Main menu:
Some comments that I have to agree with.
Well Said
16 July 2008
Taxes Don't Reduce Emissions
Farnborough, UK - The International Air Transport Association (IATA) called on governments to abandon punitive environment taxes and instead support global environment solutions that will actually reduce aviation's 2% of global carbon emissions.
"Taxes don't reduce emissions. Only better operations and technology can do that," said Giovanni Bisignani, IATA's Director General and CEO, addressing the Farnborough International 2008 Sustainable Aviation Briefing.
"The airline industry is in crisis. With a fuel bill of US$190 billion - one third of its costs - saving fuel is a matter of survival. Still Europe is fixated on punitive measures supposedly designed to reduce emissions. There is a rush to implement taxes, taxes and more taxes. They all have an environment label, but do nothing to reduce emissions," said Bisignani. He took aim at two punitive measures in particular:
UK Air Passenger Duty (APD): "By 2010 APD could be a GBP3.5 billion pot of honey for the UK Treasury. That's enough to offset four years of the UK's civil aviation emissions. The UK proposal will lead to market distortions. And governments - including the UK - are double counting. On top of APD, other countries such as the Netherlands also apply taxes. If this weren't enough, the European Union emissions trading proposal will add another layer of penalties. What will all this do for the environment? Precious little. It's time for some political honesty about where the billions are going and what they will achieve," said Bisignani.
Union Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS): "We support emissions trading, but Europe's unilateral approach is wrong. Instead of cleaning up the environment, this will create an international legal mess. States outside Europe are already threatening legal action. Why should a US carrier have to pay Europe for emissions over US territory? Going global is the only way to success. The drafters of the Kyoto Protocol understood this and tasked the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to deal with aviation and the environment. But this wisdom did not make it to the European Parliament. Even as France, Germany, Italy, the UK and the EU signed a G8 declaration reconfirming ICAO's role in delivering a global solution, the European Parliament moved in the opposite direction by voting for a regional ETS. Good sense has been hijacked by uncoordinated green policies," said Bisignani.
"States - including Europe - will make or break the ICAO process. ICAO strengthened its political leadership on the issue with a high level Group on International Aviation and Climate Change (GIACC). Europe, which can take the credit for placing climate change on the international aviation agenda, must now take responsibility to ensure that ICAO is successful," said Bisignani.
IATA's four-pillar strategy to address climate change focuses on technology investment, effective operations, efficient infrastructure and positive economic measures. This is now an industry commitment supported by airlines, manufacturers, airports, air navigation service providers and industry partners. "Now governments must play their role responsibly by taking the reality of US$140 oil into account, stopping their green grand-standing, and joining the industry's global and comprehensive approach," said Bisignani.
08 July 2008
European ETS Vote: The Wrong Answer
- The International Air Transport Association (IATA) severely criticised today's European Parliament vote to bring aviation into the European Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).
"It's absolutely the wrong answer to the very serious issue of environment," said Giovanni Bisignani, IATA's Director General and CEO. "We support emissions trading, but not this decision. Europe has taken the wrong approach, with the wrong conditions at the wrong time."
The Wrong Approach: Europe's unilateral and extra-territorial approach will apply ETS to all aircraft flying to or from Europe. Without international agreement this will only spark international legal battles. "What right does Europe have to impose ETS charges on, for example, an Australian carrier flying from Asia to Europe for emissions over the Middle East? Article 1 of the Chicago Convention prohibits this. And it goes against Article 2 of the Kyoto Protocol. Fuelling legal battles and trade wars is no way to help the environment. Already over 130 states have vowed to oppose it. The only successful way forward for ETS is as the drafters of Kyoto envisaged. That's a global scheme brokered through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)," said Bisignani.
The Wrong Conditions: In its first year of operation, the ETS will add EUR3.5 billion to industry costs and this will rise year-on-year. There is no guarantee that any of the funds generated will be earmarked for environmental purposes. Today's decision only indicates that revenues generated from the auctioning of allowances "should" be used to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. "It's the weakest possible language. The plain fact is that the only sure beneficiaries of the EUR 3.5 billion cost will be national government coffers. There is no assurance that any of the money will go to environmental programmes. It's time for Europe's politicians to be honest. This is a punitive tax put in place by politicians who want to paint themselves green. Worse, it's not even part of a coordinated European policy. This tax will come on top of the UK's Air Passenger Duty and the Dutch Air Passenger Tax. Rather than double or triple charging for emissions, governments should focus on solutions to improve environmental performance," said Bisignani.
The Wrong Time: With oil trading above US$140 a barrel and jet fuel above US$170 per barrel, the industry fuel bill for 2008 will be at least US$190 billion. "Airlines are struggling to reduce fuel burn to survive. Adding an extra EUR 3.5 billion to industry costs will not produce any better results. If Europe is serious about environment, it would move forward quickly with the Single European Sky proposal. By the Commission's own calculation, this would save up to 16 million tonnes of CO2, reduce delays and improve environmental performance," said Bisignani.are committed to effective measures to reduce the 2% of carbon emissions attributed to aviation. "Reducing fuel burn to improve environmental performance is a top priority. IATA's four-pillar strategy to address climate change is now an industry commitment that does just that. Emissions trading is one small part of a comprehensive strategy that includes investing in technology, improving operations, building efficient infrastructure and using positive economic measures," said Bisignani.
"Our focus is on results. Last year the strategy saved at least 10.5 million tonnes of CO2. Our target is a 25% improvement in fuel efficiency by 2020. And we are working towards carbon-neutral growth with a vision for a carbon-free future. Europe's tunnel-vision focus on a unilateral, punitive and illegal ETS may help some government budgets, but it will do little if anything to improve environmental performance. It's time for Europe to re-focus," said Bisignani.