ZERO – the travel business and the environment
Our monthly ZERO report. As this is a subscription report, the following is not the current edition.
Maybe
Clean cruising – maybe
CLIA (Cruise Lines International Association) has published the – wait for it – CLIA Global Cruise Industry Environmental Technologies and Practices Inventory. And more, an Environmental Report produced by OE*.
The OE report sums up various actions, but CLIA’s main EF move is for part of the industry (ocean-going only) to ‘pursue’ net carbon neutral cruising by 2050*. Unfortunately, ‘pursue’ means this may not happen.
CLIA adds that new climate-friendly fuels (CFF) will help, but notes that there are ‘engineering, supply, and regulatory hurdles’. Once again, this means there is no commitment.
There are more caveats:
-CLIA ‘proposes’ a US$5bn research and development fund to ‘accelerate’ the development CFFs and propulsion technologies.”
Some specific developments:
-Shore-side power. Enabling ships to connect to shore-side electricity, thus allowing ship engines to be switched off in port. However, CLIA wants ports and local authorities to help.
-82% of new ships (by capacity) will have this shore-side capability or will be able to add it later. We believe that 100% of new-builds should have this capability.
-35% of current world capacity (+2pts over 2020) has this shore-side capability, but there are only 14 ports worldwide where shore-side power is provided in at least one berth.
-52% of new ships (by capacity) will use LNG (Liquefied natural gas; different from LPG, liquefied petroleum gas; LNG is methane, LPG is propane or butane) for primary propulsion.
-76% (+7pts over 2020) of current world capacity uses EGCS (Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems) – for air emissions requirements.
-94% of non-LNG new ships (by capacity) will have EGCS installed.
-100% of new ships will have ‘advanced wastewater treatment systems’. 74% (+4pts over 2020) of current capacity (of CLIA members) have this. The effect of these systems is not quantified.
-CLIA members have committed to reduce CO2 emissions by 40% by 2030.
*Notes:
-OE = Oxford Economics, UK-based; unrelated to Oxford University.
–2050 is 30 years from now and we believe an unconvincing target, for public relations purposes only. 2030 would be a tough target, but surely 2035 is the furthest credible date?
Another mystery climate saver
We have noted many climate initiatives are vague, and many appear to be greenwashing. A new one is equally vague – but may be more valuable than it initially seems.
Noah (Network of Ocean Ambassadors Headquarters), Panama the country, WTO* have signed to ‘work together’ to implement the United Nations’ Fund for Climate Neutrality of Tourism (FCNT).
Noah says it will ‘support’ a fund for the FCNT and a Smart Carbon Exchange Market (MIIC). We do not know if ‘support’ means pay money. We assume the Noah fund will give money to the FCNT, but we do not know how much and when.
Panama’s role appears superficial. The WTO reports that this agreement ‘ratifies’ Panama’s ‘climate leadership and its efforts to conserve and regenerate nature’. Quite clearly, an agreement does none of these things; action might.
WTO adds that the agreement ‘unleashes economic growth [in Panama] through tourism that benefits local communities’. Again, an agreement does not do these things, and there is no automatic link between economic growth and the environment.
Panama is one of only three carbon-negative countries – absorbing more CO2 than it emits. Others are Bhutan and Suriname. Being geographically small with a small economy helps achieve this.
The WTO wants to ‘accelerate the decarbonisation’ of the travel business. Unfortunately, the word ‘accelerate’ cancels the decarbonisation aim, as any move, no matter how small, can be described as ‘accelerating’. Nonetheless, WTO’s aim probably has some motivating value.
*Notes: WTO – World Tourism Organization, which it abbreviates to UNWTO – is a Spain-based UN-designated lobbying body for the travel business.
WTO proposes nothing – again
The WTO* has announced its ‘Glasgow Declaration for Climate Action in Tourism’ (hereafter, GDCAT) in connection at the COP26 environment meeting in that city starting last month.
As WTO issues many declarations and proposes many initiatives that, for us, have little practical value, we have sought to extract what GDCAT may mean. Some pointers:
-There is an ‘urgent need for a globally consistent plan for climate action in tourism’. ‘Globally consistent’ is grammatically meaningless, and thus we do not know what the WTO wants.
-GDCAT signatories commit to measure, decarbonise, regenerate and unlock finance. See next.
-GDCAT signatories commit to deliver a ‘climate action plan, or updated plan, within 12 months of signing’. But commitment above is (a comprehensive) plan; is that not enough?
WTO says 300 ‘tourism stakeholders’ have signed GDCAT. We do not know if ‘stakeholders’ are different from any company in the travel business. Our understanding is that any company in the industry is a ‘stakeholder’.
Members named are Accor, AITO, Asian Ecotourism Network, Barbados, Bilbao Convention Bureau, Bucuti & Tara, Cairngorms National Park, Dallas Airport, Eastern Caribbean States, European Tourism Association, Forum Anders Reisen, Future of Tourism Coalition, Global Sustainable Tourism Council, Iberostar, Innovation Norway, Intrepid Travel, Kiribati DMO, Legacy Vacation Resorts, Micronesia, Much Better Adventures, Necstour, Netherlands Association of Travel Agents, Netherlands DMO, Pacific DMO, Panama, Scotland DMO, Skyscanner, Sustainable Hospitality Alliance, The Long Run, Travalyst, World Travel & Tourism Council.
*Notes:
-WTO – World Tourism Organization, which it abbreviates to UNWTO – is a Spain-based UN-designated lobbying body for the travel business.
-At press time, we had not received an answer to our request for clarifications.
Airlines’ EF future
At its annual general meeting in October, IATA* approved a plan for airlines to achieve net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050*, which would mean eliminating 1.8 gigatons of CO2.
The plan is for 65% of the 1.8 gigatons to come from using SAFs, 13% from new engine technology such as hydrogen, 11% carbon capture and storage, 8% from offsets, 3% from efficiency improvements.
However, much is needed from companies and others that are not part of IATA. These include:
-Companies to develop ‘large scale, cost-competitive’ SAFs.
-Governments and navigation providers to ‘eliminate inefficiencies in air traffic management and airspace infrastructure’.
-Aircraft and engine manufacturers to produce ‘radically more efficient’ aircraft and engines.
-Airports to provide the infrastructure to supply SAF at cost.
IATA’s timetable:
-2025 7.9bn litres of SAF – 2% of total fuel requirement. 2030 23bn 5.2%. 2035 91bn 17%. 2040 229bn 39%. 2045 346bn 54%. 2050 449bn 65%.
-Now to 2030. Navigation providers to have introduced ICAO’s programs such as the Single European Sky. (Not included here.)
-Now to 2035. Electric and/or hydrogen aircraft available for regional routes – 50-100 seats, 30-90” flights.
-Now to 2040. Hydrogen aircraft for shorthaul routes – 100-150 seats, 45-120” flights.
*Notes:
-IATA = International Air Transport Association. Switzerland-based airlines’ trade body.
-ICAO = International Civil Aviation Organization, the United Nations body administering world aviation.
–2050 is 30 years from now and we believe an unconvincing target, for public relations purposes only. 2030 would be a tough target, but surely 2035 is the furthest credible date?
Cleaner air
From Washington Aviation Summary; comments from ZERO:
[] Abu Dhabi’s airline Etihad has raised a US$1.2bn loan linked to ESG (environmental, social and governance) targets in aviation. Lenders are First Abu Dhabi Bank and HSBC. We do not know a few important factors about this loan: whether related to world aviation EV performance or Etihad’s; purpose; period; targets.
[] Ireland-based finance company Fexco and US-based consultant Avocet have introduced a system enabling aircraft lessors, owners, and banks to track CO2 emissions from their aircraft.
[] Google Flights now shows a CO2-emissions estimate in its search results.
[] A B747 has flown four hours using 100% SAF in one of its engines; the others ran on standard fuel. The partners were Boeing, Rolls–Royce, and World Energy, which provided the fuel.
[] Delta Airlines plans to spend US$1bn to buy 950mn litres of SAF from Aemetis over 10 years starting 2024,
[] Ireland-based ASL Aviation has signed an agreement with US-based Universal Hydrogen that could make it the launch customer for a hydrogen-powered cargo ATR72.
ASL may buy 10 ATR72 conversion kits from UH for non-hydrogen aircraft. Also, it will provide an ATR72 for UH to run tests.
#environment
‘end
Foxtrots 