Big walking and cycling demonstration against Dutch govt's plan to spend €1.5 billion to cut down more trees of our centuries old park #amelisweerd, and add a few lanes to highway A27. More traffic, more CO2, more pollution, more noise, and more congestion elsewhere.
This is what was already done to #amelisweerd in the 1980s. Forty years later, in the middle of our growing climate crisis, govt plans to make matters worse, despite opposition by the city of Utrecht, the province, and the majority of the people. Irresponsible.
Let's not buy the idea that aviation can't go to net-zero emissions by 2050 'because that would make flying too expensive'. Aviation has to go to net-zero just like everything else.
If that'd make flying expensive, so be it. If we want to reduce the costs, the only way is to get started now, e.g. by demanding a steadily growing share of zero-emission jet fuels.
Post-corona, we need to curb the growth of aviation; growth rates of 7%/year make it impossible to achieve net-zero by 2050. The higher cost of jet fuels will help, but airport expansion could be limited as well, with many side benefits.
The Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy just published our report on the options for combined tenders of offshore wind and hydrogen production! Aim is to optimize the system integration of large amounts of offshore wind energy. rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rap…
EU still aiming to upgrade its 2030 climate change target next month. Emission reduction target to be raised from its current -40% to -55%. reuters.com/article/us-cli…
We were at -24% in 2019, so the -55% target means a reduction of 40% between 2019 and 2030:
From an index value of 76 to 45.
So after achieving a 24% reduction in 29 years (benchmark is 1990), wel now have to 40% in 11 years.
Like most of the world, we've been dragging our feet, with grave consequences to climate. This is now what needs to be done. And it can be done.
There was uncertainty about the total climate impact of flying, with IPCC cautiously estimating it at double the impact of the CO2 emissions alone.
The EU now concludes its probably more like three times the CO2 impact.
So if you'd consider a CO2 price for aviation, better make it 3 times as high as for other emitters, to reflect total climate damage done. Same for personal carbon footprints, by the way.
On the solutions side, this underlines the importance of reducing the non-CO2 climate impact of flying as well, e.g. when developing zero-CO2-emission jet fuels. The report (link in article) discusses that as well.