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.
In reducing CO2 emissions from aviation, let's not forget that its total global warming effect is 2-3 times higher than that of its CO2 emissions alone. The indirect warming effects need to be addressed as well.
Flying is now artificially cheap. Making aviation pay for its true cost would make it more expensive. Some people say this is unacceptable, because poor people couldn’t afford to fly anymore.
Let’s say this would make a ticket €100 more expensive, then government paying them an extra €100 per year would give them back the same access to flying as before.
Will never happen? Probably true, perhaps because their access to flying isn’t really the argument after all.
That’s based on 1 flight per year, and most poor people don’t reach that now either. And if they’d get €100 extra, chances are that most of it wouldn’t be spent on flying.
The vast majority of flights is made by a minority of the people, and they’re not poor.
NB This whole thread is not against aviation, as you can easily verify. Flying was a great invention, but we just ran into a solid boundary condition, which we failed to apply so far. Emissions have to be net-zero by 2050. That’s all.
For a further discussion on the non-CO2 global warming effect of aviation, see my discussion with Prof. @_nadineunger, atmospheric chemist and lead author of IPCC’s AR6 report, in the thread below. Thanks, Nadine!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Kees van der Leun

Kees van der Leun Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Sustainable2050

6 Dec
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. Image
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. Image
Read 4 tweets
4 Dec
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…
Direct link to the report in pdf: rijksoverheid.nl/binaries/rijks… Image
The report itself is in Dutch, but there's an Executive Summary in English. ImageImage
Read 4 tweets
4 Dec
The UK just ramped up its greenhouse gas emissions reduction target for 2030 to 68% below 1990 levels! Until now it was -53%.
That's another great development in this rapidly developing story (thread):
To be followed by 1,000 pages on how to get to -68% by 2030, next week!
Read 4 tweets
26 Nov
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.

Thx for asking, @SonyKapoor !
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.
Read 4 tweets
25 Nov
25% of the entire western US now in extreme drought + 19% in exceptional drought.
Arizona:
72% exceptional drought +
21% extreme drought Image
Utah:
46% exceptional drought +
41% extreme drought Image
Read 6 tweets
25 Nov
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.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!