Airlines vow to halve carbon emissions by 2050 ... (really??)
22.9.2009 (Guardian)
Exclusive: Industry will offer cut at climate change summit to avoid tougher action
by Dan Milmo, transport correspondent
The aviation industry will tomorrow make a dramatic pledge to slash carbon dioxide
emissions in half by 2050 in a move that will force up air fares and spark a green
technology race among aircraft manufacturers.
The British Airways chief executive, Willie Walsh, will unveil an agreement between airlines, airports
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 climate change in New York.
Airlines have been accused of dragging their heels over climate change, but the
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.
Writing in the Guardian, climate change secretary Ed Miliband says he is haunted by the possibility that
politicians will fail to reach a global climate deal. Calling for a new urgency and spirit of co-operation in the negotiations,
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."
UN officials are hoping that China's president, Hu Jintao, may break the deadlock
in the negotiations by announcing in New York ambitious plans to reduce China's
carbon emissions.
If Walsh's proposals are accepted by the UN, they will be on the agenda at Copenhagen,
where world leaders hope to agree global emissions reduction targets. The pledges
drawn up by members of the global airline body, the International Air Transport Association, are:
1. Improving carbon efficiency with a 1.5% average annual improvement in fuel
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
and to submit plans for joining a global carbon trading scheme to the UN by November
2010.
The 50% reduction target by 2050 goes further than the UK government's target
of limiting airline emissions to 2005 levels by the same deadline. [See link for the government statement on keeping 2050 emissions to 2005 levels ].
Walsh's presentation to UN delegates on behalf of IATA will be viewed by climate
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.
Walsh will say: "International aviation emissions were not included in the Kyoto
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."
Under the proposals, airlines would leave the EU emissions trading scheme, which they are due to join in 2012, and would buy carbon dioxide permits in
a global market.
Walsh warned earlier this year that a global scheme would add around £3bn per year to industry costs, which would be passed on to passengers through higher fares. According to
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."
Aviation accounts for 1.6% of global greenhouse emissions currently, but will
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 committee also recommended state investment in the green technology. Cutting
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.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/sep/21/airlines-carbon-emissions-cut
see also
Airlines plan 'to cut emissions' to half the 2005 levels by 2050
Date Added: 22nd September 2009
At a conference today in New York, Willie Walsh will say that the aviation industry
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)
Click here to view full story...
see also
some initial thoughts by AirportWatch members:
This looks largely like clever PR rubbish.
1. To cut aviation emissions by 50% by 2050. The previous target was to cut
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?
2. If target is merely that emissions will be no higher in 2050 than in 2005
then, as the Climate Change Committee recently reported, everyone else will need
to cut by 90%.
3. Even this target is suspect. It depends on the invention of new miracle
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
4. To reduce emissions by 1.5% a year. Is this in total or per passenger?
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?
5. To produce plans for a global emissions trading scheme. Easy to produce
plans. The difficulty is in getting international agreement.
6. Leave the EU emissions trading scheme to join new global scheme. A good
ploy to persuade the EU to delay its scheme
7. New global emissions trading scheme would cost the industry £3 billion a
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.
8. Apparent reductions in emissions for greater use of biofuels, and use of
offsets against emissions cuts by developing countries should not be allowed to
be used as "cuts".
9. No enforecement method is mentioned - self policing and laudable aims will
not be sufficient.
10. Sounds like a lot of clever words, to give every appearance of action without
any real change. The industry still aims to grow passenger numbers to double
the current level.
11. Not a plan, just a set of assertions based on extrapolations from the days before
high-bypass-ratio engines had been invented and a fervent belief in the existence
of miracles. It needs a bit of rebuttal, though.........
12. The cap appears to be '2020 levels', while the 2050 target that grabbed
the headlines is 'aspirational'
13. The industry wants unlimited access to offsets, whereas CCC (the Committee
on Climate Change) has said they should plan to limit absolute emissions].
14. There is no statement on auctioning permits. The industry wants them all
free, with any revenue recycled to themselves.
15. The rest of it is about operations, biofuels etc is recycled puff - just
a lot of words
16. The Guardian headline "Airlines vow to halve their carbon emissions by 2050"
omitted a key three-letter word: "net". It's mainly just carbon trading and
biofuels.
17. The industry is pinning its hopes (leaving aside peak oil) for some remarkable
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.
18. What the aviation industry ignores, with its hopes of biofuels saving them,
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.
19. It looks as if the industry realise that peak oil will be making their industry
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.
20. The press have picked up on the offers to make cuts, but the press release
contains more demands about how the industry wants to be given special treatment,
and be permitted to continue to grow.
see also
Friends of the Earth press release:
Aviation industry must cut emissions without offsetting
22nd September 2009
Commenting on today's vow by airlines to cut emissions, Friends of the Earth's
Executive Director Andy Atkins said:
"The aviation industry rightly recognises that it must play its part in tackling
climate change - but it mustn't be allowed to create a smokescreen that lets
governments off the hook.
"Emissions from flying must be cut, but this must be done without using offsetting
- a con which allows companies and countries to avoid making desperately needed
carbon cuts.
"Cleaner planes have a part to play, but Government intervention is also needed
to ensure that aviation emissions are slashed - this must include the scrapping
of ludicrous plans to allow UK airports to expand.
"Aviation must make a real contribution to legally-binding international efforts
to avoid catastrophic climate change."
see also
Greenpeace response:
GLOBAL AIRLINE INDUSTRY ANNOUNCES EMISSIONS PLANS – GREENPEACE RESPONSE
Date Added: 23rd September 2009
Reacting to IATA's statement on cutting net aviation emissions by 50% by 2050,
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.
Click here to view Greenpeace press release...
see also
Flights of fancy over airline emissions (letter)
Date Added: 23rd September 2009
A letter from Jeff Gazzard, an AEF board member, says while aircraft and operational
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.
Click here to view letter...
and
IATA's hopes for aviation's future carbon emissions
Giovanni Bisigiani says he wants governments to set global targets for CO2 cuts.
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 More .....
(21st September 2009)
