Aviation is responsible for 13.9% of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions from transport and 2.5% of emissions from all human activity. Between 2000 and 2019, emissions from the aviation sector have risen faster than those from rail, road or shipping – in 2024 alone, GHGs jumped by 5% – while efforts to decarbonize the aviation industry have made little progress.

Recently, however, there have been indications that this may change. The International Air Transport Association (IATA) set a target for international aviation to be 5% less carbon-intensive by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. This will primarily be through the use of sustainable aviation fuels (SAFs), which are typically made from used cooking oil and agricultural waste and mitigate the lion’s share of emissions produced by conventional jet fuel. Canada’s Aviation Climate Action Plan targets net-zero emissions for the aviation industry by 2050 and a goal of 10% use of low-emission aviation fuel by 2030.

Given the sluggish pace at which airlines are replacing jet fuel with SAFs, not to mention the projected growth of air travel, reaching these milestones appears unlikely. Passenger air travel is expected to double by 2050. “Even the most ambitious jurisdictions are falling short of tracking to net-zero,” says Nikita Pavlenko, director of aviation and fuels at the International Council on Clean Transportation’s Washington, D.C., office. “In aviation, there are no silver bullets to decarbonization. In the auto sector, there’s electrification. In the power sector, there’s renewables. In the aviation sector, there are not the same kind of easy answers.”

Others have struck a more hopeful note. Geoff Tauvette, executive director of the Canadian Council for Sustainable Aviation Fuels (C-SAF), a non-profit representing more than 100 industry members, writes in an email that “Canada has all the right ingredients from start to finish to build a leading and made-in-Canada SAF production market.”

While developing a healthy market for SAFs will require a long-term regulatory framework and investment strategy, the smart money is on cleaner fuels, more than initiatives to increase efficiencies, to drive aviation decarbonization in the decades ahead.

Air travel takes off

Between 2013 and 2019, global demand for air travel increased by 50%, jumping another 10% in 2024 – 4% above pre-pandemic levels, an all-time high, according to figures released by IATA in January. IATA expects air travel to climb 6% this year, causing another surge in emissions.

In addition to carbon dioxide, airplanes emit pollutants such as nitrogen oxide and soot and form heat-trapping contrails. Scientists estimate that the net warming effect of these may be up to three times as great as the warming caused by the carbon dioxide emitted.

To realize the 2030 target, airlines would need to boost consumption of SAFs more than 30-fold. Some fear, however, that even if airlines replace 10% of their fuel with low-carbon alternatives by the end of the decade, the climate benefits would be erased by the anticipated growth in the aviation business.

Bending the curve

Reducing the carbon footprint of the aviation sector is one of the most difficult pieces of the energy transition, largely because it requires multiple solutions and the technology required is not yet available at scale. Writing in Nature, a science publication, researchers point out that zero-emission aviation demands a holistic approach, which includes increasing efficiencies in propulsion systems, making improvements to aircraft design and using low-carbon materials.

Carbon reductions in the production of conventional fuel, electrifying ground operations and route planning designed to minimize stopovers all represent additional levers to lighten aviation’s climate impact.

While such efforts are worthwhile, the resulting emission reductions are marginal. Numerous experts have concluded that replacing diesel with SAFs is the most viable near-term pathway for meaningful decarbonization. SAFs are liquid fuels derived from sustainable sources, versus conventional jet fuel that comes from crude oil. The cleaner fuels can mitigate as much as 80% of carbon dioxide in life-cycle emissions compared to conventional fuel. Moreover, “SAF is appealing because you can use it in existing aircraft,” Pavlenko says, noting that the European Union is leading the pack in the deployment of sustainable fuels.

Says Tauvette in an email, “It is critical that government and industry work together to properly assess the impacts and develop an SAF policy that helps reduce actual aviation emissions, supports creating value from Canadian feedstocks by producing SAF in Canada and enhances the competitiveness of the sector.”

A flight path to net-zero

The European Union aims for a 55% reduction in aviation emissions by 2030 and net-zero by 2050, leveraging SAFs and emission trading systems. China plans to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060, focusing on green airports and SAFs. Japan and the United Kingdom also target net-zero by 2050 and have drafted strategies that emphasize sustainable fuel, hydrogen-powered aircraft, and optimized air traffic management.

In Canada, British Columbia became the first jurisdiction in North America to require the use of SAFs in 2023, when the province released its revised low-carbon-fuels program.

The regulations now require renewable fuel to comprise at least 1% of jet fuel starting in 2028, increasing to 2% in 2029 and 3% in 2030 and subsequent compliance periods. The regulations also require a carbon-intensity reduction for conventional jet fuel. (The federal Clean Fuel Regulations set life-cycle carbon-intensity-reduction requirements for gasoline and diesel but does not have a reduction requirement for jet fuel.)

Currently, the high cost of low-emission aviation fuels – often far exceeding that of conventional jet fuels – has prevented widespread adoption. “The reality is that there is going to be a significant cost premium for SAF in the foreseeable future. It’s just going to be more expensive than fossil fuel,” Pavlenko says.

In its 2023 road map, C-SAF put forward an optimistic target of one billion litres of SAF production by 2030. Uptake would result in a 50% reduction, or more, in life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions relative to fossil fuel, which translates into the elimination of approximately 1.6 million tonnes of GHG emissions.

Earlier this year, Boeing announced that it will invest $17.48 million to promote the production of SAF in Canada, an encouraging signal that some investors see a long-term future for decarbonization. “Just getting a handful of commercial scale projects built to produce those second-generation technologies comprises a significant step forward for the industry and would help achieve some of those longer-term targets,” Pavelenko says. Anything less, and “we’re going to fail to achieve our 2050 goals.”

Victoria Foote is a writer and editor who specializes in clean energy and climate.

The post As air travel booms, can the aviation industry decarbonize for real? appeared first on Corporate Knights.

It’s not hard to see why the aviation industry has provoked the ire of climate activists. Flying is responsible for a staggering 5% or so of human-induced global warming and its climate impact is still growing at a rate far greater than almost any other sector.

In this context, a profusion of “green flying” and “sustainability” advertising campaigns has turned the industry into an emblematic example of the debate between growth and sustainability.

Why greenwashing?

The rise in greenwashing litigation can in part be attributed to the relative ease with which cases can be brought. It’s simply a lot easier to attack an airline’s advertising compared to other activities that might be targeted by strategic climate litigation.

Consumers can use legal mechanisms such as commercial practice or consumer protection regulations, as happened in a recent greenwashing complaint to the European Commission filed by consumer groups in 19 countries against 17 airlines.

It’s an effective form of climate action due to the power exerted by advertising on public perception and social norms. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has underscored the importance of reducing demand for flying in the first place, something significantly hindered by adverts that downplay its environmental impact.

A report by Greenpeace and think tank the New Weather Institute claimed that in 2019 airline advertisements influenced 34 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent emissions worldwide.

This litigation is also buoyed by the demonstrable falsehoods that riddle the sustainability strategies of these companies. The pillars upon which their net-zero strategies rest vary from the broadly ineffective to the dangerously fraudulent and facilitate growth in a sector in dire need of reduction.

Airlines all rely on some form of carbon offsetting – planting trees, for instance, to “offset” the carbon emitted by the planes – or sustainable aviation fuel or carbon capture and storage, in order to “mitigate” their climate impacts.

Common litigation strategies

Thus far, there have been six climate change-related cases brought against major airlines (four in Europe, one in the US and one in Brazil). These cases are buttressed by numerous legal complaints taken through the European Commission or the UK and US advertising standards boards which have already successfully ordered Ryanair, Lufthansa and Etihad to pull ad campaigns.

In each of these three cases, authorities found that terminology like “protecting the future”, “sustainable aviation” or “low-emissions airline” amounted to wilful misleading of consumers and breached advertising regulations.

A recent case taken by Dutch campaigners against airline giant KLM is the most daring example yet. Climate action group FossielVrij (Fossil-free) argues that KLM’s “Fly Responsibly” campaign constitutes misleading advertising under EU consumer law.

The group asserts that flying responsibly is impossible at present, and that KLM seeks company growth and increased flight sales, when it should be reducing emissions by reducing the number of flights. KLM said its “communications comply with the applicable legislation and regulations”, but has dropped the Fly Responsibly campaign.

Interestingly, this case builds upon a ruling of the Dutch Advertisement Code Commission and indicates the “snowballing” trend inherent in anti-greenwashing litigation, wherein cases rely upon precedent set by previous authorities. With this borne in mind, the recent 19-country complaint by the European Consumer Organisation could provide the strongest foundation to date for future litigation.

Delta Airlines is also facing a class action suit in the US, brought by a California resident who alleges that by marketing itself as a “carbon-neutral” Delta has grossly misrepresented its environmental impact. This points to a growing understanding of the ineffectiveness of carbon offsetting, a net-zero tactic adopted by almost every major airline.

A Delta spokesperson said the case is “without legal merit” as the airline has “transitioned its focus away from carbon offsets” towards decarbonising its own activities. European companies should follow this case closely as American-style “class action” litigation will soon be made possible in the EU.

Does this litigation have teeth?

These cases might result in companies simply pulling their green campaign while maintaining their existing corporate framework and growth models. More promisingly, recent research suggests that any climate-related case taken against a major emitting company will affect the firm’s value (on average by 0.057% following the filing of a case, and by 1.5% following an unfavourable decision).

In reality, these early cases are merely scratching the surface of what’s possible. Once these cases enter the public conversation, a growing understanding of consumer protection is bound to follow.

In many jurisdictions, such as my home country of Ireland, significant damages can be awarded against companies for misleading advertisement. The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority, which is currently investigating claims of greenwashing in other sectors, will soon be able to fine companies 10% of their global turnover for non-compliance.

While anti-greenwashing litigation might not halt the growth of this industry altogether, it is no doubt an invaluable tool. At its most effective, it can stop blatant profiteering from the climate crisis and force the aviation sector to confront the chimera that is green growth.

Calum Maclaren is a PhD Candidate, Climate Litigation, University College Dublin.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post How a new wave of lawsuits is targeting airline “greenwashing” appeared first on Corporate Knights.

Meanwhile, the very communities meant to benefit from a tourism boom have been grappling with record-breaking summer heat, their landscapes charred by wildfires as global heating alters ecosystems and drives extreme weather at beloved destinations.

The post Blistering heat is ravaging tourism hotspots. Can the industry reinvent itself? appeared first on Corporate Knights.

From a sustainability perspective, all that flying likely undid the climate benefits that accrued during the plane-free skies in COVID’s first year – evidence that pent-up demand for travel still exerts a greater emotional tug than global warming.

Indeed, tourism carbon is mostly about the journey. A round-trip flight for two between Toronto and a Caribbean sun destination for a week of rest and relaxation generates almost two tonnes of greenhouse gases, whereas a typical passenger vehicle produces about four to five tonnes in a whole year.

Yet the footprint of flying hasn’t slowed global demand for ecotourism, which was estimated to generate about US$180 billion in 2019, with revenue expected to almost double by the end of the decade. Much of that market is about nature and wilderness travel and off-grid experiences featuring basic accommodations. According to a survey this year by Booking.com, 71% of respondents wanted to green their travel plans, a 10% increase from 2021.

The urban hospitality sector, at pains to make itself relevant again in the Airbnb era, has sought to secure a slice of this pie with hotels promising sustainability features that go beyond the standard-issue reminders to patrons about used towels.

A U.K.-based energy retailer, Uswitch, earlier this year compiled a ranking of cities with the greatest number of green hotels, based on various public data sources and a so-called sustainability badge introduced late last year by Booking.com. “To achieve the approved sustainable travel badge,” the survey notes, “each hotel has to share their carbon emissions, water consumption, food consumption and waste, animal welfare, and many other environmental factors.”

In the green building industry, net-zero is a building that produces as much energy as it uses. For those of us focused on the climate crisis, there’s a higher bar, to have a building that doesn’t use any fossil fuels.

-Bruce Becker, architect at Becker & Becker

Canadian cities, as it turns out, fare quite well, and especially Vancouver, which isn’t all that surprising, given that the city’s electricity is almost entirely derived from hydro power. According to Uswitch, more than 40% of Vancouver’s hotels qualify for Booking’s sustainability badge, with Stockholm and Toronto ranking second and third globally.

One of the Toronto properties cited is 1 Hotel, a new luxury venue that’s part of the Starwood Capital Group’s vast real estate empire, via a subsidiary called SH Hotels and Resorts. There are eight other 1 Hotels, in places like New York, Tennessee and South Beach, Florida. According to SH’s corporate director of sustainability and impact, Corinne Hanson, “[Starwood founder] Barry Sternlicht, with the inception of the 1 Hotels brand, wanted to create something that was sustainability driven, mission driven, both in its core design and its operations.”

Hanson, who also sits on Starwood’s ESG board, rhymes off some of the features, and they do include variations on the theme of garden-variety green building elements. The company sought to use “found objects” to create some of its decor and sourced its furniture through a partnership with Just Be Woodsy, a Toronto company that salvages wood from felled city trees to makes its products. There’s an onsite composter, with the results used for the facility’s garden and plantings. Hanson says 85% of the hotel’s waste is diverted from landfill, and the goal is to achieve zero waste.

Another feature: that 1 Hotels aims to reduce embodied carbon by using existing buildings where possible. “We always try to look for buildings to repurpose, so we can try to address embodied carbon, even though we might not always be able to offset the total of our embodied carbon,” Hanson says. “We try to be quite transparent about that.”

In the case of 1 Hotel Toronto, this particular claim can be seen as an elegant elision of eco-spin, savvy business strategy and, well, the truth. The building itself, in the rapidly intensifying King West area, was home for several years to another swishy boutique hotel, the Thompson, a Toronto International Film Festival party favourite. It was shut down in 2019 for a “facelift,” per The Hollywood Reporter, so it could be rebranded as a 1 Hotel. The new luxury version was to open in 2020, but that timetable got scotched for all the obvious reasons.

A more compelling example of recycling buildings can be found in New Haven, Connecticut, where the former corporate headquarters of the Armstrong Rubber Co., a fortress-like Brutalist office building that opened in 1970, has been transformed into the Hotel Marcel, part of Hilton’s Tapestry Collection, whatever that means. (The hotel is named for Marcel Breuer, the original architect.) Hilton claims it will be the first net-zero hotel in the United States.

[Starwood founder] Barry Sternlicht, with the inception of the 1 Hotels brand, wanted to create something that was sustainability driven, mission driven, both in its core design and its operations.

-Corinne Hanson, SH Hotels and Resorts’s corporate director of sustainability and impact

“In the green building industry, net-zero is a building that produces as much energy as it uses,” Bruce Becker, an architect who acquired the long-vacant landmark structure, told The New York Times. “For those of us focused on the climate crisis, there’s a higher bar, to have a building that doesn’t use any fossil fuels.”

It’s not easy to determine whether these projects represent corporate greenwashing, a new twist on luxury accommodation or some kind of genuine improvement. Certainly, salvaging a giant concrete edifice from the wrecking ball would seem like a progressive gesture that fully embraces one of the core tenets of the circular economy. With 1 Hotel, however, the storyline seems to include a lot of branding alongside the eco-feature shopping list, although Hanson insists SH is “a cause rather than a brand.”

She acknowledges that Starwood, as a large real estate asset manager, has yet to make public a detailed accounting of its carbon performance, despite the company’s home page proudly announcing that it is both a carbon-neutral company and a signatory of the Principles for Responsible Investment. The first quantified ESG report is expected next year.

Still, one could certainly argue that urban tourism, which makes use of well-trafficked places with transit and infrastructure, is more sustainable than travel to stunning and remote locales found at the far end of complicated and carbon-intensive transportation network. Those journeys may leave a lot more footprints, carbon and otherwise, in places that once had few of them. Who is to say whether it is morally superior to travel to the Far North to take in the tragic majesty of a warming ecosystem as opposed to booking a room in a swanky hotel with all the eco-fixings that also happens to be in the middle of a big city.

Is the trend toward hyper-sustainable hotels merely going to generate more air travel? Given the seeming paradox, what is SH communicating to potential customers looking for sustainable experiences? As Hanson readily responds, “I think that’s the right question.”

The post Are green hotels as sustainable as they claim? appeared first on Corporate Knights.

In 2021, the International Air Transport Association (IATA) set a target for the aviation industry to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. With the sector contributing 2.8% of the world’s total carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion, many airlines are considering carbon-capture-and-storage technologies and electric-powered planes. But these innovations may be years away from becoming scalable solutions. Sustainable aviation fuels (or SAFs), however, are an immediate tool that could help airlines kick-start their green transition.

“The use of SAF is expected to contribute around 65% of the reduction in emissions needed by aviation to reach net-zero in 2050,” says Albert Tjoeng, head of corporate communications for the IATA, which defines an SAF as a non-fossil fuel that has the potential to generate lower carbon emissions than conventional kerosene in its life cycle.

In April, Air Canada committed to investing $50 million in SAFs and other carbon-reducing technologies. And according to IATA, more than 50 airlines around the world have used sustainable fuels.

“Airlines bought every drop of SAF available in 2021,” Tjoeng says. “So airlines want to use SAF. The issue is the supply.”

At the moment, industry standards state that . Scientific trials to prove that aircraft can safely run on a solution that’s 100% sustainable are in the works.

There are a number of sustainable alternatives, some commercially available, some in development. Here’s what could be an eco-friendly power source on your next flight:

Cooking oils

Oils and fats are currently the most accessible option, according to Bradley Saville, a professor at the University of Toronto in the school’s Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry.

“There’s a lot of growth where you’re seeing refineries being reconfigured because it’s low-cost and the infrastructure required for production is perfectly aligned with existing oil refinery technology,” he says. “The compatibility makes it a very attractive initial pathway.”

In the Netherlands, for example, Neste, an oil refining company, has a partnership with McDonald’s. Since 2020, Neste has picked up used cooking oil from 252 of the fast-food restaurants and refines it into fuel.

Dutch airline KLM has been viewed as a trailblazer for its use of cooking oil as fuel on a commercial flight in 2010. One year later, it scheduled more than 200 trial flights between Paris and Amsterdam using biofuel made from used cooking oil. Lufthansa and Continental Airlines followed suit shortly after.

Saville, who has also been assessing sustainable-fuel life-cycle emissions for the United Nations’ International Civil Aviation Organization, says that oils can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 to 90% compared to fossil fuels.

But to be truly sustainable, Saville adds that the best way to produce this fuel is to use excess or unwanted oil and fat that doesn’t pass food-grade standards instead of growing crops specifically for fuel.

His models also show used oil and fat being the cheapest to produce, at US$1,200 to $1,300 per ton.

Biomass and municipal waste

Saville says that biomass, made from algae, crop residues, animal waste, forestry residue and municipal waste, could also have big potential as an aviation fuel.

“If you look to crop and forest residue and leave just the right amount behind to promote good soil quality, you could replace a fairly high percentage of jet fuel,” he says. “Then with municipal solid waste, you’re solving a waste problem and turning it into energy.”

Biomass has the same 80 to 90% reduction as used oils but come at a slightly higher production cost, at US$1,800 to $1,900 per ton. This is one barrier to implementation, Saville explains, and one reason why these fuels are in short supply. Unlike with waste oils, the infrastructure transition isn’t as seamless and supply chains aren’t set up to source and deliver on this in a big way, he adds.

In 2021, United Airlines used jet fuel made from agricultural waste such as corncobs and corn stalks in a normal passenger flight. And in 2016, the airline and Los Angeles International Airport made a pledge to purchase up to 15 million gallons of sustainable aviation fuel using agricultural waste and non-edible natural oils over a three-year period. Saville considers the airline a leader in this sense, noting it has been the only airline that has consistently made other offtake agreements with fuel producers.

In 2017, British Airlines partnered with U.S.-based Solena Fuels to make and use jet fuel from municipal solid waste. It was the first project in the world to attempt to convert municipal waste into a fuel for airplanes.

Synthetic kerosene

Synthetic kerosene, also known as e-kerosene or power-to-liquid, might show the most promise in terms of its ability to reduce the airline industry’s carbon footprint. It is made by combining hydrogen and carbon dioxide. If the hydrogen is generated using renewable electricity (known as green hydrogen) and the carbon dioxide is captured from the atmosphere, models have shown it to have zero, or very close to zero, carbon emissions.

This is a sustainable fuel that is in the earliest stages of development and implementation.

British energy giant Shell is working on establishing synthetic kerosene operations in Germany and the Netherlands. It produced 500 litres of e-kerosene over three months for a KLM flight in February 2021, from Amsterdam to Madrid, that blended the e-kerosene with conventional fuel.

In October 2021, German non-profit atmosfair opened the first production plant, aiming to produce a carbon-neutral product. Lufthansa announced at the time that it had agreed to buy 25,000 litres of the fuel each year for five years. The fuel will be mixed with conventional kerosene.

Then in June, Airbus, Uniper, Siemens Energy and Sasol also announced that they were partnering to open an e-kerosene production facility in Hamburg that would be operational in 2026.

Saville says he can’t provide cost estimates at this time, but numbers provided by the Dutch Ministry for Infrastructure and Water Management in 2021 calculated a production price tag ranging from €1,500 to €6,800 per tonne, which translates to US$1,800 to $8,200.

What Saville does project, however, is that these options will be mainstream in the next seven or eight years.

“We’ll just be scratching the surface, but we’ll be on a clearer path,” he says. “It will be important for broader policy support and cooperation to take place amongst a bunch of different stakeholders and federal government. This will ensure we can increase production and build the infrastructure.”

The post Three sustainable fuels that could be the future of green aviation appeared first on Corporate Knights.

“Canada has given its aviation industry a free ride on climate change for too long,” write Lyn Adamson, co-chair of ClimateFast and Joe Vipond, president of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) in a recent op-ed for the Ottawa Citizen.

They add that Canada’s 2012 action plan for aviation “was developed solely with the airline sector, did not require any reductions in climate emissions until 2050, has no credible plan to do so, and has allowed emissions from that sector to increase by 35%.”

Due in September, the updated plan is “once again being developed without public consultation,” they write, raising concerns it will fail to reduce emissions from the fastest-growing source of climate pollution in Canada.

The David Suzuki Foundation has a pre-written letter urging federal transport and environment ministers Omar Alghabra and Steven Guilbeault to mandate a reduction in aviation emissions.

Meanwhile, the global aviation industry is growing adept at paying lip service to the need to cut emissions, while focusing its real efforts on the ongoing turbulence of post-pandemic supply and demand problems, writes the New York Times. The sector has made innumerable concerted, ongoing, and self-interested efforts to undermine or delay efforts to reduce emissions.

In Canada, “emissions from Canadian airlines increased by 75% between 2005 and 2019 to over 22 million tonnes a year; equivalent to the emissions from five million passenger vehicles,” Adamson and Vipond say.

“More than half of global aviation emissions are produced by 1% of super-emitters—people who fly monthly or take more than three long-haul flights a year,” they add, while “about 90% of the world’s population—including the vast majority of people in developing countries most harmed by climate change—hardly ever fly.”

Failing to hold the Canadian aviation industry responsible for its emissions has national and international consequences, said Doris Greenspun, CEO of the Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario, in a ClimateFast news release. “Every sector of our society must be transformed if we are to preserve a livable planet for our children. Air transportation is no exception.”

“That is why more than 30 health, environmental, faith-based, and youth groups are calling upon the federal government to ensure that its new action plan for aviation emissions halts the growth of emissions from the airline industry,” write Adamson and Vipond.

Canada has given its aviation industry a free ride on climate change for too long.

-Lyn Adamson, co-chair of ClimateFast and Joe Vipond, president of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment

While Canada has no 2030 airline targets, Denmark has committed to achieving 100% fossil-fuel-free domestic flights by 2030, while the Netherlands plans to reduce emissions to 2005 levels by the decade’s end, the op ed states. France is banning short-haul flights, while the UK has explored a “frequent flyer” tax.

But Carbon Brief recently reported that the UK may not be the best model to consider for aviation emissions planning. The government’s breezily named “Jet Zero” strategy is meant to address what its own Climate Change Committee (CCC) has repeatedly warned is a critical gap in its national climate strategy.

Though Jet Zero pledges net-zero aviation by 2050, the promise will depend on as-yet uncertain “breakthroughs” in sustainable aviation fuels and zero-emissions aircraft, Carbon Brief explains.

And while electric planes may soon be flying in airspace near you, Canary Media writes, their impact on emissions will be “minuscule”: battery limitations mean these planes will not be able to replace the heavy, long-range aircraft that produce the “vast majority” of aviation emissions.

In the absence of real technological breakthroughs, UK aviation emissions will rise by 14 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) from 2018 levels by 2050 under Jet Zero, with passenger numbers increasing 70% by 2050 from 2021 levels.

Even if the promised tech breakthroughs held true, sector emissions would still stand at 19 megatonnes of CO2e in 2050, emissions that would need to be mechanically removed from the atmosphere for the UK to meet its net-zero target.

But “removal technologies are still in their infancy, and there is uncertainty about whether they will scale up sufficiently,” Carbon Brief says.

The UK’s aviation strategy alsp stands firmly opposed to efforts to reduce flight demand or airport expansion. “Our approach for decarbonizing aviation will focus on the rapid development of technologies,” the Jet Zero authors say. “Our analysis shows that the sector can achieve jet zero without the government needing to intervene directly to limit aviation growth.”

That approach runs directly counter to CCC recommendations, notes Carbon Brief: “Under the CCC’s central pathway for reaching net-zero by 2050, outlined in its Sixth Carbon Budget report, aviation demand would be limited to growth of no more than 25% by 2050, when compared to 2018 levels.”

This article is republished from The Energy Mix. Read the original article.

The post Airline industry emissions are sky high – what is Canada doing about it? appeared first on Corporate Knights.

One encouraging outcome of the UN climate summit in November was a clear recognition that the days of coal-fired power are numbered. The Glasgow Climate Pact that came out of the summit is the first multilateral climate agreement that explicitly notes the need to move away from the black rock that still generates about 36% of the world’s electricity.

Even so, the pact leaves much to be desired. The final wording was watered down in the face of fierce lobbying by big coal producers and consumers, notably India and China. Signatories committed in the end only to “phase down” rather than “phase out” the use of coal. Given such foot-dragging, the spotlight now falls on who is willing – or not – to back up the Glasgow agreement’s words with action. To their credit, the U.S., the E.U. and, most recently, China have pledged to cut public financing of new coal projects in other countries. That commitment sends a powerful signal to banks that coal has become a risky investment.

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has launched a plan to speed up the closure of coal-fired power plants in the region, starting with Indonesia and the Philippines. Under an initiative known as the Energy Transition Mechanism, the bank would help finance public–private partnerships to buy the generating stations. The ADB support would shorten the time that owners need to recoup their investment and depreciation costs, enabling them to decommission plants five to 10 years earlier than their normal lifespan.

Coal currently generates two-thirds of Indonesia’s electricity and 57% of power in the Philippines. The two countries, joined by Vietnam, aim to retire half their coal-power capacity over the next 10 to 15 years. The ADB estimates that would cut 200 million tons of CO2 a year, equal to taking 61 million cars off the road.

Several dozen NGOs across the region described the plan as “a step in the right direction,” but they also expressed strong misgivings. Among them: fears that the buyout mechanism will incentivize operators of older coal-fired plants to extend their planned lifespan and the lack of any assurance that retired coal capacity will be replaced by renewable energy. Time will tell whether these concerns are justified. In the meantime, the ADB deserves marks for putting its money where its mouth is.

Zero: Croatia Airlines

In fairness, we should probably cut some slack to a small company struggling to keep its business aloft in tough times. Yet we would be remiss not to draw attention to Croatia Airlines’ dismal emissions performance at a time when the aviation industry is under growing scrutiny for its role in global warming.

The Zagreb-based carrier, which operates just 13 planes, ranks dead last in the Airline Sustainability Benchmarking Report, published in October by the Centre for Aviation (CAPA), which conducts market research for the aviation and travel industry. Croatia Airlines reported CO2 emissions of 122 tonnes per million passenger kilometres, more than double top-ranked Wizz Air, a low-cost airline based in neighbouring Hungary.

Other poor performers among the 52 carriers surveyed are Turkish Airlines, Japan Airlines and British Airways, while Wizz Air is closely followed at the top of the list by Shanghai-based Juneyao Airlines, Ireland’s Ryanair and Norwegian Air Shuttle. Air Canada ranks 15th. The findings are based on 2019 data – in other words, prior to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Aircraft generate about 3% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. However, “flight shaming” has become a popular tactic among environmental activists thanks to air travel’s high profile and its frequent association with the higher per-capita carbon emissions of the rich and famous.

Robin Hayes, chief executive of JetBlue Airways, has warned that it is only a matter of time before Americans find more environmentally friendly alternatives to flying. “This issue presents a clear and present danger if we don’t get on top of it,” he told analysts in early 2020.

The age of an airline’s fleet can make a big difference to its emissions performance. The Croatians rank 229th out of 258 carriers operating Airbus A320 aircraft and 111th out of 122 operators of Airbus A319s, according to EX-YU Aviation News. The airline ordered four newer – and cleaner — Airbus A320neo models in 2015 but has recently been in talks to cancel the deal because of financial strains.

Fingers crossed that the airline – and other carriers – will soon find more fuel-efficient planes – and more eco-friendly fuel – at a price they and their passengers can afford.

The post Heroes and Zeros: Asian Development Bank vs. Croatia Airlines appeared first on Corporate Knights.

That very approach that helped unleash the economic potential of Alberta’s oil sands can now be reimagined to drive progress to the growth markets of the future. In the low carbon economic transformation, Canada is well equipped to lead the way and supply growing global markets with zero-carbon products and technologies.

There are three key ingredients from AOSTRA that should inform government support for decarbonizing and diversifying our economy:

1. Right goal: Investment should avoid areas that involve incremental advances and focus instead on aspects that leverage innate competitive advantages, are disruptive and go beyond immediate commercial interests.
2. Right structure: Full backing and long-term capital from government, but independently delivered.
3. Right scale: Sufficient funding to realize the goal while taking into account available human and natural capital as well as industrial infrastructure.

If the federal government, working in partnership with provinces, takes this type of proactive approach now, it can help struggling regions thrive in the transition to a net-zero economy. Doing so will help to diversify Canada’s commodity risk, insulating us from the whims of a volatile global market that is vulnerable to structural disruption as the electrification of vehicles threatens up to one-third of the demand for crude oil.

The great strides made in the oil sands since 2000 in terms of GHG and cost reductions put the industry in good stead to supply global markets for some time to come, albeit with margins likely much slimmer than the industry used to enjoy. There now remains little doubt that disruptive large-scale growth opportunities are no longer centred on combustion of fossil fuels, but rather on what the Energy Futures Lab calls future-fit hydrocarbons, which include carbon fibres, activated carbon, hydrogen and sustainable aviation fuels.

The oil and gas extraction sector directly employs roughly 100,000 salaried and hourly people. It contributed 5.6% of our GDP in 2019 and provided $131 billion in annual export revenue last year, up 32% from 2015 (when oil prices hit a valley), but the value of exports is expected to drop significantly in 2020. Alberta Innovates estimates that oil sands revenue (which represents about two-thirds of Canada’s five million barrels per day of oil production) will dip to $27 billion in 2020.

The sector’s vulnerability to downturns in the global market puts Canadian workers and our economy at risk. During the most recent crash in oil prices, Rystad Energy said that “Canada leads the list of those in trouble” as Canadian oil companies plan to reduce production and capital expenditures to $14.5 billion – down 21% from the 2016 to 2018 average. Company restructuring plans are now emerging as investors seek greater returns in light of market volatility. Cost containment pressure and the move to automate the industry could lead to fewer, not more, jobs in Canadian oil- and gas-producing regions. An estimated 7,700 jobs were already lost in the Canadian oil and gas sector between March and April of this year.

As an illustration of the oil sector’s long-term decline, energy ​stocks’ share​ in the S&P 500 has fallen from a recent highpoint of 14% in 2009 to less than 3% today.

The opportunity

While the pandemic-induced market crash of the last few months was triggered by an unprecedented situation, the outlook for the sector was already troubled before COVID-19. The one-third drop in oil demand resulting from the temporary economic lockdown is a glimpse into a not-too-distant future where electrification could disrupt demand on a similar scale. According to BNP Parabas, “the economics of oil for gasoline and diesel vehicles versus wind- and solar-powered EVs are now in relentless and irreversible decline.” While the world will require tens of millions of barrels of oil per day for years to come, there is no avoiding the fact that we are living in an era of energy transformation.

Canada is home to a number of companies that already know the benefits of getting ahead of global market shifts. TransAlta Corp., a 109-year-old predominantly fossil-fuel power producer, ramped up its wind and hydro investments and spun these off into a separate company. TransAlta Renewables is now worth more than its parent.

Wind, solar and hydro aren’t the only options for diversifying. While still dwarfed by global crude markets, we know that there are potential multibillion-dollar markets close to the conventional energy industry that don’t involve combustion: bitumen-based carbon fibres and activated carbon, hydrogen, renewable jet-fuels and geothermal energy. On the broader natural resources front, Canada is a treasure trove of low carbon commodities the world needs to decarbonize, and we are producing those commodities in an increasingly low carbon manner.  Notably, Canada is one the top-five producers of important minerals for rapidly expanding battery markets, including nickel, cobalt and graphite (and soon lithium from Alberta’s oilfield brines could be added to that list). We have the resources and  industrial ecosystem to be a North American hub for battery production and zero emissions vehicles including freight trucks and buses. 

These markets will grow quickly, driven by policy and economics – and Canada has all the ingredients to be a supplier of choice.

Carbon fibre, activated carbon and hydrogen potential

Carbon fibres (CFs) and activated carbon may be the least well understood of these opportunities for the oil sands and the ones with the most disruptive potential.

Activated carbon (AC) is a form of carbon with small, low-volume pores that increase the surface area available for adsorption or chemical reactions. Due to its high degree of microporosity, one gram of activated carbon can have a surface area of 3,000 square metres. The high surface area provides many useful applications. Further chemical treatment often enhances adsorption properties.

Commercial application of AC includes methane and hydrogen storage, air purification, solvent recovery, decaffeination, gold purification, metal extraction, water purification, medicine, sewage treatment, air filters in gas masks and respirators, filters in compressed air and teeth whitening. Alberta Innovates has done a preliminary market analysis and assessed the potential of using bitumen to make AC.

For the period of 2017 to 2023, global demand for AC is expected to be 1.3 million metric tonnes. If 15% of this demand could be satisfied by oil sands, it would represent asphaltene (the stuff that makes the oil sands so viscous) and bitumen demands of 316,000 metric tonnes (at US$2,500 per tonne) and 36,000 barrels per day, respectively. If oil-sands-derived AC could capture 15% of the total global AC market by 2030, it would create asphaltene and bitumen requirements of 1.4 million metric tonnes and 160,000 barrels per day, respectively, generating $21 billion in annual revenue.

Composed mostly of carbon atoms, CFs possess unparallelled strength and stiffness (carbon fibre is five to 10 times stronger than steel and twice as stiff) coupled with low density (making it lighter than aluminum) and high resistance to corrosion. This makes the material particularly well suited for use in electric vehicles and aviation, and commercial polymers.

Currently, most commercial CFs are made from polyacrylonitrile (PAN), and a small fraction of commercial CFs are made from petroleum pitch, mostly outside of Canada. The supply chain for making carbon fibre from PAN spans three continents, with production costs starting at about US$18/kilogram (kg) for PAN-derived CFs. Demand at the current cost is about 100,000 tonnes per year. If costs were halved to US$9/kg, some experts believe that demand would increase tenfold based solely on automobile sector uptake, with Alberta Innovates estimating a potential $44 billion in annual revenue from CFs by 2030. (Canadian CF production on this scale could help Ontario become the lowest-cost manufacturer of lightweight frames for aviation, freight and personal vehicles.)

Canadian-made CF using Alberta bitumen could be the solution for low-cost carbon fibres. Asphaltene, which makes up 15 to 20% of bitumen, is a promising feedstock for making CFs and AC. If we can crack the cost nut of extracting CFs and AC from bitumen, it has the potential to deliver four times the revenue from Alberta’s current bitumen output. By diverting 30% of current oil sands activity to high-value advanced materials such as carbon fibre, activated carbon and asphalt binder, Alberta Innovates estimates the added economic potential could be in the range of $84 billion annually (including $19 billion from asphalt binder), while reducing GHG emissions from combustion by over 120 MT CO2 per year.

Materials companies such as BASF, Zoltek, Lafarge and Mitsubishi Chemicals, not surprisingly, have their eyes on CFs as a future market. Alberta Innovates is engaged with the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and three private sector partners on scaling up CF production from Alberta bitumen. One potential first application: CF hydrogen storage tanks.

Globally, Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) recently characterized hydrogen as a clean-burning molecule that could become a zero-carbon substitute for fossil fuels in hard-to-abate sectors of the economy, including as feedstock for heavy industry. The cost of producing hydrogen from renewable sources will continue to fall, but we need to ramp up demand to drive down costs and build out the delivery infrastructure. BNEF argues that this will not happen without government targets and subsidies that BNEF pegs at US$150 billion of cumulative subsidies globally by 2030. The goal of these policy investments would drive the delivered cost of hydrogen down to $15 per million British thermal units (MMBtu) in many parts of the world by 2030 and to $7.4/MMBtu by 2050.

In Canada, an industry collaboration project is already underway in Alberta. The Alberta Zero Emissions Truck Electrification Collaboration (AZETEC) project, a $15-million, three-year joint venture between Emissions Reduction Alberta, AZETEC and the private sector, is focused on building out the infrastructure that’s needed for a wider network of hydrogen fuelling stations for long-haul transportation. Trucks are the dominant mode of moving freight in Canada, and while the largest long-haul rigs make up only 9% of the freight truck population, they account for 47% of commercial truck fuel consumption. The AZETEC project is focused on the largest vehicles on our roads. While it is uncertain whether hydrogen or electricity will power heavy freight vehicles of the future, there’s a strong consensus that both technologies will have a role to play.

The prospect of producing zero-carbon, “green” hydrogen from renewable electricity where oil and gas are produced today is within our grasp. In our Building Back Better Power scenario, we envisioned a 10-year program of wind and solar development in Alberta and Saskatchewan, complemented by energy storage and enhanced transmission capacity both within the provinces and with their hydro-rich neighbours. The investment in Alberta alone would top $50 billion over the 10-year period and create more than 50,000 full-time jobs for the rest of the decade. The $5 billion per year average capital expenditure is of the same order as recent capital investments in Alberta’s energy sector (15 to $20 billion per year in oil and gas, $3.5 billion per year in utilities). The Travers Solar Project in Vulcan County, Alberta, which has received $500 million from a Danish group, is an indicator of the growing investor interest in the solar-rich resources of southern Alberta and Saskatchewan.

Geothermal potential

Canadian resources of geothermal energy – the heat found deep underground in hot aquifers and rocks – are concentrated in western Canada and can be harnessed for both power and heat for buildings. Exploratory drilling costs usually represent a major component of the cost of developing geothermal energy, but western Canada’s geothermal energy resources have been largely located as the result of oil and gas exploration and drilling. The expertise and technical know-how required for geothermal energy development already exists in the Canadian oil and gas industry and constitutes another strategic advantage, with both the supply chains and skilled human resources readily available. In addition to their potential for baseload power production, the Energy Futures Lab suggests that geothermal resources could be used to create new district heating systems for pulp- and paper-making and agriculture.

Aviation fuel potential 

A final example of a global market that may grow substantially is sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). The World Economic Forum’s report on the Net Zero Challenge puts the cost of abating a tonne of CO2 in the aviation industry at $200, compared to cement at $90 and steel at $130. Given that the COVID-19 pandemic has forced the global aviation industry to restructure at a unprecedented scale, it remains to be seen whether the industry will stick with carbon-reduction goals established under the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA). It’s worth noting, though, that under the International Energy Agency’s Sustainable Development Scenario, SAF is projected to grow to 18 billion litres by 2025 and 37 billion litres by 2030. Companies such as Finland’s Neste have made bold moves to diversify into sustainable biofuels and have already developed profitable niches serving airports such as Bergen, Oslo and Stockholm, three of only five airports globally that offer regular SAF distribution. In the past five years following Neste’s big bet on sustainable biofuels, its share price has more than tripled to bring its value up to C$40 billion, while the value of oil and gas peers has been cut in half.

Given the economic opportunity in moving beyond carbon and Canada’s commitment to reach net-zero by 2050, Building Back Better means that we need to harness the growing global markets for zero-carbon products and technologies as part of the transition away from producing oil and gas.

The proposal

In previous installments of this Building Back Better series, we have outlined the economic and job-creation potential in Canada from public and private sector investments in retrofitting buildings, decarbonizing the power grid, greening heavy industry, electrifying vehicles, promoting active transportation, and innovating nature-based climate mitigation solutions in forestry and agriculture. For the oil-producing provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland, these proposals include $200 billion in capital investments that generate 140,000 full-time jobs over the 10-year recovery program. All combined, the lion’s share of this activity would be in Alberta – $140 billion and 100,000 full-time jobs.

In addition, the federal government should create a $40 billion Natural Resources and EV Innovation Fund, which would be endowed through the issuance of sovereign green bonds, taking advantage of low borrowing rates.

Building on the lessons from AOSTRA, the Natural Resources and EV Innovation Fund would need:

1. Right goal: The goal of the fund should be rapid research, development and deployment to de-risk breakthrough technologies and to produce zero-carbon commodities, batteries and EVs on a commercial scale to sell into growing global markets where Canada has a competitive advantage. Opportunity areas include bitumen-based carbon fibre and activated carbon as well as green hydrogen, geothermal heat loops and sustainable aviation fuels. Assuming moderate levels of follow-on investment by the private sector to deploy the new technologies to produce the zero-carbon commodities (financed via debt capital markets for which the federal government could offer public incentives), it’s estimated that investment in these sectors on this scale would create up to 100,000 permanent high quality jobs over the next 10 years.

2. Right structure: The fund will be independently delivered by an organization with strong technical capacity, with government setting goals that prioritize public benefit over the long-term with two buckets: one for R&D and one for commercial deployment. As with AOSTRA, the ownership of intellectual property (IP) should remain in public hands so that it will be widely used for the benefit of all Canadians. Organizations with the technical expertise to deliver on this mandate include Alberta Innovates and Emissions Reduction Alberta. And unlike AOSTRA, which was strictly an R&D vehicle, the fund would have a mandate (in an expanded and revamped version of the Strategic Innovation Fund, or possibly as a new sleeve within the Canadian Infrastructure Bank) to make direct investments to deploy these commercial technologies and would take minority equity stakes in exchange for these direct investments. Two important things to note:

• AOSTRA made their investment over 30 years and then hit the exit after they had proven the viability of SAGD (steam-assisted gravity drainage) technology in extracting bitumen from underground oil sands deposits. Given the realities of today’s strained provincial and corporate balance sheets, the pace of change in global energy markets, and the scale of the incumbent industry (which makes the stakes higher for getting it right), we are looking at a compressed time scale that requires more investment in less time.
• It is important to get IP protection right. We can invest a lot of money and develop successful technologies, but we may lose out on benefits if we lose control of IP. The government will need to fund 100% cash for R&D up to the point of deployment in order to own IP for any research that involves non-Canadian entities. Industry co-investment may give partners usage rights but not IP ownership.

3. Right scale: A 10-year investment by the federal government of $40 billion ($5 billion for R&D and $35 billion to deploy and crowd in private sector investment), with the objective of securing triple that amount from the private sector and support from provinces as per their capacity. The fund would be fully endowed to insulate it from changing political priorities and to take advantage of low interest rates.

While drawing lessons from AOSTRA, we also need to be mindful that 2020 is not the 1970s in two important respects:

• The scale of human capital and infrastructure for Canadian innovation today is much greater than in 1974, when AOSTRA was established.
• In response to post-pandemic recovery needs, the federal government is poised to make large-scale (once-in-a-generation levels) public investment over the coming years to help Canada build back better.

We have a lot more to lose if we don’t invest wisely now to create an economic engine for the future. At the same time, the current moment offers an opportunity to act quickly and place Canada in a leadership position in fast-growing global markets.

We estimate that the prize for getting this right is being the supplier of choice for $125 billion zero-carbon commodities per year by 2030, while creating 1,000,000 person years of employment.

To paraphrase the philosopher George Santayana, those who learn from the past are empowered to win the future.

Ralph Torrie is senior associate with Sustainability Solutions Group and partner at Torrie Smith Associates.

Céline Bak is the founder and president of Analytica Advisors.

Toby Heaps is the CEO and co-founder of Corporate Knights. 

With files from Aleena Naseem and Laura Väyrynen

Notice to reader: Please be aware some of the figures and other details in this white paper have been updated in the Final Report to reflect feedback.

The post Building Back Better with a Natural Resource and EV Innovation Fund appeared first on Corporate Knights.

What would it look like if the restrictions applied to lessen tobacco use were applied to GHG-emitting products, to reduce our carbon emissions? Think restrictions on advertising, promotion and lobbying, as well as public education, warning labels and restrictions on use.

In December, ClientEarth, a non-profit UK-based environmental law group, started calling for a ban on advertisements from fossil fuel companies. As we’ve seen with cigarettes, effective public policy can help to reduce demand for harmful products, with minimal cost or interference with the rights of individual Canadians. In a world awash with fossil fuels, not encouraging demand could be one key to effective climate action.

The Tobacco Epidemic

While researchers knew in the 1940s and ’50s that smoking causes lung cancer, smoking remained ubiquitous for decades, including in aircraft, restaurants, workplaces and bars. Even after public knowledge of smoking’s deadly health impacts became widespread, tobacco advertising was effective in recruiting new generations of young smokers and in normalizing smoking as a central part of North American society, with the result that tens of millions of North Americans have died of smoking-related illnesses since the release of the U.S. surgeon general’s 1964 report definitively connecting smoking with lung cancer.

In recent decades, increasingly strict tobacco regulation has been effective in reducing the prevalence of smoking and saving tens of millions of lives. Today, Canada regulates every aspect of the manufacture, sale, labelling and promotion of tobacco products and taxes them heavily, as part of the federal and provincial governments’ strategies to protect the health of Canadians from tobacco-related harm. As a result, smoking rates in Canadians aged 15 and older have fallen from roughly 50% in 1965 to 15% in 2017.

Lessons for Climate Policy

A number of industries currently spend tens of billions of dollars each year directly or indirectly promoting ever-greater consumption of GHG-emitting goods and services. The auto industry spent $35.5 billion in 2018 across 14 key markets, with $18 billion in the U.S. alone. The fact that Canadians drive the dirtiest, highest-GHG-emitting fleet of vehicles on the planet, according to the International Energy Agency, is a testament to the effectiveness of the auto industry’s promotion of SUVs and pickup trucks. (Ford’s F-Series pickup truck has been Canada’s top-selling vehicle 11 years in a row.) Similarly, the growth in GHG emissions from commercial air travel, up 32% from 2013 to 2018, is fuelled by massive travel industry advertising – worth more than $20 billion in the U.S. alone in 2019.

If we’re to learn anything from tobacco regulation and if governments are serious about curbing the worst impacts of climate change, they should restrict the advertising, promotion and sponsorship of GHG-heavy goods and services. While we’re tackling the issue, consumers should also be warned about the emissions impacts of their purchases through notices and warning labels on gas pumps, gas bills, airline tickets, automobile and appliance stickers, and other communications (similar to how the state of California posts warnings about the presence of carcinogens). We give consumers access to nutrition labels so they can make informed choices about the foods they purchase; the same consumer right-to-know should apply to embedded GHG emissions, as well as those that would arise when using a potential purchase.

The WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, to which 181 countries (including Canada and the U.S.) are parties or signatories, provides an excellent model for new domestic and international rules to reduce demand, and also to reduce the political influence of industries that profit from increasing GHG emissions.

The climate crisis poses a clear existential threat to human civilization. The UN Environmental Programme’s 2019 Emissions Gap Report states that we need to reduce GHG emissions by 7.6% per year, starting in 2020, and we need to achieve net-zero GHG emissions by 2050 if we are to avoid ever more dangerous forms of climate disruption. Despite knowing of this problem for decades, our past and current policies have proven largely ineffective at reducing GHG emissions.

Greta Thunberg is correct: we have failed her generation. The rules, as she has said, have to be changed to achieve the dramatic reductions in GHG emissions mandated by the world’s leading climate scientists. Repurposed tobacco regulations might just help to lead the way.

Richard Corley’s interest in climate policy is informed by his background and work in engineering, law and clean technologies.

The post What if the restrictions on tobacco ads applied to climate-polluting products? appeared first on Corporate Knights.

Despite ongoing technological progress throughout the aeronautical industry, the area of air transport that remains grounded is one where the need – often caused by disasters like Typhoon Haiyan – is the greatest. Ideally, what is required is an aircraft that can land and take off without an airstrip, carry tonnes of supplies and personnel, is stable once it drops its payload (eliminating the need for ground crew), has a small horsepower engine that is frugal on fuel, can travel thousands of kilometres and is tough enough to withstand rough weather and even gunfire.

An international horse race to commercialize such a craft has pitted established aeronautical corporations like Lockheed Martin against dynamic entrepreneurial innovators like California’s Worldwide Aeros and Canada’s Solar Ship. The demand for a low-maintenance, dependable cargo craft nimble enough to navigate mountains and hills and land on uneven ground, ice, snow and water comes not only from military and government, it also comes from the mining, oil and gas sectors and isolated aboriginal groups.

The key difference between such a vessel and, say, the venerable Goodyear blimp, is the ability to transport huge payloads, says Tim Kenny, director of engineering at Worldwide Aeros, which is headquartered in Los Angeles. The company is one of the frontrunners in the development of such an airship, thanks largely to eight years of financial backing by the United States Department of Defense and NASA.

One of Worldwide Aeros’ flagship vessels is called the Aeroscraft, which underwent extensive field-testing last year but won’t be ready for commercialization until 2016. The 70-metre-long vessel has been built with unique features enabling it to fly in and out of remote areas that a helicopter or plane can’t safely access, Kenny says. “You could take in a whole platoon – about 30 or 35 guys – with vehicles and supplies, all at one drop.”

Helium highs

The Aeroscraft has long been in development and features vertical takeoff and landing, allowing it to manoeuvre in mountainous and heavily treed areas. It also boasts speeds of nearly 185 kilometres per hour. Called a hybrid, the craft is a combination of lighter-than-air technology, meaning it gets the majority of its lift from a gas like helium, which is contained in a highly engineered skin made of a material like Kevlar.

A smaller percentage of its lift comes from heavier-than-air technology: gas engines and aerodynamic wings. One of the design features that Worldwide Aeros has developed and patented is called control-of-static heaviness (COSH), enabling vertical ascent, descent and hovering. Equally importantly, COSH stabilizes the craft after it unloads, Kenny explains. COSH technology was inspired by submarines, which compress air to allow water in to create ballast for descent. For ascent, the compressed air is released, forcing the water out. With the Aeroscraft, the helium is either compressed or expanded by allowing air into specially designed envelopes in the balloon, creating upwards and downwards mobility. “We never have to dissipate helium or exhaust it outside,” Kenny says.

Since the military has provided the majority of financial backing, Worldwide Aeros has focused on fulfilling its demands and needs with a workhorse vessel that is expected to command annual lease fees of $25 million or $55 million, depending on airship size. But the company is also drafting plans for the creation of recreational aircraft for high-in-the sky casinos and wilderness excursions for well-heeled tourists.

Competing with Worldwide Aeros is U.K.-based Hybrid Air Vehicles (HAV). It has developed several prototypes that are capable of landing on a variety of surfaces, including ice, desert and water, according to spokesperson Chris Daniels. HAV even created a lake, funded by the U.S. Navy, at its U.K. facility for testing water landings of a 15-metre-long prototype.

The HAV’s 92-metre airship can carry a payload of 50 tonnes. Engineers are working on scaling up, creating a 90- to 120-metre-long aircraft with a payload potential of 200 tonnes – enough to carry vehicles and other heavy equipment. “The bigger they are, the more proportionally they can lift,” says Daniels. “That’s why the airships of the 1920s and 1930s were so massive.”

Kevlar edge

Those were the halcyon days for airships, an era that ground to a halt when the massive hydrogen-filled Hindenburg exploded in 1937 and left 36 people dead. Hydrogen is highly flammable while helium, used in today’s airships, is not. But hydrogen is not necessarily as dangerous as the tragic accident implied. The Hindenburg’s biggest weakness was the material used to contain the hydrogen, on top of the fact that in those days it didn’t have high-tech radar, advanced weather forecasting, GPS and many other gizmos commonly used today.

That, says Daniels, is a key reason modern dirigibles are different. Today’s airship skins, for example, are virtually indestructible. Made of a lightweight, carbon-fibre Kevlar weave, airship skins have undergone gruelling testing. One dirigible was fired at 200 times with 50-calibre bullets and stayed inflated for two hours, he says.

The creation of a viable commercial industry of high-payload hybrid aircraft is tantalizingly close, and HAV, like Worldwide Aeros, is also planning luxury travel airships. But the more immediate need is in northern Canadian aboriginal communities and with industries like mining. This would include delivering fuel and supplies and flying people in and out of remote First Nation communities, many of which have expressed strong interest in the idea. With an airship that is 100- to 120-metres long, “you could carry 200 people,” Daniels says.

A few years ago, HAV negotiated the sale of two aircrafts with Canadian company Discovery Air, which provides aviation and logistics services in northern environments. That deal was never consummated. Nonetheless, the vessels are a natural fit with Canada’s rugged and desolate wilderness. HAV’s “long-endurance” aircraft can stay airborne for five days, providing a platform for geological surveys, surveillance and academic research such as monitoring animal migration and melting rates of Arctic ice packs.

HAV is also refitting a long-endurance aircraft that it sold to the U.S. Army for work in Afghanistan in 2012. The vessel was grounded after one 90-minute maiden flight, a result of budget cuts and the accelerated withdrawal plans of American forces from Afghanistan. But HAV, in what could be described as the deal of a lifetime, bought back the $100 million craft for $300,000. It plans to use the vessel as a demonstration craft to help sell a new generation of models in 2016. “We are currently dealing with interest from some Canadian mining companies,” says Daniels.

Solar assist

The company faces tough competition from Toronto-based Solar Ship, which is developing three prototype airships with different cargo capacities. Some Solar Ship prototypes are solar-electric powered, which has less range and carrying ability than a hybrid airship. However, the company is also developing its own hybrid, utilizing both solar and gasoline power with customized electric motors – a compromise between the twin demands of sustainability and efficiency, says founder and CEO Jay Godsall.

Solar Ship, which is focused on testing its smallest hybrid airship called the Caracal, is carving an aeronautical niche in Canada that piggybacks on the venerable northern bush plane system. Last year, this objective was bolstered by the injection of a $2.2 million grant from Sustainable Development Technology Canada, which has helped considerably to refine a prototype that can dependably service remote communities and the increasing needs of mining companies. Godsall says that the demand is accelerating due to climate change. Canada’s famous ice road system – the main conduit for goods and services to the North – is deteriorating due to warming temperatures.

Solar Ship’s aircrafts are nimble, requiring a short runway for takeoff and landing –100 metres with a full payload and 50 metres empty. Solar Ship is also developing amphibious aircraft that, like HAV’s prototype, can land and take off from water. Its Caracal airship, meanwhile, has come to the attention of the World Health Organization, which is exploring use of a prototype for delivery of medical supplies to strife-torn nations in Africa, such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and Burundi. The immediate plan, says Godsall, is to start training pilots who already fly with non-governmental organizations like Mission Aviation Fellowship and the Flying Doctors Society of Africa.

Global challenges like extreme weather events and military conflicts are, unfortunately, not going away. This will accelerate the demand for the dirigibles currently being engineered in hangars around Canada, the U.S., Europe and the U.K. First seen floating above the English Channel in 1785, then reincarnated in various permutations over two centuries, it seems the time has finally come for airships to fill the skies.

The post Up, up and away appeared first on Corporate Knights.