THE EU’s right to impose carbon levies on all flights using European airports from January 1st next has been upheld by a “preliminary opinion” on legal actions brought by two US airlines.
The opinion – delivered in Luxembourg yesterday by the European Court of Justice’s advocate general, Juliane Kokott – concluded that the inclusion of international aviation in the EU emissions trading scheme is “compatible” with international law.
She said the open skies agreement between the European Union and the United States “does not rule out the application of market-based measures regarding aviation emissions” under the EU’s 2008 aviation directive, “the purpose of which is environmental and climate protection”.
Aviation – one of the fastest-growing sources of carbon emissions – has so far escaped regulations requiring reductions. But from January 1st, the directive will hold airlines accountable for emissions associated with their commercial flights that land at or take off from EU airports.
Under the directive, as Ms Kokott pointed out, airlines operating into and out of the EU “have to surrender emission allowances in various amounts, depending on the flight, and if they fail to comply there is a threat of penalties, which might extend to an operating ban”.
Although 85 per cent of allowances are being issued free of charge to ease the burden on airlines, the International Air Transport Association has estimated that the annual cost of purchasing the remaining permits will increase from €975 million in 2012 to €2.62 billion in 2020.
At an International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) council meeting in Delhi last weekend, the US, China and 23 other countries issued a joint declaration opposing the EU’s “unilateral” move and called on EU states to address the issue within the organisation itself.
Commenting on the argument that Europe should wait for a global deal on aviation emissions, Ms Kokott said in her preliminary opinion that the EU “could not reasonably be required to give the ICAO bodies unlimited time in which to develop a multilateral solution”. The non-binding opinion of the advocate general on the arguments advanced by American Airlines and United Continental in their legal action will now be considered by the court’s 13-member “grand chamber”, which is expected to deliver its final verdict early in 2012.
A transatlantic environmental coalition described the opinion as encouraging. “We are pleased that the advocate general found our arguments and those of the EU and its member states, persuasive, and we look forward to receiving the court’s final opinion.”
The coalition includes three US-based groups – the Center for Biological Diversity, Earth Justice and the Environmental Defense Fund – and European groups (Aviation Environment Federation, Transport Environment, and the World Wildlife Fund – UK).
Bill Hemmings, of Transport Environment, said the aviation sector had failed to make any progress on cutting emissions despite “innumerable” negotiating sessions over the past 14 years, “so the airlines cannot have been serious when they called for international action”.
Instead of “jumping on the bandwagon” of criticising the EU directive – “an extremely modest measure equivalent to one cent a litre on untaxed kerosene – the aviation industry should now start tackling climate change with engineers, not lawyers,” he added.
An analysis by US-published Forbesmagazine claims the free allowances being given to airlines would be worth more than $27 billion (€20.25 billion) at current carbon market prices, and the EU believes that this effective "saving" should be used to buy more fuel-efficient aircraft.
The EU has also suggested airlines should pass on the cost to passengers; the additional charge "could be around $3-$16 [€2.25-€12] depending on the flight length", Forbessays. But airlines may be reluctant to increase fares to offset the carbon levy.
Ryanair, Europe’s largest airline, believes it could face a bill of €16 millionto buy credits next year to cover 15 per cent of its anticipated emissions of eight million tonnes of carbon dioxide – equal to the greenhouse gases produced annually by Costa Rica.
