THE WORLD
IN 2050
What’s next for European travel? Future tech — or
back to the past
Slow, clean and rare or fast and cheap — the clashing
visions for how we’ll travel in 2050.
By SAIM
SAEED 6/18/20, 3:00 PM CET Updated 6/19/20, 12:25 PM CET
·
A
composite photograph, above, shows 42 planes taking off from London’s Heathrow
Airport over the course of an hour
Ever since
American writer Nellie Bly made it round the world in 72 days in 1889, the
travel industry has focused on ever-faster speeds and ever-lower prices.
The trouble
is that moving vast numbers of people for as little money as possible was only
possible in a world where greenhouse gas emissions weren’t a thing.
“We solve
sustainability or we die,” said Andrew Charlton, managing director of Aviation
Advocacy, a consultancy. “If we do not do that, flying goes back to 1930s — a
plaything for the very rich and very important.”
If the EU
manages to become climate neutral in 2050, the old model of cheap, cheerful
travel may have to be junked. It could be replaced by something like a return
to the pre-Nellie Bly days of slow, much more expensive, but much cleaner forms
of travel.
“The only
way for aviation to become climate neutral is for planes to stop burning
kerosene.” — Jo Dardenne, aviation manager at T&E
IATA
foresees that by mid-century, some 9 billion people will be flying every year,
compared with 4.3 billion in 2018. But aviation currently generates about 3
percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions; a percentage share that is
likely to skyrocket by 2050 as other parts of the economy decarbonize.
EU
regulations requiring dramatic cuts in carbon will certainly play a role in
putting the industry under pressure, but so could newfound consumer concern.
Passengers
are “going to be asking a lot more questions about aviation’s environmental
impact,” said Michael Gill, who leads environment issues at the International Air
Transport Association, the global industry lobby. “More passengers will take
that into consideration before they decide to fly.”
Think
calorie counts, vegetarianism and “fair trade” certificates. For new
generations of travelers, a €50 weekend jaunt to Mallorca will not be as
consequence-free as it is today. By 2050, passengers will be inevitably more
aware of the environmental effect of their travel, especially since the impact
of climate change will be more visceral and likely harsher.
That leaves
a couple of options — a dramatic change in technology to allow for continued
mass travel, or else a radical rethink of travel and tourism.
Rethinking
travel
Social
movements like flygskam — the guilt felt over the environmental impacts of
flying — and the return of night trains to Europe are already compelling
transport companies to notice and respond. And that was before the COVID-19
pandemic prompted an even sharper reevaluation of work and travel habits.
The
coronavirus led to an almost complete halt in flying. Tourism withered. Cruise
ships have become disease incubators instead of the stuff of pensioners’
dreams. Airlines have been left trying to figure out how to entice passengers
back while keeping them safe.
For cities
like Tallinn, Prague and Kraków, the end of low-cost flights crammed with cheap
boozers is making them wonder if post-pandemic tourism should be very
different. There are calls in Italy for Venice — a city that lost most of its
citizens and is now largely the preserve of tourists — to be resettled with
normal Italians.
Growing
tourism has also decreased the quality of those journeys. Packed planes flying
to overrun tourist spots in Barcelona and Santorini or even a crowded Mount
Everest are the stuff of nightmares.
“The now
mature-aged Gen-Z and millennials’ focus on experience will see a raft of
longer, more complex holidays,” said Charlton. “Airlines will have to think
about being a ‘stack ’em high, sell ’em cheap’ airline or an experience
airline.”
On the
professional front, teleworking got a sharp boost as employees were told to
work from home during the pandemic. Many companies are now rethinking the need
for corporate travel. While a return to flying is likely as countries begin to
ease travel restrictions, how much of that travel is “essential” is now in
question.
“Your job
is intimately connected to how you travel,” said Andrew Murphy, aviation
manager at Transport & Environment, an advocacy group campaigning for
cleaner forms of transportation. “Either you travel for work, or you travel to
escape from work. Those are the two reasons you get on a plane. If your working
life is different, your travel is going to fundamentally change.”
More of the
same, but better
None of
that is good for the industry, which is hoping air travel will continue to grow
at the steep pace seen for the last two decades. In the view of many in the
industry, the system only requires technological tweaks to keep that growth
sustainable.
“The
problem isn’t flying, the problem is CO2” is a familiar industry mantra — it’s
just the pesky emissions that need addressing, not the industry itself.
“The only
way for aviation to become climate neutral is for planes to stop burning
kerosene,” said Jo Dardenne, another aviation manager at T&E.
The
European Commission is currently drafting a strategy to promote sustainable
alternatives to jet fuel, and both green groups and industry alike are hoping
for swift progress.
"The
'Ryanairization' of air travel needs to stop." — Jo Dardenne, aviation
manager at T&E
Limited
amounts of jet fuel made from used cooking oil, animal fat, waste and residue
are already being produced. Experts envision lab-made fuels, electric power and
hydrogen.
“Alternative
fuels is where we’ve seen the fastest progress in the shortest period of time,”
Gill said. While these currently make up less than 0.1 percent of the fuel
aircraft burn, Gill said the share could increase to 2 percent by 2025 — at
which point there will be a business case for suppliers to produce more of it.
This month
the French government gave €15 billion to its aerospace industry, with one of
the conditions being the acceleration of research into building a plane that
runs on hydrogen by 2035. Airbus CEO Guillaume Faury said: “We are absolutely
convinced that it is feasible.”
“I think
it’s entirely possible you step onto a plane that looks the same, but
everything around the plane — how it’s fueled, why you’re getting on the plane,
how frequently you’re getting on the plane, what you’re getting on the plane to
do, all that could change,” said Murphy.
For the
decarbonization of the airline industry to be feasible, however, it will have
to happen fast.
“The pace
of development and the pace and breadth of dispersing those technologies into
the global fleet will dictate how much they help reduce emissions,” Sean
Newsum, Boeing’s director of environmental strategy, told POLITICO.
And that
will cost money. Today, clean alternatives can be up to six times more
expensive than kerosene, and airlines can’t afford air travel becoming six
times more expensive. Ideally, airlines want “no difference in price between
conventional and alternative fuels. We want to get to a situation where there
is parity,” Gill said.
But that
might be just the thing needed in a climate-neutral Europe.
"The
'Ryanairization' of air travel needs to stop," Dardenne said. "It's
super important to make sure prices don't go too low and flying is better
priced in general."
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário