Much is at stake for Europe, which has sought to burnish its identity as a significant international actor partly by leading the world on climate protection.
Airlines would have to account for the emissions for the entirety of any flight that takes off from, or that lands at, any airport in Europe — even if that flight begins or ends in faraway cities like Beijing and San Francisco.
The initiative involves folding aviation into the Union’s six-year-old Emissions Trading System, in which polluters can buy and sell a limited quantity of permits, each representing a ton of carbon dioxide.
The goal is to speed up the adoption of greener technologies at a time when air traffic, which represents about 3 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, is growing much faster than gains in efficiency.
Airlines should be able to pass on the costs of permits — most of which they will receive for free — in the form of higher ticket prices, which could rise by as much as €12, or nearly $16, on some long-haul flights.
Even so, many airlines are furious, partly because the cost of compliance could rise sharply in coming years if governments decide airlines must buy a larger proportion of their permits and if demand for the permits and their value rises.
Some of the sternest opposition has come from Europe’s most important trading partners. They have accused Europe of riding roughshod over their national sovereignty.
China and the United States were among two dozen countries calling on Europe to modify or scrap its plans with just weeks to go before the system goes into force.
A judgment at the European Court of Justice expected Wednesday in a case brought by major U.S. airlines against the measures seems unlikely to ease the tensions.
The litigation began when the industry group Air Transport Association of America (since renamed Airlines for America) and three major airlines — United and Continental, which merged last year, and American — complained at the High Court in London in 2009.
The parties argued that the law conflicted with existing aviation treaties and a swath of other agreements and principles. The British court then referred the case to the European court, the Union’s highest tribunal, for a preliminary ruling.
If the Europeans win — which seems likely after a senior adviser to the court in October dismissed most of the arguments put forward by the U.S. airlines — they will feel more confident about moving ahead with the policy.
But the matter would be unlikely to rest there, and there would be more diplomatic tussling and possibly more litigation.
A group of Chinese airlines could follow through on an earlier threat to bring a lawsuit, possibly in Germany, where the authorities will oversee the application of the system to a number of carriers from China.
The Chinese could argue that the European law violates the Kyoto climate agreement by requiring airlines from developing nations, which are exempt from emissions cuts under the Kyoto climate treaty, to bear the same burdens as airlines from wealthier nations.
The ruling on Wednesday could clarify whether a case can be brought on those grounds.
Algeria has already begun a case in France contesting the system, according to the Arab Air Carriers Organization, an industry group that includes the country’s main carrier, Air Algérie.
A spokeswoman for the organization gave no further details. The Algerian embassies in Paris and in Brussels did not return telephone and e-mail messages. A spokeswoman for Air Algérie had no immediate comment.
In the United States, the House of Representatives approved a bill this year that would ban U.S. airlines from participating in the system. A similar bill was introduced this month in the Senate.
The Europeans have offered to exempt incoming flights from the rules if those airlines come from a country with requirements comparable to its own.
Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/business/energy-environment/the-battle-over-aviation-emissions.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
Speak Your Mind
You must be logged in to post a comment.