easyJet already covers its environmental costs 5 to 1

easyJet welcomes today’s review of the 2003 Air Transport White Paper. It made the right recommendations when it was published and those are still the right ones today.

The airline believes it is time for a proper discussion about aviation’s contribution to climate change, what the Government calls the “emissions cost estimate”, as there is too much ill-informed hysteria in this area.

The Stern Review estimates that aviation CO2 emissions currently account for 1.6% of global Greenhouse Gas emissions and under Stern’s “business as usual” projections, emissions from aviation would represent 2.5% of global Greenhouse Gases by 2050.

easyJet takes the issue of aviation and the environment very seriously and we are already making huge efforts to ensure we are as environmentally-efficient as is possible. We fly brand new aircraft with high passenger densities and operate direct flights, which makes us one of Europe’s most environmentally-efficient airlines.

We welcome the Government’s desire to consider the “emissions cost estimate” of aviation because the numbers speak for themselves:

For the average easyJet flight, the cost of offsetting the carbon emitted for each passenger would be around £2 for the return journey. This compares to the £10 Air Passenger Duty (APD) that the Chancellor is now extracting from easyJet for each passenger.

This means that passengers can travel on easyJet in the knowledge that the Government’s “environmental” tax covers their carbon emissions five times over!

Andy Harrison, easyJet Chief Executive, said:

“In the last week the Government has done the right thing on the review of the White Paper and the wrong thing on Air Passenger Duty.

“The review of the 2003 White Paper has come to the right conclusion –aviation needs capacity to enhance the UK’s economic performance.

“It is also right to have a measured, objective look at aviation’s relatively minimal contribution to climate change. We are so angered by the Chancellor’s decision to double APD in last week’s Pre Budget Report because APD is a double whammy against the travelling public. It is not an effective environmental tax, because its indiscriminate flat-rate nature provides no incentive to change behaviour. And it is not a fair tax because the amount it takes from passengers vastly outweighs the environmental costs of flying. In the case of easyJet passengers, the over-recovery is in the order of 5 to 1.”