Connect with us

Published

on

Mark Maslin is professor of natural sciences at University College London (UCL) and Iain Hanson is honorary professor at the Bartlett School of Sustainable Construction, UCL.

Many of us feel guilt when we fly because it is a very obvious source carbon emissions. Aviation causes around 2.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. But we do not perhaps feel the same guilt when we walk into a new building, even though global concrete manufacture emits closer to 8%. Or when we jump in a petrol car or turn on our gas central heating.

This is because aviation is a very visible symbol of our high-carbon consumption and, until now, the aviation industry has been slow to engage with the climate change agenda. According to the UN, we are looking at global warming of up to just over 3˚C which would be disastrous for the planet and our societies.

Human-caused global warming has just nudged passed 1.5˚C. But science suggests that we could keep close to this temperature increase if we reduced global emissions by 45% by 2030 and reached net zero by 2050.

Ambition and honesty: What Climate Home readers want in 2025

Post-COVID, aviation continues to regroup and grow and is set to be a trillion dollar industry by 2030, but it is incredibly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Clear air turbulence events in the North Atlantic have increased by 55% since 1979, and prominent incidents have resulted in deaths, serious injury and damage to aircraft.

Extreme weather events are not just confined to there, with extreme rains and flooding affecting Middle Eastern airports and snowfall crippling UK airports causing considerable disruption.

While aviation is a relatively small contributor to global emissions, the industry is predicted to grow at 4% per year for the foreseeable future. Without meaningful action, net zero by 2050 will never be achieved. New generations of technology coming on-stream are not yet proven nor implementable, and aviation needs to reduce its carbon footprint now.

These five key steps focus on not only decarbonisation but make aviation more sustainable while also improving operational efficiency and safety.

1. Optimise flight planning and airspace

Airlines already try to select the most fuel-efficient routes and altitudes using advanced flight planning systems, AI, and optimisation software. However, future route optimisation could reduce turbulence events and the production of contrails with associated radiative forcing, increasing comfort and safety for passengers as well as contributing positively to the environment.

Optimising aircraft separation and air traffic control flow management can prevent aircraft bunching up and arrival delays because planes are forced into holding patterns, waiting their turn to land at the airport, carrying and burning large amounts of fuel.

2. Make operations more sustainable

The latest generation of commercial aircraft utilises advanced aerodynamics and engine technology, which saves a significant amount of fuel and emissions from previous types.

Airlines must invest in modern fuel-efficient aircraft as their expansion plans evolve. In the meantime, they can retrofit existing aircraft to improve efficiency by adding winglets to reduce induced drag and introducing new aircraft cabins, which save weight to improve efficiency.

Airlines and airports can also optimise weight and centre of gravity by reviewing the distribution of cargo and passengers to maximise efficiency, as well as using renewable energy to replace auxiliary power units on the ground and improving noise and air quality.

EU hit with lawsuit over green labelling of aviation and shipping investments

3. Switch to sustainable fuels

The biggest source of emissions within the aviation industry remains the burning of kerosene. Airlines need to transition from conventional to sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) over an agreed timescale with equitable access. SAFs cover a whole range of technology from biofuels derived from plants, animals or waste to synthetic fuels such as artificial kerosene.

Depending on which type of SAF is used, they could lower CO₂ emissions by 20–98% compared to conventional fuel. The quality, reliability and the supply of SAFs needs to be ensured and secured.

As first airline drops goal, are aviation’s 2030 targets achievable without carbon offsets?

4. Make airports more eco-friendly

Airports can become much more sustainable by using renewable energy, such as solar or wind energy, for airport operations, including powering the terminals and equipment. Renewable energy can be used for ground equipment and airplane support, by having electric airplane tugs, baggage loaders and catering trucks, for example.

It is possible to improve ground operations to reduce emissions such as minimising aircraft engine idling time during taxiing and using reduced engines for taxiing around the airport.

The industry has an exciting opportunity to design and develop the next generation of sustainable airports. There are 575 existing or new airport projects around the world at a total value of US$488 billion, (£395 billion) with many more planned over the next two decades.

5. Smart travel

The aviation industry can make passengers more sustainable by redefining the passenger experience from door to door, not just the time spent at the airport or on a plane. This could include luggage pickup from your home and incentives to use public transport to the airport.

Support to reduce luggage weight can be implemented by basic essentials (such as toiletries) or heavier equipment such as skis, ski helmets and golf clubs being provided at the end destination instead of everyone having to pack them.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Five ways to make aviation more sustainable right now appeared first on Climate Home News.

Five ways to make aviation more sustainable right now

Continue Reading

Climate Change

AI data centre ban in suburbs would not address fundamental issues: Greenpeace

Published

on


SYDNEY, Thursday 30 October 2026 — In response to
reports that the Albanese government is set to introduce draft legislation this year that would seek to ban data centres in Australia’s suburbs, Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:

“These reports are a testament to the growing community opposition to these completely inappropriate AI factories that have sprung up across our suburbs, and Big Tech corporations should take heed — the data centre build-out must not happen without the endorsement of the Australian people.

“But the government can’t simply ship this problem out to regional Australia without addressing the fundamental issues with this extractive new industry.

“We’re already seeing a trend of AI data centre proposals moving to the regions, in areas that are more water-scarce, more environmentally sensitive, and next to sources of fracked and coal seam gas to support their massive BYO gas-fired power plans — a pattern we’ve seen play out in the United States.

“From the Beetaloo Basin in the NT to the Western Downs in Qld, we’re seeing a wave of AI data centre proposals that would see new gas fast-tracked to support their massive energy demand, and threaten to completely derail Australia’s energy transition.

“Just as suburban Australians are asking, “what for?”, regional communities like Berry Springs and Dalby do not want dirty data centres setting up shop with absolutely no benefit to their communities. Greenpeace is calling for a moratorium on AI data centre developments until strict and enforceable safeguards are in place to protect our climate and our communities.”

-ENDS-

Media contact

Kate O’Callaghan on +61 406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org

AI data centre ban in suburbs would not address fundamental issues: Greenpeace

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines

Published

on

In the thick of the COP29 climate summit in Azerbaijan in 2024, the UN climate talks were rattled by what can only be described as a major PR disaster. The BBC, Reuters and The Guardian all carried headlines, attributed to leading climate policy experts, that the COPs were “no longer fit for purpose”. 

The articles outlined a series of reforms called for in an open letter signed by 22 eminent scientists and politicians, including a former UN secretary-general and previous UN climate chief, with a further 150 lending their support. The headlines shook confidence in the COP process, just as governments were wrestling over a new climate finance goal.

The Club of Rome – which handled the media relations for the letter – hurried to say that its “constructive, supportive ideas” had been “misinterpreted”. Negotiators kept calm(ish) and carried on, in the end landing the finance goal after some high-stakes drama on the final day.

    To my surprise, when I went back this week to read the letter again, I could not find the offending line about the COPs not being fit for purpose. The Club of Rome has yet to respond to my query about its disappearance.

    Whatever happened to the wording, that sentiment has been widely shared. COPs have ballooned in size while the importance of their outcomes seems to have diminished since the 2015 Paris Agreement (with the exception of the 2023 COP in Dubai where countries agreed to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems).

    The same on the surface

    Two years on from those painful headlines in Baku, has anything changed for the better? You might be forgiven for thinking not. Official decisions are still made by consensus rather than the majority voting some have called for to stop blockers.

    Tens of thousands of officials, activists and business execs still scurry around the halls to an ever-growing list of side events, roundtables and dialogues, while deals still come down to rows, all-nighters and jargon-filled texts adopted to rounds of applause.

    But it would not be true to say that COPs have completely failed to respond to the very real need to translate the words of the Paris Agreement into action in the outside world.

    Global warming is projected to be around 1.3C lower this century than it would have been if the world had not committed to tackle the climate crisis under that accord. Developing countries have a valued space at COPs in which their voices have equal weight in decision-making, unlike in many other international fora. And most importantly, perhaps, there has been a subtle shift, tipping the balance away from negotiating towards doing.

    Brazil branded last year’s summit in Belém as the “COP of Implementation”, corralling the sprawling Action Agenda into six axes. This was a bid to impose some structure on the mushrooming efforts between governments, UN agencies, cities, businesses and civil society to set targets and spur faster results on their pet issues, from methane emissions to health and adaptation in conflict zones. COP30 alone saw the launch of 120 “plans to accelerate solutions”.

    COP30 roadmaps off the cuff

    Meanwhile, as the formal negotiations drew to a close, it was clear that consensus decision-making was evolving into something a little more improvised.

    With only around half of all countries on board with the idea of a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels, COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago announced his team would put one together over the coming year, along with another on how to meet a global goal to halt deforestation by 2030. Those roadmaps will be launched next week, presented and discussed at COP31, though it’s still unclear whether or how they’ll be incorporated into the formal negotiating agenda.

    Saudi Arabia raises a point of order during the closing plenary at COP30 in Belem, Brazil on November 22, 2025 (Photo: IISD/ENB | Mike Muzurakis)

    Saudi Arabia raises a point of order during the closing plenary at COP30 in Belem, Brazil on November 22, 2025 (Photo: IISD/ENB | Mike Muzurakis)

    Some leading policy-makers don’t think that matters too much. Speaking to journalists before the Antalya summit, COP30 CEO Ana Toni and Dutch climate minister Stientje van Veldhoven said “coalitions of the willing” can move ahead without needing consensus from the COPs. This, they said, was evident this year at the first global conference on TAFF, co-chaired by van Veldhoven and attended by 60 countries.

    “Consensus or no-consensus in the general COP doesn’t make a difference for the choices I have to make in my country to get my country to phase out fossil fuels,” said the Dutch minister. The Netherlands recently became one of the first to publish a national TAFF plan.

    COP31 banks on flagship voluntary initiatives

    This thinking has permeated the management and expected outcomes of this year’s COP too. Earlier this year, Türkiye, supported by international energy agencies, floated the idea of a voluntary goal to boost electrification to 35% of the world’s final energy consumption by 2035 – and this is now being touted as one of the main results to be expected from Antalya.

    Türkiye is also championing a pledge on AI and climate, while co-host Australia is pushing to ease access to climate finance for least developed countries and small island states.

    COP31 presidency announces AI pledge as UN climate chief says Big Tech ‘on thin ice’

    None of these needs consensus. But with a political cover decision already in the works, as trailed by the COP presidents, they – and perhaps the fossil fuel roadmap – may find a home in the official text if language acceptable to most can be found, giving them them additional weight.

    UNFCCC reform process in the shadows

    Formal reform is underway too, if quietly. UN climate chief Simon Stiell is leading a review informed by ongoing consultations with a group of 15 well-respected climate policy experts, three of whom signed the open letter in 2024.

    Among them is leading Swedish climate and sustainability scientist Johan Rockström who has strong ideas about how to make COPs function better, including a switch to majority voting. He told the same press briefing nothing stands in the way of this, because the rules of procedure for making decisions at COPs have never been formally agreed.

    Still, to get away from the default setting of consensus would require agreement on a new system that may be impossible to achieve given the rise in bullying tactics by fossil fuel heavyweights.

    Comment: The UN climate process was built for negotiation – now it must support implementation

    The deliberations with the high-level policy gurus, as reflected in a summary of June’s session in Bonn, largely echo what’s already happening organically, calling for stronger partnerships and accountability both in and between the Action Agenda and negotiations. It doesn’t mention voting.

    A general overview of the reform exercise says that “improving and optimizing the [UN climate] process over the medium to long term… will be critical to fostering trust, enhancing collaboration, and catalyzing increased ambition”.

    In the short term, don’t hold your breath for anything concrete on reform at COP31 but watch for signs in what ends up dominating the headlines from Türkiye.

    The post Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Experts: What China wants from the COP31 climate talks

    Published

    on

    With the COP31 climate summit in Turkey looming, all eyes are on China to see what the country will push for in the negotiations.

    At COP30 last year, China helped to secure a “dialogue” on climate-related “unilateral trade measures”, as well as a two-year “work programme” concerning climate finance.

    The nation also championed south-south cooperation throughout the conference and co-led a summit on methane, alongside Brazil and the UK.

    In a recent press conference, China’s environment vice-minister Li Gao noted the need to “uphold multilateralism” and send a “clear political signal” that the global community is united around climate action.