Aviation’s green efforts must factor in global growth
This summer, European holidaymakers are being brought down to earth. A campaign, marked by hashtags such as #stayontheground and #flightshame, is pressuring travellers to think twice about the carbon impact of their air travel.
Even airlines are joining in the public shaming. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines is encouraging people to fly less, and Deutsche Lufthansa’s chief executive recently declared that cheap fares are “economically, ecologically and politically irresponsible”. Whether connected or not, there has been a surge in European train passenger traffic this summer.
None of this well-meaning effort will amount to much, however, unless the industry grapples with the environmental impact of its fastest-growing market.
Industry estimates suggest that global passenger numbers will double by 2037, led primarily by middle-class consumers in East, South and South-East Asia.
This growth has been driven partly by population size and partly by strategy. Rather than waiting for these consumers to become rich enough to afford traditional airfares, low-cost airlines sprung up to meet them where they were economical. In 2008, airlines in South-East Asia flew 200 million seats.
A decade later, they flew 530 million seats – during that time, low-cost airlines expanded their market share from 30 per cent to nearly 50 per cent. The region’s leading such airline, AirAsia Group of Malaysia, uses the slogan “Now Everyone Can Fly”. It is on track to become South-East Asia’s largest airline this year.
Neither the airline industry nor local governments have any intention of slowing this growth. To the contrary, by 2035, India plans to build 100 new airports. Meanwhile, developed countries including Singapore and South Korea are upgrading and expanding airports.
East Asia already has the world’s fastest-growing tourist industry and plane makers are excited about the potential for more growth. Boeing predicts that Asia-Pacific will account for about 40 per cent of the 44,000 commercial aircraft it expects to sell over the next two decades.
The environmental costs of this growth are real. An individual flying round-trip between New York and London generates the same level of
emissions as someone heating their home for a year. That adds up: the airline industry emits nearly 1 billion tonnes of CO2 annually. If aviation were a country, it would be a top 10 emitter, bigger than such notable polluters as Brazil, Canada, South Korea and the UK.
The few conscientious Europeans who choose not to fly are likely to be vastly outnumbered by the people who do.
While environmental consciousness is growing, sustainable consumption remains an idea largely embraced by the already affluent.
That means airlines and local governments are going to have to find other ways to mitigate the effect of air travel. There are no easy solutions, but governments can take tangible steps now.
Greater government support for biofuels and other sustainable fuels would reduce emissions and create economies of scale that would make it more affordable for airlines to adopt cleaner-burning fuels.
They could work together to establish and maintain “green” flight routes that reduce fuel use and climate impacts.
Finally, countries with an interest in developing plane manufacturing sectors could increase investments in electric and hybrid propulsion.
Governments will not get far if they try to tell eager new consumers they can’t fly. The key is to make all those trips a lot less damaging than they currently are.