The U.S. should file a formal complaint under the treaty that created the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to gain relief from Europe’s unpopular emissions trading scheme (ETS) for aircraft, representatives of the aviation industry told sympathetic lawmakers March 28 in Washington, D.C.
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.”
Europe’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) not only has many international airlines and governments concerned, but now even at least one of the world’s two biggest OEMs has joined the chorus of protest after China blocked a sale of Airbus A380s to Hong Kong Airlines.
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.
Unless it is renegotiated and resolved, the European Union’s emissions trading scheme (ETS) may degenerate and lead to far-reaching damage to the traveling public and trade relations between countries, according to Andrew Herdman, director general of the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines (AAPA).
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.
The European Business Aviation Association (EBAA) has urged the European Commission (EC) to correct what it views as anti-competitive aspects of its controversial emissions trading scheme (ETS). Unlike NBAA in the U.S., which has joined calls for ETS to be abandoned altogether for non-European operators, the European group supports ETS “as part of a multi-pronged approach to mitigating the rise of carbon emissions,” but is calling on the EC to ensure “fair and equitable implementation.”