Easyjet go green?

I was asked yesterday about Easyjet's national campaign last week - their demands for "a more intelligent approach to aviation" - which included scrapping air passenger duty and instead levying tax on the "oldest, dirtiest" aircraft. I wonder if that also means an end to the absurdity of free flights and ridiculously priced flights?

In fact these measures proposed by Easyjet would clearly be in their interests - meeting these demands will mean yet more flights and continued airport expansion. Budget airlines are already fuelling demand, creating new routes and getting people on to those planes - it's also mainly the middle classes who are flying.

The resulting increase in CO2 emissions cannot be mitigated by the improved technology implied by newer, "cleaner" aircraft. Indeed this is yet another case of 'greenwash' by aviation companies. A recent IPCC report confirms this saying that although there was some medium-term potential to mitigate aviation CO2 emissions by tinkering with operations and technology to increase fuel efficiency, any such improvements are "expected to only partially offset the growth of aviation emissions".

The most important question should really be whether the flight would otherwise have been taken. Low-cost airlines may be in their own terms more efficient, you can't claim to be more environmental if you're increasing flights.

Stop Bristol Airport Expansion note that Easyjet's second largest base after Gatwick is at Bristol International Airport and ask that we respond by writing to MPs and local councillors. The Green party here in Gloucestershire have already made several submissions against the airport expansion (see for example here) and would fully support the moves by Stop Bristol Airport Expansion.

They suggest making the following points:
- Environmental taxation needs be increased to suppress demand and should be continued on all flights (including freight and private jets) in the UK;
- The oldest and most polluting aircraft should be banned;
- There must be a halt to all airport expansion plans due to increased noise, road congestion, air and light pollution and loss of green fields to car parking, all of which seriously affect our communities;
- Call for immediate commencement of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme;
- Call for an aviation fuel tax and VAT on air tickets;
- Call for advertisements for air travel to show how much environmental damage is carried out when flying;
- Technological improvements to aircraft will result in a small improvement to efficiency, but will not be delivered soon enough to cut the level of emissions needed to avert dangerous climate change due to the increased demand to fly.

If your MP is Liam Fox or John Penrose, then ask them to support the recently published Conservative Party report "Blueprint for a Green Economy", which calls for a halt to airport expansion in the UK and for greater environmental taxation on all flights, including freight and private jets, among other initiatives.

It is interesting that lots of sectors are now starting to complain about being disproportionately villainised for their carbon emissions. But as one local Green said recently: "this all arises from the mentality that emissions simply need to be reduced "a bit", that everyone only needs to do "their bit". If we look to the science and the actual targets, a UK with a 90% cut in carbon emissions will look drastically different; no sector or lifestyle will be unchanged. At that point, with those reductions, the aviation sector could suddenly find itself responsible for 50% or more of our UK emissions. This whole issue is the flip-side of that saying "There is no silver bullet for Climate Change, only silver buckshot." It would be so much easier if there was a silver bullet, but as green councillors we have to face up to the fact that each green initiative we work for might decrease our local emissions by only a few percent, but if we keep going and tackle all sectors, eventually we'll get to that magic 90%."