The report is produced by T&E, an activist group. So I expected the report to be unreliable and/or very misleading. I have therefore read it with great interest, and that expectation is fulfilled.
The press release that presented the report opens -big surprise- with a bold and very alarmist statement:
Tansport & Environment
“Europe’s aviation industry plans to double its passenger traffic by 2050 and will deplete its carbon budget as early as 2026, a new study by green group T&E (Transport & Environment) shows. Policy makers must act rapidly to address airport growth, frequent flying and under-taxation of the sector.”
Press release, T&E, januari 13th 2025
What it really says
But anyone who actually reads the report will soon discover that it contains mainly disinformation.
To start with, the sector does not want to double air traffic. The sector simply projects that this will be society’s need for flight connections:
“We base our projections for passenger traffic from EU airports on growth estimates from Airbus and Boeing’s market outlooks. According to their respective forecasts, EU passenger traffic is expected to grow at an annual rate of approximately 5.7% and 5.6% in the initial years (up to 2027 for Airbus and 2033 for Boeing), followed by a more moderate long-term growth rate of 2.6% and 2.5% through 2043.”
T&E, Down to earth, pag. 7
Smokescreen
Furthermore, after you blow away all the smokescreen pages, it turns out that the Carbon Budget mainly shows that aviation – and certainly European aviation – is almost irrelevant for the depletion of that budget. In the worst-case scenario the remaining budget is 150 Gt CO₂. And, as the report states, the emissions of European aviation are about 0.15 Gt CO₂ per year:
“Between 2023 and 2050, European aviation is projected to emit (…) an average of 144 Mt to 158 Mt of CO2 per year.”
T&E, down to earth, pag. 16
(my addition: 150 Mt = 0,15 Gt)
(…)
“To limit global warming to 1.5°C, 1.7°C and 2.0°C respectively with a 67% probability, the updated estimates of the global remaining carbon budget as of early 2023 are 150 Gt CO₂, 500 Gt CO₂ and 950 Gt CO₂.”
Global total emissions were -according to one of the sources of the T&E ‘report’- about 50 Gt CO₂e per year over the past ten years:
Forster et al
“Average GHG emissions for the decade 2012–2021 were 54 ± 5.3 GtCO2e. Average decadal GHG emissions have increased steadily since the 1970s across all major groups of GHGs, driven primarily by increasing CO2 emissions from fossil fuel and industry but also rising emissions of CH4 and N2O.”
P. M. Forster et al.: Indicators of Global Climate Change 2022, pag. 2299
The real problem
That means that in three years the carbon budget will be depleted – so, in 2026 as the starting point in this study was 2023 – and that the contribution of European aviation would have been 0.45 Gt CO₂. Thus 0.3%. Probably not quite the biggest problem.
What really is a big problem – T&E rightly states – is the availability of sufficient emission-free electricity. Which is not only needed for aviation, but for the entire energy transition. So let’s concentrate on tackling that problem instead of spreading unhelpful disinformation about aviation.
By the way, the disinformation about the influence of aviation on the Carbon Budget started six years ago. Initiated by another activist group, but otherwise virtually unchanged and -apparently- unchallenged. See the post: ‘New York Times Tackled‘.
Also, activists often use percentages as a tool to spread disinformation. See for instance the post ‘Bloomberg’s Blooper‘. They are helped by the fact that quite a few people are not very good at math or are reluctant to do the math. Some people also do not really know what a percentage actually is. In any case, whenever a percentage pops up, it is always wise to ask: percentage of what.