Airplanes Emissions: The Upcoming Hysteria

Global warming is undoubtedly one of the hottest issues in today’s world agenda, and it’s getting hotter by the day. Some of the most powerful world leaders, who just a few years back could not care less about this issue, position themselves today as if global warming is the most important topic resting on their desks. And public opinion, of course, backs this political trend.

As we all know, carbon dioxide emissions comes from various sources, one of them is airplanes engines. Never the less, compared to car engines and electrical power plants, aviation related emissions are quite marginal. That has not stopped some politicians from aiming at the aviation industry and its customers as major polluters that ought to be treated as environmental criminals.

The truth may be frustrating, but we have to acknowledge it: you can not effectively reduce carbon dioxide emissions by reducing the usage of daily human and economical activities such as producing electricity, driving to the mall or traveling across the Atlantic. Even if western societies would have done so, the exploding growth of eastern nations such as China and India will make it unfruitful.

The only way to confront the climate change problem is to develop new technologies that will gradually replace the polluting current ones. Rich governments must invest in research and development, and also in existing technologies. No one can expect people in the 21st century to abandon things like cars or planes, and in favor of what? But you can expect governments and industries to shift from polluting technologies to less polluting ones.

The absurdity of the situation emerged recently when the Prime Minister of Britain, Tony Blair, was criticized for traveling to the U.S. for a private vacation. Do some people really consider a scheduled flight from Britain to America a crime? Are people supposed to avoid traveling altogether from now on, until someone will invent a plane that flies on lettuce?

Yesterday I watched a TV show, where they talked about Prince Charles being awarded a prize, in New York, for his environmental dedication. The enthusiastic reporter said that the Prince has decided to stop flying domestically in Britain for environmental reasons. In response, the anchor said: well, I guess he’ll ride his 12 cylinder Rolls Royce instead…

In the next few years, it will be interesting to see, if the new Boeing 787 lives up to the promise of 20% more efficiency in fuel consumption. If so, it will probably gain a huge advantage in a market that is becoming more and more sensitive to environmental issues. More than that: if a 20% improvement can be achieved, so can a 30% or a 40%, and this is where governments and international organizations should take a major role.

Prospects for 2007 – part 2

The most important single event expected to take place in 2007 in the world of civil aviation is the birth of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Sometime in the second half of this year the plane is due to make its first appearance on the ground, and then to have its first flight. 

 

Why is the 787 such an important plane? The main reason, in my opinion, is the fact that this is going to be the plane that will take the place of the B767 in the next two decades. The 767 has revolutionized the airline industry since it began its service in the early 1980s. It was the first twin-engine airliner that could cross the Atlantic, but not only that, it could fly long-haul routes such as New York – Athens or Miami – Tel Aviv, routes that in the pre-767 era demanded 3 or 4 engine planes. 

 

There are several major airlines in the world that their fleets are basically 767 oriented: American, Delta, United, British Airways. In addition, dozens of other airlines possesses many more 767s, which plays as the backbone of their fleet. However, the 767 is an aging plane, and it can not survive many more years in its current position. 

 

This is where the 787 comes to the scene. In basic terms, it is meant to be a better 767. The main advantages of the new airliner are two: 20% reduction in fuel consumption compared to contemporary planes; and longer range, enabling the 787 to fly trans-pacific routes, along with the trans-atlantic ones. Of course, as much as the technical, avionic and amenities aspects are concerned, the 787 will have the 21^st century technology, compared to the 1970s technology of the 767. 

 

The worst thing that could happen to Boeing is a time-table debacle like the one that surrounded the A380 a few months ago. The 787 already have hundreds of reservations, and failing to meet its ambitious deadlines will be a disaster for Boeing. All I can wish them is good luck. 

 

At the end of the day, the 787 is going to be the most important airliner of the 21^st century’s second decade, not only because it replaces the 767, but also because of its “green” features, mainly its reduced emissions engines.It is highly likely that the 787’s main competitor, the A350, will try to showcase similar features. But that’s already beyond 2007.

Prospects for 2007 – part 1

As always, the calendared shift into a new year is the natural opportunity to look ahead and try to predict the trends of the future. I’ll attempt to do just that in the commercial aviation field. 

 

Oceans of words have already been written about the so called crisis in the global market of commercial aviation since the September 11, 2001 terror attacks. Nobody needs another analysis of that, but non the less it’s worth mentioning that at least in the last two years the pattern is positive in terms of passengers, mileage etc. 

 

Entering the new year, the aviation industry can not keep on using the same old 911 excuses. Everybody must understand that the industry is going to be treated – by governments and customers alike – according to its performance and service level. 

 

The most interesting question, to my opinion, concerning the world of airlines these days is: are there going to be corporate mergers in the
U.S. market? And more specifically: are we going to see Delta being digested by U.S. Airways, or even maybe United swallowing Continental? 

 

My prediction on those questions is negative. Most of the merging combinations in the American market just don’t make sense, and can not justify the amount of energy needed to put them into reality. The truth is that each of the major American carriers has a place in the market, and can fly all year round with its planes packed full. Not succeeding in that can mean only one thing: ill management. An ill managed company can replace its management team, or can go out of business.  

 

Delta Airlines has been poorly managed for quite a long time. That has brought it to the bankruptcy court. In the last year and a half Delta has gone through a hard process of curing and rebuilding, under the same management. The next few months will show if those efforts have been futile. But the threat of the U.S. Airways hostile acquisition does not look real to me. First of all, I find it hard to believe that a not so successful company such as U.S. Airways can be a candidate for “healing” another airline which is bigger and more complicated than itself. 

 

Second, U.S. Airways and Delta are much too different in so many aspects, that a consolidation between the two can mean only the swallowing of one by the other, in this case, a not so pleasant sight. 

 

The less talked about merge between United and Continental is even more bizarre. In one side, a giant carrier that should be concentrating in a long healing and balancing process, having exited chapter 11 only in the recent year; In the other side, a smaller airline, but non the less an airline with a positive record financially and operationally. What reason is there for those two to get in the same bed? 

 

Hence, the prospect for the 2007 merging issue is: not needed, not likely.