The whole aviation industry could suffer if disinformation about airline emissions is not effectively countered. But how?
Emirates' president Tim Clark has said the aviation industry is "an environmental pariah". That's a bit strong, but it's also predictable given that his objective is to wake up all sectors of the industry to the fact that an exaggerated and distorted version of "the truth" that is being peddled successfully in certain parts of the world - mainly Europe - could do them immense harm if it is not effectively countered.
Here's another quotation from an organisation that represents those most likely to be worst affected: Europe's airlines: "For us, the issue is how green can you become before turning red?". That is Ulrich Schulte-Strathaus, secretary general of the Association of European Airlines. In principle the AEA is in favour of airlines being included in emissions trading in 2011, but says it must not be so expensive that it kills the industry. "It has to be a workable and affordable trading scheme, one that does not distort competition with other regions and one that delivers on the green objectives," says Schulte-Strathaus. "If all these requirements are met it is the way we should proceed."
Meanwhile, curbing aviation emissions may currently be accorded a high profile on European politicians' environmental agendas, but in almost all the rest of the world the opposite view prevails. The issue of aviation emissions is not totally ignored outside Europe, but as a target for political action it is way down priorities lists. Beyond Europe, aviation's effect on the environment occupies the place in political priorities that an industry producing only 2-3% of global warming gases should occupy.
The crucial task the industry faces is to work out which, among the many "cohesive counter-arguments" that the industry could use, would actually succeed in cutting through the smog of disinformation resulting from both political and media opportunism. Facts and statistics alone will not work. If they were ever going to work they would have succeeded already. When the media is on to the latest aviation/environment story, a reminder that airlines produce only about one-twelfth of the global warming emissions of motor transport, or power generation, or domestic energy consumption, will not kill the headline.
The reason why the political and media attack on the airline industry has achieved the prominence it has is through its 24/7 relentlessness. Actually, it is inaccurate to say the media attacks aviation: it doesn't - it just runs the stories willy-nilly. No-one in Europe's media questions the validity of the assertions any longer or if they do, going with the environmental flow produces a better story. Shock-horror sells.
Perhaps Clark envisages setting up an industry effort that will counter this tidal wave of disinformation, but if he does it's difficult to determine what would be effective. Defence - against the media - is more or less pointless. In fact it's likely to be counter-productive.
Does the media matter anyway? No - not in this sphere. Politicians do, because it is they who enact policies affecting the environment. Politicians might court the media for their own greater glory, but they rarely get their policymaking information from that source. So lobbying would be more effective. Information works with governments in a way it doesn't with the media. Take the UK as an example: it has the most strident of all the European voices against aviation emissions, yet its aviation White Paper makes clear that it is not prepared to see its national economy harmed by reining in aviation growth.
Prime Minister Tony Blair and finance minister Gordon Brown both know how badly the UK's economy would be harmed if they stunted Britain's aviation's growth while other states upgrade their communications with the global economy. The industry can at least buy strategy-making time by playing off the reluctance of the non-European world against Europe's governments, because that would work.
Are there effective lobbying tools beyond the economic ones? Clark points out correctly that European air traffic management is so inefficient - compared with what it could be - that it amounts to an environmental disaster. What is the major single factor holding back improvements in ATM? Government reluctance to make decisions. It's a complex arena, but if the non-specialist press were well-briefed on how bad the European governmental record on that front is, the politicians could be embarrassed into action.
Source: Flight International
