https://earther.gizmodo.com/the-un-just-made-it-easier-for-airlines-to-pollute-1844251411
The UN Just Made It Easier for Airlines to Pollute
Jocelyn Timperley
July 3, 2020
A United Nations council of 36 countries has agreed on a major change to
the main global scheme addressing the climate impact of aviation, a move
expected to remove requirements for airlines to offset emissions for
several years.
The change to weaken what was already viewed as a wholly inadequate
climate policy has been met with dismay by climate experts. The aviation
industry has long argued for a unified approach to regulating emissions
at a global level rather than a patchwork of policies by regions and
countries. Now, that argument looks weaker than ever with the new
watered rules governing air travel emissions.
“It took ICAO [the International Civil Aviation Organization] almost 20
years to come up with recommendations on how to mitigate greenhouse gas
emissions from international aviation,” Dan Rutherford, director of
aviation at the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT),
told Earther. “By delaying those already weak policies, [the ICAO]
council has given ammunition to countries that want to take more
aggressive action.”
ICAO governs the emissions from international flights and the place
where, in 2016, 193 countries agreed to achieve “carbon neutral growth”
from 2020. The scheme, known as CORSIA focuses on carbon offsets and has
been heavily criticised for being far below the action needed for the
industry’s ballooning emissions. This week’s decision to change the
parameters of the scheme will make it even easier for airlines to pollute.
Air travel emissions were initially going to be regulated based on 2019
and 2020 totals, but the change takes 2020 out of the equation owing to
the sharp pandemic-driven dip in air travel. Industry body IATA argued
the change was needed since CORSIA would otherwise put an
“inappropriate” economic burden on the sector. But since passenger
demand is not expected to reach 2019 levels for three to five years, the
decision effectively removes all offset obligations on airlines for at
least three years. This means between 50 and 200 million tons of
emissions won’t be offset, according to Rutherford.
Environmental experts and non-profits who have been pushing for decades
for stronger aviation climate measures at ICAO reacted with frustration
to the change. In the end, the change could open the door to future
regional or national action outside ICAO that are more stringent.
“At a time when there’s widespread public support for governments to
deliver a green recovery from the pandemic, focused on increasing
climate ambition, ICAO’s decision looks out of touch and leaves the door
wide open for states to introduce national measures to demonstrate the
required leadership and need for action,” Tim Johnson, director of
non-profit the Aviation Environment Federation, told Earther.
Stay Grounded campaigner Magdalena Heuwieser said the offset scheme was
“a total wreck beyond repair” even before the baseline change. “In fact,
it was broken from the very beginning,” she said in a statement,
pointing out that CORSIA only covers a fraction of aviation’s projected
emissions and “completely ignores” the huge climate impact of airplane
emissions other than carbon pollution. “It relies on harmful offsets and
biofuels, both neo-colonial measures that shift the problems to
communities in the Global South,” she added.
The weakening of the scheme could lead to a renewed push to include
international aviation in national climate plans, particularly in
Europe, Chris Lyle, an air transport consultant who has previously
worked at both ICAO and British Airways, told Earther. “While Europe has
gone along [with the baseline change] with the notable exception of
Sweden, the public pressure there for additional action will undoubtedly
increase,” he said. “Any country can already add international aviation
to its carbon budget, and indeed to its UN climate pledge.”
The cross-border nature of international aviation and shipping
complicates assigning emissions to individual countries, and
responsibility for tackling aviation emissions instead in theory sits
with ICAO. The industry has long argued only international action is
feasible to avoid a complicated patchwork of different regulations. But
the failure over the years to reach agreement on a strong climate deal
at ICAO has led to rising calls for countries to take action themselves
as part of their Paris Agreement climate pledges.
The EU already regulates intra-EU flights via its carbon emissions
trading system and there are already a variety of further regional
measures on the table. They include strengthening the carbon trading
system, the introduction of a kerosene tax that would affect jet fuel
and a mandate for sustainable aviation fuels. Even before the baseline
change, these measures would likely have far more of an impact on
emissions than CORSIA.
Some countries have also begun to take individual action as well; France
and Austria have both attached green conditions to bailouts for the
sector. The growing flygskam (flight shame) movement, inspired by Greta
Thunberg and others, has also popularized the idea of individual action
to minimize flying.
“Emission cuts in aviation in line with the 1.5 degrees Celsius [2.7
degrees Fahrenheit] limit are only achievable by reducing flights since
offsetting and technological approaches fail to do the job,” said
Heuwieser. “This structural change of our mobility system has to go
along with a just transition for the workers.”
In the absence of national or international measures, pressure could
also increase on airlines to address their ballooning carbon footprints
themselves, Annie Petsonk, international counsel at EDF, told Earther.
“With the baseline change, it will be hard for airlines, during the next
three years, to point to CORSIA as evidence that they’re addressing the
carbon pollution of flights,” she said. “If airlines reach for
substandard carbon credits that couldn’t make it through CORSIA’s
eligibility screens, they’ll expose themselves to allegations of
greenwashing right at the time when they’re trying hardest to woo
customers back.”
Gilles Dufrasne, at Carbon Market Watch, pointed out airlines have been
pushing to weaken CORSIA while simultaneously receiving billions in
bailouts from governments around the world. “Airlines are making a
mockery of governments and taxpayers, taking public money while fighting
climate policies,” he said in a statement.
=====================================
To subscribe, unsubscribe, turn vacation mode on or off,
or carry out other user-actions for this list, visit
https://www.freelists.org/list/keiths-list
Note: new climate change website is now in pre-launch
Visit https://www.10n10.ca/e/index.shtml