(Photo courtesy: http://www.climateobserver.org)
Ever since tracking and reducing carbon emissions has become a major concern for humanity, the aviation industry and aviation emissions have been called into question. And rightly so, if the human population wishes to continue living and populating this earth, we must take care of it. Currently the global aviation industry is responsible for about 2% of overall human-induced carbon emissions per year (ATAG, 2016). While it may not seem like a significant figure, 2% of all human-induced carbon emissions over the span of one year is roughly equal to 781 Million (metric) Tonnes (ATAG, 2016). Although this may seem like a massive problem, jet aircraft that are in service today are almost 80% more fuel efficient than aircraft that were in service in the 1960's. Emissions are also expected to drop by another 50% by the year 2050 as well (ATAG, 2016). As well, when broken down by liters of fuel used per passenger per 100 kilometers, newest generation aircraft like the Boeing 787 and Airbus A380 both come extremely close to 3 liters of fuel burned for each passenger over a distance of 100 kilometers. Other aircraft like the ATR-600 and Bombardier C-Series also come very close to this rather astonishingly low number. This 3 liters per passenger per 100 kilometers is actually competitive with many modern compact "fuel efficient" cars (ATAG, 2016). It should also be noted that while aviation emissions account for 2% of all human-induced carbon emissions per year, this number accounts for 12% of carbon emissions from all transport sources. This is still paled in comparison to road traffic however, which makes up 74% of carbon emissions from transport sources (ATAG, 2016). Somewhat shockingly (at least for me), aviation is vastly more fuel efficient and cleaner burning than the billions of cars that occupy the world's roads every day.
Quite recently (Thursday, October 6th, 2016 to be exact), the United Nations Aviation arm ratified an agreement to corral current international airline flight emissions to help fight global warming. The agreement was almost unanimously passed, and serves to lay a baseline by which airlines and airplane manufacturers can try to track their growth and emissions as they work to reduce greenhouse gasses. The first phase of the UN airline agreement is 100% voluntary, and will span from 2021 to 2027. In the second phase, beginning in 2028 and going through 2035, compliance with the UN airline agreement will be mandatory (US News, 2016). Currently, there are some countries still trying to determine if they will participate in the voluntary first phase. Russia has already opted out. Of course Russia already opted out. How fitting. What the UN airline agreement serves to do is cut aviation emissions by limiting the amount of CO2 that can be discharged per year by airline companies. This is done by allowing a certain amount of carbon 'credits' that are spent when CO2 is discharged into the air. Once an airline has spent all of their carbon credits, they will be forced to 'buy' carbon credits from other industries or projects that exist to limit greenhouse gasses in an attempt to maintain a positive or net-zero balance on their carbon credit account. This will force airlines to limit runs, buy more fuel efficient and lower emission planes, and buy from other industries, thus also stimulating local and global economies (US News, 2016). All this while directly or indirectly slashing the amount of CO2 and other greenhouse gasses that are released into the environment every year.
Another recent UN agreement that has gone into effect which also concerns overall global emissions. The Paris Climate Change Agreement will attempt to curb global emission discharge and will provide funding and other aid to help countries that may not have the means to trim emissions on their own (Guardian, 2016). The Paris agreement serves to try to prevent and eventually reverse the growing climate change event that has made global temperatures trend upwards. The magic (though tragic and catastrophic) number is 2 degrees Celsius. It is widely accepted that once this overall 2 degree shift has been hit, the major impacts of global warming will be irreversible (Guardian, 2016). Without bringing political affiliation into the picture, I believe that the newly elected administration will not affect the workings of the Paris Agreement in almost any aspect. During his campaign, he did what any other politician does, and what his opponent did, and said whatever he needed to garner votes from his target demographic. Already he has proven to go back on a few things that he said he would do. I expect the US' involvement in the Paris Agreement to be no different. It is something that has been worked on between many countries for many years. The Obama administration has been toiling over the workings of the Paris agreement since 2009, when a similar global warming meeting was held in Copenhagen. This one ended in disastrous chaos with nothing being accomplished. Now that science has taken a foothold and proven exactly what humanity is dealing with, I expect the advisors of the Trump administration to urge him to continue the US' involvement with the Paris Global Warming Agreement.
Overall, I would say that I am happy to see that global greenhouse gas emissions are a concern large enough to warrant at least some investigation, but I believe that the aviation industry doesn't need to be under quite as much scrutiny as it currently is. Aviation accounts for a very small fraction of travel based CO2 emissions, and there are much more effective ways to reduce greenhouse gasses than to target airplanes, which are already more than 4 times more efficient and clean than they were just 40 years ago. Compare this to the millions more cars and trucks on the road that are barely twice as efficient (on average) as they were 40 years ago. Not to mention that airplanes carry hundreds more people than a car, or even a bus, can. Planes can reach farther distances and do so in a more expeditious manner. I completely agree that greenhouse gas emissions need to be slashed, and I agree that the aviation industry can always push the boundaries to get better and reduce CO2 emissions in house. However I do not agree that the aviation industry should be scrutinized so heavily, and I believe that we, as a human species, can restrict CO2 emissions in many other areas before we start going after an industry that has already made much more progress than almost any other industry out there.
References:
ATAG - ATAG. (2016, May). Facts & Figures. Retrieved November 18, 2016, from http://www.atag.org/facts-and-figures.html
US News - Lowy, J. (2016, October 6). UN Agreement Reached on Aircraft Climate-Change Emissions. Retrieved November 19, 2016, from http://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2016-10-06/un-agreement-reached-on-aircraft-climate-change-emissions
Guardian - Harvey, F. (2015). Paris Climate Change Agreement: The World's Greatest Diplomatic Success. Retrieved November 19, 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/13/paris-climate-deal-cop-diplomacy-developing-united-nations
Photo source: http://climateobserver.org/agreement-tackle-international-aviation-emissions/
No comments:
Post a Comment