Thread by @StayGroundedNet

#Airbus announces that by 2035 it plans to build hydrogen "zero-emission" aircraft.

But #HydrogenPlanes are not the solution to the aviation industry's climate problem. Why? Thread. ⬇️
theguardian.com/business/2020/…

1. Waiting for such technologies prevents climate mitigation today.
Disruptive technologies have been announced in various sectors for decades, and the world is still waiting for the vast majority of them. In the meantime, emissions continue to rise.

2. The aviation industry is lobbying against real climate action, promising technological shifts.
E. g.: The industry has not been meeting its own (low) targets for (harmful) biofuels for years. Why should the target for hydrogen in particular be reached?

3. There are no regulations to encourage airlines to switch to hydrogen aircraft.
The only climate instrument for air traffic, CORSIA, is useless and has recently been weakened again. When should airlines switch to (more expensive) hydrogen aircraft? stay-grounded.org/corsia-baselin…

4. A technology switch takes time.

Even if "zero emission" aircraft are available by 2035: it will take decades to replace all planes. Meanwhile, all of them will run on kerosene. Reminder: we must reach zero emissions by 2050.

5. It is about more than CO2.

Aircraft also contribute to climate heating through other emissions. It is not clear how much these can be reduced by using hydrogen. Probably not or not completely.
stay-grounded.org/get-informatio…

6. The energy required is enormous.

We will have to make a major global effort to decarbonise the energy sector. Using hydrogen for aviation (in its current size) would eat up a massive amount of it - for a luxurious activity of a global minority. stay-grounded.org/e-fuels-a-real…

The better solution: Let's support solutions that are based on technologies available today, not dangerous gambling. For air traffic, this means that it must be significantly reduced.

And this is how it could be done. ⬇️ stay-grounded.org/report-degrowt…