In June 2023 I wrote Pigs Might Fly, a tongue-in-cheek look at the issue of so-called Sustainable Aviation Fuels. At the time both the BBC and the Guardian were pushing website articles about the issue. Subsequently, unless I have missed something, they have gone quiet. Perhaps the press releases from those who seek to make the news have stopped landing on journalists’ desks. Whatever the reason for the lull in news stories about this topic, it hasn’t gone away. I have written before about the (seemingly always net zero-related) conferences organised by the Westminster Energy, Environment & Transport Forum (WEET), and recently a plug for another one landed in my email in-box.

The conference in question is due to take place tomorrow morning, and is headed “Next steps for aviation decarbonisation in the UK”. The conference breaks down into five main discussion areas. Ideally I would take each in turn, but I may have to return to most of them in subsequent articles. For current purposes I simply want to discuss Jet Zero.

The keynote speaker under this heading is a deputy director for Aviation Climate Change (yes, really) at the Department for Transport. Did you know that the UK Department for Transport has a Jet Zero Strategy? No? Neither did I until I read the notes for the WEET conference. Not only that, but a glossy online report was published in July 2022 (sub-title: “Delivering net zero aviation by 2050”), running to some 83 pages including end pages, endnotes, introduction, etc. It’s signed off by Grant Shapps, as Transport Secretary, and by two junior ministers: one for aviation, and one for “Transport Decarbonisation” – to my shame, not only did I not previously know that there was a Transport Decarbonisation Minister, but I was unaware that this role is performed by the MP for the constituency neighbouring my own.

The Foreword alone is worrying, before getting in to the detail of the report. The hubris, and belief in the mantra (to be reported in every official document, it seems), is unshakeable:

Our target of net zero flying by 2050 is hugely challenging. Not just because aircraft have always relied on fossil fuels, but because aviation is only just restarting in earnest after two years of intense disruption. The COVID-19 pandemic has, however, also given us an opportunity to rebuild our economy in a stronger, fairer and greener way, with aviation as part of the solution to climate change, rather than just a major contributor of carbon emissions.

In fairness, the report was published before reality dawned on the Scottish government that setting unrealistic targets is one thing, achieving them is another, and so we are told:

The strategy is underpinned by an overarching approach and three principles. We are setting clear decarbonisation goals; in addition to the 2050 net zero target, we want all domestic flights to achieve net zero by 2040 and for all airport operations in England to be zero emission by the same year. We will be setting an emission reduction trajectory for the sector and will be monitoring progress through five-year reviews.

Does it matter that they don’t know how to achieve this and that technologies don’t yet exist to make it happen? Not really:

We recognise that many of the technologies needed to decarbonise the sector are at an early stage of development and therefore this approach is essential to allow new technology to be developed, tested and adopted across the industry.

Translation: it’s OK to jump out of the aeroplane without a parachute, because you’ll miraculously find one before you hit the ground.

Apparently COP26 led to the launching of an International Aviation Climate Ambition Coalition (ICAO). I followed the footnoted link to the page of the UK Government website that tells us about it, and from this I learned that – unlike the various agreements concluded rather feebly at the end of each COP – it was signed by a modest number of states: just 60, to be precise. And of those 60 states, the key takeaway is that except for the usual virtue-signalling developed countries (UK, USA, Canada, New Zealand, EU member states), most of the “big hitters” declined to be part of it. You will search in vain for China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, Gulf Oil states, Iraq, Iran, Russia, Australia. No disrespect to them, but given their minor contributions to greenhouse gases (both generally, and via aviation) it’s difficult to see how participation by Albania, Belize, Burkina Faso, Costa Rica, Cote D’Ivoire, Dominican Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Georgia, Madagascar, Maldives, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Niger, North Macedonia, Papua New Guinea and Trinda & Tobago can offset the absence of the absentees mentioned above. Then again, if Mr Sunak gets his way, perhaps the participation of Rwanda will yet prove to be significant.

In any event, the non-binding and vague nature of its aspirations are likely to render it about as effective as the non-binding and vague Paris Climate Agreement. I particularly liked this clause (2):

Supporting the adoption by ICAO of an ambitious long-term aspirational goal consistent with the above-referenced temperature limit, and in view of the industry’s commitments towards net zero CO2 emissions by 2050.

And this one (5):

Promoting the development and deployment, through international and national measures, of innovative new low- and zero-carbon aircraft technologies that can reduce aviation CO2 emissions.

And this one (8):

Convening periodically at both ministerial and official levels with a view to advancing and reviewing progress on the above commitments.

I particularly like the plaintive conclusion:

We invite other states to commit to this declaration and work with us towards our shared objectives.

Dream on.

But I digress. Back to the Net Zero Foreword. What other aspirations does it reveal?

The sector will have to undergo significant changes in the coming decades but with that comes opportunities to create new jobs, develop new industries with innovative new technologies, and improve our energy security as a nation, therefore maximising these opportunities will also be an integral part of our approach.

It seems that, just as costs must also be described as an investment, threats must always be portrayed as opportunities. And the steady destruction of the UK’s energy security must always be described as enhancing it.

As for the Sustainable Aviation Fuel that I discussed in Pigs Might Fly, well everything is going just fine (with a substantial bit of help from the taxpayer, as always):

We have already seen real progress, with Phillips 66 producing and providing the first commercially produced sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) in the UK. We have committed £180 million of funding to support the development of a UK SAF industry, and our aim is to unlock further private financing to develop our very own SAF plants with a commitment to have at least five plants under construction by 2025.

That date is now just a year away. I wonder how that’s going?

They speculate (in a triumph of hope over reality) that “…domestic production of SAF could support up to 5,200 UK jobs by 2035…”. This claim links to a footnote which takes us to the 100 page long Sustainable Aviation Fuels Road-Map, should you be interested. Perhaps I am becoming jaded after looking at interminable numbers of these glossily (and no doubt expensively) produced tributes to the power of optimism, but having skim-read it, I remain unconvinced.

That £180 million doesn’t represent the half of it, by the way:

…government has a role to play in supporting Research and Development (R&D) to take these new technologies to market. For example, we recently committed a record £685 million over three years in UK aerospace R&D through the Aerospace Technology Institute (ATI) Programme.

Moving in to the body of the Report, and I learn next of the existence of a Jet Zero Council:

The Jet Zero Council (JZC) is a partnership between industry, academia and government to bring together ministers and chief executive officer-level stakeholders, with the aim of delivering at least 10% sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) in the UK fuel mix by 2030 and zero emission transatlantic flight within a generation, driving the ambitious delivery of new technologies and innovative ways to cut aviation emissions.

Its ninth meeting, which took place on 8^th November 2023, seems to be the most recent meeting for which minutes are available. Reading them made me profoundly depressed, though I was mildly encouraged by the fact that Claire Coutinho apparently had better things to do, and her apologies for absence were noted. Here’s a flavour of what can be found there:

On non-CO2, Secretary of State noted the newly established non-CO2 task and finish group, who met earlier that week, as well as the Government’s recently launched non-CO2 multi-million-pound research project. [Yet more taxpayer money being spent on Net Zero]…

…Holly Greig (DfT) explained why GGRs [Greenhouse Gas Removals] are important for aviation in achieving Jet Zero and the role set out for them in the Jet Zero Strategy. She emphasised Government’s commitment to maximising in sector reduction but noted that despite the emergence of new technologies and fuels, the UK aviation sector will still have significant residual emissions in 2050 and that GGRs will therefore be crucial for meeting net zero…

...Council members noted increasing uptake of SAF but recognised there is still a long way to go…

…Baroness Vere thanked JZC members for attending noting the quality of the presentations were excellent, commending the number of women presenting…

[I’m all in favour of a level playing-field for women and for eliminating sexism, but I’m not convinced that this really is relevant for minuting].

…She noted the need for greater engagement with the private finance sector and looked forward to the hydrogen discussion planned for Jet Zero Council 10 in early 2024.

It’s now almost the end of April. Has the tenth meeting yet taken place?

Section 2 deals with the “three core principles”. The first is international leadership:

Leading coordinated global efforts to tackle international aviation emissions, including through our ongoing work in the International Civil Aviation Organization.

As we saw above, that doesn’t seem to be going very well at all, with the major emitters declining to participate.

The second is “Delivered in partnership”:

Working with all parts of the sector and different partners to develop, test, implement and invest in the solutions we need.

Judging by the quote from the minutes of the ninth Jet Zero Council meeting quoted above, that doesn’t seem to be going too well either.

The third is “Maximising opportunities”. Regrettably this is just the same pious claptrap that we have heard time and time again, but which never seems to materialise:

Using the opportunity of the Jet Zero transition to boost our economy, create new jobs, develop new industries, and become a more energy secure nation.

Afterthought

My wife and I recently took a foreign holiday for the first time in years – ironically we almost certainly have much lower “carbon footprints” than your average climate warrior. As we wandered round Antibes and the surrounding area, we were struck by the relentless numbers of aeroplanes constantly flying in and out of Nice Airport. One small airport, such a huge number of aeroplanes. Multiply that by all of the airports in the world (a number that is growing substantially, especially in China and India) and it is clear that after the pandemic shock, aviation has fully recovered, and continues to grow.

Speaking of China and India, the other thing that struck us, holidaying abroad for the first time in years, is how the number of Chinese and Indian tourists seems to have increased almost exponentially. I suppose that shouldn’t come as a surprise, given the growth of a populous wealthy Chinese and Indian middle class who share the aspirations of the rest of the world to travel and to enjoy new experiences. However, that being the case, the absence of any interest by the Chinese and Indian governments in the International Aviation Climate Ambition Coalition strikes me as hugely significant. As always, it seems, the west virtue-signals, China, India and much of the rest of the world shrug their shoulders and carry on regardless.