Climate Change News
Below are news items on climate change – many with relevance to aviation
Gaping holes in Airports Commission’s analysis of airport expansion conceal potential environmental disaster
The Aviation Environment Federation, in their response to the Airports Commission consultation, says there are gaping holes in the Airports Commission's analysis of airport expansion. These conceal a potential environmental disaster. AEF says the Commission ran out of time to complete key pieces of research on greenhouse gas emissions and on air quality. AEF is calling on political parties not to accept the Commission's recommendations until all relevant evidence has been gathered and made available for public scrutiny. The gaps in the Commission's analysis include not completing local air quality modelling in time for the consultation, despite the Commission's assessment objective being "to improve air quality in line with EU air quality laws". Also not following the Committee on Climate Change's recommendation that the economic impact assessment of expansion must include the costs associated with meeting UK aviation emissions targets (which a nrw runway would probably breach); and not providing any analysis of how noise impacts would vary if different assumptions were made about the location of flight paths.
Click here to view full story...
Three new briefings ask “Can the UK build a new runway, and stay within the aviation carbon cap?”
The Airports Commission gives the impression that the issue of carbon emissions has been fully considered, and that a new runway can be accommodated within UK carbon targets. However, that is far from the truth. It is by no means clear that the UK aviation could stay within the 37.5 MtCO2 cap that is needed, in order for the UK as a whole to meet its legal climate obligations. Indeed, the Airports Commission itself is aware of this problem, and its own figures show the carbon emissions from UK aviation far exceeding the cap, over many years. For the clearest view of this, see the Commission's interim report, Technical Appendix, December 2013, Pages 71 & 72. Though there will be carbon efficiencies in coming decades, in CO2 per passenger kilometre, the scale of those improvements is unknown and many are just hypothetical. The widely accepted assumption has been that the matter is just which airport gets a runway - rather than whether a runway could be built at all. The carbon situation makes it clear that the debate is still very much "IF" a runway should be built, and not merely "WHERE?" New briefings help set out the facts, and show that building a new runway would mean UK aviation exceeds its carbon cap.
Click here to view full story...
Aviation Environment Federation sets out 3 main gaps in the Airports Commission’s assessment of CO2 from UK aviation with a new runway
In the rush to build a new runway in the south east, the vital issue of whether or not a new runway would be compatible with national climate change commitments has been largely overlooked. The Airports Commission gives the impression that the issue has been fully considered. In fact, it has not. The AEF has set out 3 simple points on which the Commission needs to answer questions - and which people writing responses to the consultation should include. These relate to the accuracy of CO2 forecasts; the lack of any policies to build a runway and still keep UK aviation CO2 down to the required level; and the lack of any assessment of how much less of an economic benefit a runway might be, if the carbon was properly factored into the calculations. AEF suggests raising these. On forecasts, the Commission should "Explain why its CO2 emissions forecasts are lower than the Government’s latest forecasts, what assumptions are made and how sensitive to the results are to them." On policy it should: "Set out in meaningful detail what policy developments would be required in order to limit emissions to the aviation cap while building new capacity." And on cost-benefit it should "Fully include the economy-wide cost of keeping national aviation emissions to within 37.5 Mt in its cost benefit analyses."
Click here to view full story...
Carbon diary of reluctant traveller – 77,000 air miles per year for work; 12,000 air miles for holidays …..
In a carbon diary looking at his annual carbon emissions, an American who works for a transport organisation, the ICCT calculated just how much of the total came from flights. For his job, he travels a lot internationally. The number of miles for work, to attend meetings to help set emission standards for planes and ships through ICAO, came to 77,000 miles - on 30 flights over 9 work trips, releasing an additional 11 tons of CO2. Other journeys during his year accounted for 11,000 miles from regular commuting trips to the office by train, and another 12,000 miles flown on two family holidays. Due to a Californian lifestyle, in a warm climate, transport makes up a higher proportion of his annual carbon footprint than for someone living in a cold climate, needing heating (or a hot one, wanting air conditioning). But on the amount from flying, he reflects that this can be seen as a systemic problem, not just an individual one. And as such this means we need governments to develop policies internationally and domestically to impose a price on carbon to curb aviation emissions. "All this, and more, will be needed given that aviation CO2 emissions are on track to triple by mid-century." Another blog stresses the need to reduce the demand for flights.
Click here to view full story...
Aviation industry worldwide faces pressure to make progress on its carbon emissions
American article that looks, in a fairly general way, at the likelihood of some mechanism being put in place, in the foreseeable future, to regulate carbon emissions from the aviation industry. The industry is unlikely to achieve the carbon cuts it hoped for from using biofuels. There are only limited efficiencies that can be made by higher load factors and more efficient routing, and other gains are needed from newer aircraft with better engines and lighter materials. However, these will be slow to replace existing planes, due to the economics with improvements only incremental. Air traffic growth is set to triple the industry’s global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. If commercial aviation were a country, it would rank 7th in global greenhouse gas emissions. Politically, it depends on whether the United Nations ICAO can establish agreement among member states on a regulatory mechanism, which in turn may depend largely on whether the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) chooses to regulate aviation emissions. There is a risk that action taken by governments and industry may be politically feasible but scientifically ineffectual. There is no guarantee that the 2016 ICAO meeting will result in binding obligations.
Click here to view full story...
American blog “Love and long-distance travel in the time of climate change”
In a thoughtful, soul-searching article by an American climate campaigner, Eve, she sets out her dilemma about flights across the States to visit her family several times each year. About a year earlier, a meteorologist in the US, Eric Holthaus, vowed not to fly again - after he understood just how serious the issue of climate change had become, and how large a part of his personal carbon footprint flying had become. With thousands of other Americans, Eve was influenced by Eric Holthaus. She writes of her difficulties in having lived a typical American life, involving studying and working in places far from home, yet wanting to keep in regular contact with parents and family. She describes the sadness of choosing not going home to visit parents. "It is very, very strange to be in a position now — and I don’t think I’m alone — where I find myself weighing seeing the people I love against my own complicity in the global climate crisis." And "Never before has our economy been so effortlessly globalized that jobs pull people back and forth across countries and oceans, and never before have we had so much evidence that the systems and habits we’ve created to actually live in that economy are quite literally destroying the planet."
Click here to view full story...
Paper by Dr Alice Bows Larkin on need for air travel demand management to limit growth in aviation CO2 emissions
In a paper in the journal, Climate Policy, Dr Alice Bows Larkin looks at the problem of rising emissions from the international shipping and aviation sectors, and their special treatment. While all sectors face decarbonization for a 2C temperature increase to be avoided, meaningful policy measures that address rising CO2 from international aviation and shipping remain woefully inadequate. Dr Bows Larkin concludes that the more simply structured aviation sector is misguided in pinning too much hope on emissions trading to deliver CO2 cuts in line with 2C. Instead, the solution to aviation playing its part in achieving the 2C target remains controversial and unpopular. It requires demand management for air travel. Or perhaps biofuel, which seems unlikely. She asks: "Should aviation, which in a global context continues to be dominated by relatively affluent leisure passengers, take priority over other sectors for the use of sustainable biofuels in preference to less popular policies aiming to curb or even cut growth rates? ....The highly constrained carbon budget commensurate with 2 C does not permit any further delay in rolling out mitigation policies for aviation and shipping."
Click here to view full story...
LETTER: Cutting air travel is essential choice – not only advocating more cycling & more use of rail
Writing in the local Sussex press, a local resident shows up the logical inconsistency of local LibDem councillor Frances Haigh backing a 2nd Gatwick runway (against the policy of her party) while backing more cycling and more use of rail. With around 35 million passengers per year, Gatwick already provides far more capacity than everyone living within a reasonable distance of the airport could possibly need per year. The extra passengers with a new runway would need to come by road or rail from long distances away, possibly passing other airports which have spare capacity, like Stansted and Luton. To travel more by bike and by rail is commendable, but the carbon emissions from flying far outweigh the savings than can be made by these more sustainable modes. The travel distances flying permits, in just a few hours, can result in the production of more CO2 per person per day than the average per car in a year. For anyone concerned about their contribution to global warming, cutting back on air travel is an obvious and essential choice.
Click here to view full story...
NATS has a new tool ‘FLOSYS’ to help on environmental efficiency of flights – but noise ignored
The CAA requires NATS to meeting "3Di" efficiency targets (3 dimensional inefficiency) to route planes by the shortest and most efficient route, and save fuel. However, one consequence of this is more noise on the ground. The increased 3Di efficiency has a trade-off between emissions and noise, between 4,000 and 7,000 feet. (Below 4,000 feet, routes should be designed with noise as the prime consideration - above 7,000 fuel burn is the main issue). This conflict with NATS targets and noise suffered under flight paths has caused a large degree of upset at many UK airports this summer, as NATS prepares to implement the FAS (Future Airspace Strategy). Now NATS has a new tool that they call the Flight Optimisation System, or ‘FLOSYS’. This enables NATS to assess more accurately each flight trajectory. NATS says they can better identify the opportunities for operational improvements to "save airlines fuel and cut carbon emissions." The focus is definitely on cutting CO2 (ie. saving airlines money) which is laudable. But at the cost of very upset and angry residents under flight paths, who are suffering more noise. NATS is not widely endearing itself.
Click here to view full story...
140 organisations in “Taming Aviation” coalition petitions European Parliament to ban night flights
A coalition of 140 organisations that are signed up to "Taming Aviation" met European Parliament representatives on 18th November to ask for a ban on flights operating at night, over an 8 hour period. And it also called on legislators to stop the tax exemptions the aviation sector currently enjoys. Taming Aviation, and its member organisations, is asking the Parliament to take action. Some of the campaign's members are from communities outside immediate airport areas. Taming Aviation co-founder Susanne Heger said aircraft noise poses serious health threats for people living near airports. According to a study from the University of Bern, the noise increases the risk of dying of a heart attack by 50% and is one of the biggest concerns of those who live under flight paths. At Frankfurt there is already a ban on night flights and this should be extended widely. Citizens' groups have for many years taken these issues up with airports and authorities, with little success. Hence the appeal to the European Parliament to get effective action. There needs to be more action by Europe to ensure that a future aviation emissions system has teeth, and some real effect on aviation CO2.