Easyjet Steps Up Its Eco-campaign
by Sami Grover, Carrboro, NC, USA on 09.20.07
We are pretty used to campaigns to cut aircraft pollution here at TreeHugger , we’re just not so used to these campaigns being originated by airlines themselves. Not long ago Mairi reported on calls by UK-based budget carrier Easyjet for an outright ban on older aircraft, among other measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It seems that these calls were more than just a flash in the pan, and Easyjet is now stepping up its campaign with a promotional email asking customers to write to their Members of Parliament with the following message:
“Dear Politician,I agree with easyJet that it's time for politicians to be more intelligent when it comes to flying and climate change. You should be encouraging people to fly in cleaner aircraft - just like you advocate for cars. It is time to ban the oldest, dirtiest aircraft in the sky. It would be easy to do and would have a big impact.
It is wrong to tax families but not private jets and cargo. Air Passenger Duty should be reformed to tax aircraft emissions - those that pollute the most should pay the most. UK air travellers already pay more tax than any other country in Europe.
You and your party should not hesitate to encourage aircraft technology developments. Air travel could be 50% cleaner within 10 years.
You should urge people and your colleagues to act responsibly - to fly with those airlines that have new aircraft, high passenger loads and fewer emissions. More questions should be asked in Parliament about the efficiency of transport modes used for Government business. Even if you feel there is little you can do to influence this debate, make sure you read 'the facts about aviation emissions'. The more MPs are aware of the facts, the greater the ability of our country to take the lead in aviation emissions. The interests of air travellers in your constituency will be best served by having an informed political debate on the intelligent solutions to managing aviation emissions.
This is important to your constituency. Please let me know what actions you and your party will be taking.”
Apparently this email is timed to coincide with the release of an Easyjet-authored report on aviation and climate change. However, while we found mention of it in their press release here, and in a Guardian report here, we are yet to find a copy of the report available online (can anyone help us out here?).
We’d be interested to see the calculations behind Easyjet’s assertion that it produces less CO2 per passenger km than Virgin’s Voyager Trains, and less even than the Toyota Prius (assuming the Prius only has one passenger) – we are pretty sure that they are not including the admittedly controversial factor of the role that altitude plays in increasing the effects of harmful emissions.
While we’ll reserve judgment on the company’s exact figures in relation to alternative modes of transport, to some degree we must concede that Easyjet has a point – budget airlines do have a much lower carbon footprint per passenger mile than the larger carriers, especially when compared to business class or private jets. They also tend to fly direct routes, rather than using the traditional hub-and-spoke model, thus creating less passenger miles per journey. However, there is a flip side to all this that illustrates the limits of efficiency – cheaper flights from regional airports means more journeys by more people. Efficiency is only an effective means to curbing pollution if it is not coupled with a corresponding rise in usage. ::Easyjet::via site visit::
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Geoengineering Redux: Fertilizing Trees with Nitrogen to Fight Climate Change
- So What's in Obama's Overstuffed Environmental Suggestion Box?
- Sun, Nike, Starbucks and More Meet for Climate Action
- In Dark Financial Times, Americans Still Willing to Fight Climate Change
It's so refreshing to see corp's taking the health of our environment seriously. I'm actually looking at flying EasyJet and now I want to!
If you have a chance, check out my blog post today on Retail Design Diva about retailers who are making major steps towards being environmentally friendly. It's pretty amazing. Office Depot even reduced its carbon emissions by 10% despite adding 1.7 million more sq. ft. in stores.
http://retaildesigndiva.blogs.com/
Be sure to leave a comment if you know of other retailers making a difference for our environment.
Cheers,
Heather :)
Looks like this:
http://www.easyjet.co.uk/common/img/environment_myths_and_reality.pdf
From:
http://www.easyjet.co.uk/en/News/say_no_to_skyway_robbery.html
Should be an interesting read....
-----------
Author's response:
Thanks for this Scatter! For some reason that particular press release did not show up on the website for me.
Definitely, as you say, interesting reading - and I must admit that I agree with Easyjet to the extent that any tax or emissions trading schemes should incentivise more efficient operations and equipment choices, rather than being merely a blanket tax on flying.
The section on non-CO2 climate effects of aviation is also worth reading - essentially they argue that the oft-quoted multiplier of 2.7 for aviation emissions, compared with a 1-1.5 multiplier for ground activities, is inaccurate - this was based on a 1999 IPCC report (Penner et al I believe). They quote Dr Keith Shine of Dept of Meteorology at Reading University as saying the IPCC report has been misrepresented.
I have just found the following from Tourism and Climate Change: Risks and Opportunities (2007), by Becken and Hay [in the interests of disclosure I should say that I used to work for the company that published this book, and was responsible for commissioning it]:
A more recent study [ than the IPCC report by Penner et al] of radiative forcing (Sausen et al. 2005) reported much lower radiative forcing from contrails compared with the earlier estimates by the IPCC; however, the study also pointed out that the effect of induced cirrus clouds could be much larger than anticipated. The authors concluded that knowledge on aircraft-induced clouds is still very poor.
The same book puts aviation emissions at 3.5% of global emissions, though my quick skim just now failed to find the source, rather than the 1.6% given by Easyjet in this report (from the Stern report). Either way, I am no expert but while I would fully expect Easyjet to downplay aviation emissions, and am not sure we should take all of their assertions at face value, I am pleased to see them taking a pro-active stance in terms of suggesting systems for accounting for GHG emissions that incentivize cleaner operations, rather than a simple blanket disincentive for flying. Beats the combative stance taken by Ryanair...
"Beats the combative stance taken by Ryanair..."
Absolutely! They’ve definitely made some good points here though. I also agree with their taxation proposals but I disagree strongly with their assertion that aviation is overtaxed. Irrespective of the per pax km emissions, aviation enables you to fly many thousands of kilometres in hours and if you’re doing that at very low cost then it becomes very easy to build up your carbon footprint.
Unsurprisingly they've been very selective with the facts (especially the comparison with the Virgin Voyager which was very disingenuous – average CO2 emissions from rail in the UK are around 60g/km). They’ve also selectively quoted positive organisations (like Tyndall) and reports (like the RSSB report) to make them look like they back them up.
It remains to be seen whether the emissions savings from future aircraft designs can be achieved. They compare aircraft from the 1960s with aircraft from today but can something similar really be achieved again? BWB aircraft have that potential but they are a long way off and will require the complete redesign of all international airports.
But the most important thing is that just a year ago this kind of report wouldn’t even have been a twinkle in the author’s eye. The pressure is working!
---------
Author's comment:
Agreed. Any report from an industry group like this (or anti aviation pressure group for that matter!) is likely to include some clever cherry picking of research that supports their case. And yes, their predictions of 50% cuts in emissions by 2015 definitely seem like the very far end of what is possible - most reports I've seen predict much smaller gains. Still, you are right that it is great to see it being addressed, and their recommendations on how the burden of taxation/ETS/ whatever method is used to price CO2 are spot on in my book - whether they are right about the overall level of that taxation is another matter.
Your point about aviation enabling longer distances to be travelled is also a relevant one. Even if the emissions are comparible to a Prius, how the heck am I going to drive 3000 miles in 8 hours in a Prius??!!! Efficiency is not everything - ultimately reductions in overall emissions must be the goal, not emissions per passianger/km, or per unit of GDP, or whatever else.
huh ^ that was me^. typekey must have logged me out
Nice, but I think this is more a strategic move to indirectly attack the other companies. Easyjet have a fairly new fleet of planes as far as I know, and don't do private jets.
They have a point though.
But I'm still going to use trains and busses rather than planes.