Seeing through the clouds on air industry pollution

THE world, it seems, is gripped by the need to arrest global warming; talk of carbon footprints, recycling and hybrid cars is part of our daily routine. This is certainly a worthy change in behaviour and I suspect those of us with young children are learning some salutary lessons from what is an emerging generation of environmentally-conscious young people with a passion to make a real difference.

Scotland's future generations are sure to be better served by more reasoned debates on the real solutions, political, economic or scientific.

There is a distinction between the protection of our local environment and the planet's fragility in the face of rising carbon dioxide emissions from a wide range of natural and man-made sources.

I am conscious that our new Scottish Executive has judged that responsibility for managing Scotland's response to climate change rests within the department charged with developing Scotland's sustainable economy.

That is a sound decision motivated, no doubt, by an understanding that Scotland must strike a delicate balance between social and economic progress - in this context through infrastructure development - and managing the impact of this growth on our environment and communities.

Finding that balance will require mature reflection and analysis of the facts.

The critical focus on the aviation industry is a good case of where that does not happen; where emotion stands in the way of reason and lazy assumptions frustrate rational and progressive debate.

The emotion tends to fuel knee-jerk responses from people who decide to fly less - perhaps it eases their consciences - and lazy assumptions lead people to believe that aircraft must be one of the most significant sources of emissions because of their size and thirst for fuel.

But in rejecting such notions - and questioning at what point Scotland's competitive position is adversely affected by making air travellers out to be social pariahs - I do not suggest we turn a blind eye to the contribution of aviation to climate change.

On the contrary, I am more than happy to sharpen the focus on my own backyard and set out some facts, in the name of Scotland's permission to travel.

I fully accept the aviation industry is a small but growing aspect of the emissions picture. At the same time, air transport emissions are dwarfed by the output from power generation, agriculture (particularly deforestation in countries such as Brazil and Indonesia) and road transport, among others. In the UK, emissions from vehicles are five times those of air transport.

However, airports play a crucial role in enabling social and economic growth in Scotland and the UK, through international and domestic travel connections for business and tourism or through the thousands of jobs and businesses supported by the sustainable growth of airports.

According to the respected Stern review, aviation currently accounts for 1.6 per cent of the world's emissions, rising to between 5 per cent and 10 per cent by 2050. These figures inject some much-needed perspective into the argument that airport growth should be stopped in the name of saving the planet.

They also demonstrate that grounding the world's aircraft tomorrow would make little difference, especially when we know that any net savings in emissions could be wiped out by China alone in a matter of days.

Where BAA Scotland's airports can control environmental impacts, we do so, through reduction targets, air and water quality programmes and noise mitigation and recycling measures.

Where we cannot control our impacts, aircraft emissions for example, we will seek to influence our customers and we will go on making the case for emissions trading in Europe and beyond.

Aviation can and will reduce emissions through cleaner and quieter aircraft. But where emissions cannot be reduced further through technology, then the aviation industry can and should pay for other industries to reduce their impacts within a market structure.

A successful European emissions trading scheme can do several things and those of us in industry share a responsibility to make the existing system work.

First and foremost, this will stabilise and ultimately reduce total emissions. Further, it will demonstrate to the world's greatest "emitters" - the United States, China and India - that it is possible to grow economies and make social progress while safeguarding the environment.

But there is another point, of which Scotland should take note. Forcing polluting industries to buy permits from, say, the power companies, means more money can be directed to the development of clean and renewable energy and carbon capture. I am sure Scotland's energy companies would be at the forefront of this work.

Slowing climate change will require a considerable degree of international consensus and a clever combination of economic incentives for emerging economies - and existing superpowers.

Scotland undoubtedly has a role to play. But our role must be in advancing the debate and seizing the opportunities to lead the world in terms of new technology.

Withdrawing Scotland's permission to travel is not the answer, however much the campaigners say so. It will only put our economy at risk and, while it might make us feel better, it will do little or nothing for our climate and its future.

• Stephen Baxter is divisional managing director of BAA Scotland.