air traffic and the environment · air traffic and the environment 1 cf. technischer...

DOC_EN\DV\347\347031 29.05.1998 PE 167.177

AIR TRAFFIC AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR RESEARCH DIVISION FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY AND RESEARCH, STOA

BRIEFING No. 2

Air traffic and the environment

DOC_EN\DV\347\347031 29.05.1998 PE 167.177

The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the opinionsof the European Parliament

Summary

This briefing is concerned with the effects of air traffic on the environment. Little research has beendone to date on this topic, which includes the effects on air pollution, noise pollution and the healthof passengers and air crews. Information is given on the relevant EU legislation and proposals putforward for ways of reducing the impact of air traffic.

Authors: Sabine SCALLA, Andrea OTT, Georg WELSLAUHans Hermann KRAUS, Principal Administrator

Directorate BDivision for the Environment, Energy and Research, STOAEuropean ParliamentL-2929 LUXEMBOURGFax: (352) 4300 27718

or


DOC_EN\DV\347\347031 29.05.1998 PE 167.177

Rue Wiertz 60B-1047 BRUSSELSFax: (32) 2 284 49 80

Original language: DE - manuscript completed in December 1997.


DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.1771

CONTENTS

Page

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2. Effects of air traffic on the environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2.1. Pollutant emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2.1.1. Carbon dioxide (CO2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2.1.2. Carbon monoxide (CO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

2.1.3. Nitrogen oxide (NOx) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

2.1.4. Water vapour (H2O) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.1.5. Sulphur dioxide (SO2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.1.6. Effects of pollutant emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.2. Noise pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

2.3. Access traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.4. Other implications for the health of passengers and flight crews . . . . . . . . . . . 10

3. Legal provisions with regard to the effects of air traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3.1. Noise limitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3.2. Reducing pollutant emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

4. Measures to soften the environmental impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

4.1. Noise abatement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

4.2. Measures to combat pollutant emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

4.3. Economic and other measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

5. Conclusion and future prospects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15


DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.1772

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17


1 Cf. Technischer Überwachungsverein (TÜV) Rheinland etc., p. 69 et seq.

2 BT -Enquete, p.1 et seq.

3 Air traffic management - freeing Europe's air space, COM(96)0057.

4 COM(95)0691.

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.1773

EFFECTS OF AIR TRAFFIC ON THE ENVIRONMENT

1. Introduction

Anyone working on ’Europe’s building site’ in Brussels who would like to go home for the weekendmight, for example, take the train to Hamburg, 500 kms away as the crow flies, a seven-hour journeycosting approximately ECU 100 (return ticket). For about the same money they could go by air(return flight), with a door-to-door journey time of two hours. - Those studying the topic of transportlinks within Europe must be aware of falling prices and the public popularity of air travel.11

Towards the end of the 1980s the causes of the greenhouse effect, destruction of the ozone layer andthe threat of catastrophic climate change became topics for public discussion. By this time it wasrecognized as a scientific fact that the greenhouse effect was caused by human intervention, throughincreasing concentrations of the long-lasting greenhouse gases carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogendioxide and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).2 In the context of this research, such as that by the GermanBundestag Committee of Inquiry into protecting the earth’s atmosphere (1990), no particularattention was paid to air traffic. It was not until new research was done in the early 1990s thatscientists and politicians concerned with the environment realised that the contribution of aircraftexhaust fumes to air pollution was not a ’negligible quantity’.

Today, at the end of the 1990s, extensive studies have been undertaken on the effects of air trafficon the environment. They reveal disagreement among scientists on the extent and type ofenvironmental impact caused by aircraft exhausts. There is general agreement that the proportion ofair pollution in comparison with that caused by road traffic or industry is still small, but that airtraffic and with it the proportion of environmental pollution it causes will increase in the next fewyears. The EU is responsible for a significant proportion of this development as a result of theliberalization (third stage) of the air transport market which it has been conducting since 1992. In1996 the Commission presented a White Paper on unified air traffic management3, which iscommitted to environmental protection as well as increasing capacity. Also relevant is theCommission Green Paper entitled ’Towards fair and efficient pricing in transport - policy options forinternalizing the external costs of transport in the European Union’.4


5 Knisch/Reichmuth p. 58.

6 Merkel, Konzept für Luftverkehr und Umwelt, in: Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz undReaktorsicherheit, Umwelt 11/1997 p. 445.

7 Cf. Enquiry by the Swiss Transport Club into European airports' commitment to the environment, 1996,p. 12 et seq.

8 TÜV Rheinland etc. p. 15.

9 Verkehrsleistung und Luftschadstoffemissionen des Personenflugverkehrs in Deutschland von 1980 bis2020 (1996), p. 16

10 Government policy of the Netherlands, p. 3.

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.1774

The strands of world trade are becoming increasingly interwoven, leading to an ever-growing needfor transport of people and goods. World-wide, 27% of energy consumption is used for transport.Between 1980 and 1993, air transport had the highest-ever growth rates for passenger transport5, withregard both to quantity (the number of flights) and performance (the number of passenger airkilometres travelled). In Germany alone, air transport grew by almost 90% between 1985 and 1993.6

Research shows a likely annual growth rate of 6.6% for air passenger traffic and 7.1% for cargotraffic.7 According to studies by the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization), in air trafficworldwide in the last 15 years the number of passengers increased 70% to 1.3 bn in 1995, and thenumber of passenger kilometres flown doubled to 2 230 bn. Cargo transport has increased evenmore, from 31 bn tonne kms (1992) to 84 bn (1995).8 There are many reasons for this growth.

The forecast for Europe is that air traffic activities will double by 20109 and pollutant emissions willtreble by 2015.10 The airlines belonging to the Association of European Airlines (AEA) announcedin September 1997 further significant increases in comparison with the previous year: the numberof passenger kilometres up 9.2%, capacity up 7.1%, full use of capacity up 1.5 to 77%. WithinEurope sales were up 8.7%, as much as 9.7% on the north Atlantic route and 7.5% for Asia and thePacific. Cargo traffic increased by 6.3% over the same period, the highest increase again on the northAtlantic route. In the first nine months of 1997 the AEA members overall showed a 10% increasein passenger kilometres. These high growth rates for passenger and air cargo traffic show that theEuropean air traffic market is developing rapidly and environmental pollution through air traffic willbe an increasing problem in the coming decades.

2. The effects of air traffic on the environment

2.1 Pollutant emissions

Comparisons of journeys by various means of transport show that in general, aircraft have the highestprimary energy consumption and the highest carbon dioxide emissions, cf. Diagram 1. Although


11 TÜV Rheinland etc., p. 1

12 Knisch/Reichmuth, p. 42

13 Knisch/Reichmuth, Table 9, p. 52 and explanations on p. 51

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.1775

modern engines consume about 40% less than the first generation engines in use 30 years ago, it isthought that engine manufacturers will not be able to keep pace with the increase in air trafficmentioned above and that more advanced technology will not be able to achieve a reduction inenergy consumption and of specific emissions11. Emissions from aircraft, depending on the heightat which they fly, are made up of nitrogen oxide (NOx), water vapour (H2O), carbon monoxide (CO),sulphur dioxide (CO2) and hydrocarbons (HC) particularly methane (CH4). Other emissions fromaircraft, which to date have not been so thoroughly researched, are fuel additives (including anti-oxidants, additives to reduce electrical conductivity, antifreeze and biocides).12

Diagram 1: Primary energy consumption and total emissions from various transport modes,for a 1000 km journey by one person13

Car withoutcatalyticconverter

Car withregulatedcatalyticconverter

Diesel car Rail Bus Air

Primaryenergyconsumption(MJ)

1 050 1 100 1 000 730 410 1 500

CO2 (g) 75 000 79 000 73 000 33 000 30 000 110 000

CO (g) 6 240 1 450 110 14 67 100

SO2 14 15 61 30 25 42

NOx 1 020 260 230 61 340 520

HC withoutCH4 (g)

380 51 24 4 37 56

CH4 24 13 5.5 0.6 3.1 9.8


14 Cf Umweltgutachten 1996, p. 188

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.1776

Dieselparticles (g)

0 0 47 2.6 14 2

(Notes: total emissions: direct emissions plus the proportion of emissions produced by power stations and refineries,in round figures.

The figures take account of various kind of road (mix) and journeys to stations and airports by public transport; the raildistance is set 10% longer, the flight distance 10% shorter.

For cars, a load of three passengers is assumed, for public transport the figures used are the average loads for WestGermany. Reference year is 1993. Apart from CO2, emissions are not totally comparable, as their potential damagingeffect is sometimes different, cf. 2.1.6 below.)

2.1.1. Carbon dioxide (CO2)

The transport sector is responsible for 20% of carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels(oil, coal, wood etc.) worldwide, and two thirds of this is in the industrialized countries. It isrecognized that CO2 emissions contribute to the so-called greenhouse effect. This includes CO2

emissions from air traffic; it is however difficult to give an exact figure. It can be assumed that CO2

emissions from air traffic contribute to climate change (the greenhouse effect).

2.1.2. Carbon monoxide (CO)

Carbon monoxide results from incomplete combustion of fossil fuels and is oxidized in theatmosphere to CO2, which affects climate.

2.1.3. Nitrogen oxide (NOx)

Worldwide, two thirds of nitrogen oxide is produced from burning fossil fuels. Every year 2.8million tonnes of nitrogen oxide are released into the atmosphere from international air traffic14.Through the action of strong sunlight, nitrogen oxide (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs)form ozone (O3) at ground level, which is responsible for 7% of the greenhouse effect and affectsclimate particularly if it accumulates in the tropopause region (6 to 18 kms above ground), althoughthe extent of this effect is not yet certain. Because of their longevity, substances in the tropopausearea can be carried long distances by atmospheric currents, and spread to higher atmospheric levels(cf. Diagram 2). If the nitrogen oxide emitted from aircraft is carried upwards to the ozone layerabove the stratosphere, it can destroy the ozone. This is particularly likely for flights above thetropopause. The problem of destruction of stratospheric ozone by aircraft exhausts has not beensufficiently explained by scientists, as not enough is known about vertical atmospheric transportprocesses at the heights flown by subsonic aircraft. At all events, account must be taken of the


15 From: Lufthansa ’Balance’ - Environmental report 1996/1997, June 1997, p. 44

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.1777

kilometers above sea level

50

ozone layer

20stratosphere

10troposhere

8

4

2

sea level

pole equator

possibility that aircraft emissions contribute to destruction of the ozone layer. This is particularlyrelevant with regard to future supersonic traffic, which is likely to fly at heights around 20 kms.There are several recent plans to develop such aircraft. In Germany, air traffic regulations bansupersonic flights for civil aviation.

The sharp increases in ozone concentrations occurring frequently in summer have a direct effect onhuman activities (respiratory passages and circulation are affected).

Diagram 2: Construction of the earth’s atmosphere15

2.1.4 Water vapour (H2O)

The water vapourreleased into thestratosphere by airtraffic increases thegreenhouse effectand thus affectsclimate. Aircraftfuel is primarilymade up of carbonswhich are burnt inthe engines withoxygen from the airto produce carbon


16 A European aviation charge, p. 1.

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.1778

dioxide and water. The emission of water vapour, together with the water vapour produced bymethane oxidation, is largely responsible for the increase in the amount of water vapour in thestratosphere, where amounts are normally small. In the tropopause area, aircraft create vapour trails(cirrus clouds) made up of fragments of ice, which, if the surrounding atmosphere is damp enough,lead to increased cloud cover. Although sunlight can reach the earth’s surface even through thinclouds of ice, loss of heat from the earth is greatly reduced even by thin cloud cover. This leads tohigher temperatures on the earth’s surface.

2.1.5. Sulphur dioxide (SO2)

The aircraft fuel kerosene normally contains sulphur, which is released through combustion in theform of sulphur dioxide. The effect of the emissions is determined by their height above ground aswell as the amount; at normal cruising heights the effect is considerably greater than at ground levelbecause emissions take a long time to be broken down, background concentrations are low and theyare strongly affected by radiation. In the particularly sensitive polar regions (see Diagram 2) aircraftfly at the height where the ozone layer is thinning. The amounts of sulphur emitted are large enoughto significantly increase sulphate aerosol concentrations in the lower stratosphere, and thus tocontribute to thinning of the ozone layer. During periods of smog in winter, sulphur dioxide atground level can also affect respiratory passages.

2.1.6. Effects of pollutant emissions

At present, air traffic contributes only two or three percent of the emissions responsible for thegreenhouse effect.16 This figure by itself, however, tells us nothing about air traffic’s actualcontribution to the greenhouse effect.

Three different atmospheric layers are relevant to air traffic: the troposphere, the tropopause and thestratosphere. Pollutant emissions have a different effect in each layer.

In the troposphere (height up to 20 km, up to 10 km above the poles) all pollutant emissions remainfor about an hour, forming ozone and smog. In the tropopause, the area between the troposphereand the stratosphere, CO2 remains longer in the atmosphere, while the other pollutants are brokendown within ten days. In this atmospheric area however, NOx, through the effect of sunlight, canform ozone. There is also the otherwise ’harmless’ water vapour, which at this height leads to cloudformation and thus contributes to climate change. At this level of the atmosphere, air traffic is theonly source of emissions. Although research has concluded that pollutant emissions take monthsto reach the tropopause, so that by then they have already (partly) broken down, the stratospherewhich lies above the tropopause (up to 50 km above ground) can also be affected by pollutantemissions, as there are also aircraft flying at this height. At this height NOx can cause either anincrease or decrease in ozone. This particularly affects the chemically unstable ozone layerapproximately 24 to 48 km above the ground, as its life-preserving function as a filter sustains lasting


17 Vedantham/Oppenheimer, p. 10.

18 Süddeutsche Zeitung, 31 October and 1 November 1990, p. 74; Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), 6 October 1992.

19 Memorandum on Transport and Environment to the Council of Ministers and the Greek Presidency(1993), p. 5.

20 BMUNR/BMV, Konzept, p. 7.

21 Cf. FAZ, 6 October 1997, p. 39.

22 Vedantham/Oppenheimer, p. XII.

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.1779

damage from these emissions. Water vapour and sulphate dioxide also affect the balance of ozonein the stratosphere.17

Bioclimatologists have noted that the higher in the atmospheric level pollutants are emitted, thelonger they remain, and thus the more damaging is their effect.18 These pollutants remain 50 to 100times longer in the atmosphere than pollutants produced at ground level.19 Even the normal watervapour produced by all combustion and visible in the sky as vapour trails at this height becomes apollutant with an effect on climate. Finally, air traffic in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphereis the only directly anthropogenic source of pollutants.20

Research by the TÜV Rheinland has shown that 45% of carbon monoxide (CO), 68% of unburnedhydrocarbons (HC) and 23% of nitrogen oxide (NOx) from jets are emitted at heights around 1500metres, i.e. during takeoff and landing (see Diagram 3).

Takeoffs and inland flights emit 39% CO, 22% HC and 47% NOx up to a height of 11 kilometres,where the air become thinner and colder. The remainder (16% CO, 10% HC) and a further 30%nitrogen oxide are released into the tropopause and stratosphere by long-haul jets and theEnglish/French Concorde (at a height of 16 to 20 km).

In addition, heavily-used air corridors such as the north Atlantic route and the dense network ofairways over Europe show significantly higher concentrations of harmful exhaust gases in theseparticular areas. Nitrogen oxide emissions over the north Atlantic are estimated at about 40 timeshigher than the natural level.21

According to a 1994 prognosis by the Environmental Fund, air traffic in the year 2050 will beresponsible for 4.2 to 7% of carbon dioxide emissions worldwide22, while current emissions are


23 Memorandum on Transport and Environment to the Council of Ministers and the Greek Presidency(1993), p. 5.

24 Government policy of the Netherlands, p.3.

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.17710

estimated at 2.6%23 and pollutant emissions in 2015 at 3 to 4%24. Studies agree that pollutantemissions have not yet reached their peak, and that technological improvements will not be able tokeep pace with the increase in air traffic and associated environmental pollution.


25 TÜV Rheinland etc, p. 56.

26 Eurobarometer No. 18, October 1982, quoting from: The Environmental Situation in the EuropeanCommunity in 1986, Commission, Brussels/Luxembourg 1987, p. 79.

27 Cf. Bender/Sparwasser, Grundzüge des öffentlichen Umweltschutzrechts, 3rd edn., 1995, p. 317 Rn. 25.

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.17711

Diagram 3: Flight heights in relation to distances covered (average values, simplified)25

2.2 Noise pollution

One of today’s most urgent environmental problems is noise. A survey of European citizensconducted in 1982 showed that they viewed noise as the second most serious environmental problemwhere they lived.26 Over half the population regards road traffic noise as the worst offender; insecond place in this subjective view of noise nuisance is air traffic27. Although it has been possiblein recent years to reduce noise pollution by setting lower noise limits, as air traffic has grown at thesame time this has only resulted in slowing the rate at which noise levels increase.

There are various sources of noise at airports, from jet engines and aerodynamic flight, i.e. jetstreamnoise. Access traffic also causes noise through the transport of people and goods to and from theairport.

Noise pollution has various effects. Those which are not directly harmful to health includeinterference with communications, disturbance to rest and relaxation, reduced efficiency whencarrying out difficult tasks and reduction in the quality of life. Health can be damaged in the longterm through changes in blood pressure, heart rate and hormone levels. Noise can also cause stress,


28 Further information on the subject of noise pollution from traffic is given in Working Paper W-17 inParliament’s Environment, Public Health, and Consumer Protection Series: ’Noise abatement policy inthe EU’.

29 See: BT publication 13/8619.

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.17712

tiredness, insomnia, predisposition to heart disease, high blood pressure, hearing problems and evendeafness.28

2.3 Access traffic

Because most airports have poor rail and bus connections and offer cheap or even free parking atairport car parks, heavy access (road) traffic must be taken into account as well as air traffic. Airpollution, noise and the local impact of transport infrastructure mean that the effect on the region ofthe road traffic produced by the airport is at least as harmful as the air traffic itself.

2.4 Other implications for the health of passengers and flight crews

Modern aircraft at cruising heights are flying in a hostile environment characterized by considerablyreduced air pressure (200 hPa), extremely low temperatures (-70EC), high ozone concentrations andlow water content. The aircraft therefore has to rely on its own pressure and air conditioning system.The air needed to create and maintain cabin pressure and for the air conditioning is taken directlyfrom the engines’ compressors. The pressure is reduced and the air cooled from approximately 250ECelsius and circulated into the cabin.

As the flight gains height the air pressure in the cabin falls slightly, which reduces the oxygenpressure and thus the amount of oxygen in arterial blood. While this is hardly noticeable to a healthyperson, the body’s normal compensation mechanisms such as quicker breathing and increased heartrate put too much stress on those with cardiac or respiratory problems, which produces clinicaldecompensation symptoms.

Because of the amount of carbon dioxide breathed out, CO2 concentrations in the cabin can rise,which can make many passengers feel unwell. Gas given off by human beings exacerbates this effect.Sensitive people can find that the deeper and quicker breathing caused by even slightly raised carbondioxide levels can gradually and imperceptibly lead to hyperventilation, which can bring about ashort-term circulatory collapse. The extremely dry air (4.3% to 14.6% relative humidity) can irritatethe eyes and cause the mucus membranes in the upper respiratory passages to dry out.

Another problem is exposure to radiation,29 which is particularly significant on long-haul flights andfor flight crews and those who fly frequently. The amount of exposure to radiation is determined bythe height, length and route of the flight, as there is more radiation over the poles than over theequator. Exposure to radiation is caused by continuous radioactive cosmic radiation which canincrease threefold to a hundredfold for short periods when sunspots erupt. There may also beradioactive cargo in the hold of passenger aircraft, e.g. from medical research or spent nuclear rods.Exposure to radiation produces health problems such as a higher incidence of cancer andchromosome damage. Radiation protection in air travel as on the ground is bound by the principle


DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.17713

that exposure to radioactivity, regardless of the level, must be minimized. The German Governmentconsiders that, in the light of the present state of proven scientific knowledge from epidemiologicalstudies on flight crews and people who fly frequently, there is no proof of an increased risk of cancerfrom cosmic radiation. The amount of exposure to radiation from radioactive cargo is certainly smallin comparison to cosmic radiation. The studies available at present do not prove a causalrelationship with the known consequences of exposure to radiation. Studies are currently beingconducted and their results are expected in early 1998 (Robert-Koch-Institut Berlin, chromosomestudy on 50 stewardesses) and mid 2000 (Heidelberg cancer research centre, study of 20 000Lufthansa pilots).3. Legal provisions with regard to the effects of air traffic

3.1. Noise limitation

After conclusion of the Convention on International Civil Aviation the Community issued twodirectives on noise emissions from subsonic aircraft (Directive 80/51/EEC, OJ L 18, 24.1.1980,p. 26.; and Directive 83/206/EEC, OJ L 117, 4.5.1983, p. 15).The Council Directive on the limitationof noise emission from civil subsonic jet aeroplanes (Directive 89/629/EEC, OJ L 363, 13.12.1989,p. 27) restricts operation to types of aircraft which comply with the standards specified in Part II,Chapter 3, Volume 1 of Annex 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, second edition1988, or equivalent standards. The aim is to reduce aircraft noise by setting civil aviation authoritystandards which take account of environmental factors, technical feasibility and economicconsequences.

The Council also issued Directive 92/14/EEC (OJ L 76, 23.3.1992, p. 21) on the limitation of theoperation of aeroplanes covered by the ICAO Civil Aviation Convention (Part II, Chapter 2, Volume1 of Annex 16). This directive provides that noisy aircraft as defined by Chapter 2 must be taken outof service throughout the EU during the period from 1 April 1995 to 31 March 2002. This means thatfrom 1 April 2002 the only civil subsonic jet aeroplanes which may operate in the EU Member Statesare those which comply with the stricter noise limits of Part II, Chapter 3, Volume 1, Annex 16 ofthe ICAO Convention. Consequently subsonic jet aircraft with a by-pass ratio of less than two cannotoperate into Member States’ airports unless they meet certain requirements or have been in serviceless than 25 years. Exemptions are possible for aircraft from certain, particularly poor developingcountries. For airlines whose business would otherwise be adversely affected, the above period canbe extended by not more than three years. To facilitate the technical conversion of aircraft, short-term exemptions may be granted for a transitional period. Moreover no airline will be forced toreduce its fleet of aircraft by more than 10% per year.

The directive on environmental impact assessment (85/337/EEC, modified in 1997 by 97/11) appliesto public and private projects, i.e. building projects and other interventions in the naturalsurroundings and landscape. The Member States must hold a public hearing to assess the impact ofprojects involving aircraft which require a runway more than 2100 metres long, at which theenvironmental impact must be determined and evaluated.

3.2. Reducing pollutant emissions


30 cf. Merkel loc.cit.

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.17714

Annex 16 Part II of the ICAO Civil Aviation Convention set limit values for pollutant emissions.In 1981 the first limits were set for the pollutants HC (hydrocarbons), CO (carbon monoxide), NOx

(nitrogen oxide) and soot. Developments in air traffic and engine technology made it necessary toupdate these limits. This was done in Annex 2 to Annex 16, Part II by an ICAO Council Decisionof 24 March 1993, which reduced NOx emission limits by 20%. These new limits are applicable toengines manufactured after 31 December 1999.

The EU Council of Environment Ministers has agreed to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2),methane (CH4) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2 ) by 15% by the year 2010 (reference year 1990).30

4. Measures to soften the environmental impact

At present there is no systematic comparability of environmental data on European airports. Acomparison of data collected from airports which are particularly environmentally aware with thosewith lower standards shows huge differences. Among the various effects of air traffic on theenvironment, the first to come to public attention was noise. All European airports have adoptedmeasures in the past to reduce noise, but it is difficult to compare their efforts because of differentmeasurement procedures. For instance, the noise indexes used to measure noise at various Europeanairports differ widely. (Amsterdam: cost unit (CU), Paris/Charles de Gaulle: Psophic Index (PI) andLDN; Copenhagen: decibel (dB(A)) etc.). There are at least six different units of measurement, ofwhich decibels are most widely used. Normally levels are set for day and night (approximately 11pm. to 6 am.)in three different noise zones. These figures are then weighted with various factors suchas noise level, time of day, total flight movements per year, etc. Comparison between indexescalculated in this way is therefore practically impossible.

Many airports impose a noise-related landing fee, but it is very small in comparison with otherairport charges (see Diagram 3), and the effectiveness of the widespread bans or restrictions on nightflying is lessened by the many exemptions granted.

Further developments in telecommunications may be expected to slow the increase of air traffic andthus reduce its environmental impact, since much business travel could in future be replaced byvideo conferences, video telephones, etc.

4.1. Noise abatement measures

The following possible measures to reduce noise emission may be considered:

• aerodynamic improvements, e.g. laminar wings with better streamlining to reduce airresistance, thus reducing noise and fuel consumption;

• noise-insulating aircraft parts;


31 cf. Survey by the Swiss Transport Club, loc.cit. p. 24

32 cf: A European aviation charge, p. 10

33 TÜV Rheinland etc. p. 85 et seq

34 Taken from Working Paper W-17 of Parliament's Environment, Public Health and Consumer ProtectionSeries, 'Noise abatement policy in the EU', p. 22; Source: OECD, Combating noise in the 1990s, Paris1991, p. 73.

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.17715

• more powerful engines for steeper take-offs, reducing the area affected by noise;

• avoidance of particularly noisy take-off and landing manoeuvres;

• bans on night flying over residential areas near airports; there is no absolute ban on nightflying at major European airports; because of the many exemptions, such as closing particularrunways, allowing quiet aircraft etc., many major airports have only minor restrictions on nightflights; some airports such as Amsterdam, Charles de Gaulle, Frankfurt am Main, Hamburg,Copenhagen and London are open round the clock;31

• noise-related take-off and landing fees, eg. by levying supplementary landing fees based onthe amount of noise produced or reducing existing landing fees (bonus system) for quieteraircraft; the success of this kind of economic inducement depends on the level of the fee beingsignificant in comparison with airlines' other costs;

• introduction of environmental licences to limit noise around airports; increased use of suchlicences could force airlines to acquire quieter aircraft;

• including military jet aircraft in noise abatement measures.

In practice, the most-applied measure is noise charges; approximately half the major airports and20% of the smaller airports in Europe already levy such charges32. Frankfurt am Main introduced theworld's first noise charges (1974); since 1994 it has had a bonus system which rewards avoidanceof noisy flight manoeuvres. 75% of the aircraft operating in Frankfurt are the modern 'Chapter 3'type.33

Diagram 4: Fees charged for certain types of aircraft at Zurich in 199034

Category Aircraft type Fee

I DC 8 Series 20-40 US$ 250

II Boeing 707 Series 100-400 US$ 165

III Boeing 707 BAC 1-11, Boeing 727 US$ 125


35 Vedantham/Oppenheimer, p. 10

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.17716

IV Boeing 737 Series 100/200, 720B, 727 Series 100/200 US$ 85

V Airbus A 300, Boeing 737 Series 300, Boeing 747, 757, 767 US$ 0

4.2. Measures to combat pollutant emissions

The following measures may be used to reduce pollutant emissions:

• Limiting flight heights, to limit the damaging effects of emissions:

• Updating emission standards for aircraft engines; in particular, revision of the limit values andstricter absolute limits should be considered to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions;

• Making aircraft fuel more environment-friendly;

• Obliging airports to compile and publish certain minimum basic data, to make significantenvironmental auditing possible, eg. measuring the amounts of the pollutants NOx, CO, HCand Benzol and drawing up a CO2 balance sheet:

• pollutant-related landing fees.

The following measures have been adopted in practice: Norway imposes a passenger tax or 'greentax'. Since 1 January 1995 a tax has been levied on all inland and international flights. A similar taxhas also been levied in Sweden since 1989. The Scandinavian countries tried, at the 1996Intergovernmental Conference on revision of the Maastricht Treaty, to introduce this type ofenvironmental tax at Community level. The majority, however, were against this proposal and it isnot included in the draft Amsterdam Treaty.

Article 15 of the Chicago Convention states that no fines or taxes may be levied on transit flights.

In the area of environmental protection the currently recommended ICAO guidelines apply only totake-off and landing and not to other phases of the flight.35

4.3. Economic and other measures

Progress on environmental damage caused by air traffic can also be achieved by adjusting taxes. Atpresent air traffic enjoys tax advantages worldwide in comparison to other means of transport.

Pursuant to Article 8.1(b) of Council Directive 92/81/EEC, mineral oil for commercial air transportis free of excise duty throughout Europe. Abolishing excise duty exemption, as advocated by theGerman Government, would have the initial direct result of increasing running costs, which could


36 See Konzept Luftverkehr und Umwelt, p. 25 et seq.; on this topic see also the interview withCommissioner Ritt Bjerregaard, ’EU vows tough stance on greenhouse gases’ in EUR-OP News 2/97, p.1 and Walle: ’Umweltschutz braucht Balance - keine Polarisierung’ in: Lufthansa Umweltbericht1996/97, p. 49

37 Cf. Merkel, op.cit. p. 446

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.17717

reduce the amount of air travel to a certain extent. In all probability it would also indirectly resultin higher prices, so that for domestic and European journeys, high-speed trains could become aserious alternative to the aeroplane. A tax on kerosene at European level could of course lead todistortions of competition in relation to third countries. A worldwide tax would therefore bepreferable, but in practice this would require laborious revision of numerous international treaties.At present excise duty exemption under the above directive is being reviewed on the initiative of theGerman Government.36

Cross-border passenger air travel in the EU is generally not subject to VAT, in contrast, for example,to passenger transport within Germany. Here, too, air traffic has a tax advantage over other formsof international transport. It would be sensible at least to put all forms of transport in the EU onthe same footing with regard to VAT, which would in particular strengthen the position of high-speed trains.

Support for research is also important in reducing pollutant emissions. Research in Germany intooptimum noise reduction and fuel efficiency in aircraft bodies aims to produce the improvementsshown in the table below in comparison with 1994, through improved materials and aerodynamicsand electronic piloting. In addition the latest engines promise further potential savings. Thefollowing table illustrates both these points (Diagram 5).

Diagram 5: Potential savings expected through technical improvements(Basis: 1994)37

Aircraft body improvements Engine improvements

Fuel consumption 10 to 25% 20 to 25%

Pollutant emissions 10 to 25% (generally) 85% (only NOx)

Noise emissions 12 dB (A) (equivalent to reducingsubjective noise perception bymore than half)

10 dB (A)

5. Conclusion and future prospects

In conclusion it can be said that in comparison with other forms of transport, air traffic still bearsonly a small proportion of the blame for environmental pollution. This, however, should not obscurethe fact that this proportion is highly significant, as the emissions occur at heights at which more


38 A European aviation charge, p. 62

39 EU Decision No. 1692/96/EC, 23 July 1996

DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.17718

time is needed to break down pollutants than at lower levels of the earth’s atmosphere. In additionair traffic will continue to increase in the coming decades, and there are no previously provenmethods for stemming the further increase of emissions from aircraft.

The measures available - technical improvements to engines and aircraft, and introduction of akerosene tax - are problematic for technical or legal reasons. The prognosis is therefore that technicalimprovements to the next generations of aircraft will not effectively reduce emissions, as thesetechnical improvements will not be able to keep pace with the rate of increase in air traffic whichis forecast.

There are legal problems with regard to introducing a kerosene tax: the Chicago Agreement does notprohibit taxes on fuel, landing charges, air traffic control charges and tickets, but the bilateral airtraffic agreements are more restrictive in this respect38. There are also problems with regard to theGATT agreement as the free movement of goods internationally is affected. Other problem areas arethe GATS (General Agreement on Trade and Services), with regard to services, and above all theEC Treaty. Article 36 of the EC Treaty, in contrast to the GATS and GATT, does in fact legallyallow restrictions on freedom of movement of goods and services on environmental protectiongrounds. Such exemptions on environmental grounds have been allowed only to a limited andinsufficient extent under the GATT/GATS, so that an environment tax would require legaljustification at this level.

In the European area it should not be forgotten that at the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference theScandinavian countries put forward proposals on environment taxes and environment levies, butthese did not find agreement among the majority of Member States. At present at Community levelan EU initiative to impose VAT is not likely to reach a consensus and it is left to the Member Statesto make use of this possibility. A national tax of this kind would, however, have to measure up tothe exacting requirements of Article 36 of the TEU.

Nevertheless, the European Union has a significant role to play in the conceptual planning of airtraffic in the 21st century, as is shown by the inclusion of air traffic and air traffic management inthe ’Guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network’39. The intention is tomake better use of existing air traffic capacity and ensure a geographical distribution of air travelavailability. This must be complemented by promoting modern information and communicationstechnologies, which can reduce air traffic.

In addition, attractive alternatives to short-haul air traffic must be introduced. This will not beachieved through economic means alone, but depends on political initiatives. Arguments in favourof such initiatives should be based on the ecological audits of the various forms of transport (cfDiagram 1). The first option to be considered should be extending the European high-speed trainnetwork, which even leading airlines consider an adequate substitute for short-haul flights.


DOC-EN\DV\347\347031 PE 167.17719

Bibliography

Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit /Bundesministerium fürVerkehr: Konzept Luftverkehr und Umwelt, 1997, (abb: Konzept Luftverkehr und Umwelt)

Centre for energy conservation and environmental technology (Delft, Netherlands) / InternationalInstitute of Air and Space Law (Leiden,Netherlands): A European aviation charge. Preliminary study,Economics-Plus Limited, London April 1996. (abb.: A European aviation charge)

Deutscher Bundestag, 13. Wahlperiode: Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage derAbgerordneten Monika Ganseforth u.a., Drucksache 13/8619, 29.9.1997. (abb.: BT-Drucksache13/8619)

Enquete-Kommission 'Schutz der Erdatmosphäre' des 12. Deutschen Bundestages: 'Klimaänderunggefährdet globale Entwicklung', Bonn 1992. (abb.: BT-Enquete)

Knisch/Reichmuth: Vekehrsleistung und Luftschadenemissionen des Personenflugverkehrs inDeutschland von 1980 bis 2010 unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des tourismusbedingtenFlugverkehrs.Zwischenbericht im Rahmen des Vorhabens 'Massnahmen zur verursacherbezogenenSchadstoffreduzierung des zivilen Flugverkehrs', ifeu - Institut für Energie und UmweltforschungHeidelberg im Auftrag des Umweltbundesamtes, Berlin 1996.

Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment / Ministry of Transport, Public Worksand Water Management / Ministry of Defence: Government policy of the Netherlands on airpollution and aviation, The Hague 1995. (abb.: Government policy of the Netherlands)

TechnischerÜberwachungsverein Rheinland, Sicherheit und Umweltschutz GmbH (federführend)/ Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW) / Wuppertal Institut für Klima, Umwelt, EnergieGmbH: Massnahmen zur verursacherbezogenen Schadstoffreduzierung des zivilen Flugverkehrs,Zwischenbericht, Köln Januar 1997. (abb.: TÜV Rheinland etc.)

Vedantham/Oppenheimer: Aircraft Emissions and the Global Atmosphere, Environmental DefenseFund, New York 1994.

air traffic and the environment · air traffic and the environment 1 cf. technischer...

Documents