While business aircraft operators tear their hair out trying to comply with the European Union’s controversial emissions trading scheme, the issue is threatening to escalate into a full-blown trade war. But an EBACE panel on ETS here in Geneva yesterday heard that the EU appears to have no intention in backing down, with the discussion underscoring the vast gulf between the aims of the carbon cap-and-trade policy and the realities of compliance.
European Union Emission Trading Scheme
Many business aviation operators could lose their livelihoods because of political tussles between the European Union (EU) and the rest of the world, especially over the EU emissions trading scheme (ETS). This was the clear message underpinning the opening general session of EBACE 2012 yesterday, when a panel of EU regulators joined Fabio Gamba, CEO of the European Business Aviation Association (EBAA), and Ed Bolen, president of the U.S.
EBAA CEO Fabio Gamba and NBAA president and CEO Ed Bolen gave a panel of European regulators an earful about the EU Emissions Trading Scheme this morning at the EBACE 2012 opening general session. The EU officials included Matthew Baldwin, the European Commission’s director for aviation and transport policy; Marian Jean Marinescu, a member of the European Parliament; and Salvatore Sciacchitano, executive secretary of the European Civil Aviation Conference.
Gulfstream Aerospace senior flight operations technical specialist Leo McStravick testified at a House aviation subcommittee meeting yesterday to express the business aviation community’s opposition to the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS). In addition to imposing a costly administrative burden on businesses flying from the U.S. to European destinations, McStravick noted that EU-ETS is discriminatory because businesses that use general aviation are not eligible for carbon offsets, as they are not defined as “commercial.”
Critics vented frustration with Europe’s emissions trading scheme (ETS) during the FAA Forecast Conference March 8 in Washington, D.C. Leading the chorus of criticism, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood hinted that the U.S. government is considering “enforcement measures” to counter the European Union regulati
Operators flying in Europe can expect overall charges such as airspace and airport fees (including noise tariffs) to double when European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS) costs are added in for transatlantic flights. According to a preliminary report obtained last month by AIN from UK-based EU-ETS consultants SustainAvia, a U.S. Part 91 corporate flight department flying 15 round trips per year from New York JFK to Munich Airport in a Gulfstream G450 could pay nearly $35,000 annually in EU-ETS fees. That comes to more than $2,300 in extra costs per round trip to Europe.
Sometimes the simplest solution is the best, but good luck getting politicians on board when the subject involves the emissions trading scheme (ETS), which was implemented by the European Union on January 1.
A U.S. Part 91 corporate flight department flying a Gulfstream G450 could pay nearly $35,000 annually to comply with the European Union Emission Trading Scheme (EU-ETS), according to a preliminary report released exclusively to AIN by UK-based EU-ETS consultants SustainAvia.
Asian air transport industry leaders yesterday signaled European Commission vice president Siim Kallas that they will step up their war against the European Union’s emissions trading scheme (ETS). But Kallas held firm, telling the Singapore Airshow’s Aviation Leadership Summit that while the EU is willing to negotiate over how ETS applies to airlines outside Europe, it will do so only on its own terms and is in no hurry to give ground.
Even as the EU-ETS officially takes effect for air transport, it remains under fire politically and legally from almost every direction. The U.S., China, India, Russia and numerous other states have all made high-level protests against the cap-and-trade system–in some cases backing these up with thinly veiled threats of economic sanctions against the European Union, if it refuses to back down in its insistence on imposing ETS on operators from outside Europe.