The Wealthy 1% Elite Generate Half Of The World’s Global Aviation Emissions

Wealthy frequent-flyers who comprise just 1% of the world’s population generate half of the global aviation industry’s carbon emissions with their constant jet-setting.

Campaigners have long been calling for a frequent-flyer tax, arguing only the affluent can afford to take to the skies so often, but the greenhouse gases produced affect all of us.

A new study, by Sweden’s Linnaeus University and published in the Guardian today, found that only 11% of the world’s population took a flight in 2018 and just 4% of those journeys were overseas. U.S. passengers flew the most air miles by some distance, generating more carbon emissions than the next 10 countries, including the U.K., Japan and Germany, combined.  

The identification of such a small elite, whom he dubbed “super-emitters”, being behind half of aviation emissions was the most eye-opening finding, said Stefan Gössling, professor of tourism research at Linnaeus University. He believes this has important implications for how the growth of emissions should be tackled.

“If you want to resolve climate change and we need to redesign [aviation], then we should start at the top, where a few ‘super-emitters’ contribute massively to global warming,” he said.

“The rich have had far too much freedom to design the planet according to their wishes. We should see the crisis as an opportunity to slim the air transport system.”

Passenger volumes have fallen by around half worldwide since the coronavirus pandemic took hold in March. Many countries remain in lockdown or are quarantining arrivals from overseas, while others have been deterred from flying until a vaccine is available. The number of scheduled flights in the U.S. this week is still down 46.3%, compared to the same period last year, according to Statista.

However, private jet operators have reported much more resilient demand as wealthy flyers have opted to charter their own planes to reduce the risk of catching Covid-19 from fellow passengers.

The number of private flights between 1 September and 15 October only fell 10% year-on-year, compared to the near-halving of commercial flight volumes, according to WingX, the aviation consultancy. In August, there were actually more private jet flights than in 2019, as wealthy individuals and their families as infection rates began to rise globally, the Financial Times reported.

This underlines the fundamental inequality many perceive in aviation. While some highlight the rise of budget airlines and cheap flights, their impact is dwarfed by the frequent-flyers.

A U.K. Department for Transport survey last year found that 48% of the population did not take a single flight abroad in 2018. The figures are starker in other countries, with the Linnaeus University research showing 53% of Americans did not fly that year, nor did 65% of Germans.

Rethinking aviation’s carbon emissions

Campaigners are calling on policymakers to use this period of disruption to rethink their approach aviation if they are serious about meeting greenhouse gas reduction targets.

Previous proposals to introduce measures deterring frequent fliers have typically been rejected by both governments and the industry.

A report by Imperial College, London, for the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) last October recommended “a ban on air miles and frequent-flyer loyalty schemes that incentivize excessive flying”.

It also endorsed the introduction of a tax based on air miles travelled, rather than the number of flights taken, noting long-haul travel is “much more damaging”.

The International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) argued that government bailouts of airlines should have a frequent-flier levy requirement attached. The think-tank said this could “generate funds for R&D from the most frequent fliers and also provide public health benefits by curbing excessive, high-frequency flights that increase the risk of global pandemics”.

The aviation industry counters that it is only responsible for 2.4% of all global CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use, but critics point out that this figure has risen by 32% over the past five years. Added to this, airline traffic in the U.S. grew three times faster than the rate at which fuel efficiency improved between 2013 and 2018 and global traffic increased six times faster.

The industry’s own plans to reduce emissions, largely through offsetting schemes, have been disparaged as weak. The airline body the International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation’s measures will have little to zero impact on carbon emissions until 2024.

The parlous state of most airlines’ finances due to the impact of Covid-19 means governments are unlikely to impose stringent emissions reduction requirements anytime soon. Penalizing frequent-flyers will likely be a more palatable option, but still a step few governments have been unwilling to meaningfully take.