Air New Zealand has abandoned a 2030 goal to cut its carbon emissions, blaming difficulties securing more efficient planes and sustainable jet fuel.

The move makes it the first major carrier to back away from such a climate target.

The airline added it is working on a new short-term target and it remains committed to an industry-wide goal of achieving net zero emissions by 2050.

The aviation industry is estimated to produce around 2% of global carbon dioxide emissions, which airlines have been trying to reduce with measures including replacing older aircraft and using fuel from renewable sources.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Mischala@lemmy.nz 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Yeah, Unfortunately carbon credits have been gamed by ineffectual eco projects so, they pretty much do nothing but allow a company a way to pretend they aren't the problem.

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

An imperfect response to a perfect storm.

Everyone we spoke to is adamant: offsets can never be the total solution or a get-out-of-climate-regulation-free card. But even this may be thinking about it in the wrong way. John Holler, a climate expert at the World Wildlife Fund, who used to work at Verra, says carbon trading isn’t really about offsetting at all. Instead, it’s simply a tool for routing money toward good things: low-carbon stoves, forests, community solar energy. “You’re purchasing carbon credits to contribute to global decarbonization,” he says, “not making a claim against your own emissions.”

A humbler, less satisfying goal. But perhaps a more honest one.

You're letting perfect be the enemy of good.

Routing money from polluters to anyone willing to try less polluting stuff is still an improvement on doing nothing at all.

[–] Mischala@lemmy.nz 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

You make an excellent point. I was merely pointing out it's not a silver bullet.

And I believe the goals that Air NZ was targeting were not "net" but actual emission targets. So they cannot simply offset their way out of them.

Honestly, having them declare failure early is a better outcome than getting to the zero hour and saying "we can't do it" this means they are actually tracking their progress and taking the promises seriously.

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 month ago

actually tracking their progress and taking the promises seriously.

I hadn't thought of it that way.

Good point.