I am be bemused at that story. It is utter crap on the face of it. Qantas can’t plan three years down the road, let alone thirty.
It is crap, just like terminal decline, RedQ, JQ HK, JQ NZ, moving to Dubai then back to Singapore, Game changing alliances and "first" LN 615 "Dreamliners" when JQ have a fleet of them. It is crap just like "research flights" with unions excluded and all three of the flights claiming to be a "sample".
Little Napoleon is fortunate that ICAO is also big on spin, small on substance.
- The ETS has priced carbon with negligible cost impost. (Thanks ICAO)
- Doesn't start until 2027 (Thanks ICAO)
- Is only for International Airlines (Thanks ICAO)
- Airlines can continue growing ASK at around 5-6% per year (Thanks ICAO)
- From 2019 CO2 data will be collected yet strangely not disseminated (Thanks again)
Unlike the maritime industry, aviation is NOT transitioning off hydrocarbon fuel. It will be mid-century be close to the largest emitter worldwide.
Most fortunately for airlines like Qantas, it can continue to burn however much hydrocarbon fuel its aging fleet needs.
Of course the best way to actually do something would be to replace an aging four engine international fleet, where CO2 output eclipses the competitors (both on a seat and aggregate basis.)
Much better to have "aspirational puff pieces" in the daily rags claiming that in 30 years time something will be different while the "externality" of pollution is borne by others.
Spin over substance, it is the ICAO and Qantas way.