Europe Seeks to Impose Airline Emission Controls
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Europe Seeks to Impose Airline Emission Controls
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/wo...in&oref=slogin
PARIS, Nov. 14 — In a move to raise the stakes in global environmental policy, the European Commission said Tuesday that it would seek to impose emissions controls on all flights in and out of Europe, according to a draft of a proposed law.
The proposed policy could drive a wedge between Europe and its trading partners, who are wary that the push for tighter standards could mean higher costs for carriers. The United States government, along with many airlines, favors a global system that avoids regional variations. They are likely to bristle at the prospect of a costly new regulation on carriers.
Because global agreement on emissions controls would probably take a long time to achieve, European officials are determined to push forward their own. Foreign-based carriers serving high-traffic destinations like London and Paris would be forced to operate under the new rules.
“Emissions from all flights arriving at and departing from E.U. airports should be included,” the proposed law states. The “scheme can thereby serve as a model for the expansion of the scheme worldwide,” it states.
Under the proposal, airlines would have to meet emissions targets by Jan. 1, 2011, for all flights in and out of Europe. To encourage other countries to introduce similar measures, the European Union would drop its emissions requirements covering the return leg of a round-trip flight if those countries also adopted pollutions caps for airlines.
“This European proposal is something we and our industry are watching very, very closely,” said Tim Smith, a spokesman for American Airlines in Fort Worth, Tex.
Abigail Moore, a spokeswoman for British Airways, said by e-mail message that Europe should pare the proposal to cover only flights within the union. As it stands, she said the proposal would “risk international disputes and could lead to retaliation by non-E.U. countries.”
The proposal draws from the principles of an established system that Europe now uses to help combat global warming and meet emissions targets set forth under the Kyoto Protocol. Under that plan, which has so far exempted airlines, governments allocate carbon dioxide emissions targets for producers of power, cement, fuels, pulp and paper. Companies must then purchase allocations, or credits, if they exceed those targets.
Europe is expected to make its proposals public before the new year. But the proposal is likely to face intense opposition in the United States, which could delay approval.
Stavros Dimas, the European Union’s commissioner for the environment, could also amend the proposal before Europe’s governments examine it. Opposition from industries and others is already mounting.
A poorly designed plan “could be incredibly painful to us,” said David Henderson, a spokesman for the Association of European Airlines, a lobby group based in Brussels that represents major carriers, including British Airways and Lufthansa.
“We could see another trade war,” said Mr. Henderson, who cited stiff opposition from the United States several years ago to Europe’s plan to reduce jet engine noise.
David A. Castelveter, vice president of the Air Transport Association of America, a trade group, asserted that countries outside of Europe, including the United States, “believe that unilateral imposition of emissions trading requirements absent mutual agreement between nations violates international law.”
He added, “Air carriers have dramatically improved their fuel efficiency and trading obligations are unnecessary to spur continued improvement."
In that case, Europe eventually passed a set of compromise rules based on recommendations from a global body, the International Civil Aviation Organization, easing tension with the United States.
Airline officials warn that proposed emission-control measures could mean higher costs for passengers, who already face inconveniences and delays because of increased security checks. The officials also say that aviation accounts for 2 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in Europe.
“We don’t believe it will help one bit,” said Peter Sherrard, a spokesman for the low-cost Irish carrier Ryanair, referring to the proposal. Mr. Sherrard said that other measures, like using more fuel-efficient aircraft, flying full planes, reducing the number of connecting flights, and flying additional direct routes would be more effective at cutting emissions.
But environmental advocates argue that aircraft release more harmful pollutants, compared with cars, and that the boom in low-cost carriers in Europe has added to the problem.
Barbara Helfferich, a spokeswoman for Mr. Dimas, the environmental commissioner, declined to comment on the draft ahead of presentation on or around Dec. 20.
The plan covers only carbon emissions.. But Europe also recommends separate legislation regulating another pollutant, nitrogen oxides. The amount of these pollutants could rise, even as jet engines are designed to cut down on carbon dioxide.
If governments fail to regulate nitrogen oxides through special airport charges, Europe warns that it will start charging for these pollutants, as well, by raising costs to airlines as they seek to meet their carbon allowances.
“A pragmatic and precautionary approach is required,” the draft law states. “If the climate change impact of the aviation sector continues to grow at the current rate, it would significantly undermine reductions made by other sectors to combat climate change.”
Under the proposal, airlines would buy 10 percent of their credits through an auction system for the first two years of the program; the other 90 percent would be distributed free. Then, starting in 2013, airlines would be obliged to buy 20 percent of their credits; and starting in 2018, that amount would rise to 40 percent in order to discourage airlines from selling unused credits to improve their profits.
Each European government would be responsible for managing the accounting of these emissions targets for carriers based in its country. European governments would also be given responsibility for foreign-based airlines that use their airports most frequently.
That could, for example, hand the British government responsibility over some United States carriers that heavily rely on Heathrow Airport in London, Europe’s busiest.
Ms. Moore of British Airways said Europe was dealing with the airline industry differently than it had with other industrial sectors with its plan to charge increasing amounts for emissions of carbon dioxide. “There is no justification for singling out aviation for different treatment,” she said. “Requiring an increasing proportion of allowances to be auctioned off between airlines would impose additional financial burdens for E.U. operators,” she said.
Planes belonging to foreign heads of state, monarchs, their families and the military would be exempt from the new European rules, as would planes carrying fewer than 20 people.
Planes flying through European airspace but not touching down would also be exempt.
PARIS, Nov. 14 — In a move to raise the stakes in global environmental policy, the European Commission said Tuesday that it would seek to impose emissions controls on all flights in and out of Europe, according to a draft of a proposed law.
The proposed policy could drive a wedge between Europe and its trading partners, who are wary that the push for tighter standards could mean higher costs for carriers. The United States government, along with many airlines, favors a global system that avoids regional variations. They are likely to bristle at the prospect of a costly new regulation on carriers.
Because global agreement on emissions controls would probably take a long time to achieve, European officials are determined to push forward their own. Foreign-based carriers serving high-traffic destinations like London and Paris would be forced to operate under the new rules.
“Emissions from all flights arriving at and departing from E.U. airports should be included,” the proposed law states. The “scheme can thereby serve as a model for the expansion of the scheme worldwide,” it states.
Under the proposal, airlines would have to meet emissions targets by Jan. 1, 2011, for all flights in and out of Europe. To encourage other countries to introduce similar measures, the European Union would drop its emissions requirements covering the return leg of a round-trip flight if those countries also adopted pollutions caps for airlines.
“This European proposal is something we and our industry are watching very, very closely,” said Tim Smith, a spokesman for American Airlines in Fort Worth, Tex.
Abigail Moore, a spokeswoman for British Airways, said by e-mail message that Europe should pare the proposal to cover only flights within the union. As it stands, she said the proposal would “risk international disputes and could lead to retaliation by non-E.U. countries.”
The proposal draws from the principles of an established system that Europe now uses to help combat global warming and meet emissions targets set forth under the Kyoto Protocol. Under that plan, which has so far exempted airlines, governments allocate carbon dioxide emissions targets for producers of power, cement, fuels, pulp and paper. Companies must then purchase allocations, or credits, if they exceed those targets.
Europe is expected to make its proposals public before the new year. But the proposal is likely to face intense opposition in the United States, which could delay approval.
Stavros Dimas, the European Union’s commissioner for the environment, could also amend the proposal before Europe’s governments examine it. Opposition from industries and others is already mounting.
A poorly designed plan “could be incredibly painful to us,” said David Henderson, a spokesman for the Association of European Airlines, a lobby group based in Brussels that represents major carriers, including British Airways and Lufthansa.
“We could see another trade war,” said Mr. Henderson, who cited stiff opposition from the United States several years ago to Europe’s plan to reduce jet engine noise.
David A. Castelveter, vice president of the Air Transport Association of America, a trade group, asserted that countries outside of Europe, including the United States, “believe that unilateral imposition of emissions trading requirements absent mutual agreement between nations violates international law.”
He added, “Air carriers have dramatically improved their fuel efficiency and trading obligations are unnecessary to spur continued improvement."
In that case, Europe eventually passed a set of compromise rules based on recommendations from a global body, the International Civil Aviation Organization, easing tension with the United States.
Airline officials warn that proposed emission-control measures could mean higher costs for passengers, who already face inconveniences and delays because of increased security checks. The officials also say that aviation accounts for 2 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in Europe.
“We don’t believe it will help one bit,” said Peter Sherrard, a spokesman for the low-cost Irish carrier Ryanair, referring to the proposal. Mr. Sherrard said that other measures, like using more fuel-efficient aircraft, flying full planes, reducing the number of connecting flights, and flying additional direct routes would be more effective at cutting emissions.
But environmental advocates argue that aircraft release more harmful pollutants, compared with cars, and that the boom in low-cost carriers in Europe has added to the problem.
Barbara Helfferich, a spokeswoman for Mr. Dimas, the environmental commissioner, declined to comment on the draft ahead of presentation on or around Dec. 20.
The plan covers only carbon emissions.. But Europe also recommends separate legislation regulating another pollutant, nitrogen oxides. The amount of these pollutants could rise, even as jet engines are designed to cut down on carbon dioxide.
If governments fail to regulate nitrogen oxides through special airport charges, Europe warns that it will start charging for these pollutants, as well, by raising costs to airlines as they seek to meet their carbon allowances.
“A pragmatic and precautionary approach is required,” the draft law states. “If the climate change impact of the aviation sector continues to grow at the current rate, it would significantly undermine reductions made by other sectors to combat climate change.”
Under the proposal, airlines would buy 10 percent of their credits through an auction system for the first two years of the program; the other 90 percent would be distributed free. Then, starting in 2013, airlines would be obliged to buy 20 percent of their credits; and starting in 2018, that amount would rise to 40 percent in order to discourage airlines from selling unused credits to improve their profits.
Each European government would be responsible for managing the accounting of these emissions targets for carriers based in its country. European governments would also be given responsibility for foreign-based airlines that use their airports most frequently.
That could, for example, hand the British government responsibility over some United States carriers that heavily rely on Heathrow Airport in London, Europe’s busiest.
Ms. Moore of British Airways said Europe was dealing with the airline industry differently than it had with other industrial sectors with its plan to charge increasing amounts for emissions of carbon dioxide. “There is no justification for singling out aviation for different treatment,” she said. “Requiring an increasing proportion of allowances to be auctioned off between airlines would impose additional financial burdens for E.U. operators,” she said.
Planes belonging to foreign heads of state, monarchs, their families and the military would be exempt from the new European rules, as would planes carrying fewer than 20 people.
Planes flying through European airspace but not touching down would also be exempt.
