Airlines vow to halve carbon emissions by 2050 … (really??)
emissions in half by 2050 in a move that will force up air fares and spark a green
technology race among aircraft manufacturers.
and aircraft companies to cut emissions to 50% below 2005 levels by 2050. In
a bid to seize the initiative from environmental groups clamouring for higher
taxes on the industry, the plan will be presented to world leaders at the United
Nations forum on
strategic shift reflects industry concerns that it could be ambushed at the global
warming summit in Copenhagen in December if it does not address its growing emissions.
politicians will fail to reach a global climate deal
he writes: “The fate of every nation on earth hangs on the outcome of Copenhagen.
It is too important to play the cards-close-to-your-chest poker games that marked
diplomacy of the twentieth century.”
in the negotiations by announcing in New York ambitious plans to reduce China’s
where world leaders hope to agree global emissions reduction targets. The pledges
drawn up by members of the global airline body, the International
efficiency to 2020
2. Stabilizing emissions with carbon-neutral growth from 2020
3. Emissions reductions with a 50% absolute (net) cut in emissions by 2050 compared to 2005
2010.
of limiting airline emissions to 2005 levels by the same deadline. [See link for the government statement on keeping 2050 emissions to 2005 levels ].
change campaigners as an attempt to pre-empt punitive measures at Copenhagen,
amid fears among airline executives that the aviation industry will be singled
out over its exclusion from carbon dioxide caps enshrined in the 1997 Kyoto protocols.
protocol 12 years ago. Now we have a chance to rectify that omission, and we
must seize it. Our proposals represent the most environmentally effective and
practical means of reducing aviation’s carbon impact. They are the best option
for the planet and we urge the UN to adopt them.”
a global market.
the European commission, the EU trading scheme will add €9 ( £8.16) to the cost
of a return short-haul flight and €40 to a long-distance return flight. However,
campaigners suggested the new pledge was undermined by its reliance on the industry
funding emissions cuts elsewhere. “It is a real problem that this will include
offsetting and buying carbon credits,” said John Sauven, director of Greenpeace.
“It shows that Willie Walsh is not really taking the issue of climate change
seriously.”
become the biggest emitter in the developed world if it grows unchecked. [Actually it is higher than 1.6% – see link ]. The government’s advisory body, the committee on climate change, warned ministers
this month that aviation will account for a quarter of all emissions in the developed
world even if it caps 2050 emissions at 2005 levels.
the industry’s emissions will require radical advances in technology that, if
they are not achieved, would force airlines to make up the difference on carbon
trading or offset markets. Airlines are expected to lose $11bn ( £6.8bn) this
year, according to IATA, and their weak balance sheets will be strained further
by carbon permits, analysts say.
Airlines plan ‘to cut emissions’ to half the 2005 levels by 2050
is to pledge to cut CO2 emissions to half the 2005 levels by 2050. This will force
air fares up and could prompt a race for green technologies among aircraft makers.
The deal between airlines, airports and aircraft companies will be presented at
the UN’s climate summit. The aviation industry’s plan is to head off criticism
at Copenhagen over increasing emissions. (BBC)
emissions per passenger by 50%, so that if as predicted passenger numbers double,
emissions in 2050 would be no higher than in 2005. Has the target suddenly doubled
or is the UN being misled?
then, as the Climate Change Committee recently reported, everyone else will need
to cut by 90%.
aircraft to be introduced on a wide scale after 2020. Thus it is a subtle PR
ploy to be allowed to continue to grow unchecked at present
If the latter, not much use if passenger numbers growing at 4 or 5 % a year.
And how exactly is the 1.5% reduction to be defined? If they grow for one year,
is the cut the next year then smaller? And who enforces the reduction?
plans. The difficulty is in getting international agreement.
ploy to persuade the EU to delay its scheme
year. Peanuts compared to the benefit it gets worldwide through paying no tax
on aviation fuel, and no VAT or sales taxes on airline tickets.
offsets against emissions cuts by developing countries should not be allowed to
be used as “cuts”.
not be sufficient.
any real change. The industry still aims to grow passenger numbers to double
the current level.
high-bypass-ratio engines had been invented and a fervent belief in the existence
of miracles. It needs a bit of rebuttal, though………
the headlines is ‘aspirational’
on Climate Change) has said they should plan to limit absolute emissions].
free, with any revenue recycled to themselves.
a lot of words
omitted a key three-letter word: “net”. It’s mainly just carbon trading and
biofuels.
technological break-through happening after 2020. Whatever it is, we have no
idea. But they depend on something turning up which will enable planes to continue
to fly, but with far lower carbon emissions. Something magical.
is that the carbon dioxide emitted by planes at high altitude still causes around
x3 as much climate damage as the same emissions at ground level. Whether that
carbon came from biofuel, or conventional fossil fuel, burnt in a plane engine,
the climate efffect of the emissions is the same. The emissions have to be multiplied
by 3, so being carbon neutral is even harder.
contract within the next decade, and they realise growth out to 2050 will be impossible.
Therefore they can make these commitments, and aspirational targets for the longer
term, to allow them to continue to emit in the short term.
contains more demands about how the industry wants to be given special treatment,
and be permitted to continue to grow.
Executive Director Andy Atkins said:
climate change – but it mustn’t be allowed to create a smokescreen that lets
governments off the hook.
– a con which allows companies and countries to avoid making desperately needed
carbon cuts.
to ensure that aviation emissions are slashed – this must include the scrapping
of ludicrous plans to allow UK airports to expand.
to avoid catastrophic climate change.”
Greenpeace said this is little more than an elaborate conjuring trick, designed
to make the public think the industry is serious about climate change while it
carries on growing. Greenpeace says the announcement is designed to allow the
industry to carry on with business as usual, and amounts to little more than corporate
greenwash. Airlines cannot offset their carbon or depend on biofuels.
efficiency could improve by 1.5% a year to 2020, it is likely to slow to around
1% as technology matures. There are simply no blended-wing hydrogen-fuelled aircraft
ready to fly to the airlines’ rescue. The key weasel word is “net”. Carbon offsets
are a significant part of the aviation industry’s menu, but are no substitute
for real emissions cuts and biofuels won’t do it.
IATA’s hopes for aviation’s future carbon emissions
He wants aviation emissions managed through ICAO, (which has been ineffective
so far). Also better air traffic management; more biofuels and global 1.5% average
annual fuel efficiency improvements till 2020. Not overall emissions cuts. Then
aviation growth (just the growth) will – they hope – be “carbon neutral” after
2020. This would allow unconstrained growth before 2020. After 2020, if they
can get the carbon offsets, biofuels and other technological miracles of startling
proportions, they will try to make the growth “carbon neutral”. And finally they
will try to cut aviation emissions by 2050, to half of 2005 levels. It is a
long time till 2050. 8.10.2009