airzona11
Posts: 1495
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Thu May 16, 2019 6:37 pm

LH707330 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
This isn't a climate change debate, it's a discussion on whether possible climate change may impact aviation. If this turns into a non aviation debate over the existence of climate change, the thread will be locked, and users may be warned or banned for not staying on topic. Let's not forget that this is an aviation forum.

✈️ atcsundevil


Sticking to that question, and the OP's line of inquiry...

It depends on how CO2 pricing is implemented in aviation. It's too big a sector to be ignored forever. If CO2 taxes increase fares by more than 10%, yes, there will be a demand inflection. One ton of jet fuel = 3.15 tons of CO2. Look at a prospective Canadian tax of CDN$ 32/ton of CO2 for 2022.

Doing some back-of-the-napkin math for a 10-hour A330 flight, that pencils out to $20/pax one-way with that number. As a rough-cut, you could say price per tonne is slightly higher than the additional price per pax on a 10-hour flight, so if the CO2 price goes up to $100/t, we'd be looking at a $75 surcharge based on the assumptions I listed. Adding this to a $1000 ticket will make a bit of a dent in the demand curve, which should help spur investment in CO2-neutral fuels, which currently suffer from a lack of scale when competing with fossil fuels.

Climate change is already impacting aviation in the forms of increased turbulence, heatwaves causing hot/high payload restrictions (or even the >48* C CRJ stop in PHX a few years ago), so it's in the best long-term interests of the industry to invest in fixing its contribution to the problem.


10 hrs
6 t/h
60 t
3.15 CO2/t fuel
$25 USD/t CO2
$4,725 Externality
250 pax
$18.90 Ext/pax


Speaking of PHX, we have had the mildest Spring in the 30 years I have lived here. The CRJ issue is an engineering constraint of the jet, nothing to do with Mother Nature. Current 737s/A320s do not have those problems. This is nonsense that you are going to “tax” me $20 or anything For that matter. It is a feel good tax, that you can already self select to pay via carbon credits etc.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 2987
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Thu May 16, 2019 6:54 pm

I don't think the $2 per hour carbon tax is going to seriously impact flying. It is about 4 cents a mile, not insignificant, but not a deal breaker. If it were to go into better rail/mass transit transit to the airport it would be a plus.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 9479
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Thu May 16, 2019 7:00 pm

airzona11 wrote:
LH707330 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:

Sticking to that question, and the OP's line of inquiry...

It depends on how CO2 pricing is implemented in aviation. It's too big a sector to be ignored forever. If CO2 taxes increase fares by more than 10%, yes, there will be a demand inflection. One ton of jet fuel = 3.15 tons of CO2. Look at a prospective Canadian tax of CDN$ 32/ton of CO2 for 2022.

Doing some back-of-the-napkin math for a 10-hour A330 flight, that pencils out to $20/pax one-way with that number. As a rough-cut, you could say price per tonne is slightly higher than the additional price per pax on a 10-hour flight, so if the CO2 price goes up to $100/t, we'd be looking at a $75 surcharge based on the assumptions I listed. Adding this to a $1000 ticket will make a bit of a dent in the demand curve, which should help spur investment in CO2-neutral fuels, which currently suffer from a lack of scale when competing with fossil fuels.

Climate change is already impacting aviation in the forms of increased turbulence, heatwaves causing hot/high payload restrictions (or even the >48* C CRJ stop in PHX a few years ago), so it's in the best long-term interests of the industry to invest in fixing its contribution to the problem.


10 hrs
6 t/h
60 t
3.15 CO2/t fuel
$25 USD/t CO2
$4,725 Externality
250 pax
$18.90 Ext/pax


Speaking of PHX, we have had the mildest Spring in the 30 years I have lived here. The CRJ issue is an engineering constraint of the jet, nothing to do with Mother Nature. Current 737s/A320s do not have those problems. This is nonsense that you are going to “tax” me $20 or anything For that matter. It is a feel good tax, that you can already self select to pay via carbon credits etc.


It isn't taxation, it is paying for pollution which is nowadays free. This money should be spent on innovation to make a green world work for everyone and it is a great incentive to lower the emissions by any means. The payment for emissions should be around 100USD/ton CO2 to have a real effect in society, not just in aviation. We have a limited carbon reserve before we reach 1,5degrees or even 2,0degrees.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
tomcat
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2000 4:14 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Thu May 16, 2019 8:01 pm

uta999 wrote:
Despite the huge backlog in new orders, particularly NB’s, could the industry actually be facing a 9/11 style depression caused by Climate Change?


Do you really mean "climate change" or "anti-climate-change policies and behaviors"? If you talk about the latter, any policy would surely be designed to contain the demand for air travel. Whether it would achieve this goal or not is debatable. I keep in mind the increase of the oil prices between the late nineties and mid-2008. Airlines have absorbed a five fold increase of the fuel price and the air trafic has been barely affected. Granted, at the beginning of this period the fuel costs were only making a small share of the airlines operating costs, while they're good for about 30% of the operating costs today. The airlines also took the opportunity to increase the cabin densities, thanks to the spare capacity of their aircraft (an A320 was then filled with 150 seats, it's now stuffed with 180 seats) and to the advent of the slim seats (probably triggered by the sustained high fuel prices). There are no more similar opportunities for the current narrow bodies, their are now operated close to their certified max capacity. On the wide-bodies, there would still the opportunity to adjust the densities to optimize them according to the new reality.

Interestingly, and it is rarely mentioned, the USA are already applying a hefty amount of taxes on air travel, including a tax on fuel on domestic flights. Somehow, the USA are leading the way in terms of climate-change fiscal policy. In the EU, we're just starting to hear some politicians asking for applying a tax on kerosene or a sales tax on the flight tickets.

http://airlines.org/dataset/government- ... portation/

uta999 wrote:
People generally could start to think, do I need to fly as often. It won’t happen everywhere , but I can see signs of a shift in attitude towards the environment.


The most striking example of this attitude shift is probably to be found in Sweden. We'll see how it evolves over the time.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ate-battle

uta999 wrote:
Are A and B doing enough R&D on a replacement for the turbofan, using clean electric propulsion?


There are a few initiatives on both sides of the Atlantic, but there won't be any significant development for a while. Here are a few references of ongoing research on LH2 fuel.

The Cleansky program in the EU has allocated some budget for this research:
https://www.fch.europa.eu/news/joint-cl ... afAyp2eB40

Here is a brand new project that has just received NASA funding. This project is lead by the University of Illinois and "it includes participation from eight additional institutions: the Air Force Research Laboratory, Boeing Research and Technology, General Electric Global Research, The Ohio State University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Arkansas, the University of Dayton Research Institute, and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute."
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases ... 051319.php

In Germany, a four-seat passenger aircraft powered solely by a hydrogen fuel cell system already flew in 2016:
https://www.dlr.de/dlr/en/desktopdefaul ... lery/24480
 
SEAflyer97
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed May 09, 2018 9:10 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Thu May 16, 2019 8:13 pm

I think I read something the other day aviation only contributes to 1-2% of the CO2 emissions globally? I won't worry about it too much -- cars are by far a bigger problem. It's not like we can't emit any CO2 -- we just need to control it a bit better.

Ahh, here's a stat sheet about it.
https://www.atag.org/facts-figures.html
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 11630
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Thu May 16, 2019 8:18 pm

With current technology, what makes the most sense is kerosene made out of renewable sources.

Since the EU has opened its sugar market, the price has dropped, and countless beet producers are being driven to bankruptcy, and are stopping their production. Surely they could continue to make the same amount, going to fuel production instead. There would be no argument that the fuel is taking away from food production.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1679
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Thu May 16, 2019 8:55 pm

StudiodeKadent wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:

The economic benefits of using renewables is far greater than all the old technologies. WIND AND SOLAR ARE ALREADY CHEAPEST! Nuclear is by far the MOST EXPENSIVE way to generate electricity.


Show me an economic cost-benefit analysis proving this, please.

If wind and solar were the cheapest they'd out-compete everything on the market we have.


Well I would love to say that I did actually give you many many links to proof, after spending to much of my working day researching it all for you, but inexplicably my post disappeared. How strange! Just like the post I replied to Enilria showing indisputably how wind energy is both the cheapest form of energy and powers more than 15% of the UK with no harm to birds or massive amounts of human maintenance.
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
 
LAXBUR
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Thu May 16, 2019 9:29 pm

It is likely climate change itself and the damage it may cause will hit aviation before climate change policy/regulation.

Sweden is an exception when it comes to social and environmental awareness. Very few Americans will alter their plans with the idea it is helping a cause. Especially when many Americans don’t believe there’s a problem. Also, Sweden and the rest of Europe have generally convenient rail options for short and medium distance travel. For instance, I just priced out LA to Sacramento on a direct train and it was $143 one way and 14 hours with one departure time. The same booking window on the same day for a one way airfare is $120+ with multiple departure times and one hour travel time.
 
User avatar
Erebus
Posts: 987
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 2:40 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Thu May 16, 2019 10:02 pm

morrisond wrote:
Wouldn't a better near term technology be using Renewables to make Liquid Hydrogen and use that to fuel planes?

Wouldn't that be a better (lighter) energy storage solution?

It would require totally new designs - but it could work for the short range at least.


I was going to bring this up as well.

In my opinion, hydrogen fuel cells seem to have more promise than using batteries but the technology and infrastructure has not progressed as far as the latter (while electric cars are a mature tech now, hydrogen powered cars are still stuck in concept mode). They both require electric motors for propulsion but unlike the case of heavy batteries, hydrogen can be "burned off" lightening the plane as the flight progresses making it more energy efficient. It is better safety-wise as well IMO. By itself, pure hydrogen is as inert as any other fuel. High energy density batteries have so many variables in the chemical composition putting it at a greater risk of something going bad.

NASA is designing the first ever ALL-ELECTRIC airliner powered by hydrogen.

The other alternative is probably carbon neutral fuels such as bio-diesel.
 
TurnaroudUK
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 7:11 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Thu May 16, 2019 10:13 pm

The surrounding area in the industry needs to improve itself. It's going to take time for aircraft to run on a new fuel or be electric. Airports need to become greener, Solar Panels, All electric vehicles, more efficient routings - things like ACDM will help this to reduce ground holding. There are things that can be done but unfortunatly due to fine profit margins it isnt worth the cost atm.
 
LH707330
Posts: 2188
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Thu May 16, 2019 10:52 pm

Erebus wrote:
morrisond wrote:
Wouldn't a better near term technology be using Renewables to make Liquid Hydrogen and use that to fuel planes?

Wouldn't that be a better (lighter) energy storage solution?

It would require totally new designs - but it could work for the short range at least.


I was going to bring this up as well.

In my opinion, hydrogen fuel cells seem to have more promise than using batteries but the technology and infrastructure has not progressed as far as the latter (while electric cars are a mature tech now, hydrogen powered cars are still stuck in concept mode). They both require electric motors for propulsion but unlike the case of heavy batteries, hydrogen can be "burned off" lightening the plane as the flight progresses making it more energy efficient. It is better safety-wise as well IMO. By itself, pure hydrogen is as inert as any other fuel. High energy density batteries have so many variables in the chemical composition putting it at a greater risk of something going bad.

NASA is designing the first ever ALL-ELECTRIC airliner powered by hydrogen.

The other alternative is probably carbon neutral fuels such as bio-diesel.

The issue with hydrogen are:

1. The energy per volume ratio is not very good
2. Cooling is an issue
3. Containment vessels will likely be heavy

Batteries are currently too heavy per unit energy, so for longer ranges they're not ideal. Bio or Synthetic jet fuel will likely be the way forward, provided the right incentive structures.
 
StudiodeKadent
Posts: 387
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:43 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 3:29 am

enilria wrote:
StudiodeKadent wrote:
If you really want to massively cut CO2 emissions, the only viable strategy is nuclear power. Because people aren't going to sacrifice their quality of life.

Agree 100%. It's ironic that countries are running away from nuclear power when it is the most viable solution in terms of climate.


I wouldn't say its ironic. I'd say its because of a mixture of Chernobyl Hysteria and because the environmentalist movement is generally misanthropic and believes that advanced modern technological civilization is the secular equivalent of the Fall Of Man. They HATE the idea of a "tech fix" for anthropogenic climate change, because that would just prove Prometheus > Gaia and thus destroy the basic moral premise at the core of their worldview.

Renewable energy, thus far, has only been shown to be viable with massive amounts of government subsidies. Ergo, it is a very expensive way of producing electricity.
 
StudiodeKadent
Posts: 387
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:43 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 3:31 am

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
Well I would love to say that I did actually give you many many links to proof, after spending to much of my working day researching it all for you, but inexplicably my post disappeared. How strange! Just like the post I replied to Enilria showing indisputably how wind energy is both the cheapest form of energy and powers more than 15% of the UK with no harm to birds or massive amounts of human maintenance.


I certainly wouldn't ask you to re-post such a long argument. But I can't reply to arguments I haven't read.
 
grbauc
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 4:31 am

We just need to cause a few Volcano eruptions. They do put out some CO2 but better yet the put out SO2 into the stratosphere that slows down global warming. Pinatubo 1991 emitted aprox 20 megtonnes of SO2.

this is a tongue in cheek comment not meant for reply but for humor.
 
User avatar
Lingon
Posts: 73
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 7:20 am

Norway has envisioned all-electric domestic air travel in 2040. Siemens, Airbus and Rolls-Royce are working together in a project for a 100-passenger plane with 1000 km range. Electric engine testing in flight is assumed to start next year (one electric engine replacing a conventional engine on a quad, I suspect its on an Avro RJ).

Norway is very suited for this, since the geography with the fjords and mountains creates a market for short hops. It can be a very short distance as the crow flies, but a long distance on ground between two locations. I wouldn't take a bet that an Oslo-Tromsø flight can be electric by 2040, though.... at least not on a battery.

However, the choice is not 100% kerosene versus 100% batteries. There are lots of options. One relatively low hanging fruit would be bio fuel replacing fossil kerosene. I don't think there will be a slump, there will be a technology step as there has been so many times in the past when needed. There was a time when a passenger airplane had piston engines, railway locomotives were coal powered water boilers...
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12300
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 7:39 am

spinotter wrote:
You may be right, but then that is a sad commentary on the human race. We would rather destroy all life on our planet than miss our Golden Week or in any way consider the consequences of our actions. Climate disaster and nine-tenths of life including human beings one century from now is my prediction.

Then at the end of the day, what's so sad about it and why do you even care?

Even if exactly what you said becomes true: (1) that's the overarching history of life on Earth since the Cambrian Period, 99.8% of species to ever exist are already extinct (2) and you and everyone you've ever interacted with, been related to, or know in any way-- will have been dead by then regardless.

So what's the point in whining about it?
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1170
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 9:24 am

Lingon wrote:
Norway has envisioned all-electric domestic air travel in 2040. Siemens, Airbus and Rolls-Royce are working together in a project for a 100-passenger plane with 1000 km range. Electric engine testing in flight is assumed to start next year (one electric engine replacing a conventional engine on a quad, I suspect its on an Avro RJ).

Norway is very suited for this, since the geography with the fjords and mountains creates a market for short hops. It can be a very short distance as the crow flies, but a long distance on ground between two locations. I wouldn't take a bet that an Oslo-Tromsø flight can be electric by 2040, though.... at least not on a battery.

However, the choice is not 100% kerosene versus 100% batteries. There are lots of options. One relatively low hanging fruit would be bio fuel replacing fossil kerosene. I don't think there will be a slump, there will be a technology step as there has been so many times in the past when needed. There was a time when a passenger airplane had piston engines, railway locomotives were coal powered water boilers...


Exactly. And Habour Air in Canada is going all electric as well. Granted, these are small planes, and short hops, but it is a start:

https://www.aviationcv.com/aviation-blo ... c-aircraft
 
lazyme
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2019 9:57 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 10:28 am

LAXBUR wrote:
It is likely climate change itself and the damage it may cause will hit aviation before climate change policy/regulation.

Sweden is an exception when it comes to social and environmental awareness. Very few Americans will alter their plans with the idea it is helping a cause. Especially when many Americans don’t believe there’s a problem. Also, Sweden and the rest of Europe have generally convenient rail options for short and medium distance travel. For instance, I just priced out LA to Sacramento on a direct train and it was $143 one way and 14 hours with one departure time. The same booking window on the same day for a one way airfare is $120+ with multiple departure times and one hour travel time.


Unfortunately not true for Sweden, its a long country with few citizens in it, a rail travel from south Sweden to the far north takes 25-26 hours including 2-4 train changes.

Norway and Finland are in the same boat - long countries and low populated.
 
Gangurru
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2019 7:30 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 10:50 am

SEAflyer97 wrote:
I think I read something the other day aviation only contributes to 1-2% of the CO2 emissions globally? I won't worry about it too much -- cars are by far a bigger problem. It's not like we can't emit any CO2 -- we just need to control it a bit better.

Ahh, here's a stat sheet about it.
https://www.atag.org/facts-figures.html


CO2 is one gas which accelerates climate change, other include methane, water vapour and nitrous oxide.

Aviation is unique because these gases are mostly generated at altitude. Overall, these contribute to a impact which is estimated to be up to four times greater than CO2 produced on the surface of the earth.
 
log0008
Posts: 469
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 12:17 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 11:26 am

I suggest some people watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNvzZfsC13o
The simple fact is that using batteries is going to be near impossible for aviation thanks to weight, remembering that even if batteries could be reduced to a weight similar to fuel for energy output the aircraft couldn't land. Most commercial jets can land with 20% fuel, that means batteries need to be 80% lighter than fuel.

This simple stat is the greatest issue

Image
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1679
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 11:42 am

StudiodeKadent wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:
Well I would love to say that I did actually give you many many links to proof, after spending to much of my working day researching it all for you, but inexplicably my post disappeared. How strange! Just like the post I replied to Enilria showing indisputably how wind energy is both the cheapest form of energy and powers more than 15% of the UK with no harm to birds or massive amounts of human maintenance.


I certainly wouldn't ask you to re-post such a long argument. But I can't reply to arguments I haven't read.


Well, in fear of wasting my afternoon on another post putting together a storyline full of quoted facts that gets deleted, I'll just collect some links and hope it stays up this time:

"Renewable energy versus nuclear: dispelling the myths"
https://energypost.eu/renewable-energy- ... ing-myths/

"Nuclear power at the mercy of government subsidies while costs remain high"
https://energypost.eu/how-profitable-is ... ear-power/

"Renewables Generate 33% Of Britain’s Electricity In First Quarter"
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/16/re ... t-quarter/

"Greg Clark knows nuclear cannot compete with the likes of wind and solar – but he is not giving up"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -secretary

"Hinkley Point C is £1.5bn over budget and a year behind schedule, EDF admits"
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... edf-admits

"New electric generating capacity in 2019 will come from renewables and natural gas"
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=37952

"Offshore wind power cheaper than new nuclear"
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-41220948

"'Coal is on the way out': study finds fossil fuel now pricier than solar or wind"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ergy-study

This last is from the official UK annual energy report and contains a lot of facts, including that renewables already account for more than 30% of UK total energy supply (chart 6.8) and that wind power accounts for 50% of those renewables (chart 6.4):
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... 53/Ch6.pdf

In summary - renewables are already the cheapest form of energy and prices continue to tumble. I didn't get links for this, but battery technology and legislation is going the same way such that electric vehicles are going to be the dominant form of ground transport within just a few years (the EU has a lot of targets set for 2020). In other words, fossil fuels and nuclear are finished. It follows that air transport will, like ground transport, go through some kind of disruptive transformation soon... hydrogen and/or electric.
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
 
na
Posts: 9686
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 12:28 pm

In a TV duel yesterday with both main contenders for the seat of the chief of the EU (succeeding Juncker) they were asked about a possible ban of short flights. The Social Democrat candidate, Dutchman Timmermans, is an advocate of forbidding short flights - when the train system in Europe is finally able do deliver a viable alternative (very few routes are now, and in most cases that will take a few decades...). The Christian Democrate Weber from Germany also leans towards to that direction, though is against a general ban.
 
superjeff
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 2:14 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 12:57 pm

tomcat wrote:
uta999 wrote:
Despite the huge backlog in new orders, particularly NB’s, could the industry actually be facing a 9/11 style depression caused by Climate Change?

Interestingly, and it is rarely mentioned, the USA are already applying a hefty amount of taxes on air travel, including a tax on fuel on domestic flights. Somehow, the USA are leading the way in terms of climate-change fiscal policy. In the EU, we're just starting to hear some politicians asking for applying a tax on kerosene or a sales tax on the flight tickets.

In the U.S. we have essentially no alternatives to air travel. Distances are too great for high speed rail outside of the "Northeast Corridor" and a few other areas. And the U.S. has done a lot in reducing carbon emissions, much more than most other countries. As an American, I'm not sure I want to be penalized because China and India, for example, don't seem to be as serious as we are.

http://airlines.org/dataset/government- ... portation/

[quote="uta999"]People generally could start to think, do I need to fly as often. It won’t happen everywhere , but I can see signs of a shift in attitude towards the environment.[/quote

The most striking example of this attitude shift is probably to be found in Sweden. We'll see how it evolves over the time.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ate-battle

The United States is a heck of a lot bigger than Sweden, with a much bigger population. In countries that are geographically large (I would include the U.S., Canada, Australia, and Brasil, as examples - I'm omitting Russia, China and India for this analogy), frequent travel essentially requires air transportation; if you reduce the availability of air travel, including by artificially restricting it with taxes, it will be detrimental to the economies of those countries, at least IMO.
 
StudiodeKadent
Posts: 387
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:43 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 12:58 pm

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
StudiodeKadent wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:
Well I would love to say that I did actually give you many many links to proof, after spending to much of my working day researching it all for you, but inexplicably my post disappeared. How strange! Just like the post I replied to Enilria showing indisputably how wind energy is both the cheapest form of energy and powers more than 15% of the UK with no harm to birds or massive amounts of human maintenance.


I certainly wouldn't ask you to re-post such a long argument. But I can't reply to arguments I haven't read.


Well, in fear of wasting my afternoon on another post putting together a storyline full of quoted facts that gets deleted, I'll just collect some links and hope it stays up this time:

"Renewable energy versus nuclear: dispelling the myths"
https://energypost.eu/renewable-energy- ... ing-myths/

"Nuclear power at the mercy of government subsidies while costs remain high"
https://energypost.eu/how-profitable-is ... ear-power/

"Renewables Generate 33% Of Britain’s Electricity In First Quarter"
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/16/re ... t-quarter/

"Greg Clark knows nuclear cannot compete with the likes of wind and solar – but he is not giving up"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -secretary

"Hinkley Point C is £1.5bn over budget and a year behind schedule, EDF admits"
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... edf-admits

"New electric generating capacity in 2019 will come from renewables and natural gas"
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=37952

"Offshore wind power cheaper than new nuclear"
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-41220948

"'Coal is on the way out': study finds fossil fuel now pricier than solar or wind"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ergy-study

This last is from the official UK annual energy report and contains a lot of facts, including that renewables already account for more than 30% of UK total energy supply (chart 6.8) and that wind power accounts for 50% of those renewables (chart 6.4):
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... 53/Ch6.pdf

In summary - renewables are already the cheapest form of energy and prices continue to tumble. I didn't get links for this, but battery technology and legislation is going the same way such that electric vehicles are going to be the dominant form of ground transport within just a few years (the EU has a lot of targets set for 2020). In other words, fossil fuels and nuclear are finished. It follows that air transport will, like ground transport, go through some kind of disruptive transformation soon... hydrogen and/or electric.


To be blunt, a lot of the sources you cite are frankly unreliable. There's political bias at issue for one. The second is that many of the academics who produce these studies are not economists (someone who's a professor of "interdisciplinary environment studies" isn't an economist). Some of these articles are literally derived from environmentalist websites. And in addition, these calculations often presume a regulatory environment that's brutally strict on nuclear power vs. renewables; of COURSE highly-regulated old-tech nuclear power will be more expensive than subsidized renewables but that isn't due to the method of energy generation but rather a regulatory climate that makes the technology artificially costly. Also, "nuclear shills" are one thing, but renewable energy is just as much of a profit-seeking industry with just as much of an incentive to lobby for subsidies (with additional Baptist-Bootlegger effects owing to the environmental movement) as the nuclear power industry. If nuclear power is "shilled" for by insincere lobbyists, so are renewables.

Modern nuclear technology, at the moment, and presuming a level regulatory playing field is the cheapest way to generate huge amounts of power.

You may be correct that disruptive innovations in renewables could greatly increase the efficiency/capacity of renewables, however. I agree with this and look forward to these developments. But by the same token, the same thing could happen with nuclear energy.

This is getting off topic however if you want to continue this, you can always send me a private message.
 
User avatar
Keith2004
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 11:59 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 1:08 pm

Gangurru wrote:
SEAflyer97 wrote:
I think I read something the other day aviation only contributes to 1-2% of the CO2 emissions globally? I won't worry about it too much -- cars are by far a bigger problem. It's not like we can't emit any CO2 -- we just need to control it a bit better.

Ahh, here's a stat sheet about it.
https://www.atag.org/facts-figures.html


CO2 is one gas which accelerates climate change, other include methane, water vapour and nitrous oxide.

Aviation is unique because these gases are mostly generated at altitude. Overall, these contribute to a impact which is estimated to be up to four times greater than CO2 produced on the surface of the earth.


Even if this is the case...4 times 1-2% is still a small fraction of the CO2 produced globally, meaning that there are def lower hanging fruit (Cars etc) to go at first
 
User avatar
lugie
Posts: 705
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2013 4:11 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 1:23 pm

Keith2004 wrote:

Even if this is the case...4 times 1-2% is still a small fraction of the CO2 produced globally, meaning that there are def lower hanging fruit (Cars etc) to go at first


This is what I think too.
Yes, with current battery technology it is near impossible to fly commercially using electric propulsion, but there are many industries that contribute considerably more to worldwide emissions and at the same time are easier to convert to green energy.
Power production itself is probably the greatest contribution (all the coal plants should imo be shut down within the next 20 years) but there are many ways to generate energy carbon neutrally. Nuclear, wind, solar, hydroelectric, you name it. Using this electricity to feed industries, households and, once widely used, cars, will go a long way to reducing global emissions.

It's easy for people to point to aviation as a polluter but let's be honest, nobody wants to (and given the modern globalized economy, we literally can't) go back to the days where a trip from London to New York takes a week. Now, I'm not saying that aviation should sit on their hands, there are many promising approaches to improve the impact it has (bio fuels for example) and, as opposed to the LON-NYC route, quite literally nobody needs a flight from FRA to MUC for example so these hops can be massively reduced or even cut, especially in countries with decent rail infrastructure.
However, there are many industries that can adapt so much easier and if we reduced our emissions to 2% of what they are today (i.e. only aviation burns fossils), we would all deserve a massive pat on the back.
DH4 E75 E90 CR9 CRK M88 319 320 321 332 333 359 733 73G 738 739 748 764 772 788
X3 LH 4U TP US SN EI FR IB LX LA CM UA DL AA AS WN
FRA STR HAM TXL MUC ZRH ACE BRU BLL DUB MAN ARN MAD OPO LIS FNC AMS PHL RDU LGA CLT EWR ORD ATL SFO MDW SJO PTY
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2237
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 1:42 pm

If we could reliably store H2 in a compact form (far more compact than liquid) then a cryoplane would offer a realistic alternative to Jet-A. Its possible that storing within carbon nanotubes may be the answer; but that is TRL1 or 2 at most at the minute.

Batteries are not realistic and won't be for decades.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2237
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 1:44 pm

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
Just like the post I replied to Enilria showing indisputably how wind energy is both the cheapest form of energy and powers more than 15% of the UK with no harm to birds or massive amounts of human maintenance.


Does that include the reserve power that has to be kept to account for variability?

Sometimes, the ecologists can be very efficient with the truth.
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1679
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 2:26 pm

StudiodeKadent wrote:
To be blunt, a lot of the sources you cite are frankly unreliable. There's political bias at issue for one.


To be blunt in return, I entirely disagree (and expected that the messenger would be shot when I posted). The "truth" - for want of a better word - is that all the political bias comes from the traditional energy lobby... yet it has lost anyway. I'm following this topic and all I'm hearing from anyone is that renewables are beating everything else RIGHT NOW on economics alone. Look at the facts in those articles rather than just dismiss the opinion.


these calculations often presume a regulatory environment that's brutally strict on nuclear power vs. renewables; of COURSE highly-regulated old-tech nuclear power will be more expensive than subsidized renewables


Again, it's absolutely the other way round! Renewables are no longer subsdised... Nuclear is very heaviliy subsidised. All "base load" stations are given discounts and subsidies to keep them running, whether they're needed or not... The grid is transforming in most countries such that the entire concept of base-load is becoming redundant - renewables and battery/hydro storage are able to respond faster, cheaper and more flexibly and allow for a much leaner and well planned supply than before.


Modern nuclear technology, at the moment, and presuming a level regulatory playing field is the cheapest way to generate huge amounts of power.


I've pointed to so many facts saying the opposite. I missed out a couple I posted yesterday about just how over budget and deadline all new nuclear power has been in the last decade. It is just a huge subsidised boondoggle now. And that's even before decommisioning is factored in. Unless you have anything to substantiate your statement you have no leg to stand on.

You may be correct that disruptive innovations in renewables could greatly increase the efficiency/capacity of renewables, however. I agree with this and look forward to these developments. But by the same token, the same thing could happen with nuclear energy.

This is getting off topic however if you want to continue this, you can always send me a private message.


Well, we obviously won't see eye to eye on nuclear (for the record, I've always had an interest in it since I was kid - so I'm not some naive greenwasher), but I'd be happy to continue on the topic of disruptive technologies in aircraft - assuming we agree these will be heavily influenced by transformative electrification of the rest of the transport industry... :)
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1679
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 2:30 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:
Just like the post I replied to Enilria showing indisputably how wind energy is both the cheapest form of energy and powers more than 15% of the UK with no harm to birds or massive amounts of human maintenance.


Does that include the reserve power that has to be kept to account for variability?

Sometimes, the ecologists can be very efficient with the truth.


Yes it does. The UK has made great use of hydro storage for decades and battery storage has already saved New South Wales from brown-outs while the rest of the Australian grid fell flat on its face.

And I forgot to mention that Vehicle-to-Grid is going to make this a complete non-issue as people's own cars will be buffering the grid when they're not being driven. This stuff is all coming, and it's all coming fast.

Part of the problem is labelling things like "ecologists". This is not them and us, this stuff is mainstream and big business already.
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 3:04 pm

FlyingColours wrote:
The biggest risk to the sector is people being priced out of flying, all it takes are governments to start adding "green taxes" etc to airfares in an attempt to assuage the green groups. Not that this does much good either as green taxes have been wasted before...

But I'll be damned if some environmentalist is going to tell me I can't go on a deserved holiday...

Phil
FlyingColours


When airplanes are banned due to “Climate Change”, only billionaires will have airplanes.
 
Gangurru
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2019 7:30 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 7:45 pm

Keith2004 wrote:
Gangurru wrote:
SEAflyer97 wrote:
I think I read something the other day aviation only contributes to 1-2% of the CO2 emissions globally? I won't worry about it too much -- cars are by far a bigger problem. It's not like we can't emit any CO2 -- we just need to control it a bit better.

Ahh, here's a stat sheet about it.
https://www.atag.org/facts-figures.html


CO2 is one gas which accelerates climate change, other include methane, water vapour and nitrous oxide.

Aviation is unique because these gases are mostly generated at altitude. Overall, these contribute to a impact which is estimated to be up to four times greater than CO2 produced on the surface of the earth.


Even if this is the case...4 times 1-2% is still a small fraction of the CO2 produced globally, meaning that there are def lower hanging fruit (Cars etc) to go at first


The 2% figure diminishes the total of 859 million tonnes of CO2.
https://aviationbenefits.org/environmen ... te-change/

Aviation and it’s carbon emissions is also growing rapidly. 3% annual growth of total emissions delivers a doubling about every 23 years.

I am employed in the airline industry and I live in Cairns, Australia. It’s a gateway to the Great Barrier Reef, so it’s a tourist town reliant on air travel. I’m acutely aware of the benefits aviation can bring.

That said, I’ve experienced dying coral reefs, droughts devastating local farmers and unprecedented record heat waves that had bats dropping dead from trees due to heat stress. Accelerated climate change is now impacting my life and threatens my community’s livelihood.

From my perspective, size does not excuse inaction. Everyone needs to act, including myself and the airline industry I love working in.
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 3986
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Fri May 17, 2019 8:51 pm

StudiodeKadent wrote:

Modern nuclear technology, at the moment, and presuming a level regulatory playing field is the cheapest way to generate huge amounts of power.



That´s not reality today. Hickley Point C, still under construction, got a strike price of GBP 92.50 per MWh. The Moray East Offshore Wind Farm has a strikeproce of GBP 65.09 per MWh. Round four projects will be even cheaper, and several offshore wind projects in Germany and the Netherlands are zero-subsidy projects now.

I´m living in a city where we have lead and zinc smelters operating - in the 70ties when there was little enthusiam in clean air, and lead concentration were so high in the air that cows dropped dead on fields around due to lead poisining. Clean technology forced on the smelters has certainly killed of that problem. And, and least from my point of view, there is little to believe that a gas emitted in large quantities won´t have a negative influence on the planet in general, minimum in the longer term. Limiting and reducing emissions is certainly not a bad idea.

Going back to aviation: constant innovation is driving efficiency and carbon levels per seat / pax down. And I thing an age limited combined with a technology limit could be a constant driver to reduce emissions. There are still a bunch of DC-9/B737-200 etc flying around - heck Argentina just retired their last F28-4000 couple of days ago. Introducing a law forcing airlines to decomission and scrap planes two generations behind the current / most modern version could be such a way to reduce emissions.

There´s one very recent article which points towards some real-world trials, and its effects. Worth to be monitored and repeated.

ATR served as one of the partners of BRA’s ‘Perfect Flight’ on May 16. Flight TF703 took off from Halmstad Airport in the southwest of Sweden at 10:05 am local time and landed at 11:15 am at Bromma with 72 passengers on board, and produced 46 percent less CO2 than the average of the same flights last year. A blend of 50 percent conventional jet fuel and 50 percent sustainable aviation fuel supplied by Air BP and produced by Neste powered the flight. Neste’s sustainable aviation fuel comes from non-palm renewable and sustainable materials, in this case used cooking oil. Other elements in the flight management process that contributed to reduce to carbon emissions included the direct flight path and higher cruising altitude, TF703 Captain Johan Molarin explained. “The Swedish air navigation service provider prioritized the straightest possible route for the flight and a descent at reduced speed,” he told AIN.
[/quote][/quote]

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2019-05-17/braathens-regional-looking-expand-atr-fleet-drops-a220s

A last word to electric planes: there are enough short range operations around where a commuter sized plane will make sense - I just need to think about the short hops from Amsterdam to UK, Germany and France to think about large scale markets available. Or smaller island hopper, even down to BN-2-size, where planes will rotate back to their base every day. Or in principle the complete Cape Air operation in the North East.
Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A343/346, A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8/9,B742/4,B762/763,B772/77W,CR2/7/9/K,ER3/4,E70/75/90/95, F50/70/100,M11,L15,SF3,S20, AR8/1, 142/143,...
 
LAXBUR
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2018 1:05 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Sat May 18, 2019 4:51 am

lazyme wrote:
LAXBUR wrote:
It is likely climate change itself and the damage it may cause will hit aviation before climate change policy/regulation.

Sweden is an exception when it comes to social and environmental awareness. Very few Americans will alter their plans with the idea it is helping a cause. Especially when many Americans don’t believe there’s a problem. Also, Sweden and the rest of Europe have generally convenient rail options for short and medium distance travel. For instance, I just priced out LA to Sacramento on a direct train and it was $143 one way and 14 hours with one departure time. The same booking window on the same day for a one way airfare is $120+ with multiple departure times and one hour travel time.


Unfortunately not true for Sweden, its a long country with few citizens in it, a rail travel from south Sweden to the far north takes 25-26 hours including 2-4 train changes.

Norway and Finland are in the same boat - long countries and low populated.


The article stated rail in Sweden was seeing increases in traffic while air travel was down. So that’s a lie? The Swedish are lying about their own system?
 
afcjets
Posts: 2817
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Sun May 19, 2019 1:25 pm

There probably won’t be any impact on aviation, unless it occurs or is regulated within the next 11 years. Climate scientists are seeing increased sun spot activity and predicting a mini ace age beginning in 2030 which is expected to last approximately 30 years. Since the sun can’t be regulated and since this is an inconvenient truth to those eager to pass strict regulations like the GND, it is not allowed to be part of the debate even though the sun by far is the biggest factor in climate. Coincidentally, those aggressively pushing the GND say we only have 11 years to get this done before it’s too late. There is a lot of truth to that statement. No one is going to voluntarily fly less during an ice age because they are concerned about carbon emissions warming the planet.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 9479
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Sun May 19, 2019 1:57 pm

afcjets wrote:
There probably won’t be any impact on aviation, unless it occurs or is regulated within the next 11 years. Climate scientists are seeing increased sun spot activity and predicting a mini ace age beginning in 2030 which is expected to last approximately 30 years. Since the sun can’t be regulated and since this is an inconvenient truth to those eager to pass strict regulations like the GND, it is not allowed to be part of the debate even though the sun by far is the biggest factor in climate. Coincidentally, those aggressively pushing the GND say we only have 11 years to get this done before it’s too late. There is a lot of truth to that statement. No one is going to voluntarily fly less during an ice age because they are concerned about carbon emissions warming the planet.


Ok, there are models which predict this. But you are spectacular missing the overall picture. These natural retimes will come and go, the pollution of the atmosphere will stay and add to this. It is the same kind of argument that humankind only adds a few percentages of CO2 and other gasses to the atmosphere, that is true, but the natural cycle is balanced and those few percentages will add over the years. The same will polar ice packs, lowering 1 degrees means that in certain places ice will not meld and just continues to be build up, year after year.

But look at it this way, you are trying to get out of your responsibility to preserve the planet for our children's children. And even if you do not believe in this hardcore science, then there is this:

Image
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 9479
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Sun May 19, 2019 1:59 pm

Of course, this might be the right strategy for you

Image
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
afcjets
Posts: 2817
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Sun May 19, 2019 2:16 pm

I just answered the TA’s question.
 
1989worstyear
Posts: 588
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:53 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Sun May 19, 2019 2:31 pm

Flying-Tiger wrote:
StudiodeKadent wrote:

Modern nuclear technology, at the moment, and presuming a level regulatory playing field is the cheapest way to generate huge amounts of power.



That´s not reality today. Hickley Point C, still under construction, got a strike price of GBP 92.50 per MWh. The Moray East Offshore Wind Farm has a strikeproce of GBP 65.09 per MWh. Round four projects will be even cheaper, and several offshore wind projects in Germany and the Netherlands are zero-subsidy projects now.

I´m living in a city where we have lead and zinc smelters operating - in the 70ties when there was little enthusiam in clean air, and lead concentration were so high in the air that cows dropped dead on fields around due to lead poisining. Clean technology forced on the smelters has certainly killed of that problem. And, and least from my point of view, there is little to believe that a gas emitted in large quantities won´t have a negative influence on the planet in general, minimum in the longer term. Limiting and reducing emissions is certainly not a bad idea.

Going back to aviation: constant innovation is driving efficiency and carbon levels per seat / pax down. And I thing an age limited combined with a technology limit could be a constant driver to reduce emissions. There are still a bunch of DC-9/B737-200 etc flying around - heck Argentina just retired their last F28-4000 couple of days ago. Introducing a law forcing airlines to decomission and scrap planes two generations behind the current / most modern version could be such a way to reduce emissions.

There´s one very recent article which points towards some real-world trials, and its effects. Worth to be monitored and repeated.

ATR served as one of the partners of BRA’s ‘Perfect Flight’ on May 16. Flight TF703 took off from Halmstad Airport in the southwest of Sweden at 10:05 am local time and landed at 11:15 am at Bromma with 72 passengers on board, and produced 46 percent less CO2 than the average of the same flights last year. A blend of 50 percent conventional jet fuel and 50 percent sustainable aviation fuel supplied by Air BP and produced by Neste powered the flight. Neste’s sustainable aviation fuel comes from non-palm renewable and sustainable materials, in this case used cooking oil. Other elements in the flight management process that contributed to reduce to carbon emissions included the direct flight path and higher cruising altitude, TF703 Captain Johan Molarin explained. “The Swedish air navigation service provider prioritized the straightest possible route for the flight and a descent at reduced speed,” he told AIN.
[/quote]

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2019-05-17/braathens-regional-looking-expand-atr-fleet-drops-a220s

A last word to electric planes: there are enough short range operations around where a commuter sized plane will make sense - I just need to think about the short hops from Amsterdam to UK, Germany and France to think about large scale markets available. Or smaller island hopper, even down to BN-2-size, where planes will rotate back to their base every day. Or in principle the complete Cape Air operation in the North East.[/quote]

Problem is, what counts as a "generation"? A 30 year old A320-200 CEO, for example, is still considered part of the "fuel efficient current generation" of airliners due to the relative lack of innovation in the NB sector since the end of the '80s.

Regarding small electric craft, Harbour Air in BC is converting their Beavers to electric:

https://www.harbourair.com/harbour-air-and-magnix-partner-to-build-worlds-first-all-electric-airline/

I'm anxious to see how it pans out. :bouncy:
Stuck at age 15 thanks to the certification date of the A320-200 and my parents' decision to postpone having a kid by 3 years. At least there's Dignitas...
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 4840
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Sun May 19, 2019 2:34 pm

afcjets wrote:
Climate scientists are seeing increased sun spot activity and predicting a mini ace age beginning in 2030 which is expected to last approximately 30 years.


No. There won't be an ice age, mini or otherwise, in the next 30 or 50 years. I honestly won't bother posting all the links that debunk this ridiculous theory, or why it is completely taken out of proportion, as anyone can easily google them. Basically, a temporary and transient low in solar activity might lower the global temperatures by about 0.3 degrees, while we add about 0.2 degrees per decade, and that's not accounting for the acceleration of the global climate change.

This is just another bogus theory in the portfolio or delirious theories against GW that deniers like to cite with absolutely no knowledge of the subject.

What fascinates me, however, is that your are happy to cite the few 'climate scientists' that suit your views but not the vast majority of other climate scientists who are all telling us that we are, in fact, creating a major issue and whose findings are corroborated by observation... What makes you believe some climate scientists and not others?

Back in the real World, the one solution that is both realistic, applicable and effective is a carbon tax on aviation (among others).
We are all going to have to pay for the effects of climate change one way or another, and those who fly do contribute quite a bit to that change. They also happen to represent the wealthiest group of people on the planet, those who can afford to pay for their damaging contribution . And, yes, I am saying that as someone who derives his entire income from the airline business... There is simply no point in denying reality or trying to pass the hot potato down to our children. The sooner we tackle it, the better and cheaper it will be to fix (mitigate is a better word).

Aviation is not necessarily tied to fossil fuels. Carbon neutral fuels are an option and they have been successfully tested in the last couple of decades. Interestingly, they mostly seemed to interest airlines back when oil was expensive and they seem to have fallen out of favor once it became cheap, despite the industry's hypocritical claim that they were driven by environmental conservation...
At the end of the day, money talks. Make jetfuel expensive, artificially or otherwise, and you'll see airlines naturally looking for cheaper options. I won't even care if they pretend to do it for the environment.
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9323
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Sun May 19, 2019 3:15 pm

Francoflier wrote:
afcjets wrote:
Climate scientists are seeing increased sun spot activity and predicting a mini ace age beginning in 2030 which is expected to last approximately 30 years.


No. There won't be an ice age, mini or otherwise, in the next 30 or 50 years. I honestly won't bother posting all the links that debunk this ridiculous theory, or why it is completely taken out of proportion, as anyone can easily google them. Basically, a temporary and transient low in solar activity might lower the global temperatures by about 0.3 degrees, while we add about 0.2 degrees per decade, and that's not accounting for the acceleration of the global climate change.

This is just another bogus theory in the portfolio or delirious theories against GW that deniers like to cite with absolutely no knowledge of the subject.

What fascinates me, however, is that your are happy to cite the few 'climate scientists' that suit your views but not the vast majority of other climate scientists who are all telling us that we are, in fact, creating a major issue and whose findings are corroborated by observation... What makes you believe some climate scientists and not others?

Back in the real World, the one solution that is both realistic, applicable and effective is a carbon tax on aviation (among others).
We are all going to have to pay for the effects of climate change one way or another, and those who fly do contribute quite a bit to that change. They also happen to represent the wealthiest group of people on the planet, those who can afford to pay for their damaging contribution . And, yes, I am saying that as someone who derives his entire income from the airline business... There is simply no point in denying reality or trying to pass the hot potato down to our children. The sooner we tackle it, the better and cheaper it will be to fix (mitigate is a better word).

Aviation is not necessarily tied to fossil fuels. Carbon neutral fuels are an option and they have been successfully tested in the last couple of decades. Interestingly, they mostly seemed to interest airlines back when oil was expensive and they seem to have fallen out of favor once it became cheap, despite the industry's hypocritical claim that they were driven by environmental conservation...
At the end of the day, money talks. Make jetfuel expensive, artificially or otherwise, and you'll see airlines naturally looking for cheaper options. I won't even care if they pretend to do it for the environment.


Excellent points all :checkmark: :checkmark:

I can’t believe somewhat educated people are still in such a state of mental oblivion that they buy GW denials hook, line, and sinker. Let’s just call it what it is: lobbying for high-pollution industry
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 11630
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Sun May 19, 2019 3:29 pm

log0008 wrote:
I suggest some people watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNvzZfsC13o
The simple fact is that using batteries is going to be near impossible for aviation thanks to weight, remembering that even if batteries could be reduced to a weight similar to fuel for energy output the aircraft couldn't land. Most commercial jets can land with 20% fuel, that means batteries need to be 80% lighter than fuel.

This simple stat is the greatest issue

Image


Weight is indeed the main issue, fire safety might be another.

But landing with the weight is no problem, just design the aircraft for it (some more weight).

We're only talking about short haul aircraft anyway, who today already can land at MTOW.

I think batteries have a bright future and will become ever more prominent in our lives, but for commercial aircraft, I don't believe it's a sensible option.

I talked about renewable sources for kerosene, but depending on what we do for everything else, it might even make sense to continue to use oil as a source, if most other uses for oil are replaced by renewables, recycling, using less plastic, etc.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 11630
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Sun May 19, 2019 3:40 pm

LAXBUR wrote:
The article stated rail in Sweden was seeing increases in traffic while air travel was down. So that’s a lie? The Swedish are lying about their own system?


People who are ditching air for rail are city dwellers, so they don't go north anyway, but south.

Still, if people live in the north by choice, for their love of nature for example, then it's possible they would also like to avoid flying, and have alternatives. Electric coaches maybe ? Electric cars ? Cold makes them more difficult to use, and doesn't help their range.

It's only on this website that I learned that people who loved nature would take a couple commercial flights, then a lead gas powered, gas guzzler beaver or something to go into the "wild" in Alaska to kill moose.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
stratclub
Posts: 1286
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Sun May 19, 2019 9:08 pm

log0008 wrote:
I suggest some people watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNvzZfsC13o
The simple fact is that using batteries is going to be near impossible for aviation thanks to weight, remembering that even if batteries could be reduced to a weight similar to fuel for energy output the aircraft couldn't land. Most commercial jets can land with 20% fuel, that means batteries need to be 80% lighter than fuel.

This simple stat is the greatest issue

Image

Tells it all. The simple fact is that with batteries, for an equivalent amount of energy of every gallon of fuel you would be carrying 292 pounds of fixed weight. For a Cessna's range of 696 miles, gasoline weights 352 pounds, where as batteries would weigh 2,352 pounds. Battery technology is a fairly mature technology and unless some miraculous break through in battery tech comes along, the math is pretty weak for converting aircraft to electric.

In the end, it's the politics of Climate change, not the actual realities of Climate Change that will be the determining factor. Something that is ignored by the climate change proponents is that for the last 30 years or more, none of the computer models about climate have come true essentially because the science for climate is not understood completely.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9323
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Sun May 19, 2019 11:17 pm

stratclub wrote:
log0008 wrote:
I suggest some people watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNvzZfsC13o
The simple fact is that using batteries is going to be near impossible for aviation thanks to weight, remembering that even if batteries could be reduced to a weight similar to fuel for energy output the aircraft couldn't land. Most commercial jets can land with 20% fuel, that means batteries need to be 80% lighter than fuel.

This simple stat is the greatest issue

Image

Tells it all. The simple fact is that with batteries, for an equivalent amount of energy of every gallon of fuel you would be carrying 292 pounds of fixed weight. For a Cessna's range of 696 miles, gasoline weights 352 pounds, where as batteries would weigh 2,352 pounds. Battery technology is a fairly mature technology and unless some miraculous break through in battery tech comes along, the math is pretty weak for converting aircraft to electric.

In the end, it's the politics of Climate change, not the actual realities of Climate Change that will be the determining factor. Something that is ignored by the climate change proponents is that for the last 30 years or more, none of the computer models about climate have come true essentially because the science for climate is not understood completely.


Regardless only an ignoramus on the order of a flat earther sees the plastic waste, increasing energy demands, increasing resource demands, increasing human population, increasing CO2 in atmosphere, massive loss of food chain critical species, destruction of rain forest and polar habitats and thinks ‘hmm we still don’t know where this all leads - let’s take our sweet time on sustainability and reducing human impacts.’
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
stratclub
Posts: 1286
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Mon May 20, 2019 12:47 am

Aaron747 wrote:
stratclub wrote:
log0008 wrote:
I suggest some people watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNvzZfsC13o
The simple fact is that using batteries is going to be near impossible for aviation thanks to weight, remembering that even if batteries could be reduced to a weight similar to fuel for energy output the aircraft couldn't land. Most commercial jets can land with 20% fuel, that means batteries need to be 80% lighter than fuel.

This simple stat is the greatest issue

Image

Tells it all. The simple fact is that with batteries, for an equivalent amount of energy of every gallon of fuel you would be carrying 292 pounds of fixed weight. For a Cessna's range of 696 miles, gasoline weights 352 pounds, where as batteries would weigh 2,352 pounds. Battery technology is a fairly mature technology and unless some miraculous break through in battery tech comes along, the math is pretty weak for converting aircraft to electric.

In the end, it's the politics of Climate change, not the actual realities of Climate Change that will be the determining factor. Something that is ignored by the climate change proponents is that for the last 30 years or more, none of the computer models about climate have come true essentially because the science for climate is not understood completely.


Regardless only an ignoramus on the order of a flat earther sees the plastic waste, increasing energy demands, increasing resource demands, increasing human population, increasing CO2 in atmosphere, massive loss of food chain critical species, destruction of rain forest and polar habitats and thinks ‘hmm we still don’t know where this all leads - let’s take our sweet time on sustainability and reducing human impacts.’

Yes of course. Pollution of the planet certainly is something that needs to be addressed, but seriously, the scientist do not understand CO2's place in all of this. Political agendas that cost trillions of dollars with no benefit to the planet are not a viable solutions. A lot of the "Climate Change" hysteria is not based on hard science, but based on computer models that have proven to be wrong for the last 30 years or so. A worst case scenario based on "what if" worst case scenarios is not true science, it's just political hysteria.

Debating "climate change" is not the topic of this thread, anyway. The topic is how does the climate change hoax effect aviation.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 9323
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Climate Change - Is aviation heading for a slump?

Mon May 20, 2019 12:52 am

stratclub wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
stratclub wrote:
Tells it all. The simple fact is that with batteries, for an equivalent amount of energy of every gallon of fuel you would be carrying 292 pounds of fixed weight. For a Cessna's range of 696 miles, gasoline weights 352 pounds, where as batteries would weigh 2,352 pounds. Battery technology is a fairly mature technology and unless some miraculous break through in battery tech comes along, the math is pretty weak for converting aircraft to electric.

In the end, it's the politics of Climate change, not the actual realities of Climate Change that will be the determining factor. Something that is ignored by the climate change proponents is that for the last 30 years or more, none of the computer models about climate have come true essentially because the science for climate is not understood completely.


Regardless only an ignoramus on the order of a flat earther sees the plastic waste, increasing energy demands, increasing resource demands, increasing human population, increasing CO2 in atmosphere, massive loss of food chain critical species, destruction of rain forest and polar habitats and thinks ‘hmm we still don’t know where this all leads - let’s take our sweet time on sustainability and reducing human impacts.’

Yes of course. Pollution of the planet certainly is something that needs to be addressed, but seriously, the scientist do not understand CO2's place in all of this. Political agendas that cost trillions of dollars with no benefit to the planet are not a viable solutions. A lot of the "Climate Change" hysteria is not based on hard science, but based on computer models that have proven to be wrong for the last 30 years or so. A worst case scenario based on "what if" worst case scenarios is not true science, it's just political hysteria.

Debating "climate change" is not the topic of this thread, anyway. The topic is how does the climate change hoax effect aviation.


Image

In all seriousness, how scientific conclusions on impacts are interpreted relates inherently to the actions the aviation industry must undertake.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: frmrCapCadet, tmu101 and 30 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos