Aviation Lawyer & Attorney : Chevalier Allen & Lichman Law Firm : Airport Development, Environmental Law

less) effect on climate change than CO2 at ground level.  David H. Fahey, a research physicist for NOAA, has a small issue with that statement, when he responded to Rep. Ehlers' question about the effects of emissions.  Dr. Fahey stated that although CO2 does not affect atmosphere any differently at altitudes, nitrous oxides, a component of aircraft emissions, do.  That, in turn, affects ozone creation and methane. “That aspect of aviation is one that stands out,” Dr. Fahey stated. Moreover, Dr. Fahey continued, aircraft emission create water vapor in the upper atmosphere, i.e., contrails, which in turn creates clouds, which in turn creates "radiative forcing," a primary element of climate change.

Finally, Mr. Elwell wanted to make clear that the U.S. was not falling behind Europe in terms of environmental impact of aircraft emissions.  European aviation emissions, Mr. Elwell testified, have increased three times faster in recent years than U.S. emissions. He says that the U.S. is happy to participate in market-based environmental initiatives, as long as they are “based on mutual consent.”

This led to perhaps the testiest exchange, though came when the Subcommittee heard from Ambassador John Bruton, Head of the Delegation of the European Commission to the United States.  Ambassador Bruton testified about the controversial inclusion of aviation in EU's Emission Trading Scheme.  He believed that because aviation emits far more CO2 than other industries included in ETS, such as steel and oil, aviation must be included in the ETS.  Everyone seemed to acknowledge, however, that ICAO was the proper forum, although Ambassador Bruton indicated that the EU has attempted to go that route, but did not receive any indication that ICAO would take any action.  The members of the Subcommittee apparently did not cotton to the idea that the EU was taking the lead on this issue.  It also should be pointed out that the Lieberman-Warner Bill, currently before the Senate contains an emissions trading program.

Dr. Gerald L. Dillingham, Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues, for the U.S. Government Accountability Office also testified.  It was his belief that the aviation inductry could achieve significant reductions in emissions through the use of "Next Generation Air Transportation System" (NextGen) and an increase in research and development to promote such technologies as biofuels and fuel cells.  NextGen involves new technologies and air traffic procedures that can reduce aviation emissions and incorporates research and development on emissions-reducing technologies.

In short, the industry stated that it was making strides toward fuel efficiency, which would lower the amount of GHG emissions, although a more fuel efficient fleet would also increase the airlines' and aircraft manufacturers' bottom line, as well.  The government pointed to (reasonably) successful efforts made in better management of the airports and airways.  What remains to be seen is what action, if any, the House will take.

Also testifying:

• Captain Mary Ann Schaffer, Chairperson, Air Lines Pilots Association;
• Mark M. Reis, Managing Director, Seattle-Tacoma International Airport;
• Richard L. Altman, Executive Director, Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative; and
• Opening Remarks of Subcommittee Chair, Rep. Jerry F. Costello.

Five environmentalist groups, Friends of the Earth, Oceana, the Center for Biological Diversity, the National Resources Defense Council and Earthjustice, jointly submitted a petition in December seeking the curbs on aircraft engine emissions.  The bases for the petition were:

1. aircraft engines “represent an increasing and potent source of greenhouse gas emissions due in part to the unprecedented growth in air travel;”
   
2. aircraft in the U.S. are responsible for almost half the carbon dioxide emitted from aircraft worldwide;
   
3. “Recent reports show that at altitude, aircraft emissions have a greater impact on global warming than previously understood.” 

EPA has historically followed the approach of the International Civil Aviation Organization, he said, adding that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld this approach as reasonable. Meyers also said international consistency is beneficial as well since aircraft and aircraft engines are international commodities.

Noting that there has been “considerable study” of GHG emissions from aviation, Meyers said the ANPRM is the “next step in our process.” EPA will solicit public comment on potential technological controls for aircraft and engines and operational measures to reduce emissions. EPA also will seek specifics on what is feasible near- and long-term and on relevant cost and safety information. EPA said it planned to coordinate with FAA in response to the petitions.

Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), chairman of the select committee, warned that the panel “cannot let aviation fly under the radar. The impact of these emissions cannot be ignored.” Markey noted that aviation has reduced emissions through technology, but said he also believes the growing number of flights will increase emissions. “Aviation must answer for the heat-trappings of their own success,” Markey said.

He pointed to petitions from various organizations asking EPA to regulate aviation GHG emissions, and said Congress already is considering a cap and trade system. Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Va.) have introduced such legislation, which would tax fuel at the producer level. Markey also noted environmental efforts in Europe and said, “As local governments and other nations move to limit the impact of aviation on the environment, Congress cannot linger in a holding pattern.”

Meyers, however, expressed concern about European caps and trade proposals. The European Commission proposed to include carbon dioxide emissions in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme for commercial flights arriving or departing European Union airports, including U.S.-registered aircraft. The proposal would cap carbon dioxide emissions at the average emission levels between 2004-2006. The proposal would exclude flights from non-European Union countries that have equivalent GHG mitigation measures in place.

“The U.S. and other nations have expressed serious concern about the legality of the proposed EU legislation in the context of both the Chicago Convention of 1944, which established the International Civil Aviation Organization, and bilateral air services agreements,” he said.

FAA shares these concerns, said Daniel Elwell, assistant administrator of FAA’s Office of Aviation Policy, Planning and Environment. “There appears to be a disconnect between perception and performance on aviation emissions, at least in the U.S.,” he said, adding, “In some quarters there is a perception that aviation greenhouse gas emissions are growing out of control and that it needs to be reigned in by emissions caps and taxes.” But carbon dioxide emissions in the U.S. have declined by 4 percent between 2000 and 2006 while emissions in Europe have increased by 30 percent during the same period. Commercial jet aircraft fuel efficiency has improved by 70 percent in the last 40 years, Elwell said.

He pointed to efforts to improve technology and accelerate air traffic management improvements as keys in helping to lower emissions. Alternative fuels also will play a role, he said, as could market-based measures, such as tax incentives, emissions trading or carbon offsets.