As I look for daily environmental news for the European Union, one story continues to pop-up: the EU’s recent decision to regulate airline emissions. The EU doesn’t just want to regulate their own airline emissions, but rather, the new law will mandate that any aircraft from anywhere in the world flying to or from Europe must abide by these emissions regulations. The new plan under the EU ETS states that starting in 2012, airlines will be brought under a carbon cap in which by 2013 airlines must reduce their emission 3% below 2004-2005, and 5% by 2020. Currently, airline emissions account for 2-3% of all greenhouse gas emissions.
The projected law has sparked widespread debate across the globe. American airlines have taken the law to the European Court of Justice and hired lobbyists to help push American laws against the cap regulations. House Representative John Mica of Florida has proposed the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition Act of 2011, which would prevent US aircraft operators from abiding by the European statute. Under this law, the US aviation operators would not be penalized for not abiding to a unilaterally imposed European regulation. Other countries such as China, India, and Russia have all opposed the bill as well. India has threatened to file complaints to the World Trade Organization stating that the law would be unfair to developing countries. Overall, these countries state that the law could end up costing them each around 4 billion US dollars. Almost every country feels that the EU should withdraw the cap until a consensus is reached via international negotiation, possibly at the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
So which side deserves to win? It is difficult to say. The goal is certainly a worthy one that directly addresses the issue of rising air travel and greenhouse gas emissions. If airlines make changes to reduce their emissions—whether via fuel-efficient airplanes or investment in biofuels, overall savings will not be immediate, but in the long-run savings on fuel costs could be between 15-35%. Second, almost all countries have made pledges to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, yet their protests to this new regulation make them seem hypocritical. Here is finally a concrete solution to help all countries reduce their emissions, and almost none want to take it. This is not a solution that the European Union can go in on alone—the emission trading must apply to all airlines or none. Simply regulating the European Union’s airline emissions would not be enough change to make a dramatic difference, and it would be economically detrimental to the country and European Airlines such as Virgin Airlines. Finally, while countries are calling for international negotiation on the issue, these negotiations have occurred time and time again, and historical evidence proves that almost nothing is ever accomplished. If the European Union brings these emissions rulings into negotiations, they will likely never pass.
On the other hand, it is quite easy to see the opposite side of the argument. Anyone who has traveled in the past few years has watched how airline prices have skyrocketed, and not just ticket price, but airlines now charge for baggage, food, blankets, headphones, basically anyway they can to make a profit. To now add a carbon tax would be to increase pressure on airline profits, and that pressure would be placed on the consumer. It is predicted that the average flight to Europe would now cost about $6 US per passenger; that adds up. The overall fine for violating the plan would be approximately 100 Euros, or $142 per every ton of carbon dioxide that airlines emit above the limit. The National Airlines Trade Group predicts that this could cost the US airlines at least 3 billion through 2020. Second, while advancements in biofuels are taking off, they are not yet commercially available enough yet to be a practical solution to hit the 2013 mandates, and purchasing a new fleet of efficient airplanes could take 5 years. In addition, deeper information about the cap is still widely unknown. If the European Union collects cap money from airlines that don’t follow the emissions guidelines, where does this money go? And second, how is this money even going to be collected? In addition, countries that cut emissions by greater than 5% can sell their allowances, which some argue will cause international trade disputes. At the end of the day, no country likes to be told that they must do something when they have had little to no say in the matter.
The question is: what is going to happen? The cap and trade law has gone to European court, where many predict it will pass. Some airlines have already begun to accept this fate: American Airlines just placed the largest order in history for 460 new, fuel-efficient airplanes. These airplanes would abide by the regulations, making American Airlines the most fuel-efficient fleet in the US. As of right now, the bill proposed by Representative Mica seems more of a statement than anything else—the Senate has not yet produced any form of a bill dealing with the issue. Whether or not the ruling will pass, it is hopeful that like American Airlines, airlines begin to pay more attention to green issues at hand. Greener fleets or technologies like GPS systems can reduce flight paths and reduce fuel costs, lowering emissions. As of right now, one of the best bets would be to postpone the implementation of the law, attempt to reach some sort of international negotiation, and ask that each country attempt to reduce their airline emissions even without the tax in the time being. It’s a sticky issue—both sides have valid arguments, and if not careful, this cap could result in a scuffle between several countries, hence why many figureheads have failed to comment on the issue. In my humble opinion, however, this seems like a promising global emissions reduction plan, and it would be a shame to not see it passed and followed.
Sources: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-eu-has-the-right-idea-in-regulating-greenhouse-gases-from-airplanes/2011/07/08/gIQADGLn7H_story.html
Sources: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-eu-has-the-right-idea-in-regulating-greenhouse-gases-from-airplanes/2011/07/08/gIQADGLn7H_story.html
http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-threatens-to-move-WTO-against-EU-s-carbon-tax/Article1-726730.aspx
No comments:
Post a Comment