Climate crisis, what climate crisis?
As of 1 April, the tax you pay on UK domestic flights has plummeted, as the government halves Air Passenger Duty (APD) from £13 to £6.50. It’s expected to lead to soaring demand, with new routes, more flights and lower fares.
You’d think we’d solved global warming.
Slashing emissions, alongside restoring healthy biodiversity (which soaks up carbon), couldn’t be more urgent. However personally or politically unpalatable it may be, right now that means – despite some progress towards renewable aviation – flying less. Any policy designed to incentivise the polar reverse, especially where there are lower carbon alternatives, is obscene.
The tax cut is a huge boon for the UK’s aviation lobby; a confidence boost they could do without. The country’s largest airports are already betting on an alarming 60 per cent increase in overall passenger numbers compared with 2019. But flying more for less really is too good to be true.
Higher flight taxes for some benefit everyone
Make no mistake, this cut isn’t about giving ordinary people a fairer deal. That would be investing in our disappearing bus services – over a quarter have been axed in the last decade – and our failing, overpriced trains.
Yes, we can choose not to board a plane. But where greener alternatives are unreliable and unaffordable, that decision becomes much harder. Chronic lack of investment and policy failures chip away at our choices.
It needn’t be this way. Look at Germany, rolling out a £43 monthly unlimited public transport pass, and France banning short domestic flights.
Make no mistake, this cut isn’t about giving ordinary people a fairer deal
Curbing flight demand is vital. Two things would help and, what’s more, they’d benefit everyone. First, reverse the tax cut on domestic flights. APD should be fairer across the board – higher for frequent flyers, as well as first class and business seats. Crucially, these taxes must be ringfenced for investment into lower-carbon – affordable – alternatives, and new sustainable technologies. I call it a Green Flying Duty, something I’ve long advocated for. Higher airfares may sting, but domestic rail fares dropping to affordable levels in tandem should help soften the blow.
Second, tax aviation fuel. Unlike petrol or diesel for drivers, airlines don’t pay fuel tax. Another free pass which, globally, could constitute a tax break of billions of pounds each year. Imagine what that money could do for our railways.
The aviation industry needs to shoulder its share of responsibility. The Government can better hold it to account by applying the same principle it applies to us: the polluter pays.
Emissions growth is incompatible with Net Zero
The UK is legally-bound to net zero emissions by 2050. Being realistic, there’s practically no chance aviation can or will achieve that itself. But the Government has a plan. It’s called Jet Zero and it commits UK domestic aviation to net zero by 2040, heralding a future of ‘guilt-free’ flying.
A heady claim. So how will we reach it? Through a mix of cleaner fuels, new aircraft, offsets and carbon removal tech – with a particular reliance on Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs) to cut emissions. The good news is, these fuels can actually work well. The bad? They’re extremely expensive, and we can’t yet produce them at scale. Meeting existing UK aviation demand alone using energy crops would require roughly half the nation’s agricultural land. Jet Zero aims for SAF use in 10 per cent of UK flights by 2030, and 50 per cent by 2050.
Innovation is hugely welcome. I want to see progress on renewables accelerating, and there’s exciting potential in many emerging technologies that I hope, in the long run, will see us boarding much greener flights.
U-turns don’t come easy in Westminster, but there’d be no shame in one here
But that’s a future we can’t take for granted if we fail to act today. I don’t think it’s forever – but until we achieve genuinely sustainable aviation, we must cap growth. The current policy flightpath doesn’t do this and that allowance for increased emissions simply isn’t viable.
The government’s own advisers agree, warning against a ‘risky’ overreliance on unproven tech to mitigate against rising emissions. In fact, says the Climate Change Committee (CCC), continued aviation expansion, under any technological advances, is incompatible with achieving net zero by 2050.
But it isn’t too late to put right. U-turns don’t come easy in Westminster, but there’d be no shame in one here. Launching the Jet Zero policy last year, Energy Secretary Grant Shapps commented that, “from now on, it should all be downhill for carbon emissions – and steadily uphill for green flights.” Reversing the cut on APD would be a positive – and simple – place to start.
Cheap flights are the result of massive tax breaks. While not all of us fly, we all pay a price for it.
