The government dilema- green or growth in air transport?

The green lobby have the future survival of the globe on their minds and have successfully lobbied governments to take action.

The air transport industry is a fundamental within the global economy -Without it, global commerce would not exist in its present form. Aviation globally is a huge employer both directly and indirectly. If constrained as an industry, employment prospects of the many millions who support the needs of the billions who travel for leisure and business would be in doubt. Like it or not, air travel is something that needs to continue to develop to support the many facets of the global economy.

Carbon emission reductions at ground level can be achieved. The technology already exists to deliver emission reductions across the major contributors of greenhouse gasses. In the area of consumer and industrial electricity supply, power generation will be less dependent on fossil fuel burning. Road transport emission reductions will appear over the next generation as road vehicles move towards fuel cell and multi fuel types . However it is likely that aviation will benefit last in any large scale term from alternate energy technology - certainly in the area of large air transport equipment . Thus the industry will remain the black sheep for the 'greens' . Air transport must find a way to live and prosper under this shadow.

One could argue that the development of runways in the UK regions has a major green benefit. Runway development away from the southern airfields will encourage airlines to increase service at these major regional conurbations. As these passenger volumes migrate back to these more convenient departure points, the reduction of millions of ground journeys for people who travel from the regions to the dominant southern airfields would have great net benefit for the carbon emissions issue.

This argument of course does little for our colleagues over at Waterside who have set out their stall over recent years to become 'London Airways'' relying now almost totally on the concept of a single UK city departure point . BA now has to defend the only piece of land it stands on from new predators at Heathrow resulting from USA route open skies concessions and major global carriers willing and able to acquire UK operators with valuable Heathrow slots . Having essentially abandoned regional operation in favour of more lucrative London based long haul operations, they have allowed many 'Johnny Foreigner' airlines who perhaps have a little more faith in the UK regions or a little more strategic foresight to rampage all over its back yard.

Perhaps the 'greens' should take a more considered approach to the issue- rather than objecting to everything - a little thought would identify that the industry can in fact make its contribution without draconian interference and they could perhaps even support some of the initiatives .

So what is the solution? As a famous lady once said - ''This is no time to wobble''. Aviation despite its carbon enemy title will need to continue its development, in turn supporting global commerce.

Government will not wish to see the UK economy decline in relative global importance and thus will need to achieve compromise solution allowing this continued development of airports and air transport expansion whilst achieving a politically correct carbon emissions reduction. Not forgetting that even the most pessimistic observers identify an air transport carbon contribution of around 5% of the total UK, it will be able to achieve its targets for total reductions in spite of all the hot air blowing in the direction of air transport and its relatively small carbon footprint. The fact that government has again deferred the decision regarding a third runway for Heathrow indicates it has not got its aviation act together .

But the air transport community in part has itself to blame, by allowing its critics to occupy the high ground. Airlines and airports have to defend themselves in the public domain. There are positive stories to tell but so far, the industry has failed to deliver a successful pro air transport lobby. The industry already has bodies who can speak with a strong single voice. But major travel industry and air transport groups like GMTC and BAR UK have played a defensive bat in countering accusations rather than going on the attack with a pro-active campaign delivering the positive facts to government and public. A coordinated lobbying exercise will be required to overcome and correct the misunderstandings that the anti aviation lobby put forward. So far too little pro aviation information and too piecemeal . It's time to go on the offensive with a coordinated message delivering positive and factual information about its plans and achievements in the carbon reduction project.

Maybe then government and aviation will stop trading blows and realise a more collaborative approach will deliver better solutions.

What are your views?

25 years ago - A paper airline exercise was starting to become more than paper with the result that within 12 months an airline with an unusual (for an airline) name appeared and so did a scantily clad lady on the side of its aircraft . The airline was allowed to successfully develop itself with a strong brand and product against established major carriers. Were the strategists and marketeers at those competitive carriers asleep on the job?? The then chief executive of BA was later alleged to suggest he couldn't take seriously any competitor whose MD wore a pullover rather than a tie - Not his best ever character analysis !