National aviation plans: little climate friendly

NGO Transport & Environment drafted a ranking for EU countries on energy and climate plans.

We cut out the aviation part – coloured yellow in the next diagram – and split the comments.

The comments per country on aviation

Ranked more or less to the measures they take; (x): the overall ranking of T&E.

Belgium (19): Elaboration of a roadmap to reduce emissions from the sector, and the possibility of fuel or passenger taxes in aviation. Not enough, but steps in the right direction.’

United Kingdom (2): Grant for future fuels. Additionally, they mention an aviation strategy coming first half of 2019, to tackle emissions from the sector. Unchecked growth in aviation from new runways and terminals.’

Netherlands (1): ‘Just a mention to advanced biofuels. Nothing on synthetic fuels, which will be needed in the long-term. Too much trust on what ICAO can deliver. Preparing a specific climate plan on aviation to complement the NECP.’

France (5):Improvement of efficiency is mentioned, but not how to achieve it. 50% biofuels by 2050 is too high to ensure sustainability of the feedstocks. Details needed on feedstocks. No reference to taxation policy to reduce emissions.’

Sweden (11): ‘A new tax was introduced. Even if positive, it is not enough to decarbonize the sector. Other policies currently being developed, like potential inclusion of a sustainable advanced aviation fuel mandate.’

Spain (3): Advanced biofuels are the only option presented. As in the draft climate law, the NECP should also mention synthetic fuels. Measures around taxation should be mentioned to manage demand.’

Ireland (7): ‘Only mention to ICAO’s CORSIA. Problematic, as the scheme just covers a small percentage of the emissions, and it is based on dubious offsets.’

Finland (13): ‘Aviation is mostly ignored. It is just mentioned as a sector that needs to reduce mineral oil consumption.’

Slovakia (16):Emissions from aviation are mentioned, but the plan doesn’t include a single measure on how to reduce them.’

Luxembourg (6):Even if the impact of the aviation sector is mentioned, there are no references to try to decrease its climate impact.’

Italy (17): ‘Aviation is mostly ignored. There are only references to biofuels in the sector, but no details on amounts or sustainability considerations.

Bulgaria (27), Croatia (26), Cyprus (20), Czech Republic (14), Denmark (4), Estonia (10), Germany (15), Greece (23), Hungary (28), Latvia (25), Lithuania (21), Poland (9), Portugal (8), Romania (18) and Slovakia (12) have the comment ‘Aviation is totally ignored. The country cannot decarbonise its economy without dealing with the emissions from the sector.
Austria (22) has this comment too, with the addendum ‘Expanding airports will not help.’

Malta (24): ‘Neither aviation nor shipping are mentioned in the NECP. For a country highly dependent on both transport modes, it is surprising that both are left aside.’