a strategy by the E.U. to offer generous terms and conditions to encourage the industry to participate.
The creation of a flexible carbon-trading system was important for the airlines, too.
Until Europe formally approved the system four years ago, the airlines had been fighting to stave off a far more rigid carbon tax.
“Including aviation in the existing E.U. E.T.S. should be the least-cost and most environmentally effective way forward,” Brian Pearce, the chief economist for the International Air Transport Association, wrote in an article in 2006.
The following year, a study by the association even suggested that carbon trading could be an advantage for some international airlines. The I.A.T.A. said this week that that study had been carried out before the organization knew airlines would be required to buy allowances over other states’ airspace.
Even as airlines have lined up to condemn the European system, most have applied to receive the free permits, and some, like American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Continental Holdings have already raised prices about $6 for trans-Atlantic round trips.
American Airlines said its surcharge had “no specific purpose.” But it could help offset an expected shortfall of nearly 570,000 permits costing about €4.5 million.
Asked whether the $6 charge would help the carrier break even, or whether it could generate extra revenue, American Airlines referred questions to Airlines for America, a trade organization.
Airlines for America said that to its knowledge, there had been no “specific charge or fare increase.”
Seven years ago, when they joined the European system, electrical utilities put a market value on their books for the many free permits they also received, and they added some of that putative cost to their prices, creating a multibillion-euro windfall.
Regulators in Germany accused some utilities of charging customers for more permits than the utilities were entitled to.
But many analysts agree that profits on that scale are very unlikely in the case of airlines.
“We can never be sure there will be no additional profit being made,” said Mr. Sikorski of Barclays Capital.
But a “real focus on costs is essential for any airline,” and that “would suggest that the level of windfall profit-making in the sector will be reasonably low,” he said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/22/business/energy-environment/carbon-plan-could-pay-off-for-airlines.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all?src=tp
Posted: Thursday, March 22nd, 2012. Filed in Climate Change News, Recent News.
Read more »
India is apparently poised to ask airlines not to take part in the ETS. China in February barred its airlines from participating in the ETS. The Indian official, with direct knowledge of talks between the EU and other countries on the issue, told Reuters that India will soon ask local airlines not to share emissions data with the bloc or buy any carbon credits. The official said that if the EU retaliates by suspending Indian airlines from flying to Europe, India would make similar moves and consider charging an “unreasonable” amount for flying over India. ”We have lots of measures to take if the EU does not go back on its demands. We have the power of the economy, we are not bleeding as they are.”
By Anurag Kotoky
NEW DELHI
Mar 19, 2012 (Reuters)
(Reuters) – India is poised to ask airlines not to take part in the European Union emissions trading scheme, a senior official said, in what would be an escalation of a row over the EU’s unilateral move to charge for carbon emitted by flights in and out of Europe.
China in February barred its airlines from participating in the European scheme, which is meant to reduce emissions.
The Indian official, with direct knowledge of talks between the EU and other countries on the issue, told Reuters that India will soon ask local airlines not to share emissions data with the bloc or buy any carbon credits.
If the EU retaliates by suspending Indian airlines from flying to Europe, India would make similar moves and consider charging an “unreasonable” amount for flying over India, the official said on Monday.
“We have lots of measures to take if the EU does not go back on its demands. We have the power of the economy, we are not bleeding as they are,” the government official said, adding that Europe’s position would harm its own economy and airlines.
Indian government is awaiting formal approvals from several ministries to implement the order to airlines, which it expects soon, the official said.
“The questions is, are you EU.L provoking the world into a trade war?” the official said.
Last week, China suspended the purchase of 10 more Airbus (EAD.PA) jets, raising the stakes in the trade row over European Union airline emissions charges.
India does not yet plan to ask airlines to cancel Airbus purchases, but that is a possibility if the dispute escalates, the Indian official said.
Amber Dubey, director for aviation at global consultancy KPMG, said India is in the midst of a huge increase in the size of both its civilian and defence fleets, with a significant share of the orders coming from European suppliers.
“The EU-ETS (emissions trading scheme) issue is escalating fears of a trade war between EU and the rest of the world. There is a chance that the government may decide to use these large aircraft orders as a negotiating tool”, Dubey said.
European planemaker Airbus has a 73% share of the commercial plane market in India. It has orders for more than 250 planes with IndiGo, Go Air and Kingfisher Airlines (KING.NS), making fast-growing India a crucial growth market.
Foreign governments say the EU is exceeding its legal jurisdiction by charging for an entire flight, as opposed to just the part covering European airspace.
The European Commission argues the scheme is needed to cut rising emissions and help the world fight climate change.
India this month inadvertently delayed approval of some European summer schedules by a day, which disrupted the flight schedules of many European airlines.
The official said India may use that example to show how disruptive a dispute with the country could be.
“If things continue like this, then European airlines will be forced to avoid flying over India and go over the Indian Ocean and the Bay of Bengal,” the official said. “That’s not viable for them. They won’t have fuel to do that.”
(Editing by Tony Munroe and Anthony Barker)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/19/uk-india-eu-emission-idUSLNE82I02Y20120319
See many recent news items on the EU ETS at
EU Emissions Trading Scheme
Posted: Monday, March 19th, 2012. Filed in Climate Change News, Recent News.
Read more »
Climate Rush have been out subvertising. Subvertising means adding a slightly different message to billboards and posters, subverting the advertising. Heathrow airport has been lobbying MP’s on their way to work with posters and advertising all the way up the escalators with a £100k advertising campaign in Westminster Tube station. The billboards bear grotesque slogans including, ”The road the economic recovery isn’t a road. It’s a flight path”. And then “Which is why we need an aviation policy that doesn’t restrict growth [meaning aviation growth]. Climate Rush has now modified them, to give a more climate aware message.
The road the economic recovery climate change isn’t a road. It’s a flight path
The road to climate change, it’s a flight path.
Climate Rush
18.3.2012
The fight against Heathrow is not over. Heathrow has has been lobbying our MP’s on their way to work with posters and advertising all the way up the escalators with a £100k advertising campaign in Westminster Tube station. The billboards bear grotesque slogans including, ”the road the economic recovery isn’t a road. It’s a flight path”.
The idea that economic growth is dependent on ignoring climate change is a dangerous myth. It ignores the projections of the estimated cost of climate change. The Assessing the Cost of Adaptation to Climate Change report suggests that the cost of climate change is estimated at £190bn a year by 2030 – a real financial threat. The expansion of airports makes it impossible to meet our carbon targets and prevent runaway climate change and our illegal and deadly levels of air pollution would only be worsened through more flights, costing London millions of pounds in EU fines. It is estimated that over 4,300 Londoners die every year as a result of air pollution. Air pollution is the second biggest cause of preventable deaths in the capital and increased flights would only result in a greater loss of life. If you would like to get involved in making our air cleaner please join us for our
Spring Clean action on the 19th of April.
You can read more about Climate Rush’s subvertising Heathrow campaign here
Posted: Monday, March 19th, 2012. Filed in Climate Change News, News about Airports, Recent News.
Read more »
A senior ICAO official has said that getting a global agreement to limit aviation emissions will be difficult because of developing country concerns about the economic impact. ICAO met this week to discuss the issue, and directed a working group to continue studying the four options that could form an alternative to the EU ETS, and report back in June. One problem is the principle of “common but differentiated responsibility,” under which developed countries should shoulder most of the burden of cutting emissions. And at the same time adhering to the Chicago Convention, that requires ”non-discrimination” between members.
By Allison Martell (Reuters)
Thu Mar 15, 2012
(Reuters) – The hunt for a global mechanism to address airlines’ emissions will be difficult and complicated, partly because of developing country concerns about the economic impact, a senior official from the UN body overseeing civil aviation says.
Speaking in a telephone interview, the International Civil Aviation Organization’s Roberto Kobeh Gonzalez outlined four possible mechanisms that could form an alternative to a controversial European Union scheme that requires foreign airlines to pay into its emissions trading scheme.
“The market-based measure development is a very difficult exercise, very complicated, with a lot of implications, political, social, economic,” said Gonzalez, president of ICAO’s governing council.
The council met this week to discuss the issue, and directed a working group to continue studying the four options and report back in June.
Gonzalez characterized Wednesday’s meeting as very constructive. He said he expected one or more of the four options will be ruled out in June, but he did not want to speak for the council.
Gonzalez said some countries had raised concerns about how an ICAO emissions scheme could respect the principle of “common but differentiated responsibility.” That concept argues that developed countries should shoulder most of the burden of cutting emissions.
ICAO must find a way to reconcile that principle with its own governing document, known as the Chicago Convention, which Gonzalez said requires “non-discrimination” between members.
The four options being considered are mandatory offsetting of emissions from airlines, mandatory offsetting with some revenue-generating mechanism, and two cap and trade systems. Under one, all aviation emissions could be traded. Under the other, only increases or decreases from an initial emissions baseline could be traded.
A coalition of more than 20 countries, including China, Russia and the United States, opposes the EU scheme, which took effect on January 1. They say the plan infringes on their sovereignty and the conflict could escalate into a trade war.
Sources said on Thursday that China was suspending the purchase of 10 more Airbus jets, raising the stakes in the dispute.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/15/us-airline-emissions-interview-idUSBRE82E1BM20120315
Posted: Thursday, March 15th, 2012. Filed in Climate Change News, Recent News.
Read more »
Seven European aviation firms have written to 4 government leaders complaining about the inclusion of airlines in the EU ETS. These include Airbus, BA and Virgin Atlantic. They are arguing now that the ETS threatens jobs. They are concerned about trade retaliation by countries not complying with the ETS. Airbus is claiming the retaliation by China and the USA is threatening more than 1,000 jobs (at Airbus) and another 1,000 through the supply chain. China had suspended the purchase of planes made by European manufacturers because of the levy. In a draft of the letter seen by the BBC, the companies urge politicians to pursue a “compromise solution”… They now want the ETS to be put on hold until a global plan for carbon emissions is agreed.
2 March 2012 (BBC)
Aviation plea to leaders over EU price on carbon
Aviation companies argue that putting a price on emissions will have an adverse impact on their industry
Seven European aviation firms have written to governments complaining about the inclusion of airlines in the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).
The signatories, which include Airbus, British Airways and Virgin Atlantic, argue the move threatens jobs.
They are concerned about trade retaliation by countries not complying with the ETS, which puts a cost on carbon emissions beyond set limits.
China and the US both oppose the move.
“The measure is threatening more than 1,000 jobs (at Airbus) and another thousand through the supply chain,” Airbus chief executive Thomas Enders is quoted as saying.
The boss of EADS, the parent company of Airbus, Louis Gallois told reporters last week that China had suspended the purchase of planes made by European manufacturers because of the levy.
“The ETS issue… is turning into a trade conflict,” an Airbus spokesman told the Financial Times.
Resistance
In a draft of the letter seen by the BBC, the companies urge politicians to pursue a “compromise solution… which will mitigate third-country concerns whilst protecting the environmental integrity of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme”.
They believe that the proposals should be put on hold until a global plan for carbon emissions is agreed.
“Trying to impose a scheme on flights outside of Europe risks retaliatory action against EU airlines and EU trade at a time when the European economy is under severe pressure,” a spokesperson from BA said in a statement.
“The amount of resistance to the EU’s plans shows that the European Commission needs a Plan B in case there is retaliatory action,” the statement goes on to say.
The European Union has gone it alone with its ETS, which levies a charge on flights in EU airspace based on carbon emissions.
The opposition campaign is being led by Airbus and has the support of the chief executives of British Airways, Virgin Atlantic, Lufthansa, Air France, Air Berlin and Iberia.
Letters have been sent to leaders including Britain’s David Cameron, Germany’s Angela Merkel and France’s Francois Fillon.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17335616
Aviation firms warn of ETS dangers
By Constant Brand
12.03.2012 (European Voice)
Bosses of major European firms say carbon tax could cost thousands of jobs.
Some of Europe’s largest aviation firms have written to political leaders to warn about the effects of the EU’s plan to bring global airlines into the emissions trading scheme (ETS).The group sent letters to the leaders of France, Germany, Spain and the UK warning them that a trade war was imminent if the EU pushed ahead with the carbon tax.
They said that counter-measures and other restrictions on European airlines “are in preparation” that would have a major impact on the aviation industry. They added that China had suspended a €9.2 billion order for Airbus planes, which they said would threaten more than 1,000 jobs at Airbus and a further 1,000 jobs in related businesses.
The letters were signed by the bosses of Airbus, British Airways, Virgin Atlantic, Lufthansa, Air France, Air Berlin and Iberia. The heads of Safran and MTU, two makers of aerospace engines, also signed the letters.
China, Russia, the United States and other countries have complained about the EU’s plans to include airlines in the ETS, under which they would have to pay for every plane that enters or leaves an EU airport. The Chinese government has already banned its national carriers from participating in the ETS. The US is considering legislation to ban US-based airlines from participating.
The aviation companies said they “fully expect the list of suspensions, cancellations and punitive actions to grow as other important markets continue to oppose [the] ETS”. They added that it was a situation Europe “can ill-afford in the current economic climate”.
The companies urged the political leaders to “urgently request consultations” at EU level and to seek negotiations with China and others that have taken or are threatening action. They suggested the EU call for talks at the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
“The aim must be to find a compromise solution and to have these punitive trade measures stopped before it is too late,” they said.
“We have always believed that only a global solution would be adequate to resolve the problem of global aviation emissions,” the aviation firms said.
http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/2012/march/aviation-firms-warn-of-ets-dangers/73840.aspx
European airlines rally against EU carbon tax: source
By AFP
Airbus and six European airlines have written to four EU leaders attacking the carbon tax imposed by the European Union, a source close to the dossier told AFP Sunday.
Plane maker Airbus, British Airways, Virgin Atlantic, Lufthansa, Air France, Air Berlin and Iberia have written to the leaders of Britain, France, Germany and Spain to warn them about its economic consequences, said the source.
They argue the tax could cost them billions of dollars in lost orders and lead to the loss of the thousands of jobs.
French aerospace and defence group Safran and Germany’s MTU also put their names to the letters, to British Prime Minister David Cameron, French Prime Minister Francois Fillon, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy. All four countries helped found Airbus.
“We question the unilateral nature of this measure,” said the source, adding that they wanted talks with all those affected, within the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
Their initiative was first revealed late Sunday in the Financial Times.
It comes after the head of the Airbus parent company EADS said Thursday that China had blocked purchases of Airbus planes by Chinese companies in reaction to the disputed tax.
Airbus was being subjected to retaliation measures, EADS chief executive Louis Gallois told reporters.
According to a report on the website of the French economic daily Les Echos, China’s decision to freeze Airbus orders could cost the European aircraft company up to $12 billion (nine billion euros).
In the letter to Fillon, Airbus chief Tom Enders warned that the tax threatened more than a thousand jobs at the heart of the business and a thousand more in industries supplying Airbus, Les Echos reported.
On Tuesday, the head of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) warned that the EU tax could provoke trade wars.
On Friday however, Denmark’s Climate Minister Martin Lidegaard said the EU would maintain the tax on airlines operating in its airspace so long as an international solution had not been found.
Denmark currently holds the EU’s rotating presidency.
The carbon tax imposed on airlines by the European Union came into effect on January 1, but carriers will begin receiving bills only in 2013 after this year’s carbon emissions have been assessed.
More than two dozen countries, including China, Russia and the United States, have opposed the EU move, saying it violates international law.
But the EU has said the tax will help it achieve a goal of cutting carbon emissions by 20 percent by 2020 and has insisted it will not back down on the plan.
It argues that the cost for airlines is manageable, estimating that the scheme could prompt carriers to add between 4.0 and 24 euros ($5.25 and $31.50) to the price of a round-trip long-haul flight.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/european-airlines-join-forces-against-eu-carbon-tax-201506562.html
China ‘blocks Airbus plane deals’ over carbon tax
8 March 2012 (BBC) Video clip
China has blocked purchases of Airbus planes by Chinese firms in reaction to a disputed European carbon tax, the head of Airbus’s parent company, EADS, has said.
EADS chief executive Louis Gallois says Airbus is being subjected to “retaliation measures” by China.
The EU imposed a carbon tax on airlines which took effect on 1 January.
China has not commented, and it is not clear whether it is official policy or a negotiating ploy, analysts say.
Jeremy Howell reports.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17305320
Comment on this story, by Jeff Gazzard
There’s something very, very wrong with the claim being made by Airbus, along with 6 airlines and 2 engine manufacturers, that some A330 orders from Chinese airlines are “not being finalised” because of fears that the EU ETS will have an adverse impact on ticket prices.
Firstly, in January this year, Cathay Pacific’s CEO estimated that a one-way ticket from Hong Kong to Europe could go up by HK$50 or £4.11 pence. This will have absolutely zero impact on traffic and will be passed on to passengers in any event. A return ticket would therefore face an £8.22 pence surcharge – EU ETS costs will clearly not mean the end of air travel between Europe and China.
Secondly, there are 854 A330′s currently in service, with a 335 production backlog – they are built at a rate of 9 per month. Just like Boeing, Airbus requires a 5% deposit, often with further staged payments, as aircraft are built. Airlines order new aircraft to fit their acquisition/fleet commonality and replacement plans, alongside route development and growth forecasts. Production line slots will not easily be given up on a whim, particularly when switching to a rival manufacturer could be hugely problematic and very costly.
More importantly, the 5% deposits are also non-refundable. An A330 has a variant-dependent list price between US$200 to 225 million. Are we seriously meant to believe that Chinese airlines are prepared to throw away millions of dollars in forfeited deposits over a few pounds per ticket ETS surcharge? I don’t think so.
So what’s going on? It’s simple really: airlines and aerospace manufacturers despise the EU ETS and will go to any lengths to collapse the scheme, hence this kind of PR-inspired political pressure. It seems Airbus do not only make aircraft – they can also manufacture stories.
Jeffrey Gazzard
Board Member
Aviation Environment Federation
LONDON
Comment from an AirportWatch member:
What a wonderful exercise in double think – they urge the EU to suspend the ETS so that its environmental aims can be fulfilled through a global agreement, Thus the airlines are pretending to be eager for a solution that reduces emissions while at the same time doing everything they can to make sure there never is such a global agreement.
It is clear to me that this always was the airlines’ game plan – and that going along with the ETS initially allows them now to permanently derail it while not looking like the bad guys.
Posted: Monday, March 12th, 2012. Filed in Climate Change News, Recent News.
Read more »
An aviation industry body calling itself The Sustainable Aviation Group has updated its 2008 Road-Map on how it hopes to continue growing as much as possible, and yet also magically keep its carbon emissions down. There are many assumptions about the extent of fuel efficiency from new planes and new engines; from better operational practices such as better air traffic control. And a huge hope that biofuels will be the salvation and provide immense carbon savings. In addition, they will depend to a huge extent on carbon trading with other sectors, so at least a quarter of their emissions will have to be compensated for by other sectors. And for all this they want a lot of government subsidy and assistance – which means money from the tax payer.
The story is well reported by GreenAir online:
UK aviation industry plots roadmap to accommodate significant growth to 2050 without substantial CO2 increase
Thu 8 March 2012 (GreenAir online)
An alliance of UK aviation sectors committed to driving a greener long-term strategy for the industry says a significant growth in passenger and freight traffic to 2050 is possible without a substantial increase in absolute carbon emissions.
The Sustainable Aviation (SA) group http://www.sustainableaviation.co.uk/ – made up of airlines, airports, aerospace manufacturers and the national ANSP [see membership list ] – has updated its 2008 Road-Map to reflect revised traffic forecasts and the latest developments in aircraft and engine technologies, as well as progress made in aviation biofuels.
The group says the latest Road-Map takes into account its support for the global industry target of reducing emissions to 2005 levels by 2050 and recognising the significant role required of carbon trading in achieving this aim.
SA warns the UK government against imposing unilateral national targets and measures to restrain capacity or including international aviation emissions in UK carbon targets.
Currently, CO2 emissions from UK aviation make up around 5-6% of the worldwide [aviation] total and although this share will decrease as global growth rates are expected to be considerably higher due to rapid development in emerging markets, UK passenger numbers are still forecasted to grow at an average of around 2% per annum to 2050.
Citing Department for Transport (DfT) 2011 data, in the absence of any improvements in fleet fuel efficiency or in operational practices, and assuming no use of biofuels, SA expects carbon emissions from UK aviation would rise 150% between 2010 and 2050, implying an average annual growth rate of 2.32%. Overall CO2 emissions would rise in this scenario from 33.4 million tonnes in 2010 to 83.5 million tonnes in 2050.
Offsetting this growth are a number of developments that have taken place since publication of the previous Road-Map, such as the benefits from an earlier than previously anticipated introduction in the middle of this decade of re-engined single-aisle airliners from Boeing and Airbus.
SA also sees a higher level of ambition and renewed focus on European aerospace research and the rapid development of biofuels following certification of two main classes of blends in 2011.
The Road-Map has also been updated to reflect the global industry’s own targets announced in 2009, the annual 2% fuel efficiency improvement agreement reached at ICAO and the incorporation of aviation in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme.
The introduction of the ‘imminent’ generation of aircraft types will improve the fleet-average fuel efficiency of UK aviation by some 17% by 2050, says SA, with the bulk of this improvement delivered by 2040. It estimates the subsequent generation of aircraft types from 2025 onwards has the potential to improve fuel efficiency by a further 26% by 2050. Combined, the introduction of more fuel-efficient aircraft and engines between 2010 and 2050 should yield improvements of around 39%, calculates the industry group.
Other improvements in air traffic management, for example optimal flight profiles, and ground-based operational practices, such as improved taxiing techniques and APU substitution, have the potential to improve UK aviation fuel efficiency by a further 13.5% by 2050 relative to 2010, although SA has factored in a 9% improvement in its Road-Map.
SA estimates that by 2050 the use of sustainable fuels in UK aviation will offer between 15% and 24% reduction in CO2 emissions. This assumption is based on a 25-40% penetration of sustainable fuels into the global aviation fuel market, coupled with a 60% life-cycle saving in emissions compared to fossil fuel-derived kerosene. For the purposes of the Road-Map, SA has assumed an overall 18% reduction in emissions from the use of sustainable jet biofuels.
Taking together advances in aircraft, engine, ATM and operational technologies and procedures, the combined average improvement in fuel burn per tonne-kilometre is some 1.44% per annum, of which an average of 1.21% per annum is derived from the deployment of more fuel-efficient aircraft. This is improved still further, to 1.93%, when the impact of sustainable fuels is taken into account.
SA acknowledges that its projection of absolute CO2 emissions from UK aviation in 2050 is some 22% lower than the DfT forecast and also lower than that estimated by the UK government’s independent climate advisers, the Committee on Climate Change, but it believes that there are bigger gains to be made from new aircraft efficiencies and is more bullish about the prospects for sustainable fuels.
Even with this lower forecast, SA projections would appear to indicate that a substantial tonnage, perhaps as much as 20 million tonnes of CO2 in 2050, of UK aviation emissions will have to be offset through carbon trading in order to achieve the industry target of 50% net reduction of 2005 levels by 2050. [Out of 33.4 million tonnes in 2010 to 83.5 million tonnes in 2050 quoted above for UK aviation emissions. So about a quarter of their total emissions. AW].
Carbon trading is by far the most effective economic instrument to reduce net emissions in the aviation sector, believes SA. However, it adds, the climate impact of international aviation cannot be confined to the UK and must be addressed at a global level through appropriate bodies such as ICAO. Globally, it says, policy should be coordinated on a pathway towards a global target for aviation within an internationally-agreed carbon trading framework that would complement technological developments, operational improvements and the use of sustainable fuels.
The UK government is due to make a decision on whether international aviation emissions should be included in national carbon budgets, a move which SA strongly opposes.
However, the group calls on the government to provide additional help for UK research and development, support the drive towards an interoperable European air traffic management system, incentivise the production of sustainable fuels and prioritise a global deal on carbon trading. [ie. the industry wants public funds to assist them, from taxpayers].
Presenting the findings at the House of Commons, Matt Gorman, BAA’s Director of Sustainability and the current Chair of Sustainable Aviation, said: “This report shows that UK aviation can achieve economic growth to 2050 without a substantial increase in absolute CO2 emissions by implementing a series of simple measures.
“The industry also supports the international goal of halving net CO2 emissions by 2050 compared to 2005 levels. Achieving this will not only require the continued commitment and focus of the aviation industry itself but will also rely on action from governments.”
Link:
Sustainable Aviation
The 2012 Road-Map is at http://www.sustainableaviation.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/SA-CO2-Road-Map-full-report-280212.pdf
The 2008 Road-Map is at http://www.nats.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/sa-road-map-final-dec-08.pdf
http://www.greenaironline.com/news.php?viewStory=1435
Sustainable Aviation CO2 Road-Map:
Copyright © 2012 GreenAir Communications |
by comparison the chart from the 2008 Road-Map
The Sustainable Aviation press release says:
Aviation groups publish road map for meeting emissions goals
6 March 2012
Sustainable Aviation, an alliance of leading UK aviation groups, today publishes a report explaining how the aviation industry and government can accommodate significant economic benefit from aviation in the period to 2050 without a substantial rise in absolute CO2 emissions. SA also sets out its support for a reduction in net CO2 emissions to half of 2005 levels by 2050.
The report comes against a background of rising aviation demand, and the forthcoming publication of the UK Government’s Sustainable Aviation Review. Passenger numbers are expected to more than double by 2050 and air freight activity, vital to the UK’s trade with emerging markets, is expected to increase more than seven fold.
The report calls the aviation industry and government to take the following steps to ensure the emissions goals are met while satisfying rising demand for air travel:
- Provide research and development support for new generation aircraft and engine technology. The UK’s leading position in the aerospace industry means that the UK Government can exert strong influence over global aviation’s carbon emissions by providing additional support for research and development here in the UK.
- Improve air traffic management. Our report explains that the industry can take several simple steps to minimise emissions: using mains power, instead of aircraft engines, as generators, running engines less during taxiing, optimising the flight path and cruising altitude, devising steady patterns of descent, and reducing the need for aircraft to circle in the air before they land will all help reduce flights’ environmental impact.
- Incentivise the production of sustainable fuels. Governments must provide positive incentives, through the provision of loans and guarantees that will attract private sector investment in biojet fuels to make their development more economically viable.
- Prioritise a global deal on carbon trading. Governments should prioritise reaching an agreement on a global carbon emissions deal and make it happen.
Matt Gorman, BAA’s Director of Sustainability and the current Chair of Sustainable Aviation, said: “This report shows that UK aviation can support UK economic growth to 2050 without a substantial increase in absolute CO2 emissions by implementing a series of measures. The industry also supports the international goal of halving net CO2 emissions by 2050 compared to 2005 levels. Achieving this will not only require the continued commitment and focus of the aviation industry itself but will also rely on action from governments.”
http://www.sustainableaviation.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Road-Map-PressRelease-FINAL.docx
The Sustainable Aviation website says:
Sustainable Aviation has published a report explaining how governments and the aviation industry can achieve the industry target of halving CO2 emissions by 2050, compared with 2005 levels. The report comes against a background of rising aviation demand, and the forthcoming publication of the UK Government’s Sustainable Aviation Review. Passenger numbers are expected to more than double by 2050 and air freight activity, vital to the UK’s trade with emerging markets, is expected to increase more than seven fold.
Posted: Friday, March 9th, 2012. Filed in Climate Change News, General News, Recent News.
Read more »
@AirportWatch
