David Stone: Flying in the face of change

The UN's climate change convention does not cover aviation - yet. Photo / Supplied

International debate on measures to deal with aircraft emissions is hotting up in anticipation of a major conference of the parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) - on which the Kyoto Protocol is based - to be held in Copenhagen in December.

Neither the Convention nor the Protocol covers aviation. But Damian Ryan, a senior policy analyst with international non-government organisation The Climate Group, commented last week that there is no political appetite to let international aviation (and shipping) off the hook a second time. He told GreenAir, an independent online publication on aviation and the environment: "They can't get away with another 10 years of not producing anything."

He added that the Danish environment minister, who will be president of the UNFCCC conference, had made it clear that if the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) does not deliver on emission reductions, she will ensure responsibility is taken away from the agency.

In Britain, Lord Turner, chairman of Parliament's climate change committee - dubbed Gordon Brown's "environment tsar" by the media - proposed in February that limits be imposed on how many plane journeys travellers can take each year.

Meanwhile, the EU has already taken action on the issue. As a result of a directive that took effect in February, the EU's emissions trading scheme will apply to all airlines landing and taking off from its airports from January 1, 2012. The effect will be to impose a cap on the level of emissions that airlines may produce and provide for airlines above and below the cap to trade their "allowances". This would result in financial benefit for those that reduce their emissions and penalties for those that don't.

In justifying its action, the EU argued that while air transport plays a major role in the EU economy, it also contributes to global climate change - and that contribution is increasing. Although there has been significant improvement in aircraft technology and operational efficiency, the EU claims this has not been enough to neutralise the effect of increased traffic, and the growth in emissions is likely to continue in the decades to come.

In anticipation of the EU's move, a majority at the 2007 triennial assembly of ICAO approved a resolution requiring that such action be taken only on the basis of mutual agreement. The assembly also set up a new group of senior officials to recommend "an aggressive ICAO Programme of Action". The EU attacked the ICAO resolution as too weak in opting for "aspirational goals" instead of meaningful emission reduction targets.

The ICAO group has yet to produce its recommendations. Consequently, this month aviation industry leaders attending an Aviation Environment Summit in Geneva, reported by GreenAir, called on ICAO to "redouble its efforts" to provide a sectoral framework for a global solution on reducing aviation emissions that can be taken to the UNFCCC climate negotiations in December.

Speaking at the Geneva meeting, British Airways CEO Willie Walsh said there was a genuine threat to the industry if an agreement was not reached. Otherwise, he said, "we will suffer at the hands of politicians who will see us as fair game for opportunistic taxation that will not benefit the environment". Referring to the industry's advances in technology, he said it "had a great story to tell" on its environmental efforts. But he added: "I don't buy into the industry claim that aviation is 'just' 2 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions ... We should acknowledge that 2 per cent is a big figure and we need to be doing everything we can to address it."

Giovanni Bisignani, the Director General of the International Air Transport Association (IATA), which represents 230 airlines worldwide, referred to "four pillars" in IATA's strategy. He was convinced that the industry was "on the right track with respect to technology, operations and infrastructure", but that "the fourth pillar - positive economic measures - needs our attention. Governments must move beyond punitive economic measures ... to focus on measures that reduce emissions in a globally co-ordinated effort."

A new industry organisation, The Aviation Global Deal Group (AGDG), comprising British Airways, Cathay Pacific, Air France/KLM, Virgin Atlantic, BAA (the British airports company) and The Climate Group, has also entered the fray. In addition to discussions with IATA, last week the AGDG presented UN climate change negotiators with a draft policy framework for addressing CO2 emissions from international airlines.

This included a global target for the aviation sector, achieved through a "cap-and-trade" emissions trading mechanism; an airline's CO2 emissions to be based on the carbon content of its annual fuel purchase; an international body to administer the system; and any revenue generated from auctioning CO2 allowances to be used for climate change adaptation and mitigation activities in developing countries and research into greener aviation technology.

Some of these proposals are controversial - for example, EU countries have been unwilling to earmark auction revenues from their emissions trading scheme for environmental purposes. But, importantly, setting a global emissions target for the aviation sector contrasts with the ICAO approach of setting "aspirational goals" based on improved fuel efficiency across the international airline fleet.

A significant problem to be overcome is the different approach in the ways that ICAO and UNFCCC operate. The UNFCCC imposes responsibilities on some states, but not all: the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" takes account of the situation in developing countries. ICAO imposes standards on a universal basis, equally applicable to all 190 states, providing technical assistance where needed. So, although a global sectoral approach is favoured by IATA and the airlines that have spoken out on the issue, it is not clear that developing countries will feel able to agree.

Air NZ's strategy

Air New Zealand has not publicly taken a position in the international debate on aircraft emissions, but may well be content to support the policy developed by IATA .

However, over the past 12 months it has sought to reinforce its claim to be "the world's most environmentally responsible airline". In addition to establishing an Environment Trust, measures to save fuel and reduce CO2 emissions include:

* World-first test flight, to San Francisco, adopting an optimum flight planning and operation regime to demonstrate potential reduction of carbon emissions.

* Tailored arrival into San Francisco and Los Angeles, involving shorter, more optimal descent.

* Introducing dryers into aircraft to reduce moisture trapped between the outer skin and inner lining, to reduce weight during flights.

* Operating the world's first test flight using a 50/50 blend of Jatropha - a biofuel - and jet fuel in one engine of a B747-400 aircraft.

* Mounting performance-enhancing blended winglets on the wings of its B767-300ER aircraft, to be completed by July.

Air NZ is also moving towards an international fleet of fuel-efficient B777 and B787 aircraft. If it achieves the CO2 reductions it claims, it may be better placed to cope with an emissions trading regime such as the one decided on by the EU for 2012.

David Stone is an independent aviation consultant and commentator