60 Reasons to Protest: Reason #5 – Noise reductions = Emission reductions
The AFR reports that Qantas and Virgin are set to fly below the tougher “safeguard mechanism” emission caps proposed by the Albanese government, meaning the airlines won’t even need to buy extra carbon offsets. That’s bad for the climate and bad for us wanting net noise reductions. Why?
Let’s look at the common ground between achieving net noise reductions and net emission reductions. The Royal Society released a policy briefing on 28 February 2023 on “Net zero aviation fuels: resource requirements and environmental impacts.”
It concluded that:
(Source)
- Availability and accessibility of sustainable feedstock for all options is a key challenge.
- Further R&D will be needed in the development of the efficient production, storage and use of green hydrogen, ammonia and efuels.
- Further development of LCAs of all alternative aviation fuels is required which will be critical in clarifying emissions across the entire cycle and highlighting key mitigation opportunities.
- R&D is required to understand and mitigate the non-CO2 climate impacts of all the alternative fuel options.
- A holistic approach with regards to alternative fuel and engine and airframe development will be needed.
- Considerations will have to be made on handling multiple technologies both in the airport and aircraft.
- Staff and crew will need specialised training on handling alternative fuels, and the public will need to be informed about the relevant safety concerns within the airport and aircraft.
Protest reason #24 looked at the widespread greenwashing that is being done by the aviation industry. We highlighted that the aviation industry’s greenwashing regularly relies on techno-fixes such as “Sustainable Aviation Fuel” (SAF). There are many issues with relying on SAF as a way to make aviation climate neutral, e.g. insufficient production capacity; environmental concerns; not addressing indirect aviation emissions such as nitrogen oxides, water vapour (contrails) and ultra-fine particle (soot) air pollution, and; it being simply too slow and too late. Read more about this here.
There is also an economic problem with relying solely on efficiency gains as a means to address climate change. Economists call this the Khazzoom–Brookes postulate, or Jevons Paradox, or Rebound effect. In essence:
Activity growth outpaces fuel efficiency improvements, and progress has slowed
New aircraft are up to 20% more efficient than the models they replace, but this has been insufficient to keep up with growing activity. Between 2000 and 2010 fuel efficiency improved by 2.4% per annum, and by 1.9% from 2010 to 2019, demonstrating that additional incremental improvements are becoming more difficult. Meanwhile passenger demand grew at over 5% per year from 2000 to 2019, meaning that annual improvements are far below what is needed to align with the Net Zero Scenario.
IEA (2022), Aviation, International Energy Agency, Paris.
What we need are net reductions
Net reductions are good for reducing noise AND emissions. Several countries have implemented various measures to curb noise AND carbon emissions from the aviation industry. Here are some genuine measures that have been adopted internationally to achieve net reductions in flight noise and emissions:
- Noise-Based Landing Charges: Airports in certain countries charge airlines landing fees based on the noise levels generated by aircraft. This measure incentivises airlines to use quieter and more fuel-efficient aircraft, leading to emission reductions. Not so in Australia…
- Banning Short-Haul Flights: Some countries have started banning short-haul flights (typically those with alternative modes of transportation) to reduce noise and emissions. The rationale behind this measure is that trains or other low-emission modes of transport can serve as viable alternatives for relatively short distances. By discouraging short-haul flights, countries aim to lower emissions and promote more sustainable transportation options. Not so in Australia – we are introducing new short-haul flight routes to be operated by air taxis…
- Restricting or Banning Private Jets: Private jets are known for their higher carbon emissions per passenger compared to commercial flights. Some countries have implemented measures to restrict or ban private jets in order to reduce noise and emissions. This involves implementing stricter regulations on private jet operations, limiting their access to certain airports, or imposing higher fees or taxes on private jet travel.
- Movement Caps: They are designed to control the growth of air traffic and limit the environmental impact of airports both in terms of noise and emissions. By setting a maximum number of flight movements, the aim is to ensure that the airport’s capacity aligns with community, environmental and sustainability goals. Find out more…
- Alternative Transport Infrastructure: Investing in alternative transport infrastructure, such as high-speed rail networks, can provide viable alternatives to short-haul flights. By improving intercity connectivity, countries can reduce the demand for domestic flights, resulting in emission reductions. Not so in Australia…
Do you want to know more?
Register for the BFPCA protest:
Discuss this in the BFPCA Facebook group:
