Reducing airline's climate impact

Airlines can differentiate themselves, and consumers can select airlines, based on a number of ethical issues. For example, consumers might express their displeasure for a country by boycotting its national airline. This article confines itself to the issue of climate change. Potential air travellers might respond to the issue of climate change by travelling less and/or by using other modes of transport which are perceived as being more efficient (such as rail). This article further confines itself to the steps being taken by some airlines to offer services that are more ‘climate friendly’ and the response of consumers to those services.

Three approaches to climate change

Air travel is suspected of contributing significantly to climate change through a number of mechanisms (not just greenhouse gas emissions). Individual airlines and air travellers are currently utilizing/exploring three approaches to reduce their impact on climate:

• Carbon offsetting: Paying others to achieve a counterbalancing effect on climate through activities outside the air transport sector. Note that the effectiveness of carbon offsetting is criticised.
• Reducing air travel’s consumption of fossil fuels (air travel’s contribution to well-mixed greenhouse gases is completely dominated by the emission of carbon dioxide from burning fossil-derived aviation fuels^[1],[2]). Two ways in which this can be done are:
  • Improve fuel efficiency.
  • Use a biofuel: This has some effect only if the biofuel has lower full-life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions.

Carbon offsetting

Independent of airline

Carbon offsetting organizations emerged into the mainstream in the latter half of the 1990s^[3]. Today there are a large number of such organizations that passengers can use to offset a flight. Their products differ in method used to determine impact on climate, method used to offset impact on climate, price, and so on. Kollmuss and Bowell have compiled a review of the organizations and their products^[4]. In recent years, the quantity of offsets sold has grown rapidly but the fraction of flights that are offset in this way remains negligible^[5] (and this is despite the fact that the cost of an offset is typically of order only 1% of the cost of an airfare^[6]).

Through airline

Voluntary participation

Airlines can offer carbon offsets to their passengers (in such a program, passengers that wish to participate pay the airline an additional charge — the airline then uses the money to purchase appropriate offsets for the passenger’s flight from a carbon offsetting organization). British Airways was the first major airline to establish such a program (in September 2005)^[7],[8]. Initially British Airways kept its program largely hidden from its passengers, resulting in very low passenger participation. This was later criticised by the British government^[9]. Since then many more airlines have introduced offset programs. For example, in June 2007 Delta Air Lines became the first major U.S. airline to introduce such a program^[10]. Airlines have also become much more aggressive at marketing their programs to passengers. For example, since September 2007, passengers booking flights over the internet or telephone with Jetstar Airways have been required to specify whether or not they wish to purchase offsets for their flight^[11]. With this approach, JetStar has secured approximately 10% passenger participation^[12],[13] (JetStar’s offsets typically add approximately 1% to the price of the airfare^[14]). British Airways also adopted this approach (in January 2008)^[8]. Virgin Atlantic has (since November 2007) promoted its offset program while in flight^[15]. Virgin America has (since January 2009), done the same thing using its inflight entertainment system^[16].

Mandatory participation

^[17]

References