Climate groups taking government to High Court over greenwash “Jet Zero” aviation strategy
In July 2022, the UK government published a “Jet Zero” strategy (the best part of which is the catchy name). It aspires to allow the UK airline sector to continue to grow, with unrealistic hopes of being able to decarbonise with novel fuels. It was widely condemned at the time as being greenwashing, with no credible ways to achieve its goals, and its steadfast refusal to contemplate measures to reduce the demand for flights. Two organisations, GALBA and Possible, challenged the government. In October 2022, with lawyers at Leigh Day, Possible filed for a judicial review of the “Jet Zero” strategy. They now have permission to proceed to a joint hearing. This is a hugely important milestone in climate change litigation in the UK. Experts have judged the plans in Jet Zero to be inadequate, and lawyers will argue that the failure to consider this risk to the delivery of its plans renders its net zero aviation strategy unlawful. The key grounds on which the challenge will be heard in the High Court are: The government failed to lay a report before Parliament setting out how the strategy would enable carbon budgets to be met. And the government failed to consult in a lawful manner by having a “closed mind” before the consultation commenced on whether demand management measures were required.
.
Tweet
Climate groups taking government to court over “dangerous” aviation strategy
28.3.2023
From We are Possible
Along with Group for Action on Leeds Bradford Airport (GALBA), we are taking the government to court. In October 2022, with lawyers at Leigh Day, we filed for a judicial review of the “Jet Zero” strategy (its plan for aviation emissions), which the Department for Transport released in July 2022.
Our legal challenges will now proceed to a joint hearing. This is another hugely important milestone in climate change litigation in the UK.
What is wrong with the “Jet Zero” Strategy proposed?
Since the strategy was published, a range of environmental groups have expressed concern that it is utterly inadequate to hold the industry to account on reducing emissions in line with the UK’s legally binding climate commitments. In fact, it would fail to reduce aviation’s climate impacts, encourage a huge increase in flights, and pave the way for airport expansion.
The Royal Society and Imperial College London recently analysed all the measures that the government proposes in Jet Zero to cut aviation emissions. They were all judged to be inadequate. It will be argued that the failure to consider this risk to the delivery of its plans renders its net zero aviation strategy unlawful.
The key grounds on which the challenge will be heard in the High Court are:
- The government failed to lay a report before Parliament setting out how the strategy would enable carbon budgets to be met.
- The government failed to consult in a lawful manner by having a “closed mind” before the consultation commenced on whether demand management measures were required.
Flights are highly polluting and very difficult to decarbonise. Rather than take sensible steps to tackle this problem by limiting frequent flying, the government’s dangerous strategy encourages huge growth in flights. It relies too heavily on “pie in the sky technologies” that are completely unproven. To meet their own climate targets, demand management and reducing the overall number of flights are essential.
What are the solutions?
However, there is an alternative that would lower aviation emissions without stopping ordinary people from holidaying.
The frequent flyer levy, a policy which is both popular and fair, would manage demand by placing a progressively higher tax on the small group of people who fly frequently, with just 15% of people taking 70% of all UK flights.
The climate crisis is here now. The government has refused to listen to their own advisors on climate, who have repeatedly warned that we need to limit flights. We can’t allow the government to continue to give airports and airlines a free ticket to keep cashing in as our world burns. And when we see the government in court, we’ll make that clear
In their most recent report this week, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a grave warning that the world must “massively fast-track climate efforts” in order to stand a chance of limiting warming to 1.5C. Demand management policies, which the government refused to include in the Jet Zero Strategy, have been noted by the IPCC as a vital part of bringing down emissions.
The UK’s Committee on Climate Change has also consistently stated that the government needs to “implement a policy to manage aviation demand as soon as possible” to ensure there are adequate mechanisms in place “in the likely event” that low emission technologies are not commercially available in time to sufficiently reduce emissions from flights.
Until there is a credible pathway to decarbonizing the aviation sector, it is a massive gamble for the government to allow the unchecked growth of the sector without any attempt at managing demand.
And that’s why we’ll see the Government in court.
.
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF GOVT’S JET ZERO STRATEGY TO PROGRESS TO COURT HEARING
29 MAR 2023
BY ILARIA GRASSO MACOLA (Travel Trade Gazette – TTG)
A judicial review of the UK aviation industry’s proposed journey to net zero has taken a major step forward, with a date for a hearing set to be announced soon.
Climate charity Possible and campaigners from the Group for Action on Leeds Bradford Airport (GALBA) are challenging the government’s Jet Zero Strategy, claiming it will fail to sufficiently reduce the sector’s environmental impact by 2050.
Published in July 2022, the government’s Jet Zero strategy aims to decarbonise aviation by 2050 by improving the sector’s efficiency and accelerating the uptake of sustainable aviation fuels and zero-emission flights.
MORE: The burning issue: Is travel really set up for a carbon-free future?
Possible senior campaigner Alethea Warrington told TTG: “We’re looking forward to seeing the government in court to explain why their perpetual growth plan for aviation is so dangerous for our climate that it’s illegal.
“There’s no way to fly without causing huge amounts of emissions that heat up our world. As most emissions from flights are from a small group of frequent flyers, the only sensible solution for our climate is policies to discourage frequent flying.
“Yet instead of cutting back on flights, our government is handing out huge chunks of public money to companies offering expensive, unproven and often polluting technologies. This just isn’t going to fly for our climate.”
Both Possible and GALBA’s legal cases were initially brought last October on the grounds the strategy was in breach the Climate Change Act of 2008, and that the transport secretary had failed to properly consult on it.
The local campaigners’ legal case has also brought additional grounds related to how the Jet Zero Strategy will impact local airports, such as Leeds Bradford.
“Possible believes that the secretary of state failed unlawfully to take the independent expert’s advice into account,” said Leigh Day solicitor Rowan Smith, which represents the green charity.
“By not fully appreciating the risk to delivery that sustainable aviation fuel represents, he has breached his duties under the Climate Change Act 2008.”
TTG has approached the Department for Transport (DfT) for comment.
.
See earlier:
Royal Society report on novel aviation fuels – no option other than cutting demand for flying
The UK government has been promoting the idea of “guilt-free flying” in a few years time. Now a report from the Royal Society says (as has been well known by anyone who properly investigated the issue!) that there is currently no single, clear alternative to traditional fuel. Switching to so-called “sustainable” fuel is key to the government’s aim to reach “jet zero” flying by 2050. Realistically, there will be no significant impact on reducing aviation CO2 from electric planes, or hydrogen. Small economies and efficiencies by airlines can only make a small dent, while demand for flights is expected to increase. The Royal Society looked at options for “greener” fuels to replace the 12.3m tonnes of jet fuel used annually in the UK. They conclude that to produce biofuels for UK aviation would require half of Britain’s farming land, putting severe pressure on food supplies and nature. There is not enough genuinely low carbon electricity to produce much “green” hydrogen. The Royal Society says research and development is required to understand and mitigate the non-CO2 climate impacts of all the alternative fuel options. But it stops short of the obvious solution to reducing aviation carbon emissions – reducing the demand for air travel, and not allowing it to grow.
The Aviation Environment Federation (AEF) responds to the government’s “jet zero” strategy
In July, the DfT set out its “jet zero” strategy – with the intention of bringing down UK aviation CO2 emissions to “net zero” by 2050, (after allowing an increase) with sub-targets to make domestic flights and airports “net zero” by 2040. Environmental groups are distinctly unimpressed, as the strategy has very low ambition or real measures to cut the CO2. The groups say there should be detailed policy proposals on how the strategy’s ambitions will be achieved, with specific policy mechanisms to create incentives for the development and deployment of “zero emission” aircraft and “sustainable aviation fuel” (SAF). There also needs to be a clear decarbonisation pathway to cut emissions by 2035, compared to 2019, not by 2050. It needs to cut air travel demand, which is the only sure way to cut emissions, but the strategy studiously avoids doing that. There should be no airport expansions allowed. And the non-CO2 impacts should be included, which they are not. The AEF considers that the near term policies are too ineffective – just using the UK ETS and more SAF, and the cost of decarbonisation measures should be borne by the aviation industry, not the taxpayer.
https://www.airportwatch.org.uk/2022/08/aef-responds-to-governments-jet-zero-strategy/
.
Inadequate Jet Zero strategy criticised by environmental groups and even pilots
The DfT has produced its “Jet Zero Strategy” which is the nearest thing there is to an aviation policy for the UK. Though, as that, it is entirely inadequate. Leading environmental groups – Green Alliance, Friends of the Earth, Possible, Transport & Environment and AEF – have explained why the strategy is ineffective, in cutting future aviation CO2 emissions. The Climate Change Committee’s annual report, published in June, found the aviation industry (also agriculture) is unprepared for meeting the UK’s legally binding climate targets for “net zero” by 2050. The Jet Zero strategy needs to have detailed policy proposals on how its ambitions will be achieved, with specific policy mechanisms to create incentives for the development and deployment of zero emission aircraft and sustainable aviation fuels. It should have a detailed decarbonisation pathway that achieves genuine carbon reductions before 2035, not only after then. It needs to have a plan to curb air passenger demand, as novel and untested technological solutions – on which the strategy largely depends – cannot be relied up. Even BALPA, the pilots’ union, has said the strategy places too much faith is future technologies, that may not deliver.
.
And
DfT publishes “Jet Zero Strategy” … “so passengers can look forward to guilt-free travel”
The DfT has published its “Jet Zero Strategy”, such as it is. For net emissions, not all emissions. Predictably, it does not propose realistic cuts in aviation carbon emissions, nor any measures to reduce air travel demand. The Strategy says: “We are introducing a CO2 emissions reduction trajectory that sees aviation emissions peak in 2019. [39.6MtCO2]. This trajectory from 2025 to 2050, is based on our “High ambition” scenario, and sets ambitious [sic] in-sector targets of 35.4 MtCO2e in 2030, 28.4 MtCO2e in 2040, and 19.3 MtCO2e in 2050.” The level was about 18MtCO2 in 1990. So it will take 30 more years, to get them back to the 1990 level (by which time, the UK should – miraculously – have become “net zero”. The strategy makes no mention of air travel demand management, which would be the simplest and most effective mechanism to cut emissions. Instead there are hopes of tech solutions of all sorts (none that could become commercially viable for decades) and the intention to have a mandate for jet fuel to contain 10% SAF by 2030. Problem with that is “sustainable aviation fuels” have their own considerable carbon and environmental downsides. The aviation industry will be happy – they can keep on growing …
Click here to view full story…
.
.
.