Research shows that aviation carbon emissions could be drastically reduced by reorganising the airplane.
getty
When we think about sustainable air travel, we might think about electric planes or sustainable aviation fuel, but these are a long way from being implemented in mainstream travel. Instead, a new study shows that removing business class from airlines could immediately reduce aviation emissions by up to 50% by using planes more efficiently—rethinking cabin layouts could slash emissions.
This takes the emphasis off the challenge of engineering efficiency, defined by “how much thrust an engine generates for a given amount of jet fuel”, and places it on operational efficiency, the “amount of passenger kilometers per unit of carbon dioxide emitted.” After all, carrying more people on each flight means other planes can stay grounded, and fewer planes are needed overall.
The peer-reviewed study from researchers at Linnaeus University in Sweden highlight that:
- Budget airlines are usually more environmentally efficient; they generally don’t offer business or first-class seats, and pack more people in more efficiently, meaning they tend to be more efficient overall. Revenue is generated through services such as baggage, food, or flexible booking.
- Long-haul flights are usually more environmentally efficient, too. They’re in the air for longer, so take-off emissions occur less frequently, and they’re usually operated with larger aircraft with more seats. The study points out that, for the same reasons, larger airports tend to have lower average emissions per passenger.
- Incidentally, the study found that many of the least efficient flights in the highest carbon-emitting countries depart or land in the U.S., followed by China, Germany, and Japan.
And quite often, carbon emissions fluctuate depending on how airlines choose to fit their airplanes out. As the research shows, many airlines use Boeing 777-300ERs, which have a maximum seating capacity of 550, but some fit them with 400 economy seats, while others fit them with only 200—this can make a big difference to each flight’s environmental impact.
The aviation industry accounts for 2-3% of global carbon dioxide emissions, but this figure may be slightly higher due to secondary effects, such as contrails, which trap heat.
It’s a well-known fact that the predominant impact of carbon emissions is caused by a small minority of individuals who fly incredibly frequently, usually in business and first class or private jets—1% of the population is responsible for 50% of global carbon emissions.
The EU Is Planning To Increase Its Spend On Private Jets
Against this backdrop, the EU’s decision to increase its private jet budget could look especially out of step. The EU is planning to spend an additional €3 million on private jets for staff in the European Commission, Parliament, and Council over the next 4 years, taking the total to nearly €15.67 million. The Commission told Politico that no one has been awarded the contractors yet. The increase is really down to volatility in international affairs and the broader geopolitical context, which generate more short-notice travel needs that require staff to use a private jet.
Diane Vitry, Aviation Director at NGO Transport and Environment, believes it shows a lack of commitment and leadership on climate change. Vitry told Politico that the commission should lead by example, “closing the tax loopholes that allow the most polluting form of flying to remain one of the least regulated, and it certainly should not increase its own use of private jets.” The commission added that this is a contract amount and does not mean that the full amount will be spent.
Private jets are something of a hot, political, environmental potato in Europe, particularly in France, which sees a lot of private jet traffic, particularly in the summer months.
France banned short-haul flights where a train alternative of 2.5 hours or less exists, but as The World points out, the most frequent private jet trip in 2022 was between Paris and Nice. It consumes four times more carbon per person than a commercial flight and 800 times more than the train.
The research lands then at an awkward moment for policymakers and airlines alike: while scientists have mapped a path to reducing aviation’s climate impact by up to 50% by filling planes more efficiently, other factors remain that make it difficult. It’s clear that if regulators are serious about cutting carbon emissions in the aviation industry, they need to reward efficient cabins—and rethink their own time in the air.