Environmentalists have long complained that the Government's solution to aviation emissions, the EU emissions trading scheme is about as useful as a (vegan) chocolate teapot. That's the ETS, which will, by the EU's own account, reduce industry growth to just 78% by 2020, instead of 83%. But the aviation industry's international lobby group has decided it's the greatest threat to the industry, like, ever.
Giovanni Bisignani, head of IATA - a group set up to complain in a whiny voice whenever anyone suggests that aviation might want to stop shitting on the carpet - used to oppose the ETS as unfair. Now he's arguing that the ETS is going to lead to a patchwork of different schemes, all of which overlap and interlink, which he thinks is far worse than an international agreement. The ETS should therefore be scrapped while everyone starts all over again to work towards a multi-lateral agreement.
I should probably point out that IACO, another international aviation body, has been trying to get an international agreement for several years now. It has been a complete failure, because every country wants their own carriers exempted and everyone else's charged to the hilt. There are no signs that this situation will change, because the industry lost almost $5 billion last year thanks to the recession.
So where does all this leave us? The ETS is rubbish, and that while it exists the UK Government can keep using it as a get-out-of-jail-free card to avoid doing anything about aviation emissions. But is it better than nothing? I'm meant to say yes here, but consider this: if the industry succeeds in overturning the ETS, then the Government might actually have to do something about reducing aviation emissions. The enemy of my enemy?
