Climate Change News
Below are news items on climate change – many with relevance to aviation
If government wants a new runway, why does the UK have no aviation climate strategy?
Business Green has looked at the implications of the UK allowing a new runway for our carbon emissions, and found the government has only an embarrassing space where a credible aviation carbon strategy should be. It has so far refused to engage with is the fact the aspirational target to keep UK aviation emissions at 2005 levels in 2050 is both arbitrary and too weak, and even then the Airports Commission made clear that meeting it requires heroically ambitious (unrealistic) assumptions on future carbon pricing and clean tech adoption. The Commission hoped that adding a runway would be manageable "if the rest of the economy decarbonises as people expect and aircraft become more fuel efficient". There is no guarantee of either of those - and in their absence, aviation emissions would rise too high. The Commission was aware that adding a south east runway would require hardly any expansion at regional airports. Allowing the expansion of aviation means all other sectors having to cut their CO2 emissions by 85% by 2050. Currently the UK is not on track to deliver the decarbonisation of the wider economy as planned. Large swathes of the economy will have to become virtually zero emission just to give aviation more headroom. "The basic principle of climate action should be to try and pull risk out of the system; new runways simply load more risk in."
Click here to view full story...
George Monbiot: Climate change means no airport expansion – at Heathrow or anywhere
An excellently written and eloquently argued piece by George Monbiot sets out why the UK should not build a new runway. Not at Heathrow. Not at Gatwick. Worth reading the whole article. Some extracts: ... "There is only one way to prevent aviation from wrecking the planet. We need to fly much less ... The correct question is not where, it is whether. And the correct answer is no. .... There is only one answer that doesn’t involve abandoning our climate change commitments and our moral scruples: nowhere. ... The prime minister cannot uphold the Paris agreement on climate change, which comes into force next month, and permit the runway to be built. ... [airlines] seek to divert us with a series of mumbo-jumbo jets, mythical technologies never destined for life beyond the press release. Solar passenger planes, blended wing bodies, hydrogen jets, algal oils, other biofuels: all are either technically impossible, commercially infeasible, worse than fossil fuels or capable of making scarcely a dent in emissions. ... Having approved the extra capacity, the government will discover that it’s incompatible with our commitments under the Climate Change Act, mull the consequences for a minute or two, then quietly abandon the commitments. It’s this simple: a third runway at Heathrow means that the UK will not meet its carbon targets."
Click here to view full story...
Little new on aviation in CCC advice after Paris Agreement – STILL waiting for Government policy on aviation CO2
The Committee on Climate Change has produced its advice to government on UK climate action following the Paris Agreement last December. It sees aviation as a "challenging" or "hard to treat" sector from which to cut emissions. The CCC advocates greenhouse gas removal options (e.g. afforestation, carbon-storing materials, bioenergy with carbon capture and storage) to help deal with these CO2 emissions. It is aware that the option for these measures is limited, though it suggests 10% use of biofuel in aircraft eventually (and reduced red meat consumption in diets as a solution ...) The CCC suggests shifting demand to lower emissions alternatives (e.g. virtual conferencing in place of international air travel). The CCC say government should develop strategies for greenhouse gas removal technologies and reducing emissions from the hardest-to-treat sectors eg. aviation. The CCC continues to say UK aviation CO2 emissions should not be above 37.5MtCO2 by 2050. They have said (Nov 2015) that government should publish an effective policy framework for aviation emissions by autumn 2016. This has NOT happened. While international aviation is not yet included in UK carbon budgets, the CCC said in Nov 2015 that it would "provide further advice following the ICAO negotiations in 2016, and recommend that Government revisit inclusion at that point." No mention of that yet.
Click here to view full story...
Might the ICAO deal, weak in itself, be the beginning of the end for very cheap flights?
The recent deal from ICAO on slightly limiting the rise in global aviation carbon emissions would perhaps add around 2% to the price of an air ticket. That would be about the cost of a coffee on many short haul cheap flights - not a deterrent. It would not start till 2020. The aviation industry may worry that its wafer thin margins (shocking it makes so little profit for the emission of SO much CO2) may be further hit. But the industry is pleased there is an ICAO deal, as it will be much cheaper for them than a patchwork of more stringent regulations by regions or countries. Hence their (muted) enthusiasm for it. They have got off lightly. The aviation industry currently has very cheap fuel, but it has not had a good year due to fears of terrorism, cutting growth - and also fears of coming economic gloom, with Brexit as part of that. There have been airline staff cuts. Airlines will need to invest in newer planes, that emit less carbon per mile - to save themselves costs in future. The price of oil is not likely to stay low for ever, especially due to the lack of investment in the current downturn. With the first mechanism to act on aviation CO2 now agreed, there may in future be more environmental regulation for the sector. With anticipated growth of 4 - 5% per year, the CO2 emissions from global aviation could become around 25%of the total by 2050 - eclipsing the progress made in cutting carbon from other sectors.
Click here to view full story...
ICAO’s aviation offsetting deal is a weak start – now countries must go further to cut CO2
A deal was finally agreed by ICAO on 6th October. It was progress, in that there had never been any sort of agreement on global aviation CO2 emissions before. But it was not a great deal - and far too weak to provide the necessary restriction on the growth of global aviation CO2. It came in the same week that the Paris Agreement crossed its crucial threshold to enter into force, but the ICAO deleted key provisions for the deal to align its ambitions with the Paris aim of limiting global temperature rise to well below 2 degrees with best efforts to not exceed 1.5 degrees C. Tim Johnson, Director of AEF and the lead representative of The International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation (ICSA) – the official environmental civil society observer at the global negotiations, said in relation to the UK: “But while today’s deal is applauded, this international effort falls well short of the effort required to bring UK aviation emissions in line with the Climate Change Act. With a decision on a new runway expected later this month, the UK’s ambition for aviation emissions must match the ambition of the Climate Change Act, and not simply the ICAO global lowest common denominator of carbon neutral growth from 2020. The ICAO scheme could make a contribution towards the ambition of the Climate Change Act, but it does not solve the whole problem.”
Click here to view full story...
Report shows EU’s ‘imperfect’ ETS still outperforms draft UN aviation deal on aviation CO2
When in April 2014 the EU agreed, reluctantly, to "stop the clock" on its inclusion of aviation in the ETS (Emissions Trading System) it was on the condition that this limiting of the scheme would be re-assessed in 2017, depending if ICAO had come up with an effective scheme to restrict aviation CO2 by then. Currently the EU ETS only includes carbon from flights within, (not to and from) the EU. But the deal that ICAO is likely to sign up to next month looks as if it will fail, by being too small in its scope, voluntary not obligatory, and depending on unknown biofuels and technologies in future, no environmental safeguards, as well as unreliable carbon offsets which may not in practice cut CO2 emissions. It will not meet ICAO's stated goal of "carbon neutral growth" from 2020. Therefore, as the ICAO scheme does not meet the requirements of the EU, in order to suspend its ETS, the EU may find it necessary to revert to its full ETS system, to include flights out of (maybe also into) the EU as well as flights within the EU. The EU needs to ensure it gets agreement through ICAO that it can continue to include aviation in its ETS. The ETS scheme had its faults, but used emissions allowances instead of dubious offsets, was binding instead of voluntary, and include all CO2 emissions. To be fully effective, the cap on aviation carbon in the EU scheme needs to reduce each year. A new report "Aviation ETS - gaining altitude" sets out the details of how the ETS could work in future.
Click here to view full story...
China, US and EU reported to have pledged to join the weak, voluntary, initial stages of ICAO scheme for CO2
It is reported that China, Europe and the US have pledged to join the initial voluntary phases of ICAO's carbon-offsetting scheme designed to give international aviation a chance of achieving it goal of "carbon-neutral growth" after 2020. On 3rd September, the 44 member states of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) committed to being part of ICAO’s global market-based measure (MBM) scheme “from the start”. On the same day the US and China said they “expect to be early participants” in the global MBM, also called the Carbon Offset and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation, or CORSIA. On 2nd September ICAO released a revised text that will be presented for adoption by the ICAO Assembly in early October. This makes participation voluntary in the pilot and first phases of the scheme, covering 2021-26. The MBM will become mandatory only in the 2nd phase, covering 2027-35, with exemptions for countries with only a small share of international aviation activity in 2018. India and Russia are opposed to joining the global MBM. Under the CORSIA scheme, airlines would "offset" additional CO2 growth beyond 2019-20 levels by buying credits from designated environmental projects.There are concerns about REDD forestry credits being used. ICAO estimates the cost to airlines would only be at most 1.4% of total revenues, by 2035. Far less till then.
Click here to view full story...
MEPs shocked by ‘secretive’ and unacceptably unambitious ICAO plan to cut aviation CO2 emissions
A meeting of the European Parliament’s Committee on Environment has been told of the way a possible agreement by ICAO next month - on global aviation carbon emissions - has been watered down. MEPs were informed of the likely 6-year delay, with the scheme for a global market based mechanism (GMBM) not taking effect properly until 2027, rather than in 2021 that had been foreseen. Opt-in to the GMBM scheme before 2027 would be voluntary, but mandatory from 2027 through to 2035. There will be exemptions for poor nations, and even after 2027 the participation of the least developed countries and small island states would remain voluntary only. EU deputies said they were “shocked” to learn how many concessions the EU was prepared to make at the Montreal meeting, which took place in May behind closed doors. Then, to make matters yet worse, “a special review in 2032 will determine whether the mechanism will be continued,” taking into account progress made as part of a related “basket of measures” which includes “CO2 standards for aircraft”, technological improvements, air traffic management and alternative fuels. In a rare show of unity, Parliament representatives from across the political spectrum urged the EU to be more aggressive in the negotiation. Bas Eckhout, a Dutch MEP, said what is on offer now is not acceptable.
Click here to view full story...
Aviation low carbon future using biofuel from wood waste described as a “pipe dream”
Plans to cut airline CO2 using jet fuels made from waste wood have been dismissed as a "pipe dream" and "fairytale stuff" and unrealistic by environmentalists. ICAO anticipates a trebling of CO2 emissions from aviation by 2050 if nothing is done to restrict it. It is attempting to develop long term plan to ensure that, by 2050, net aviation emissions will be half of what they were in 2005. One of the key parts of that plan is "green" jet fuel. Earlier this year the FAA authorised a new biofuel made from a type of alcohol called isobutanol, which companies are hoping to make from wood pulp treated with enzymes to produce sugars. Then genetically modified yeast produce isobutanol from the sugars. Another process then converts the isobutane into high octane fuel. If this fuel was made of just forestry residue, rather than purposely felled trees, it could be considered to be "sustainable" with probably low environmental impact. Bill Hemmings of T&E believes these fuels are far too expensive, and they are not - and will not - deliver the emissions reductions that would justify the investment. ICAO's dream of halving the level of 2005 aviation CO2 missions by 2050 depends on a rapid uptake of genuinely low carbon and "green" fuels. That would need an improbable 170 large scale bio-refineries to be built every year between 2020 and 2050, at a cost of up to $60 billion per year.
Click here to view full story...
India to summarily reject ICAO’s proposed market based measure for aviation CO2 emissions
ICAO is meant to be getting global agreement in October on some way to control the growth of the aviation sector's emissions. However, India - which has a relatively new and very fast growing aviation industry - is not willing to accept anything that might cost the industry money or slow its growth. The purpose of some form of market based mechanism, agreed through ICAO, is for airlines to have to buy carbon permits to offset CO2 emissions above their level in 2020. That works by the airlines having to spend money on the permits, with the likely effect of slowing growth. Airlines are naturally not keen, which is why ICAO has made virtually zero progress on this over several decades. Officials from India's civil aviation ministry say Indian airlines are not willing to abide by the proposed "tax". India as a country has pledged to reduce CO2 emissions, as committed at the UN Climate Change Agreement in Paris last December. Carbon emissions from Indian aviation could double from their 2011 level by 2020, but India considers itself to be a "developing country" although in many respects it no longer is. ICAO proposes allowing developing countries special leeway with their carbon emissions, but this is intended for small countries that are far less rich - and with far less thriving aviation industries - than India.