AEA: ETS Retaliation is not the solution

An urgent reality check is needed to offset the notion that the entire aviation industry is a collection of anti-environment ETS-refuseniks. They aren’t: there are already a significant amount of global airlines in full compliance with the EU Aviation ETS regulations including ALL AEA member airlines I am very happy to report!

In fact, “significant” in this case means 100%, as every single airline that flies in and out of the EU has already registered under every aspect of the ETS with their respective regulator in each EU member state; they have met every deadline along the way; and many are active in carbon markets. They have effectively already surrendered in this phoney "carbon war".

And here is a snapshot of how ticket prices are already being impacted:

• Etihad Airways, Abu Dhabi's carrier, has increased the fuel surcharge on all its flights to Europe to counter the costs of the EU's Emissions Trading Scheme by USD$3 per passenger for flights into and out of Europe and 0.03 cents per kilogram for cargo shipments.
• Delta Air Lines, American Airlines, United Continental and US Airways say they have already added a $3 surcharge each way on tickets for flights between the United States and Europe
• ryanair introduced a 0.25 Euro levy per passenger per flight from 17th January to cover its’ ETS costs
• Air France/KLM, British Airways and Lufthansa have each added ETS costs to ticket prices via an increase in their existing fuel surcharge although the actual amount is a little opaque
• many other airlines, such as Thai Airways, have already been buying carbon permits, taking advantage of the current record low prices of around 7.9Euros per tonne of carbon.
• and earlier this month, Qantas said it would raise fares by A$3.50 ($3.77) per passenger each way on flights to London and Frankfurt, to cover the cost of the EU ETS.

These are low, low pass through levels that will not bring about the collapse of air transport as we know it! Now call me naive but this is compliance, is it not? It is sad but true that all the countries meeting in Moscow later this week appear simply to want to bring about the complete collapse of the EU ETS, nothing more, nothing less.

We know today that growth in global aviation fuel use and emissions through to 2050 unfortunately outpaces the very best that airframe/engine technology, improved ATM systems and smart operational techniques have to offer. And this includes the rather witless promotion of unsustainable biofuels as part of the industry’s PR-led attempt to manufacture consent for unlimited growth. They have nothing to offer but a high carbon future. This is not a destination we should all be hurtling towards at 39,000 feet and 500 miles per hour.

The EU rightly continues to stand firm to protect the integrity of the aviation ETS which clearly should be developed as the global market-based element in a worldwide programme to control and reduce damaging climate change emissions from civil aviation.

Jeffrey Gazzard
Board Member
Aviation Environment Federation
LONDON

Clearly Mr Gazzard above knows how to copy & paste (from 1 article herein to another 1, hooray!) more of his pious omnipotent diatribe filled with artificial overhype about evil aviation-generated pollutants which are certain to bring doom to the known galaxy before he (the self-appointed aerospace engineer herein) devises a way to power a jumbo jet with a solar panel.

(And) by the way, NO one's surrendered to ANYone in Euro'land w/ regards to this bogus tax grab. Airlines must continue to operate during this time period of formal contest by nations the world over against this farce, just as they continue to operate during times of labor negotiation & such. Operations just don't cease because issues are being debated & resolved, Jeffrey. Once THIS one's been defeated altogether, there'll be enough time to recoup monies absconded by the EU --- OOPS! unless of course they've already been blown on everything BUT the environment.....

ATF is one of the most expensive fuels to burn. So, obviously airlnies would already do whatever they can to reduce the amount of fuel burnt by investing in better aircraft and technologies. How can a single carbon emission cost be applied on all types of fuels and all types of industries when the price of each type of fule and the emission reduction potential in the short term for each industry are different?
Inclusion of airlines in ETS is a major distraction for airlines who wants to invest in better equipments. If the cost of carbon remains low, then why would airline industry invest in high cost emission reduction technology? in any case, airlines should be exempted from ETS.

How is the EU spending the money it collects? Will there be a transparent accounting showing all funds coming in are going back out to solve environmental issues? Does the ETS apply to ocean going passenger and cargo traffic as well? Ships seem to polute as bad or worse than aircraft (in my totally unscientific opinion).