Better Transport

Let's separate aviation myths from aviation facts.

Myths:

• Aviation is just 2% of global CO2 emissions
• Cheap flights are helping poorer people fly more
• We can expand airports and tackle climate change
• The industry is building super quiet / green planes
• Airport expansion is necessary for UK businesses to thrive
• A cut in flights would harm the economy

Myth: Aviation is just 2% of global CO2 emissions

Fact: This isn’t far from the truth, but that ignores the fact that most of the world isn’t flying. Aviation was 2% of global CO2 emissions in the late 1990s, but has been growing at an alarming rate ever since, as more and more countries are encouraging airport expansion and short-haul flights.

But it’s not just the CO2 that we have to worry about. Aircraft emit a wide variety of gases right into the atmosphere, many of which contribute to global warming. To work out the full greenhouse impact of flying – including all these other gases and the effect of emissions at altitude, you have to multiply its CO2 emissions by around 2.7.

Even if aviation is not yet a global problem, it’s a massive problem in the UK. Per capita, the British population flies more than any that of other country on Earth. That’s why aviation is 13% of the UK’s climate impact (which includes the ‘radiative forcing’ factor).

Myth: Cheap flights are helping poorer people to fly for the first time

Fact: It's the wealthiest people who are benefiting from the growth in aviation. The average annual household income of Stansted passengers is £47,000, and low-skilled people and people on benefits, despite making up a quarter of the population, only took 6% of the flights. Meanwhile the top quarter of the population took almost half of all flights.

75% of those who use budget airlines are in social classes A, B and C, while people with second homes abroad take an average of six return flights a year. And while air travel has been getting progressively cheaper over the last decade, the cost of bus travel – the most common mode of public transport for the poorest 25% - has increased 24% in real terms.

Myth: We can expand airports and tackle climate change

Fact: Not according to the UK’s top climate scientists we can’t. The Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research predicts that the UK’s aviation emissions alone could exceed the government’s target for the country’s entire output of greenhouse gases in 2050 by up to 134%.

The Government’s preferred solution is the European Emissions Trading Scheme, where the industry would be given a carbon limit and have to buy credits if it couldn’t reduce its emissions enough. Not only will the ETS not come into play until 2012, but it will also allow the aviation industry to expand further and increase emissions unchecked. Many are already predicting that the aviation ETS will to be a disaster, with a WWF report warning of massive windfalls for airlines, and MEPs concerned that under the ETS, the industry will continue to grow massively: by 78% instead of 83%.

Myth: The industry is building super quiet / green planes

Fact: There are lots of prototypes being talked about, but not a lot of action. Most airlines have replaced their fleets fairly recently, and planes tend to stay in use for at least two or three decades. Martin Broughton, Chairman of British Airways, admitted in a speech to the Aviation Club that the airlines' fuel efficiency gains "are likely to be outweighed by future growth".

This is confirmed by the Royal Commission, which reports that "the basic gas turbine design emerged in 1947. It has been the dominant form of aircraft engine for some 50 years and there is no serious suggestion that this will change in the foreseeable future." There aren’t even any renewable options available; according to the Government’s renewable energy paper, "there are not expected to be safe, commercially viable options for renewable energy in aviation by 2020."

Myth: Airport expansion is necessary for UK businesses to thrive

Fact: The Government could reduce the need for business flights by improving alternatives like teleconferencing and rail travel. We recently surveyed 11 companies from a wide range of sectors; all of them said that teleconferencing is convenient, can save time and money, enables greater control over time and is less stressful than air travel, and can enhance an organisation’s corporate image.

We also found that business people prefer rail travel to flying, finding train tickets more flexible than plane tickets, stations easier to access and less stressful than airports, and trains more comfortable than planes. Crucially train travel allows travellers to make more productive use of their time than plane travel. And contrary to many people’s beliefs, trains can compete strongly on both cost and punctuality.

In 2006, 36% of take-offs and landings at UK airports were for domestic flights. If people could choose rail instead of these flights, it would greatly reduce the need for airport expansion.

By improving rail travel and working with businesses to promote teleconferencing, the Government could reduce flights while helping businesses to thrive.

Myth: A cut in flights would harm the economy

Fact: Right now we have a £17 billion tourism deficit, thanks to UK residents spending more money abroad than foreign visitors bring in. For every £1 an overseas visitor spends in the UK, a UK resident spends £2.32 abroad. A cut in flights would improve this situation. It would also reduce road congestion around airports and increase house prices, as the constant roar of aircraft noise lowers house prices by up to 10%.