UK minister flies into rage with airlines over CO2 emissions 

With the proliferation of cheap flights, CO2 emissions from aviation – which currently account for around 3% of European carbon emissions – are rising rapidly and the EU fears that they could double over the next 20 years – undermining efforts made by other industrial sectors to fulfil Europe's Kyoto Protocol commitments. 

The Commission feels that the best way to halt this evolution is to include aviation in the EU's emission-trading scheme (ETS) – a system that limits the amount of CO2 that planes can emit while allowing them to buy additional pollution allowances if they want to exceed them. 

The system, it claims, could slow down the growth in greenhouse-gas emissions from air transport by 46% – or 183 tonnes – by 2020. 

However, a number of leading European airlines, including Germany's Lufthansa, British Airways and Ryanair oppose the plan, which they say will distort competition, prevent the sector from developing and fail to lead to any significant reduction in emissions. 

American airlines have also threatened to take legal action against the EU if it goes ahead with its plan to impose the system on foreign companies as of 2012. 

UK Environment Minister Ian Pearson stressed: "Like every other industry, the airline industry must take its share of responsibility for combating climate change and the European Union's proposal is the vehicle by which they can do just that." 

Referring to Ryanair's Chief Executive, Michael O'Leary, he said: "When it comes to climate change, Ryanair are not just the unacceptable face of capitalism, they are the irresponsible face of capitalism. O'Leary just seems to take pride in refusing to recognise that climate change is a genuine problem." 

Pearson also criticised the American airline industry's attitude: "They just seem to be saying they don't want anything to do with the trading scheme, and that they will take the EU to court if transatlantic flights are included. It is completely irresponsible." 

He added: "Even British Airways are only just playing ball. They say they are happy with a trading scheme that is confined to flights within Europe, rather than one that includes all flights departing the EU," despite the fact that this would limit the scheme to covering only 20% of total EU aviation carbon emissions. 

However, Ryanair's Michael O'Leary  countered Pearson’s attacks, calling the minister "foolish and ill-informed" and adding that, "unlike Pearson and most other politicians who talk a lot but do little", Ryanair is actually acting against climate change. He explained: "Ryanair has spent more than $10billion on a fleet of fuel-efficient engines which have reduced fuel burn by 45% and cut CO2 emissions by 50% per passenger, making Ryanair Europe's greenest airline." 

He dismissed the Commission’s proposal to include aviation in the emissions-trading scheme as yet another of "these so-called environmental taxes, which are just another way of greedy politicians grabbing more money from ordinary passengers while doing nothing at all for the environment", and said that he would continue to oppose such measures. 

"Aviation accounts for just 1.6% of global greenhouse-gas emissions and is neither the cause nor the solution to global warming. If the EU was serious about reducing emissions it would tackle the real polluters such as road transport [18% of CO2 emissions] or power generation [26%]," he added. 

Lufthansa claims not to be opposed to an ETS but says that the scheme must be global to avoid distortion of competition. "An 'EU island solution' would contradict the principles of the Lisbon Agenda," it states. 

Wolfgang Mayrhuber, chairman of Lufthansa's executive board, added that the EU's largest climate protection project in the aviation sector should be to realise the Single European Sky. "Implementing this project would mean avoiding 8–12% of CO2 emissions. But instead of driving this concrete project forward with determination, the option of including aviation in an Emission Trading System (ETS) is considered at the European level. Notwithstanding all problems and incalculable aspects of this scheme, even its supporters anticipate less reduction in emissions which could be achieved in the short-term by a Single European Sky," he said. 

The Air Transport Association of America (ATA), which represents more than 90% of all US airline passenger and cargo traffic, called the Commission decision "misguided", saying its "intent on unilaterally covering the flights of non-European Union carriers in its emissions trading scheme…clearly violates international laws and bilateral air service agreements. And deferring its implementation by one year does not change that outcome."