BA Whistleblower Reveals Tankering of Fuel - BBC
If you truly wanted to save some fuel, how about banning duty free carriage on board and have it picked up at destination? Some items must get flown around the world for hundreds or thousands of hours before being sold.
I occasionally do a tankering flight but it is often to destinations where fuel supply is intermittent as well as expensive. As others have said, there are sound operational reasons for doing so sometimes and if we want to be serious, reducing holding delays and taxi times at busy airfields is much lower hanging fruit and is a win in all respects...
I occasionally do a tankering flight but it is often to destinations where fuel supply is intermittent as well as expensive. As others have said, there are sound operational reasons for doing so sometimes and if we want to be serious, reducing holding delays and taxi times at busy airfields is much lower hanging fruit and is a win in all respects...
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 68
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a load. Amazing how so many punters feel the need to comment on something they know nothing about. Here’s the news flash; All airlines have tankering policies !?!? Shocking isn’t it? Say you’re operating Sydney - Alice Springs. Alice Springs is in the middle of nowhere and JetA1 is extortionately expensive AND in limited supply. Of course you tanker fuel. You’re an idiot if you don’t. And much does it cost to transport fuel to the Alice in the first place ? Are you going to volunteer to pay a surcharge to NOT tanker ? People really need to get a grip on what they get outraged by.
Last edited by George Glass; 11th Nov 2019 at 11:08.
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Prague
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think those who dismiss the environmental effects of tankering outright are a bit short-sighted. I am a bit tired of the standard response "this is such a small issue. It makes very little difference in the grand scheme of things". Maybe true. But all the little areas where we waste resources combined do make a big difference. It's like every industry saying: "We only contribute x% to worldwide carbon emissions. Again, true, but if every single one of those industries cut their emissions by say 25% then the effect would be massive. And yes, Human consumption, animals etc emit a lot of carbon. But that should be no reason to not minimize emissions/use of finite resources were we can.
As an industry we have lot's of room for improvement without having to ban flying or making it prohibitively expensive. If, with the help of governments, we could fly optimum levels and direct routes more often, spend less time in holding and in queues for departure, and yes, perhaps had to tanker fuel less frequently, that would all help. Now, I'm sot suggesting airlines should be forced to buy expensive fuel instead of tankering, but if governments are serious about cutting emissions then maybe it should be illegal to sell fuel at such prices that economic tankering makes sense for the airline. Just a thought.
As an industry we have lot's of room for improvement without having to ban flying or making it prohibitively expensive. If, with the help of governments, we could fly optimum levels and direct routes more often, spend less time in holding and in queues for departure, and yes, perhaps had to tanker fuel less frequently, that would all help. Now, I'm sot suggesting airlines should be forced to buy expensive fuel instead of tankering, but if governments are serious about cutting emissions then maybe it should be illegal to sell fuel at such prices that economic tankering makes sense for the airline. Just a thought.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: next to sidestick
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolute nonsense. Not going to into the details of our fuel policy here, but typically we fly with a low cost index, sometimes CI=0 if we are ahead of schedule, When I joined from EZY I found both AF and EZY flew the same CI. If running late we may ask to speed up to salvage a few connections, but this is far from being the norm. Our fuel policy is in line with industry norm, but hey let’s not miss a good excuse to talk down the french or AF
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: nl
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CO2 scare
After some 30 or 40 years of climate propaganda any impact of CO2 on climate has not been shown. There is a good chance that no evidence will ever appear.
The propaganda relies completely on so called projections through unsuitable guided and tuned models.
Making the subject of this thread, the CO2 scare, somewhat silly.
The propaganda relies completely on so called projections through unsuitable guided and tuned models.
Making the subject of this thread, the CO2 scare, somewhat silly.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Esher, Surrey
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All is now resolved
British Airways reviews fuel tankering.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50365362Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Tana
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yet another no-news. When I see numbers like "same as 100,000 people in a year", I start to smell the rat. Every London bus emits enough greenhouse gas to fill the Atlantic ocean three times over. Go try to fact check this. Until news outlets like BBC are chasing "hot" stories written by bored teenagers instead of promoting proper research, this planet is doomed.
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One sided
From my experience working for a maintenance outfit at STN a few years ago, this is only part of the story. As someone said earlier in the thread, the fuel may be more expensive down route; it may also be of poor quality.
In addition airlines who pride themselves on quick (30 min) turnarounds will not be able to, as you can't refuel while pax are on board (unless the rules have changed), thus the turnaround would not be achievable.
So rather one-sided reporting in my opinion...
In addition airlines who pride themselves on quick (30 min) turnarounds will not be able to, as you can't refuel while pax are on board (unless the rules have changed), thus the turnaround would not be achievable.
So rather one-sided reporting in my opinion...
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right hand seat of a 777
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is utter garbage! Tankering has happened forever, period!
Any aviator will tell you they’ve burned more fuel than they’ve tankered in their entire career waiting at ANY holding point, at ANY airfield!
Absolute codswallop from all the snowflakes these days trying make a case!
OMAA
Absolute codswallop from all the snowflakes these days trying make a case!
OMAA
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: South East England
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Carbon Dioxide is really good stuff, we don't have enough of it. It is food for plants, which by photosynthesis release from it (and from water) the Oxygen we breathe.
The main effect of fossil fuel use has been to green the planet, feeding us and preventing famine. The effect is huge. NASA say "increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States."
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard...greening-earth
It is also worth noting that there is no scientific proof whatsoever that CO2 acts as a "greenhouse gas" in the earth's atmosphere. There is no correlation between CO2 levels and planetary temperatures.
The Medieval Warming Period was some 1.5C warmer than the current one and the Roman Warming Period as much as 4C warmer, yet their CO2 levels were lower.
However there is a correlation between Milankovitch Cycles and global temperature. These are caused by scientifically proven variation to the Earth's orbit due to the gravitational pull of the planets.
The main effect of fossil fuel use has been to green the planet, feeding us and preventing famine. The effect is huge. NASA say "increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States."
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard...greening-earth
It is also worth noting that there is no scientific proof whatsoever that CO2 acts as a "greenhouse gas" in the earth's atmosphere. There is no correlation between CO2 levels and planetary temperatures.
The Medieval Warming Period was some 1.5C warmer than the current one and the Roman Warming Period as much as 4C warmer, yet their CO2 levels were lower.
However there is a correlation between Milankovitch Cycles and global temperature. These are caused by scientifically proven variation to the Earth's orbit due to the gravitational pull of the planets.
Last edited by Eclectic; 11th Nov 2019 at 13:32.
old, not bold,
Which comes back to my contention that devising a much more co-ordinated European ATM system would pay dividends in every way for efficiency, costs, emissions and time keeping. If the ATM system worked more as a whole, rather than a set of different national systems, 'going round and round in the hold ' as you say, waiting to land could be very much reduced. Heathrow uses holding to maximise runway throughput, but it could also be done by a Europe-wide metering system to adjust arrivel times with far less holding.
BUT, this needs Europe-wide co-operation, and politicians are not very good at that unfortunately.
Which comes back to my contention that devising a much more co-ordinated European ATM system would pay dividends in every way for efficiency, costs, emissions and time keeping. If the ATM system worked more as a whole, rather than a set of different national systems, 'going round and round in the hold ' as you say, waiting to land could be very much reduced. Heathrow uses holding to maximise runway throughput, but it could also be done by a Europe-wide metering system to adjust arrivel times with far less holding.
BUT, this needs Europe-wide co-operation, and politicians are not very good at that unfortunately.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree it's not a direct consequence, but overall profitability and Income exceeding costs is what makes the industry financially sustainable (But perhaps not ecologically Sustainable!!)
But agree it is small fry!!
There is something missing from the BBC articles and that is that tankering is done to some rather surprising places. Glasgow fuel is mentioned as being 25% more expensive than Heathrow.
https://www.theguardian.com/business...ma-revelations
https://www.theguardian.com/business...ma-revelations
This thread is utter garbage! Tankering has happened forever, period!
Any aviator will tell you they’ve burned more fuel than they’ve tankered in their entire career waiting at ANY holding point, at ANY airfield!
Absolute codswallop from all the snowflakes these days trying make a case!
Absolute codswallop from all the snowflakes these days trying make a case!
Out of interest, what do you think the snowflakes at Eurocontrol stand to gain from their scaremongering ?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the BBC article:
Seems like the airline industry has introduced a matter creation scheme - burn 286,000 tonnes of fuel and get 901,000 tonnes of carbon doixide!
Eurocontrol, the body which coordinates air traffic control for Europe, has calculated that tankering in Europe resulted in 286,000 tonnes of extra fuel being burnt every year, and the emission of an additional 901,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide.
It’s very basic organic chemistry. Each carbon atom from the fuel combines with two oxygen atoms from the air meaning the resulting waste product (CO2) is much heavier than the fuel. Likewise the very light hydrogen in the fuel combines with heavier oxygen at a ratio of 2:1 making water which is also heavier than the original fuel.
2 C12H26 + 37 O2 = 24 CO2 + 26 H2O
That brought on a cold shudder!
2 C12H26 + 37 O2 = 24 CO2 + 26 H2O
That brought on a cold shudder!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If tankering becomes an issue, what about ultra long-haul? QF's Project Sunrise and similar operations will be the next target no doubt: massive fuel load, tiny payload fraction, handful of pampered pax etc etc.
Not really ..I've not checked the sums, I'm not about to, but in very very simplistic terms think of it as the combustion process "adding" atmospheric oxygen scooped up by the engine intakes to some of the carbon in fuel to produce the carbon dioxide, hence the mass increase.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about the cost of repeatedly lugging trolleys full of duty free booze and trinkets all over the world for sale on an aeroplane?
Why not ship the duty free goods once by an environmentally friendly means, and collect at your destination?
Why not ship the duty free goods once by an environmentally friendly means, and collect at your destination?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When flying in Club Europe yesterday on a certain Big Airline, the seatback pocket included 1x Highlife 1x BusinessLife 1x HighLife SHOP 1x M&S Buy on Board Menu 1x Safety Card 1x Wifi Brochure 3x sick bags. *180 seats, how many kg of mainly-unread paper are they carrying around every day?