Jeff Gazzard of the Aviation Environment Federation is predictably scathing of the whole exercise, under the heading Stuntman? Or Saviour?. (See the text of their press release below as it doesn't seem to be on the web.) It's a bit of a rant frankly. But he does also reference a much more interesting analysis by someone called Almuth Ernsting of relatively new pressure group Biofuelwatch. Oh, and just in case there were any more vacancies for biofuel detractors, in the UK the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds took out full-page newspaper ads this week campaigning against it (though aimed at motorists rather than aviation.) More positively for Virgin, my somewhat distant colleague Simon Robinson, who blogs on biofuels for our chemicals group ICIS, is back from holiday and thinks the airline has contributed something useful.
The entire air transport industry is, rightly in our view, under massive worldwide pressure to control and reduce its rising greenhouse gas emissions. They know that as unrestrained demand for air travel rises, so inexorably do emissions. They know too that this growth outpaces technology improvements and that aircraft are likely to be fossil-fuel powered for the next 30 years. Our Government exhorts us daily to reduce our fossil fuel dependency – aviation finds this very hard. They need a diversion. They need a front man. They need a “green” smoke-and-mirrors act. Desperately. Ghostbusters were busy. So they’ve sent for Sir Richard.
Tomorrow, Sunday, February 24th, Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Atlantic airline will undertake the first so-called “commercial” flight of an aircraft powered by biofuel from London’s Heathrow Airport to Schipol Airport, Amsterdam. But like many of Sir Richard’s outpourings, this flight is just another publicity stunt. Our investigations have discovered that it isn’t a commercial flight at all, as this aircraft and its engines are due for major servicing – the trip will be a research and development test flight carrying no passengers and operated by a reduced crew. It is highly unusual to conduct test flights between large passenger airports over densely populated areas.
The test programme is a venture between Virgin Atlantic, the aircraft manufacturer, Boeing, and the company who makes the engines powering this particular aircraft, GE. Only one engine on this short trip, with its fuel supply isolated for safety reasons, will be powered by a probable mix of 80% conventional jet fuel and 20% Sir Richard’s new semi-secret wonder biofuel ingredient, which his PR machine has been touting pre-event will be an algae-derived laboratory product. Or is it as the aircraft manufacturer Boeing told Flight International this week, simply bog-standard “first-generation feedstock” from unsustainable monoculture crop sources.
Sir Richard has invited the world’s media to Heathrow to watch the aircraft take off and land from the comfort of Virgin Atlantic’s facilities, over brunch. So in the hope of something more than uncritical coverage, here are some questions we would like those present to ask Sir Richard – after all, there is no such thing as a free brunch:
Is your bio-fuel made from algae? Or first generation-feedstocks, such as palm oil, which are now widely acknowledged as environmentally unsustainable? Is it sourced from a company you own? How much has been manufactured and used in aircraft engine testing so far? How soon will this fuel be in commercial production? How soon will it replace the current 238 Mt p.a. of conventionally refined jet fuel? Where will the feedstock producing facilities be located? How big do they have to be to replace oil-based jet fuel? How much will all this cost? What is the carbon footprint of the growing, manufacturing, distribution and final energy use of this fuel? Is it better or worse than conventional oil-based jet fuel? How much will this fuel cost per tax-free litre when available? What are the current total CO2 emissions of all Virgin’s aviation activities worldwide? Is there any independent peer-reviewed evidence of your spokesman’s claim to a Seattle newspaper that “After the demonstration flight, Boeing will ask other carriers to do tests, which might lead to biofuel-powered commercial flights within a couple of years”?
Jeff Gazzard, AEF spokesman, said: “Virgin’s spin machine has been turning faster than its jet engines recently! Saving the planet is an important task – too important to be left to a publicity-seeking billionaire fossil fuel junkie at another carefully stage managed PR event. Key questions for Branson to answer are what exactly is this fuel?; how sustainable is it?; what is a realistic timetable for replacing current the 238Mt p.a. of conventional jet fuel?; is there any independent scientific and economic scrutiny of Branson’s claims?
We fully expect glib, superficial and exaggerated claims from Branson and his acolytes. But if there is a proper story, don’t keep us dangling, Sir Richard. Enough of the stunts. Let’s have some real answers, please to the real questions we have posed.”
It's time Flight Global readers, Industry leaders and anyone else involved in avaition actually supported any initiatives to seek to reduce Aviations environmental impact. Sadly with their recent poll even Flight Global seems to seek media headline grabbing rather than sensible debate:
Poll on biofuels: Total Votes: 1047
Poll ended on: 22 February 2008
I wonder how many of those votes came from so called Green campaigners?
At least this blog might bring some balance.