This week Morgan Henley describes the environmental dilemma of an air traveller and deals with burning questions associated with air transportation.
Up until recently, I considered myself a pretty environmentally sustainable person. I could check off most of the boxes: vegetarian, recycle fanatic, public transport user, green candidate supporter – all of those things that I thought would do enough to give me a low carbon footprint. Then one day, I realized the truth. I had heard something vaguely mentioned from a friend once or twice before, but it wasn’t until then that I knew the extent of my oblivion. Did you know that one return flight from Europe to the US can increase your carbon footprint for a year by 25%?
Cue my shock and horror. As someone who takes flights rather frequently – and often long ones- I realized I had been a carbon culprit all along. Opening my frequent flyer mile statements became a weekly reminder of my sins. In the process of dealing with this horrifying news, I did some research, and I feel it is my duty to share with you. To do so, I am going to walk you through my small crisis by using something you might be familiar with – the five steps of grief. Technically, it’s called the Kubler-Ross system, and it’s been around since 1969, so if it’s been around for that long, it’s got to work!
1. Denial. At first, I was in disbelief. Can airplanes really be so bad for the environment? If you listen to scientists than unfortunately, yes. This is why:
In 2008, the European Union found it’s answer to the airline carbon emitting issue and moved to include aviation into the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (for more info on this topic, feel free to read my previous article here). Under the EU ETS, airlines will receive an amount of tradable emission shares which represents that amount of CO2 they are permitted to emit. If they go above their allotted amounts of CO2, they have to buy more credits. The intended plan would apply to all flights (including non European airlines) that fly into and out of European airports.
2. Anger. Now that I knew how bad airplanes were, I was angry. Why were airlines letting this happen? What about the government? Why haven’t either of them done anything about it? In reality, some governments have tried to do something about it, but as I will explain here, it’s not that easy. Airlines will often claim that air travel accounts for 3% of all human produced CO2 emissions. This figure seems pretty modest, but in reality, this isn’t accounting for some other “sketchy things” that planes are emitting. They are also emitting other things such as nitrous oxide, water vapor and soot- all of which trap heat in the atmosphere. These “sketchy things” act as multipliers and increase the impact flights have on climate change outside of just their CO2 emissions – studies estimate that aviation emissions should actually be multiplied by 1.9 to accurately include these gases when added at such high altitudes.
This decision was not exactly greeted warmly across the globe. Lawsuits flooded in from governments and airline companies alike from countries such as the US, China, and India. The EU, successfully scared by the airline industry, realized that maybe they had bitten off a little more than they could chew, and decided to buy some time. The EU held off on making non European airlines abide by their requirements until recently a ruling by the highest international aviation organization deemed their plan illegal. So now, the EU’s hope is that we will come to a workable international agreement on aviation carbon emissions, which the aviation organization promised it would do by 2016.
3. Bargaining. Well, if we can’t really expect much change via the government, what about the industry? Can’t we change our planes? There’s has to be something we can do! What do the experts think?!
So the experts, the International Panel on Climate Change (the highest regarded authority on the science of climate change) estimates that every year from 1990-2015 air travel will increase 5% but fuel is only expected to increase 3% each year. Rationale being that the IPCC expects airplanes to become more energy efficient and that air traffic control will improve and become better at airspace management.
Increasing fuel efficiency is desirable for industry as it is financially to their benefit, so we can be fairly confident we will see that aspect improve in the upcoming decades. The IPCC notes that we can already see that today’s airplanes are about 70% more fuel efficient per passenger-km than 40 years ago.
What about alternative, cleaner fuels? Well, unlike other travel sectors like the auto or rail industries, electric means are not an option. In order for a plane to take off, it needs more power than an electric motor can provide. Therefore, don’t expect an electric car in plane form anytime soon.
A second option- hydrogen fuels, have some potential, but to be used, they would need new aircraft designs. Also hydrogen gases contribute to water vapor, which as we mentioned before, is quite dangerous in terms of climate change. Another alternative could be biofuel, but unless we give up agriculture completely (and therefore food…), there is certainly not enough arable land available to grow the necessary crops to produce the amount of biofuel that would be necessary.
The IPCC offers some recommendations of it’s own. Most of which, are going to make your flight tickets a bit more expensive but should lead us to a greener flying future. Included, are removing government subsidies that do not encourage green innovation in aviation as well as adding environmental taxes to ticket costs. They also encourage increased investment in rail and coach options. If passengers had better options via ground transport, this could decrease air travel, especially for short distances.
4. Depression. Some of these options sound nice, but I am still feeling guilty about my carbon footprint. Unless technology advances at crazy rates in my lifetime or our governments make a sharp change in their policies it’s hopeless! *This is the phase where I do not get out of bed for one week*.
5. Acceptance. Ok, ok, snap out of it, you have to come terms with this. You will probably ride a plane again. There’s still so much of the world to see you are too young to be housebound! There have to be some options in order to fly and not be racked with guilt! So what are they?
Offsetting – Today there are various services available that will calculate how much CO2 your flight is emitting and the amount it would cost to fund projects that would counteract those emissions. Frustratingly you might find that the estimates will range in price. For instance, some companies include these “sketchy things” we mentioned before, while others just are looking to offset the CO2. Also, make sure you look into what company you are using – carbon offsetting is big business now, in 2012 it was an over $523 million USD industry. The opinions on the best will vary, but IYNF recommends “atmosfair” – 90% of their carbon offset projects adhere are CDM Gold Standard which is the strictest standard available for climate protection projects.
Fly Cheap – Another maybe surprising option is to use low cost, budget airlines. Budget airlines tend to use newer, more fuel efficient planes compared to the older, national lines. Also, budget airlines maximize their space better since they tend to fit more people than other airlines, thus the fuel to passenger ratio is lessened. Their strict bag weight limits can often result in their passengers packing lighter (limiting your bag weight is also another small step you can take). This also then in turn means that on larger flights, those first class seats with extra space hurt the passenger to fuel ratio, therefore making their impact worse than the economy seats in the back.
Cut Down on Those Frequent Flier Miles – The best option of course it to limit your flights. Riding by train, bus, or car are substantially greener options, especially for shorter trips. Take off and landing use more fuel than cruising, therefore shorter flights can be worse per kilometer than long trips (but long trips are still worse as you are flying a farther distance..). If you are staying within the continent, really take into account all the additional time required for flights vs ground options. All of those steps add up and in the end, and sometimes as far as time is concerned, you might as well have taken a train or bus.
After going through the stages of grief, I did come out feeling stronger and more empowered to be a better environmentally conscious flyer. Maybe you can identify with some of my struggle – as many of us are avid travelers, I believe that it might be this love for the world that makes us want to save it. Yet if we are serious about climate change, we really cannot ignore this issue.
So keep in mind as we look to the future, much of the changes we would like to see on a governmental or industrial scale are not going to happen overnight. Companies are not going to burden themselves with costs that could in anyway hurt their profits and that they deem unnecessarily and governments will allow them to do so as long as the airlines keep making money in their countries. Expect to see a long fight ahead between these players and environmental regulation and keep yourself informed and involved. One person vying to limit their flying is one thing, but industry wide change – now, that could be clear skies ahead.
Thanks for the Information and Pictures Kindly Provided By:
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/spm/av-en.pdf
http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/aviation/index_en.htmhttp://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/apr/06/aviation-q-and-ahttp://www.enviro.aero/aviationsroleinclimatechange.aspx
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=503cac32-97b2-487f… 31bc97371
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/sunday-review/the-biggest-carbon-sin-a… ?_r=0
http://grist.org/news/e-u-wimps-out-postpones-controversial-airline-emis…
http://www.businessdestinations.com/move/sustainable-travel/airlines-get…
http://comicsalliance.com/the-12-days-of-comic-book-christmas-day-5-box-…
http://english.sina.com/business/p/2012/0318/450010.html