Civil aviation almost defines the age we live in. Long ago it passed from the stage of luxury to commodity. Today it is recognised as a key enabler in economic and social development. However, aviation faces increased turbulence from the environmental lobby. Mike Martin, who in the early 1970s was the first environmental journalist in Britain in mainstream newspapers, takes a sceptical look at the campaign to curb air travel and wonders when the industry is going to unite and fight back.
Would all passengers on Flight 123 please fasten their seat belts, relax and start to feel very guilty indeed….
Just when our industry and the global aviation networks have reached a state of development where “getting away from it all” is as easy as it is necessary in a high pressure world, so events are in danger of conspiring to spoil the party.
As if airport congestion and heightened security measures were not enough to take the gloss off air travel, the aviation industry is now firmly in the sights of the environmentalists. Not a day goes by without some new claims about the threat that aircraft pose to the environment, particularly in the area of emissions.
The environmental lobby says that jet travel is one of the fastest-growing sources of carbon dioxide (CO2), a key contributor to global warming.
So far, they are right. However, the growth in the contribution to emissions from aviation is dwarfed by that from the growing industrial powerhouses of India and China. Yet it is aviation that draws nearly all the flak.
Criticism
The tsunami of criticism of the industry no longer takes the form of reasoned debate. The industry is in the dock and guilty and the only issue is the nature of the punishment.
A travel programme broadcast on the BBC recently examined the issue of travel in the context of emissions and global warming. In a section on well-known personalities using private aircraft, the commentator referred to them throughout as “carbon criminals.”
Once the BBC was a byword for impartiality, but that was before the environmental orthodoxy inflicted on the industry by the green movement. Word from Australia has it that members of the industry there are seriously concerned that growing “guilt” about the impact of the aviation industry on global warming could have a major impact on its tourism industry, highly dependent on air travel.
So far, the industry is wrong. A few facts can be a useful antidote to the new orthodoxy.
To begin with, the output of CO2 from the global aviation industry is below 2 percent of the total global emissions. That compares to a whopping 30% for the automotive industry, similar for industry and energy production.
So why the preoccupation with aviation?
The green lobby is exceptionally good at public relations. It understands that aviation is high profile and criticism of it is usually going to get you a headline. In fact, sometimes it seems that the green lobby expends most of its energy on PR, usually to scare the pants off us.
I have watched the green lobby develop over more than three decades, having been (I believe) the first environmental journalist in mainstream newspapers in Britain. Environmental issues then were largely the preserve of the eccentric. How different today when nobody is left unaware of the issues and many seek to modify their lifestyles to lead a greener life.
We are all environmentalists now. You might even argue that the issues are too important to be left to the green lobby.
A critical turning point was the 1997 Stanford University speech by Lord Browne, former BP chief executive. who said that evidence about the human impact on the environment was not conclusive, but ten years ago advocated the “precautionary principle” and said that we should all act as if human intervention was a principle cause of global warming.
The science has moved on and the most recent pronouncement by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change rates the likelihood of human agency as the primary cause at 90%.
That said, it should be remembered that short-term climate cycles saw the River Thames freeze over each winter in the (pre-industrial) 17th century. The last ice age ended just ten thousand years ago and that was certainly nothing to do with human agency and probably not the product of master dons farting in the Siberian wilderness.
Now it’s the turn of aviation to be the target of choice for the enviromentalists. What is particularly worrying is not so much its targeting by the environmental lobby or even the wider public acceptance of the messages. It is more the way that politicians have been so eager to sign up to the campaign. In Britain, Tory leader David Cameron has floated the idea of rationing aircraft use by creating personal aviation mileage allowances that would make flying progressively more expensive for the individual. Forget Frequent Flyer benefits: welcome to the world of Frequent Foulers penalties.
Some more facts. It has been estimated that aviation is responsible directly and indirectly for some 8 percent of world GDP, or a staggering $2,960 billion. The phenomenal rise of the hitherto small city state of Dubai is in no small measure due to its genius in creating and positioning Emirates as a key enabler in its development.
Less fuel
Within the aerospace industry, enormous work is devoted to ensuring that modern aircraft consume less fuel while travelling further and making less noise. Aircraft entering service today are 70% more fuel efficient than those of 40 years ago.
A self-respecting environmentalist might consider that worthy of applause and a model for other industries. Take the world’s largest passenger aircraft, the Airbus A380, which is due to enter service with launch customer Singapore Airlines later this year. It will carry 555 passengers and yet produces half the noise of the previous largest passenger aircraft. It has the lowest fuel burn per seat of any aircraft and produces the lowest CO2 emissions in its class.
Or the Boeing 787 “Dreamliner,” which will use 20% less fuel for comparable missions than today’s similar-sized aircraft.
The biggest potential cut in aircraft emissions could come from reforming the Air Traffic Control networks of the world, particularly that in Europe.
In Australia, an aircraft sequencing programme deployed at Sydney airport is cutting more than nine tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions a day by enabling aircraft to land at a more precise time rather than having to hold.
The aviation and aerospace industries have a raft of good news stories on the environment. The issue is a more coordinated approach to countering the campaign against aviation.
Tim Clark, president, Emirates, recently gave a lecture to the Royal Aeronautical Society in which he at length on the subject of aviation and the environment.
He said: “I would suggest that the industry needs to do far more to help itself or face what is best described as the ‘pariah syndrome’ where the airline is tolerated but not really wanted.”
He added that the result of the constant attacks on the industry meant that it was being “damaged almost on a daily basis”.
Clark expressed his frustration at the contrast between the extraordinary progress that aviation has made in tackling environmental issues and the bad press it continues to get.
He said: “The message is clear: 21st century jets will be the most fuel and emissions efficient mode of transport and where airlines can facilitate a shift from road transport to air, emissions will fall in absolute terms.
“Environmental challenges, both real issues and misleading falsehoods, must be addressed head on.”
Thus far, the ability of the industry to tackle the campaign being waged against it has fallen considerably short of its real progress on actually doing something about environmental issues.
“The seatbelt sign is now switched off. We trust you are sitting uncomfortably….”
Source: Flight Daily News
