Final Blog: Aircraft Emissions

For my Final Blog, I decided to revisit the issue of aircraft emissions across the globe When discussing what we posted about this blog in class, it seemed that everyone was on the same page that aircraft emissions were not an issue. Although it may seem like this can be looked over because of this trend, I went back to some of my fellow classmates blogs to view their sources. I found that  most of us used the same sources when researching this topic. After doing further research, it almost seems as if aircraft emissions are a bigger issue than it may seem.

In our class discussion, it seemed that many other forms of transportation had a greater affect on climate change than the aviation industry. However, that doesn't really seem to be the case. According to the Center of Biological Diversity,"Airplanes could generate 43 gigatonnes of planet-warming pollution through 2050, consuming almost 5 percent of the world’s remaining carbon budget. Aircraft emit staggering amounts of CO2, the most prevalent manmade greenhouse gas. In fact they currently account for some 11 percent of CO2 emissions from U.S. transportation sources and 3 percent of the United States’ total CO2 emissions. All told, the United States is responsible for nearly half of worldwide CO2 emissions from aircraft." (N.d.) The argument was also made in class that the aviation industry contributed the least amount of CO2 when being compared to other industries. One negative to this approach is that these statistics are mainly given only within borders. Most forget the the aviation industry is being used much more frequently now, due to is capability to travel around the globe very quickly. The David Suzuki Foundation states,"Compared to other modes of transport, such as driving or taking the train, travelling by air has a greater climate impact per passenger kilometre, even over longer distances. It's also the mode of freight transport that produces the most emissions. (N.d.) International flights, both passenger and cargo, fly for long periods of time all throughout the day. Flying for such long periods of time contribute more emissions than people actually believe. On top on this, there is no real way yet of finding how much emissions aircraft produce on a global scale. With that in mind, most statistics can be skewed and less than they may actually seem. 

The UN recently adopted an agreement that will help cut down on aviation emissions. As stated in my previous aircraft emissions blog,"The deal, aimed at reducing the growing climate impact of plane travel, follows years of disagreement between nations on how to slow emissions from the sector. Instead of facing a cap or charge on emissions, airlines will be involved in an offsetting scheme whereby forest areas and carbon-reducing activities will be funded, costing about 2% of the industry’s annual revenues. Global aviation emissions in 2020 will be used as a benchmark, with around 80% of emissions above 2020 levels offset until 2035." (Milman, 2016) There are a couple downsides that come to this agreement. The first negative is that it is voluntary for countries to join until 2027. This leaves almost ten years with no improvement, and more damage to our environment. On top of this, this plan still fails to measure to amount of aviation emissions on a global scale. With that in consideration, there needs to be a way to monitor all types of flights, as well as flights that venture out of a countries own borders. This way, aircraft emissions can be more accurately tracked.

The Paris Agreement has been looked at very carefully since Trump has won the presidential election. In my previous blog, Trump took a stance that seemed he would remove the United States from this agreement. Most of this information was just he said she said. With being able to shift focus from the election to current global issues, Trump has been able to figure out where he currently stands with the Paris Agreement. ""I’m looking at it very closely," Grynbaum reported Trump as saying. "I have an open mind to it."" (Cama, 2016) I felt that Trump took a very strong stance on policies that most republicans agreed with during his election. After the election however, I feel as if he has been able to get more time to actually sit down and think about policies he thought to enact. There are leaders and diplomats across the world who previously criticized Trump for his strong views on climate change being false. We can now see some of these views starting to fall off and adhere to modern ideas of climate change.

In conclusion, I feel that these new laws being put into place are a good start to solving a global issue. Though they have good intentions, there is still is a long grace period for countries to opt into the agreement. Also, there is still a major gap on monitoring emissions on a global scale. There has to be a way to be able to monitor every aspect of an industry before changes can be made. Being an overlooked industry due to inaccurate date, diplomats across the world should find changes to this and act appropriately.

References:

(n.d.). Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/climate_law_institute/transportation_and_global_warming/airplane_emissions/

   Air travel and climate change. (2014). Retrieved December 14, 2016, from     http://www.davidsuzuki.org/issues/climate-change/science/climate-change-basics/air-travel-and-climate-change/

Cama, T. (2016, November 22). Trump softens stance on Paris climate pact. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/307211-trump-i-have-an-open-mind-on-paris-climate-pact

Milman, O. (2016, October 06). First deal to curb aviation emissions agreed in landmark UN accord. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/oct/06/aviation-emissions-agreement-united-nations