ATA urges U.S. negotiators to oppose climate change tax.November 6, 2009 -
In letter to Todd Stern, ATA urges support for ICAO to lead global sectoral framework for aviation and climate change and to oppose proposal for International Air Passenger Adaptation Levy. Proposal targets airlines/passengers with exorbitant tax to fund climate-change adaptation measures in developing countries. Letter cites ICAO track record in addressing aviation environmental issues. It also says tax would remove vital airline funds and damage already financially crippled industry.
Air Transport Association Urges U.S. Climate Negotiators to Oppose Climate Change Tax Targeting International Air Passengers |
(Archive News Story - Products mentioned in this Archive News Story may or may not be available from the manufacturer.)
Air Transport Association Of America, Inc. (ATA)
1301 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W., Suite 1100-T
Washington, DC, 20004
USA
Press release date: October 30, 2009
Dear Mr. Stern:
As the United States approaches the Copenhagen climate change negotiations, we urge you to continue to support having the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) take the leading role in developing and implementing a global sectoral framework for aviation and climate change. We also urge you to strongly oppose the proposal by some countries to target airlines and their passengers with an exorbitant tax to fund climate-change adaptation measures in developing countries.
The Air Transport Association (ATA) airlines greatly appreciate the United States' support for an international approach to aviation emissions, which was affirmed by President Obama in the North American Leaders' Declaration on Climate Change and Clean Energy, and the specific support that the United States has given for ICAO to continue to lead on this issue. As aviation is a global industry with mobile assets, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are truly global in their effect, it makes sense to address aviation GHGs on a global basis. ICAO has a proven track record for successfully addressing aviation environmental issues. For example, they adopted a combination of noise standards and a "Balanced Approach" noise policy to significantly reduce aircraft noise exposure worldwide. And ICAO's aircraft emissions standards have greatly reduced aircraft carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen and hydrocarbons while virtually eliminating smoke.
The progress made at the recent ICAO High Level Meeting (HLM) demonstrates that the ICAO States can work together to complete a comprehensive framework for aviation to further address climate change. Accordingly, we trust that the United States will continue to promote ICAO leadership in the context of the Copenhagen negotiations. Moreover, we urge the United States to support an even broader global sectoral approach for aviation, as proposed by the aviation industry at the HLM. Under such an approach, the framework for both international and domestic aviation emissions would be established internationally, with States encouraged to act consistently with the international framework when addressing GHGs from domestic flights. All airline emissions would be subject to collective emissions targets - an annual average fuel and CO2 efficiency improvement of 1.5 percent through 2020 and carbon-neutral growth from 2020, with an aspirational goal of a 50 percent reduction in CO2 by 2050 relative to 2005 levels. While the airlines will have to make significant investments to meet these targets, they also depend on governments doing their part with respect to air traffic control modernization, alternative fuels and research and development investments. We are working closely with Congress and members of the administration to promote these necessary and complementary technology, operations and infrastructure initiatives. A detailed issue brief is enclosed.
While we encourage the United States to continue to support a global sectoral approach, we also urge you to strongly and expressly oppose the "International Air Passenger Adaptation Levy," proposed by a set of countries led by The Maldives. This exorbitant tax - which would see anywhere from $6 to $62 added to the cost of an international airline ticket - unfairly and unreasonably targets one industrial sector, a sector that has a tremendous fuel and GHG efficiency record. In fact, the U.S. airlines improved our fuel efficiency by approximately 110 percent since 1978, saving 2.7 million metric tons of CO2 - roughly equivalent to taking 19.5 million cars off the road each of those years. And even though the U.S. airlines account for less than 2 percent of the U.S. GHG inventory (and the world's airlines only account for 2 percent of the CO2 on a global basis), we are committed to doing more. However, the adaptation tax would be counterproductive, as it would siphon away to the developing countries the very funds that the U.S. airlines need to continue to invest in new aircraft, retrofits, alternative fuel and other upgrades to continue their strong record of continuous fuel and GHG efficiency improvements. Moreover, the tax would further damage an already financially crippled industry to the detriment of the global economy. Further, unless countries were willing to confirm that such a levy was the only climate change measure to be applied to aviation, to the preemption of other measures, it would add to the patchwork quilt of economic measures, sprouting up all over the globe, that threaten to cover the same ton of aviation GHGs over and over. Thus, we urge you to oppose this inequitable levy - we need a coordinated, global sectoral approach instead.
Thank you for your consideration of our views.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 
