Policy Update For reprint orders, please contact
[email protected]
Carbon Management (2012) 3(6), 537–540
A one-way ticket to high carbon lock-in: the UK debate on aviation policy
“
…the debate is ongoing as to whether investment in
aviation generates returns over and above similar investment levels elsewhere in the UK economy.
”
F Ruth Wood*1, Alice Bows1 & Kevin Anderson2 The UK Climate Change Act 2008 requires the UK Government to decide by the end of 2012 whether and how it will include international aviation emissions in the Act’s emission reduction framework. The decision will follow two public consultations and will be announced within the context of a double-dip recession and assertions that expanding aviation capacity will reinvigorate an ailing economy [1,2] . The additional GHG emissions from expansion, it is argued, will be minimized by the use of ‘environmentally friendly planes’ incentivized through aviation’s recent inclusion in the EU-ETS; any residual emissions would be offset through traded permits [101] . This article highlights how, given the difficulties of carrying out robust analysis on the economics around aviation, the presumption that further aviation growth is good for the economy is at best premature and may yet prove dangerously misleading. As it stands, the debate is ongoing as to whether investment in aviation generates returns over and above similar investment levels elsewhere in the UK economy. Any resilient decision on investment must heed the carbon intensity of the activity in generating such returns and the likely upwards trajectory of a carbon price. On climate change and emissions the conclusion is unequivocal. Regardless of the EU-ETS, any level of medium-term aviation growth is incompatible with the carbon budgets accompanying the UK’s commitments under both the Copenhagen Accord and the Cancun Agreement. Even with optimistic projections of improved aircraft efficiency, it is incumbent on the industry to substantially reduce its emissions over the
coming two decades if the UK is not to renege on its climate change commitments. Given the high profile and stridency of claims by Yeo and Darling, amongst many others, for the urgent expansion of aviation capacity [101–103] , how do their arguments stand up to the evidence on the role of aviation in climate change and economic reform? ‘Environmentally friendly planes’ The proposition that environmentally friendly planes will play a pivotal role in delivering a low-carbon aviation industry is worthy of particular focus, as it suggests concern over growth in the sector is misplaced. However, despite the rhetoric, there are significant challenges and inherent obstacles in relying on technology to mitigate the GHG emissions from aircraft [3,4] . Take fuel as an example; there are few fuels that are sufficiently energy dense, and hence light enough, for flight. With those that may be viable, important uncertainties remain over the climate consequences of their combustion at high altitudes. Turning to the airframe and engine design, decades of research, development and deployment leave little opportunity for future efficiency gains, with current estimates of efficiency improvements between 0.8 and 1.5% per annum, and this would still demand substantial and ongoing R&D [5] . This absence of low emission technology is exacerbated by the fast growth that has been observed from the sector in the last 20 years, continuously outpacing technological and operational efficiency improvements [3] . Future projections demonstrate a continuation of this trend [6] . Coupling these challenges with the long lifetime of both aircraft
Sustainable Consumption Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK Tyndall Manchester, School of Mechanical, Aerospace & Civil Engineering, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK *Author for correspondence: Tel.: +44 161 306 3715; E-mail:
[email protected] 1 2
future science group
10.4155/CMT.12.61 © 2012 Future Science Ltd
www.future-science.com
537
News & Analysis Policy Update
and the infrastructure required for manufacturing new designs (~30 years each) seriously curtails the rate of technical and operational mitigation available to the industry. Against this backdrop of severe limitations in early efficiency gains, there are limits to aviation growth if it is to remain within the boundaries of the EU-ETS. The impact of the EU-ETS on aviation growth The EU-ETS is a cap-and-trade system – as such there are limits on the quantity of permits that can be purchased. The price of the available permits is a product of both the size of the cap and the success of sectors’ mitigation efforts in reducing their absolute emissions. Current discussion on airport expansion assumes that all future emissions growth can be offset through the purchase of EU-ETS permits. Whereas this assumption may hold for phase three, 2013–2020, it does not take into account the future direction of the EU-ETS. New infrastructure decisions made today will have both a long lead time and lifetime; with new runway capacity unlikely before 2020.
“
As an island, the UK has become disproportionally reliant on aviation compared with other EU nations.
”
If the ETS is considered in the context of the EU’s 2050 Roadmap, a significant reduction in the cap and corresponding increase in carbon price can be expected post-2020 [7] . The Roadmap sets out how the EU could achieve its objective of an 80–95% GHG reduction on a 1990 baseline by 2050, with 80% of the reduction being achieved through domestic action alone; in other words, excluding offsetting or carbon trading with other countries. These reductions include emissions from domestic and international aviation. The transport sector is expected to contribute emissions reductions of 54–67%, a target range that aviation will struggle to reconcile with anticipated growth between now and 2050 [7] . The sector will be competing for carbon permits with the industrial and power sectors, with their own reduction targets of 83–87% and 93–99%, respectively [7] . The ability of aviation to continue purchasing carbon allowances requires these and other sectors to go beyond their already challenging reduction targets. Given that the Roadmap and cap are to be reviewed with an eye to them being further tightened, it would be prudent to assess how much (or whether) the sector could grow while remaining within the tightening constraints of the EU-ETS. Advice to the UK Government from its independent Committee on Climate Change (CCC) recommends that UK aviation emissions return to 2005 levels by 2050,
538
Carbon Management (2012) 3(6)
a level consistent with the Committee’s wider strategy but still not yet aligned with what is necessary under the UK’s international commitments [5] . Recognizing the technical and operational limitations of mitigation, the CCC advised that growth be limited to a maximum increase in air traffic movements of approximately 55% between 2005 and 2050, and a maximum of 60% increase in passenger demand, equating to 140 million extra passengers arriving or departing UK airports per annum [5] . The consultation on the retention of the UK’s hub status in the south east of England follows the UK Government’s previous and high profile rejection of new runways in the area, proposing instead any new capacity be met by regional airports [104] . Announcements to date suggest the consultation will seek views on a range of potential options including additional runways, improved utilization of existing capacity and the construction of a new hub airport [2] . Policy regarding the expansion of regional airports remains unchanged [8] . However, any expansion in the south east of the UK through an additional runway at Heathrow or a new hub airport, coupled with existing regional expansion plans, would facilitate passenger growth over and above that recommended by the CCC and be incommensurate with the emission constraints imposed by the EU-ETS. Aviation as an economic growth provider Part of the rationale for the renewed examination of aviation expansion in the UK is that in times of economic hardship aviation services can stimulate growth, particularly by providing hub services to new markets. The economic contributions from aviation are direct, indirect and catalytic. It is principally the catalytic effects that are sought from capacity expansion; the economic contribution presumed to arise by enhancing the productivity of the country by increasing connectivity and thus trade and inward investment. However, the current evidence base upon which the catalytic impacts can be assessed is limited and there is no consensus in the literature as to their size [9–11] . That said, whatever the catalytic impacts, they relate primarily to passengers flying for business purposes; passengers who represent just 30% of those using Heathrow, and typically lower proportions for regional airports [12] . Any catalytic effects are thus associated with a small proportion of the passengers currently using UK aviation services. An additional economic benefit is claimed to come from overseas tourists to the UK; however, their expenditure in the UK is offset by UK resident’s expenditure overseas. For 2011 there was a net deficit of £13.7 million [105] .
future science group
Policy Update News & Analysis
As an island, the UK has become disproportionally reliant on aviation compared with other EU nations. The emissions from flights serving the UK represent 28% of the aviation sector’s emission baseline in the EU-ETS – a baseline that encompasses the aviation emissions from services in 29 other countries [13,14] . The evidence base for future aviation policy requires a fundamental re-examination of the role of aviation within a country’s economy. This requires research to identify how and why connectivity begets inward investment and productivity and whether provision of aviation services can be focussed to maximize this within a boundary that recognizes the sector’s significant and growing climate impacts. Any investment in high-carbon activities now effectively locks all sectors included within the EU-ETS into a future with high carbon prices. The evidence base to support future investment decisions on aviation expansion would include comparisons with anticipated returns from similar levels of investment in other areas of UK activity; reducing congestion for commuters, improved freight routes or high-speed data transfer, for example. Understanding the opportunity cost of airport expansion may well highlight alternative and much more strategic investment opportunities. This presents an important and timely research agenda for academics in the field.
Ultimately, however, sustainable economic growth is about more than short-term financial gains; climate change is real and the UK has, thus far, played an important leadership role in acknowledging its economic, social and environmental repercussions. Disturbingly then, as the trend in global emissions is locking the international community into a future of ‘dangerous climate change’, the self avowed ‘greenest government’ is considering the expansion of the most carbon-intensive activity humankind has thus far developed. This is a real test of both leadership and the future of evidence-based policymaking. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank S Geeling and E Harper for their contribution to the thinking that has gone into this paper.
Financial & competing interests disclosure The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties. No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A Roadmap for Moving to a Competitive Low Carbon Economy in 2050. Brussels 8.3.2011 COM. EC, Brussels, Belgium (2011).
References Papers of special note have been highlighted as: of considerable interest n
n
Department for Transport. Consultation on the Draft Aviation Policy Framework. Department for Transport, London, UK (2012).
8
2
Butcher L. Aviation: Airports in South-East England SN2893. House of Commons Library, London, UK (2012).
Butcher L. Aviation: Regional Airports SN 323. House of Commons Library, London, UK (2012).
9
3
Bows A, Anderson K. Transport policy, policy clash: can projected aviation growth be reconciled with the UK’s government 60% carbon reduction target? Transport Policy 14(2), 103–110 (2007).
Oxera Consulting Ltd. What is the Contribution of Aviation to the UK Economy? Final Report Prepared for the Airport Operators Association. Oxera Consulting Ltd, Oxford, UK (2009).
4
Cairns S, Newson C, Boardman B, Anable J. Predict and Decide: Aviation, Climate Change and UK Policy. Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK (2006).
5
Committee on Climate Change. The UK Aviation Target – Options for Reducing Emissions to 2050. The Stationery Office, Norwich, UK (2009).
6
Department for Transport. UK Aviation Forecasts. Department for Transport, London, UK (2011).
7
EC. European Commission Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the
1
future science group
n
n
n
n
Outlines the EU’s future climate policy directions.
A thorough analysis of the different ways through which aviation contributes to the UK’s economy, highlighting areas of certainty and those where evidence is still limited.
10 Bleda M. Evidence Based Policy Making: the Positive Economic
Contribution of the Aviation Sector in the UK vs its Negative Environmental Impacts’ UACES European Collaborative Research Network. The Governance of Sustainability, University of Bradford, UK (2009). 11 Wood FR, Bleda M, Randles S, Anderson K, Bows A, Footitt
A. Aviation in the North West: Emissions, Economics and Organisational Flying. Tyndall Centre, University of Manchester, UK (2009).
www.future-science.com
539
News & Analysis Policy Update
12 Civil Aviation Authority. Passenger Survey Report – A survey of
Passengers at Birmingham, Doncaster, East Midlands, Gatwick, Heathrow, Humberside, Leeds Bradford, Liverpool, London City, Luton, Manchester and Stansted Table 18.4. Civil Aviation Authority, London, UK (2010). 13 Wood FR. Who’s flying? The spatial distribution of aviation
emission in Great Britain. Carbon Management 2(1), 85–98 (2011). 14 Aires E. EUETS and Aviation SN/SC 5533. House of
Commons Library, London, UK (2012).
Websites 101 The Right Hon Tim Yeo MP. Heathrow expansion: a third
runway must be cleared for take-off. www.timyeo.org.uk/newsshow.aspx?id=3&ref=197 (Accessed 21 September 2012)
540
Carbon Management (2012) 3(6)
102 BBC News. Heathrow Third Runway rethink urged by Tory
MP, 27 August 2012. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19389094 (Accessed 23 September 2012) 103 The Guardian. Andrew Clark. Huge airport expansion given
the green light, 17 December 2003. www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/dec/17/transport.greenpolitics (Accessed 23 September 2012) 104 Cabinet Office. The coalition: our program for government
– energy and climate change. http://programmeforgovernment.hmg.gov.uk/energy-andclimate-change/index.html (Accessed 31 August 2010) 105 Office of National Statistics, 2011 Travel Pac.
www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/ott/travelpac/index.html (Accessed 21 September 2012)
future science group
