SKH: Some of the major criticisms of CORSIA are that it is voluntary until 2027 and that it doesn’t cover domestic flights, which account for a third of aviation emissions. What’s your response – are these criticisms fair? Is there something the critics are overlooking?

MG: As far as the scheme is concerned, it’s voluntary in the sense that states must declare their participation, but the scheme applies to its full extent and rigour to flights between states that have volunteered. Regarding the time frame, ideally it would be applied on a mandatory level before 2027 but this is a scheme that has been agreed upon by 193 sovereign countries. A high level of engagement makes the scheme more effective, but it does mean some countries need more time to prepare.

Many global domestic routes are already covered by separate emissions schemes, such as the EU ETS and more airlines are introducing voluntary offset programmes on domestic flights. But there has to be a framework that covers flights between sovereign states and that is what CORSIA is designed to do. As you point out, more than 70% of emissions are generated by medium- to long-haul flights and the majority of these flights are international and covered by CORSIA.

SKH: Even some airlines are critical of CORSIA. Would it be better for airlines to pursue their own individual strategies, which could spur competition, or is a global framework the only way to achieve and monitor results?

MG: We believe a global patchwork of schemes would create competitive distortions and could possibly lead to more emissions. For example, passengers might fly further to take advantage of cheaper fares in a country where the emissions policy is less stringent. We believe CORSIA is the most effective short to medium term solution for emissions until new low-emissions technology is scaled up.

SKH: A Deutsche Welle analysis found that participation in CORSIA will cost airlines less than 1% of their operating costs by 2035. Does that level of investment show that airlines are taking their environmental commitments seriously?

MG: CORSIA was not intended to ensure a minimum level of financial commitment from airlines. It’s intended to stabilize emissions at 2020 levels. And this allows the investment in actual emissions reductions. Airlines have invested about $1 trillion dollars since 2009 on more fuel-efficient planes constructed with new generation materials (composites) and more efficient engine technology to reduce CO2 emissions. Carbon offsetting is only one pillar and airlines will focus more on SAF and other technology to achieve decarbonization as it is scaled up. Offsetting is necessary to account for the remainder of emissions.

SKH: International aviation is the only sector that has an absolute cap on global CO2 emissions and today’s flights emit only roughly half as much CO2 as they did 30 years ago. Do you think that the aviation industry gets the credit it deserves for its advancements to date and its future green initiatives?

MG: It is not widely known that aviation was the first global industry to declare a climate target back in 2009 (increase fuel efficiency by 1.5% a year between 2010-2020; carbon-neutral growth from 2020; and cutting emissions 50% relative to 2005 levels by 2050) and emissions per passenger have fallen 54% since 1990 as aircraft and engines become more fuel-efficient.

Aviation accounts for about 2% of all global emissions but most surveys show that the public thinks the figure is much higher. But just because it is 2% doesn’t mean we are not focused on sustainability. Safety remains paramount, but sustainability is the metric on which we will be judged for decades to come. Innovation runs deep in the industry and technology such as SAF and hydrogen and electric powered flight is now a reality. We need to convince the public that we can reach our emissions targets – but it is a fact that we will need government support to scale up new technology like SAF. If we receive the same sort of support that governments gave other renewable industries like solar, wind power and electric vehicles in their development stages, we will be very well placed to achieve our targets.

SKH: If we could ask you to look into a crystal ball, do you think the industry will hit its 50% emissions reduction target by 2050? If that target is reached, what sort of role will CORSIA have played in that?

MG: Yes, we firmly believe that we will hit the target but this is still a huge challenge for the industry. Aviation is a hard-to-abate sector: there is no replacement for liquid fuel for long haul flights which account for about 75% of aviation’s CO2 emissions.

The Waypoint 2050 research paper published by the cross-industry Air Transport Action Group has identified three clear pathways to reach our 2050 emissions targets. While SAF is the key technology to get us there (because it can be used in long haul flights), the ATAG research shows carbon offsets will play an important role in the short-term but taper off as other technology is introduced and scaled up (SAF, hydrogen and electric powered flight). As we move into the 2030s, the offsets are likely to be scaled back but will be available to cover any shortfalls from technology-based solutions.

Digital services

Quick Links

Quick Links

Legal Links

CORSIA proponent: ‘Fundamental to achieving carbon-neutral growth’