Why we need to fly less: aviation, carbon offsets and climate change

First step needed: includeFirst step needed: include
the climate impact coststhe climate impact costs
of flying in aviation ticketof flying in aviation ticket
pricingpricing
Aviation emissions and carbon offsets
John Englart – Climate Action Moreland
Why We need to Fly LessWhy We need to Fly Less

● Aviation contributes 2% of global
CO2 emissions and is rising.
● Causes about 5% of human global
warming climate impact.

● Growth in aviation
emissions at 3-6%
per year. (Larkin)
● 5.2% passenger
growth in year to
June 2016 (Choice)

● Climate impact of aviation is
estimated at least 2-3 times actual
aviation CO2 emissions
(and perhaps up to 6x) due to emissions of soot
and particulates, other Greenhouse gases, ozone
formation, effects on the atmosphere, contrails
and cirrus cloud formation.
See Anja Kollmuss and Crimmins (2009)
http://sei-us.org/publications/id/13

●
Aviation is projected toAviation is projected to
consume approximatelyconsume approximately
a quarter of the world’sa quarter of the world’s
remaining carbon budgetremaining carbon budget
by 2050 for 1.5°C.by 2050 for 1.5°C.

To meet the 2 degrees Celsius ParisTo meet the 2 degrees Celsius Paris
Agreement target “assuming anAgreement target “assuming an
optimistic 2% annual fuel efficiencyoptimistic 2% annual fuel efficiency
improvement…. passenger-kmimprovement…. passenger-km
growth rates would need to be cutgrowth rates would need to be cut
to zero from 2020, with a 4% p.a.to zero from 2020, with a 4% p.a.
reduction from 2025.”reduction from 2025.”
- Professor Bows-Larkin (2015)- Professor Bows-Larkin (2015)

●
Airlines are achieving only minor efficiency gains which are dwarfed by growth inAirlines are achieving only minor efficiency gains which are dwarfed by growth in
capacity. The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) has hadcapacity. The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) has had
responsibility for emissions reduction under Kyoto but has dismally failed to stopresponsibility for emissions reduction under Kyoto but has dismally failed to stop
the growth in global aviation emissions to date...the growth in global aviation emissions to date...
●
““The absence of meaningful policies that go beyond pursuing efficiency gainsThe absence of meaningful policies that go beyond pursuing efficiency gains
through technology has influenced recent aviation emissions growth rates.through technology has influenced recent aviation emissions growth rates.
Incremental technology change and minor adjustments to operations, coupledIncremental technology change and minor adjustments to operations, coupled
with a buoyant market, uphold the aviation sector’s COwith a buoyant market, uphold the aviation sector’s CO22 growth at between 3%growth at between 3%
and 6% per annum (p.a.).” Bows-Larkin (2015)and 6% per annum (p.a.).” Bows-Larkin (2015)
False hopes and myths abound for reducing these emissions.False hopes and myths abound for reducing these emissions.
See Peeters etal (See Peeters etal (2016)2016): Are technology myths stalling aviation climate policy?: Are technology myths stalling aviation climate policy?
The Conversation: Aviation emissions are rising – and industry solutions are justThe Conversation: Aviation emissions are rising – and industry solutions are just
technological myths.technological myths.
https://theconversation.com/aviation-emissions-are-rising-and-industry-solutions-are-just-technological-myths-56032https://theconversation.com/aviation-emissions-are-rising-and-industry-solutions-are-just-technological-myths-56032
●
Aviation Industry promises efficiency improvements toAviation Industry promises efficiency improvements to
technology and Infrastructure to reduce emissions.technology and Infrastructure to reduce emissions.

Aviation used 48 billion gallons (174 bn litres) jet fuel in 2008.Aviation used 48 billion gallons (174 bn litres) jet fuel in 2008.
To supply biofuels, some 274.8 million acres of cropland would be needed toTo supply biofuels, some 274.8 million acres of cropland would be needed to
supply global aviation industry at current levels of consumption. (1.11 million sqsupply global aviation industry at current levels of consumption. (1.11 million sq
kms, 424,700 sq miles).kms, 424,700 sq miles).
About 2.5% of crop and pasture land would have to be devoted to satisfy aviationAbout 2.5% of crop and pasture land would have to be devoted to satisfy aviation
biofuel demand. This has equity, food security and biodiversity implications.biofuel demand. This has equity, food security and biodiversity implications.
Using 100% Biofuels mitigates just a third of aviation climate impact.Using 100% Biofuels mitigates just a third of aviation climate impact.
Up to end of 2016 there were two airports supplying biofuels to about 5500+ flights.Up to end of 2016 there were two airports supplying biofuels to about 5500+ flights.
See Treehugger: So How Much Agricultural Land Will We Need To Keep GlobalSee Treehugger: So How Much Agricultural Land Will We Need To Keep Global
Aviation Aloft With Biofuels?Aviation Aloft With Biofuels?
http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/so-how-much-agricultural-land-will-we-need-to-keep-global-aviation-aloft-http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/so-how-much-agricultural-land-will-we-need-to-keep-global-aviation-aloft-
with-biofuels.htmlwith-biofuels.html
●
The promise of biofuels to reduce aviation emissions?The promise of biofuels to reduce aviation emissions?

A single trip flight from London to Sydney generates theA single trip flight from London to Sydney generates the
equivalent of about 125 suitcases of COequivalent of about 125 suitcases of CO22 (2.5 tonnes) , argues(2.5 tonnes) , argues
Engineering Professor Hugh Grant (Cambridge University), in anEngineering Professor Hugh Grant (Cambridge University), in an
October 2016 youtube video.October 2016 youtube video.
““How are you going to get the message across that flying is oneHow are you going to get the message across that flying is one
of the worst things you can be doing?”of the worst things you can be doing?”
“The thing that I feel about flying is that I’ve been hoodwinked,“The thing that I feel about flying is that I’ve been hoodwinked,
I’ve been duped into thinking that flying - ‘is perfectly safe, it’sI’ve been duped into thinking that flying - ‘is perfectly safe, it’s
clean, it’s the best way….see the world, but there is no penalty,clean, it’s the best way….see the world, but there is no penalty,
everyone should do it’”everyone should do it’”
“I think 30, 40 years ago when the Jumbo jet transformed the“I think 30, 40 years ago when the Jumbo jet transformed the
way we fly, we ought to have been told: ‘By the way, by the timeway we fly, we ought to have been told: ‘By the way, by the time
you get to our destination you will have 125 suitcases of COyou get to our destination you will have 125 suitcases of CO22 toto
get rid of.’”get rid of.’”
Youtube: How to calculate your carbon footprint fromYoutube: How to calculate your carbon footprint from
flyingflying https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrCX_mawAmkhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrCX_mawAmk
●
Hoodwinked: suitcases full of CO2 wasteHoodwinked: suitcases full of CO2 waste

So why not just put a tax on aviation jet fuel as a climateSo why not just put a tax on aviation jet fuel as a climate
impact tax?impact tax?
Fuel for international aviation is tax free as set by theFuel for international aviation is tax free as set by the
Chicago Convention on International Aviation in 1944 andChicago Convention on International Aviation in 1944 and
bilateral agreements.bilateral agreements.
Flying is kept artificially cheap, while trains and carsFlying is kept artificially cheap, while trains and cars
become lower emission but more expensive.become lower emission but more expensive.
So any climate impact tax would need to be collected as aSo any climate impact tax would need to be collected as a
ticket or departure tax, making it a hard sell forticket or departure tax, making it a hard sell for
politicians.politicians.
See The Conversation (2015):See The Conversation (2015): It’s time for a global tax onIt’s time for a global tax on
aviation emissionsaviation emissions
https://theconversation.com/its-time-for-a-global-tax-on-https://theconversation.com/its-time-for-a-global-tax-on-
aviation-emissions-36020aviation-emissions-36020
Taxing aviation fuel? You wish….Taxing aviation fuel? You wish….

ICAO is taking climate action with CORSIA offsets….ICAO is taking climate action with CORSIA offsets….
● The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) agreed in October 2016 to
introduce in 2020 the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International
Aviation (CORSIA) program, a market based mechanism for carbon offsetting
(First phase 2020-2027 is voluntary participation).
● New CO2 efficiency standard for aircraft adopted….but compliance starts 2028
● CORSIA program from 2020 covers estimated three quarters of international aviation’s
expected emissions growth between 2021 and 2035.
Anticipated coverage 2.5 billion tons of CO2 emissions.
BUTBUT
● This falls short of ICAO’s own target of carbon neutral growth from 2020, and well short
of what the Paris Agreement requires – one study indicates that it deviates 55% from the
2°C objective
● Integrity of CORSIA program depends upon high quality carbon offset credits being
used. (Not guaranteed, rules still to be written)
● Under CORSIA, base aviation emissions activity not offset, just the increase from 2020.
Australia was one of 60 countries that initially signed up
Sources: International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation - 6 Oct 2016
COP22: aviation emissions under Paris – Nov 2016

Aviation’s emissions gap

ICAO offsets program from 2020
Base emissions set at 2020 levels. Some growth excluded from the program.
Airlines will offset only the increase above 2020 levels, which will flow into ticket
prices. Consumers still expected to voluntarily do own carbon offsets for the rest.

ICAO carbon offsets program CORSIA is not a solution to aviation emissions,
just some small steps to continue the charade of business as usual for the
industry. A way to hoodwink the public that action is happening in aviation.
It diverts emissions reduction work primarily to other sectors through offsets
with no guarantee of effectiveness (rules still to be written on offsets)
Majority of aviation emissions are not offset under CORSIA, just the excess over
2020 levels.
Flight tickets will continue to not reflect true cost and climate impact of flying,
providing a significant advantage over lower emissions ground transport.
ICAO refuse to consider demand management, yet to have emissions reduction
in line with the Paris Agreement 2°C temperature target requires zero growth in
passenger-kms from 2020, and 4% p.a. reduction from 2025, according to
Professor Alice Larkin.
ICAO carbon offsets won’t solve the problemICAO carbon offsets won’t solve the problem

“the more simply structured aviation sector is pinning too much hope
on emissions trading to deliver CO2 cuts in line with 2°C. Instead, the
solution remains controversial and unpopular – avoiding 2°C requires
demand management.”
“A personal carbon quota scheme for CO2 that includes international
flights is one mechanism that could lead to such a radical change in
levels of per capita flying”
- Professor Alice Bows-Larkin (2015)
“Demand management. This is very unpopular with industry, very
unpopular with those of us who fly regularly, but we are going to have
to seriously manage demand in aviation whilst we wait for
technologies to try and substitute for this very high carbon form of
activity. At the moment those technologies are a long, long way off,
and in the interim we just have to curtail the amount of flying that we
do.” - Professor Kevin Anderson (Youtube Dec 2014)
Bows-Larkin (2015):Bows-Larkin (2015): All adrift: aviation, shipping, and climate changeAll adrift: aviation, shipping, and climate change
policypolicy http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14693062.2014.965125http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14693062.2014.965125
The need for demand management...The need for demand management...

“The aviation industry’s current projections of the sector’s growth are
incompatible with the international community’s commitment to
avoiding the 2°C characterization of dangerous climate change.
“Even a highly optimistic uptake of the most promising technologies
for reducing the CO2
intensity of flying cannot deliver the rapid and
deep rates of mitigation to comply with the IPCC’s carbon budgets for
a reasonable to likely chance of staying below 2°C.
“This stark conclusion holds even with the heroic assumption that
other sectors may be able to shoulder some additional mitigation
effort to compensate for the aviation sector mitigating less than its
counterparts.
“Ultimately, however construed, the maths forthcoming from the
IPCC’s 2°C carbon budget, mandates that the demand for aviation will
need to be constrained if the global community is not to renege on its
2°C commitments.”
Aviation growth incompatible with Paris AgreementAviation growth incompatible with Paris Agreement
Source: Alice Larkin et al (May 2016) Aviation and
Climate Change – The Continuing Challenge
(Chapter)

You get to choose and way up the ethics of flying….You get to choose and way up the ethics of flying….
● Do I need to travel? Can I skype, teleconference?
● Can I travel by lower emissions means: train, boat, bus, even car?
● Should I offset my CO2 emissions or my CO2e emissions?
● What credits do I buy?
● How can I be assured of carbon offset credit quality?
● A number of climate scientists and others already restrict or
refuse air travel due to aviation emissions carbon footprint.
Photo: London’s Heathrow Terminal Four. Airports have
a huge carbon footprint, generate air and noise pollution.

● Carbon Offsetting is a fraught area that needs
better regulation, with many marginal schemes
that don’t have any positive value and need to
be avoided.
● It’s a confusing area for consumers
● 30 Airlines offer voluntary carbon offset
programs for CO2 emissions to customers.
They are very cheap, but poorly marketed and
mostly ignored by consumers.
● Only 1 in 10 passengers on Qantas or Jetstar
choose to buy carbon offset credits. (Qantas
has largest offsets program of any airline)
● For 2014/2015 1.2% of Qantas flight emissions
offset by customers.
● Choice recommends “Purchase verified carbon
offsets from the airline or through an accredited
agency. Offsets that avoid emissions through
energy efficiency, or replace fossil fuel based
energy with renewable energy are the most
effective, with forestry projects ranked last.”
The Australian Consumers Association
magazine Choice featured aviation carbon
offsets in their Dec 2016/Jan 2017 issue.
Should you buy carbon offsets?
https://www.choice.com.au/travel/on-holidays/air
lines/articles/should-you-buy-carbon-offsets-for
-flights
Choosing Carbon offset credits….Choosing Carbon offset credits….

● Carbon offsets are shown to be
ridiculous in a satirical website
called cheatneutral.com
● This website puts forward that
you can pay someone to offset
the guilt of cheating in a
relationship. In fact it is likely to
provide a justification for
continued cheating. It makes it
acceptable to cheat.
● Similarly, carbon offsets are
used to assuage our guilt with
flying everywhere.
● Carbon offsetting is
fundamentally the wrong way to
go about tackling climate
change.
Carbon offsets like cheating in relationshipsCarbon offsets like cheating in relationships
For aviation emissions we need to
reduce the number of flights taken,
and where possible avoid flying.

Only 3-5 percent of the World’s population undertakes flying. It is undertaken
proportionately more by rich people, while the impacts of climate change will
be felt disproportionately by poor people.
“When it comes to aviation, this is the most profligate form of energy
consumption we have of carbon emissions per hour of activity. There is no
other activity, nothing that we do, that consumes more energy than flying in
any single hour. If we are serious about climate change, because there are no
good alternatives in the short to medium term, we have to curtail the amount
of flying we do.
“Currently, flying is carried out by a relatively small proportion of our
population who fly regularly. It is those who should be taking the lion's share
of the cuts in the amount of flying we do.
“So we can still have some aviation, but much more limited amount of
aviation, but that needs to be spread more evenly rather than a small cohort
of people flying very regularly and making arguments for expansion on the
basis of a family that occasionally flies to Benidorm for a holiday once every
two years.”
-Professor Kevin Anderson (Youtube 2014)
Flight emissions and inequityFlight emissions and inequity
Professor Kevin Anderson, Deputy director of The Tyndall Centre, on Air Travel (Dec
2014) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGGptVyiIe8

There may be a green future for
aviation, but it will likely be very
different to the one presented by ICAO
and the airline industry.
Low fossil fuel Hydrogen or helium
dirigibles and solar+battery flight is
already here in smal-scale
demonstration forms. Hybrid aircraft
may be possible.
Battery development and engineering
breakthroughs are needed to make
mass transit low fossil-fuel aviation
possible. This may be decades away
at the earliest. But it may also prove
not to have quite the same capacity or
speed of present day high carbon
emissions aviation….
Does Aviation have a Green future?Does Aviation have a Green future?
Two ICAO brochures marketing
the airline industry ‘Green’
efforts in aviation, primarily
based on carbon offsets.

● We need to fly less
● Price flight tickets to include climate
impact.
● Demand management of flying needed
to meet 2°C Paris Agreement target.
● Climate impact of aviation is 2-3 times
(and might be up to 6x) actual CO2
emissions
● If you do fly and offset CO2 , choose
quality carbon credits that help to
reduce emissions.
● The ICAO CORSIA offsets program
starting 2020 is insufficient. It is
largely a greenwash mechanism to
maintain business as usual for the
airlines.
Summary
Photo: Fossil fuel free aviation?: André
Borschberg in Solar Impulse flying over the
Torresol Energy’s Gemasolar Thermosolar
Plant in 2016, which is partially owned by
Masdar, Solar Impulse’s host partner in Abu
Dhabi Image: Solar Impulse/Flickr

Why we need to fly less: aviation, carbon offsets and climate change

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

En vedette

En vedette (10)

Similaire à Why we need to fly less: aviation, carbon offsets and climate change

Similaire à Why we need to fly less: aviation, carbon offsets and climate change (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Why we need to fly less: aviation, carbon offsets and climate change