by
How do we process your data?
We use cookies to improve your browsing experience and personalize our content. They are mainly used for statistical purposes.
“Why should we deny ourselves something when others have been able to enjoy it without limit before us?” When it comes to environmental issues, if there’s ONE topic that really brings tensions to a head as the holidays approach, it’s air travel.
A few days ago, Climate Action Network published a report a fascinating story that puts the church back at the heart of the village: “How can we reduce air traffic in a fair and effective way?”. In response to advocates of air travel and technosolutionism, the association has presented 55 pages of statistical data to explain why, but also how reduce air traffic in France. Most importantly, it evaluates nine concrete measures and debunks a few common misconceptions along the way! We'll explain everything to you.
By the way, Who are the people who fly, and where are they going? ? By painting a sociological portrait of French passengers, the study debunks the most widespread clichés. This gives us some talking points for the next heated debates with friends.
One might think that the rise of companies Low Cost has made it possible for less affluent families to travel more often. However, here's the first surprise: flights Low Cost did not lead to more people flying, but they did lead those who were already flying to do so even more often.
The study we learn that French people who fly are mainly affluent, urban residents (a resident of the Paris region is twice as likely as a resident of a rural area to fly, all other things being equal), often senior executives, traveling for leisure. In other words, “Air travel is really more for wealthy city dwellers going on vacation””.
Source: © Climate Action Network - “How Can We Reduce Air Traffic in a Fair and Effective Way?”
Another key figure from the study: Leisure flights account for 75% of CO2 emissions from French people who fly!
Business flights, on the other hand, rank only second on the podium (tied (including family flights), which weigh “that” for 13% greenhouse gas emissions.
We also learn that business flights are mostly taken by affluent individuals—primarily men in their forties—while family flights are taken by lower-income households to visit relatives abroad.
On this subject, the numbers are undeniable: Most greenhouse gas emissions are caused by long-haul flights.
Thus, even though long-haul flights (i.e., outside France, Europe, and North Africa) account for only 20% of all flights, they are responsible for more than 55% of the aviation sector's carbon footprint !
Conversely, while flights to metropolitan France (11%), Europe (26%), and the Maghreb (8%) account for three-quarters of all flights, they are responsible for less than half of the emissions.
The study’s conclusion: if we are serious about decarbonizing the aviation industry, We can't ignore long-haul flights…
Source: © Climate Action Network - “How Can We Reduce Air Traffic in a Fair and Effective Way?”
Technological solutions (such as biofuels, for example) are, of course, useful and welcome, and they offer hope. But according to the organization, they won’t be enough. And here’s why.
It already exists for flying clubs and is being deployed by the aviation industry on very short routes (a few hundred kilometers; the weight of the batteries currently prevents flights over longer distances). The problem is that these short routes—as we have seen— “that a very small portion of the sector’s emissions”. And most importantly, there’s already an efficient train alternative available on many of these routes in France!
It could eventually decarbonize some short- and medium-haul flights. The problem is that it currently relies on “many technological ventures” which cast doubt on its future. And even in the most optimistic scenario, it would not be fully deployed until after 2050! As a result, this technology is not being considered for long-haul flights, which account for 60% of the aviation sector’s carbon footprint in France.
They can be blended with kerosene, so they do not require new equipment, and they can be produced at reasonable costs. The problem is that biomass is limited and is already being used or sought after by other sectors, “which raises issues of competition for land use (fertilization of farmland, heat production from biomass, etc.)”” ! Furthermore, given France’s target of 5% biofuels by 2030, the impact on CO2 emissions from the aviation sector will remain modest in the coming years.
They can certainly have a positive impact on the climate (“provided that the necessary CO2 is biogenic or captured directly from the air”). The problem: overall efficiency is low, so the amount of electricity required is enormous. “According to Lufthansa’s CEO, it would take 50% of Germany’s electricity production to convert its entire fleet to synthetic fuels. Without a reduction in air traffic, it seems unrealistic to develop sufficient production capacity, especially since the industrial infrastructure does not yet exist,” the study points out.
In this context, if we are to comply with the Paris Agreement, a decline in air traffic seems inevitable…
For the Climate Action Network, the question is no longer “Should we "reduce air traffic" but " how "reduce it" in an effective and socially just manner.
And that's for one simple reason: The aviation sector accounts for 7% of CO2 emissions in France, and it is the only sector that has not begun to reduce its emissions.
Even worse, CO2 emissions from the aviation sector have been steadily increasing for the past 30 years (despite the COVID-19 pandemic). Since the end of the health crisis, air traffic has even “resumed its rapid growth” : "It has almost fully returned to its pre-COVID level, boosted by international flights and low-cost airlines."
Source: France 2 - News broadcast on Wednesday, September 20, 2024
And to make matters worse, the International Air Transport Association (IATA) predicts that it will far exceed pre-COVID levels in 2024.
Source: CITEPA Secten 2019 / Aurélien Bigo
If you want to hear from someone who’s been through it, we recommend the story of Anthony Viaux, a former airline pilot, who sat down with us to share his fascinating journey and his drastic decision to leave aviation after a career spanning more than 20 years.
Aware of the aviation industry’s environmental impacts, he shares with us his growing environmental awareness and his transition toward a career more in line with his values. This courageous account sheds light on the dilemmas faced by those who, while loving their work, find themselves confronted with an increasingly pressing cognitive dissonance.
To learn more about his story and his vision for aviation from the inside:
For the association, the priority is to deter the minority that flies most often. And for good reason: “The wealthiest 20% of French people account for 41.5% of greenhouse gas emissions from air travel by French households” and “40.4% of flights are taken by the wealthiest 20%”!
Among Climate Action Network’s flagship proposals is a bold measure that has already caused quite a stir in just a few days (and has been rejected outright by airlines): the “frequent flyer tax.” How does it work? A progressive tax that increases based on the distance traveled and the frequency of flights. It would therefore be very low for the first flight of the year and very high for the fifth flight.
Source: France 2 - News broadcast on Wednesday, September 20, 2024
This measure, which would therefore work in the opposite way to typical “miles”-style loyalty programs, would allow according to the association from reduce emissions from the aviation sector by 13%, while placing the bulk of the burden on the most frequent passengers.
In total, the Climate Action Network proposes 9 solutions in its report to regulate the sector and curb climate change. From the simplest (such as raising the “Chirac Tax” on airline tickets, with a higher rate for chartered private jets, as proposed by the Citizens’ Convention on Climate Change) to the most radical (such as banning people from flying more than once a year per person).
Source: © Climate Action Network - “How Can We Reduce Air Traffic in a Fair and Effective Way?”
As you might expect, we couldn't wrap up this article without mentioning the ultimate low-carbon alternative: the train.
As we have seen, it is essential to reflect on the decline in air traffic. But in our view, the battle is being fought on all fronts, particularly in the realm of the imagination.
Making train travel appealing through positive stories is exactly what motivates us to get up every morning at HOORAY!. By offering Turnkey train itineraries and by showing that it is possible to make train travel cheerful and approachable, even if it means going to the ends of the earth (as evidenced by the experiences of Delphine and Arnaud all the way to Indonesia, or even Victor and Léa to Taiwan), we fully intend to get the trip back on track!
And because the battle will also be fought on the financial front, To sign our petition calling for a reduction in rail tolls, It's here !
To learn more, check out the full report from Climate Action Network, available here.
Issue du monde de la communication et des médias, Sophie est Responsable éditoriale chez HOURRAIL ! depuis août 2024. Elle est notamment derrière le contenu éditorial du site ainsi que La Locomissive (de l'inspiration voyage bas carbone et des bons plans, un jeudi sur deux, gratuitement dans ta boîte mail !).
Convaincue que les changements d’habitude passent par la transformation de nos imaginaires, elle s’attache à montrer qu’il est possible de voyager autrement, de manière plus consciente, plus lente et plus joyeuse. Son objectif : rendre le slow travel accessible à toutes et tous, à travers des astuces, des décryptages et surtout, de nouveaux récits.
