Thursday, May 15, 2008
One airline is taking climate change very seriously. Will others follow suit? Plus: What to do with all that on-board trash?
Feb 29, 2008 | Last week we looked at the fact and fallacy of aircraft emissions and their effect on the environment. In summary, commercial planes account for only about 5 percent of the world's total greenhouse gas pollutants, and are a lot more fuel-efficient than people give them credit for. However, the rapid growth of civil aviation will drastically increase the industry's contributions of climate-changing emissions; by the middle of the century, assuming carbon emissions from other sources are curtailed, aviation could be the single biggest contributor to climate change.
First, the obvious question: The efficiency of modern engines notwithstanding, considering that the airlines are so beholden to oil prices, why has there not been a stronger push for alternative fuels or new propulsion systems?
There's no good answer, I'm afraid. To be fair, the same can be asked about postindustrial society as a whole. Rising fuel costs affect a lot more than just airlines, and the dangers of long-term reliance on fossil fuels are well known. If you ask me, there is no technical or strategic reason for the lack of efforts; it's merely symptomatic of our larger malaise when it comes to energy policy. We're entrenched. Not that research isn't taking place. Boeing and others are looking into hydrogen fuel-cell technology, for instance, but any widespread application will be many years away.
And not that some carriers -- one in particular -- aren't taking climate change very seriously. That'd be Virgin Atlantic. The London-based airline has announced a $3 billion investment in renewable-energy initiatives, and promises to someday power its entire fleet using biofuel. Virgin Fuel is the entity created by Virgin's chairman, Sir Richard Branson, who hopes to produce and market aviation biofuel worldwide. (The environmental benefits of some types of biofuel are themselves questionable, and there are numerous technical complications that need to be overcome. I wonder if Virgin Fuel will prove more popular than the ill-fated Virgin Cola.)
In the meantime, Branson believes that global airline emissions can be reduced by up to 25 percent in as little as two years. A major step toward this goal, he argues, would be the optimizing of air traffic control (ATC) routes. Currently, more than 30 separate ATC organizations control flights over Europe, a setup that Branson rightly describes as a "mess." According to the International Air Transport Association, traffic delays in Europe account for a quarter-million hours of extra flight per year. Branson advocates a simpler, unified agency to better coordinate flights, shortening flight times and reducing fuel use.
That dovetails with his push for the widespread use of "continuous descent approaches," a technique whereby aircraft essentially glide to a landing from cruise altitude rather than face a series of inefficient step-down descents and speed changes. Aircraft burn considerably more fuel at lower altitudes, and allowing a constant gradient descent at a low power setting would save thousands of pounds of fuel per flight.
Another of Branson's big ideas is the use of "starting grids" at major airports. Basically, under the plan, aircraft would be towed to starting positions close to the runway instead of taxiing in lengthy conga lines with their engines running, which would greatly reduce on-the-ground fuel burn and subsequent emissions.
These are all good ideas, if not entirely practicable. The grids proposal works in theory, I guess, but among other problems it would require a major redesign of many airports. It's a large-scale concept for a small part of the overall problem. Similarly, for continuous descent approaches to become commonplace, massive changes in ATC procedures would be required.
But the flamboyant Branson is a man who has never met an overly ambitious idea he didn't like, and he has succeeded with many of them. "With global warming," says Sir Richard, "the world is heading for a catastrophe." How many airline CEOs would have the gumption to admit such a thing?
Virgin has meanwhile implemented a long list of smaller-scale initiatives, including using lighter paint on its aircraft, replacing metal cargo bins with lightweight composite ones, and installing lighter cabin furnishings.
All good, but while Virgin is a high-profile carrier, with fewer than 40 aircraft it's a fraction the size of its chief competitors -- British Airways (235 planes), for example, or any of the American majors. These sorts of initiatives are carried out more easily on a small platform, but perhaps, in time, one of the megacarriers will become similarly engaged.
Speaking of small platforms, kudos to Nature Air, a Costa Rican domestic carrier that proudly claims to be the planet's only carbon-neutral airline. Over the past four years, Nature Air says it has offset more than 10,000 tons of carbon emissions through green investments and reforestation efforts in its home country.
Several airlines, including Virgin and Delta, allow passengers to purchase inexpensive offsets when booking their reservations online. Delta was the first U.S. airline to offer such an option. Travelers may contribute $5.50 for a domestic round-trip flight, or $11 for international round-trip flights, with proceeds going to the Conservation Fund. (Together with the Conservation Fund, Delta has committed to planting more than 47,000 trees -- one for each of its employees -- in protected areas along the U.S. Gulf Coast.)
Or, for a small fee, third-party organizations like Climate Care and GreenSeat will offset the estimated C02 of your journey, investing the money in sustainable energy projects around the world.
Get Salon in your mailbox!
