| Author (Person) | Carstens, Karen |
|---|---|
| Series Title | European Voice |
| Series Details | Vol.10, No.28, 29.7.04 |
| Publication Date | 29/07/2004 |
| Content Type | News |
|
By Karen Carstens Date: 29/07/04 THIS Autumn, the European Union will go into battle against a coalition of countries, led by the United States, over how best to combat greenhouse gas emissions from airplanes. Governments have been haggling for years over what would be the most environmentally effective and least economically damaging approach to curbing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse-gas emissions from airplanes and airports. Freed from any major restrictions so far, Europe's aviation industry has gradually come round to reading "the writing on the wall", one EU official claimed. "They know that something will happen soon - it is just a question of what," he said. Both the aviation and shipping sectors were excluded from the 1997 Kyoto climate change agreement because at the time non-stationary sources of emissions were deemed too tricky to tackle by the US and other industrialized countries. As a consequence, aviation was also excluded from the EU's carbon dioxide emissions trading scheme, which comes into effect on 1 January. Aviation accounts for around 1% of global carbon dioxide emissions, though because the greenhouse gases produced by aircraft are distributed at altitude, the effect on global warming is around three times that amount. Aviation emissions from those industrialized countries that signed up to Kyoto increased by more than 40% in 1990-2000 - double a comparable 20% figure for road transport - partly because of a boom in low-cost air travel. British airport operators in particular have been pushing for a partial integration into the EU's emissions trading system by 2008. They view this as a more agreeable alternative to kerosene fuel taxes or en route charging schemes, two other options under discussion. The European Commission suggested in its report on EU funding earlier this month that a pan-EU fuel tax for the aviation sector might serve as a source of revenue for the Union's budget. There is no such EU-wide fuel tax at present, although an October 2003 directive on energy taxation allows member states to tax kerosene on domestic flights and - on the basis of bilateral agreements - on intra-EU flights. But what use member states might make of the freedom to impose tax on aviation fuel is still unclear, especially as the scope to tax all carriers may be constrained by existing "open skies" air service agreements with third countries such as the US. The Commission wants provisions requiring the mandatory exemption from tax to be removed from air-service agreements when they are renegotiated. Until a single "open skies" agreement exists between the EU and US, a single EU aviation fuel tax would be problematic, if not impossible. Talks on such a transatlantic agreement are not expected to resume until after the US presidential elections in November. However, before that, comes the next general assembly of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), to take place in Montreal beginning on 28 September. The EU's aim at ICAO is to get other countries to agree to allow it to move forward. "We will push to defend our right to do something," a Commission official said. But a letter addressed to ICAO's president last month, signed by 22 countries including the US, Russia and Canada, suggested that further action should be made contingent upon new global guidelines being hammered out by ICAO's environment committee. This has led to concern, according to one EU official, that such stalling tactics could prevent Brussels from moving forward. "We're not even trying to impose anything on other [ICAO] member states," he said. Forging ahead at global level through ICAO with market-based measures including emissions trading and emissions levies (taxes or charges) has already proved problematic. Margot Wallström has suggested the EU may have to "go it alone". "I cannot hide my disappointment with the slow progress that has been made within ICAO on climate change," the environment commissioner said in a speech last autumn, adding that "we cannot wait forever". But tying the sector into the EU's emissions trading scheme would not be easy. It could distort competition if only European carriers were affected, begging the question of how to treat international flights. ICAO's rules governing international air traffic would provide a solid legal basis for the EU to use to defend a position of including all carriers, the EU official said. Another question that needs to be settled is where the burden of enforcement should fall - the airline's country of origin, or its destination. From September, the Commission will be conducting an impact assessment to be completed by next Spring to help streamline the debate, an official from the environment department said. "The Commission is not committing itself yet to a single instrument," he added, though he saw some advantages to the emissions trading option as "there is a scheme that will already be in place". Tying the aviation sector into this scheme would only require a qualified majority vote in the Council of Ministers. Imposing a mandatory EU-wide fuel tax, on the other hand, would require unanimity - and would likely be vetoed by the UK or other member states that might favour emissions trading. In the meantime, the EU plans to go into the ICAO meeting "keeping all options on the table", a Dutch presidency spokesman said. "This is not yet about a choice of direction," the spokesman added. A Commission's official said that it was too early to tell whether the aviation sector will be tied into the emissions trading regime, or subject to taxes, or even a mix of these options. But he stressed that the status quo is not an option. |
|
| Source Link | Link to Main Source http://www.european-voice.com/ |
| Related Links |
|
| Subject Categories | Environment, Mobility and Transport |
