Aircraft emissions to be debated under UK Presidency[fr][de] 

The highly politically charged debate on how to tackle the global warming impact of aviation will be launched under the UK Presidency, according to Roberto Salvarani, head of Environment and Safety Unit at the Commission's Transport directorate.

Several options are being assessed to reduce the global warming impact of the aviation sector:

• Incorporating aviation in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS). This implies including nitrogen oxide (NOx) into the scheme which currently only covers CO2. CO2 emissions from the aviation sector are actually quite low in the EU (about 2% of total human induced emissions). The bulk of the global warming impact of aviation in fact comes from NOx, which causes ozone formation, especially at high altitudes.
• A charging system based on the quantities burned (unit cost)
• A tax on kerosene (fixed price)

Other, less radical measures are being given equal attention:

• Reducing flight routes thanks to better air control and operation systems
• Increasing the fuel efficiency of aircraft

Questions remain as to the feasibility of integrating aircraft emissions in time for the second phase of the EU ETS in 2008. Such a project would require the approval of both the Council and Parliament, a procedure which can take several years if it is not backed up by a strong political consensus in both institutions.

A study for the Commission by the Dutch consulting and research organisation CE Delft explored the policy options to reduce the global warming impact of aviation. CE Delft's Ron Wit said CO2 emissions from the air transport sector were expected to grow by 110% between 2002 and 2025. Emissions of Nitrogen oxide (NOx) are to grow by 60% over the same period. According to Wit, political solutions need to take account of:

• Competition issues between EU and non-EU airlines
• Scope of measures (route-based or inside the EU airspace only)
• Monitoring emissions and the 'currency' chosen to measure climate impact as well as the associated measures to curb emissions

According to the study, the cost effectiveness of a charging system or an emissions trading system are similar. But Wit said that a tax on kerosene would be faced with legal obstacles related to the inclusion of non-EU companies. The answer, he argued, "is based on political arguments" such as a global emissions trading scheme.

Roberto Salvarani, head of the Environment and Safety Unit at the Commission's Transport directorate, warned that new measures to tackle the global warming impact of aviation were likely to weigh heavily on industry and consumers. Measures, he said, "will affect the competitiveness of the EU industry unless they are applied on a global scale". The EU, he said, is "a pioneer" in tackling climate change. However, he hoped the EU would not "confuse bravery with naivety" by taking measures without previous impact assessment on jobs and competitiveness. 

Speaking to EurActiv, he said the Commission will publish a communication on the topic, probably in July or September, under the UK Presidency. The communication will revisit three instruments: aviation fuel taxes, emissions charges and inclusion in ETS. A Commission   roadmap document  indicates that the communication is likely to suggest a combination of measures, taking particular account of ease of implementation when examining options. The proposed measures will be agreed between the directorates responsible for transport, environment and taxation, Salvarani indicated.

Salvarani further pointed to a number of possible other measures aimed at optimising energy consumption in the aviation sector:

• Update aircraft fuel efficiency (although future savings will be lower than those already achieved)
• Optimise air traffic management thanks to the Galileo satellite navigation system
• Reduce airport energy consumption with existing measures on energy efficiency of buildings
• Make increased usage of alternative fuels to reduce aircraft emissions

"My Commissioner [Jacques Barrot] has a complete open mind" on the range of options available, Salvarani told the seminar.

The Association of European Airlines (AEA - which includes the likes of British Airways and Air France) said in a press briefing a year ago that an emissions trading scheme would be "the most effective mechanism to allow aviation industry to reduce its CO2 impact". The AEA said it was "committed to promote such a scheme". But the AEA is opposed to the introduction of a tax on Kerosene or to taxes on EU flights on the basis that they would lead to distortions of competition between EU and non-EU airlines.
In a   letter  sent to the Financial Times, the director of the European Association for Transport and the Environment (T&E), Jos Dings, said that "airlines are wrong to say emissions trading is the only way to combat the impact of aviation on the environment". Dings suggests "en-route emissions charges and tax on aviation fuel" as two
examples that would "bring the sector into line with every other area of economic activity".

In a resolution, the Parliament expressed itself in favour of "incorporating emissions from international flights and shipping into the emission reduction targets of the second commitment period" of the Kyoto Protocol (2008-2012).