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

First step needed: include First step needed: include the climate impact costs the climate impact costs of flying in aviation ticket of 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



http://sei-us.org/publications/id/13

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



To meet the 2 degrees Celsius Paris To meet the 2 degrees Celsius Paris Agreement target “assuming an Agreement target “assuming an optimistic 2% annual fuel efficiency optimistic 2% annual fuel efficiency improvement…. passenger-km improvement…. passenger-km growth rates would need to be cut growth 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 in Airlines are achieving only minor efficiency gains which are dwarfed by growth in capacity. The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) has had capacity. The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) has had responsibility for emissions reduction under Kyoto but has dismally failed to stop responsibility 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 gains The 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, coupled Incremental 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 just The 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

● John Englart – Climate Action Moreland


Aviation Industry promises efficiency improvements to Aviation Industry promises efficiency improvements to technology and Infrastructure to reduce emissions.technology and Infrastructure to reduce emissions.

https://theconversation.com/aviation-emissions-are-rising-and-industry-solutions-are-just-technological-myths-56032

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 to To 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 sq supply 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 aviation About 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 Global See 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?

http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/so-how-much-agricultural-land-will-we-need-to-keep-global-aviation-aloft-with-biofuels.html

http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/so-how-much-agricultural-land-will-we-need-to-keep-global-aviation-aloft-with-biofuels.html

A single trip flight from London to Sydney generates the A 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 an Engineering 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 one How 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’s I’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 time way 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 to to get rid of.’”get rid of.’”

Youtube: How to calculate your carbon footprint from Youtube: How to calculate your carbon footprint from flying flying 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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrCX_mawAmk

So why not just put a tax on aviation jet fuel as a climate So 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 the Fuel for international aviation is tax free as set by the Chicago Convention on International Aviation in 1944 and Chicago Convention on International Aviation in 1944 and bilateral agreements.bilateral agreements.

Flying is kept artificially cheap, while trains and cars Flying 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 a So any climate impact tax would need to be collected as a ticket or departure tax, making it a hard sell for ticket 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 on It’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….

https://theconversation.com/its-time-for-a-global-tax-on-aviation-emissions-36020

https://theconversation.com/its-time-for-a-global-tax-on-aviation-emissions-36020

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 2016COP22: aviation emissions under Paris – Nov 2016



Aviation’s emissions gap



ICAO offsets program from 2020Base 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 change All 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...

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14693062.2014.965125


“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 CO

2 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 AgreementAviation emissions and carbon offsets

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/airlines/articles/should-you-buy-carbon-offsets-for-flights

Choosing Carbon offset credits….Choosing Carbon offset credits….

https://www.choice.com.au/travel/on-holidays/airlines/articles/should-you-buy-carbon-offsets-for-flights




● 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 relationshipsAviation emissions and carbon offsets

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 inequityAviation emissions and carbon offsets

Professor Kevin Anderson, Deputy director of The Tyndall Centre, on Air Travel (Dec 2014) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGGptVyiIe8

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.


Aviation emissions and carbon offsetsSummary

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

Environment