Nos actus
03-févr.-2012 The EC published the new list of aircraft operators included in the EU ETS
01-févr.-2012 Opening of the EUROCONTROL ETS Support Facility for Aircraft Operators
30-janv.-2012 Single EU Registry activated for aircraft operators
Dans les médias
14-févr.-2012 EU-ETS Could Cost Bizav Operators Dearly [AINonline]
04-janv.-2012 ETS Goes Live As Political Battles Gather Momentum [AINonline]
22-déc.-2011 Green Machines [Business Airport International]
21-déc.-2011 ECJ ruling in favour of EU's right to include non-EU airlines in its ETS unlikely to stem US political pressure [GreenAir Online]
19-déc.-2011 US demands data from European and US airlines as it fires off first retaliatory salvo in growing dispute with EU over ETS [GreenAir Online]
03-nov.-2011 States opposed to Europe's emissions trading scheme win ICAO Council backing but EU remains defiant [GreenAir Online]
Dans les médias
EU-ETS Could Cost Bizav Operators Dearly
[AINonline, 14-févr.-2012] A U.S. Part 91 corporate flight department flying a Gulfstream G450 could pay nearly $35,000 annually to comply with the European Union Emission Trading Scheme (EU-ETS), according to a preliminary report released exclusively to AIN by UK-based EU-ETS consultants SustainAvia. This cost estimate assumes 15 long-haul (New York City to UK) round-trip flights per year; a carbon credit (also referred to as European Union Allowances, or EUAs) price of €25 ($32); free 27 allotted EUAs; and emissions monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) charges of $5,628 for aircraft assigned to the UK registrar for EU-ETS compliance. Costs would be similar for aircraft assigned to other European countries, with lower MRV charges in countries, such as France, offset by the need to buy more EUAs due to longer distances flown from the U.S., according to the report.
SustainAvia also asked 132 business jet operators to evaluate the administrative burden of EU-ETS. Not surprisingly, 80 percent of all respondents said the administrative burden is either high or very high. "This may serve as an indicator that total costs of emissions trading are far higher than costs related to the purchase of carbon credits alone," the report's authors said. [...]
ETS Goes Live As Political Battles Gather Momentum
[AINonline, 04-janv.-2012] [...] "This will be a nightmare for many operators," said Julien Dufour, CEO of ETS specialist support company VerifAvia. In addition to the intrusiveness of criminal background checks, other burdens include the need to provide notarized–and in some cases translated–documents, such as current proof of a company's legal incorporation, which may not be available under the legal jurisdiction in which the operator is based.
The accounts will be used to deposit free credits earned by operators who completed the full kilometer/metric ton calculation of emissions for 2010 and 2011. However, according to Dufour, the free-credits process has left many business aircraft operators frustrated. Having spent significant amounts of money to have the required full verification, they found that they will end up with a tiny allocation–in some cases no more than between one and four percent of their total annual needs. Carbon credits don't actually have to be surrendered for the first time until April 30, 2013.
However, Dufour predicted that the process for reporting and verifying 2011 emissions should prove to be more straightforward than it was for 2010. For most of the 27 EU states, the deadline for filing verified reports is March 31, 2012, but for the Czech Republic it is March 15 and for Spain it is February 28. Dufour suggested that most authorities have proved to be more flexible in practice than their rules and deadlines would suggest. However, he did urge operators not to leave the reporting and verification process until the last few weeks. [...]
Green Machines
[Business Airport International, 22-déc.-2011] [...] First verifier to be approved in France, Paris and Londonbased VerifAvia, hit the ground running. Standing between operators and the European Commission, it rapidly verified the greenhouse gas emissions and payload metric ton/ kilometer (TK) for over 400 small emitters in 40 countries, the vast majority of them in North America. And, as VerifAvia’s ETS expert, Tobias Konik, points out, at least half of them were late with their emissions reports. “All of our clients have complied now, though,” he adds.
VerifAvia developed a simplified and cost-effective system for small emitters that
avoids the time and expense of a site visit. Qualifying operators can conduct the process remotely by email.
Konik, who is conducting a large-scale investigation of the impact of environmental restrictions on business aircraft, has his reservations about the scheme. “Small emitters have no incentive to reduce their emissions. They’re not rewarded for saving carbon,” he explains. “The only way they can reduce emissions is to buy new aircraft with a better fuel coefficient.” Where are the incentives, he asks, to fly more slowly or employ other fuel-saving measures?
More accurate, he argues, would be a system based on the measurement of fuel burn. “This would account for everything – speed and payload,” he says.
VerifAvia’s in-depth investigation of the impact of environmental restrictions on the industry could turn out to be a landmark. So far, it’s covered over 50 operators and, as well as including carbon emissions, looks at the effects of limits on noise, nitrogen oxide, fuel taxes, and other factors as well as the ETS scheme. [...]
» En savoir plus (pdf, 1335 KB)
EC sets benchmarks for EU ETS free emission allowances but Hedegaard upsets airlines over investment remarks
[GreenAir Online, 30-sept.-2011] [...] Analysts Point Carbon have calculated airlines will receive 60-70% of their allowance requirement for free. However, VerifAvia CEO Julien Dufour believes that although this might be the industry average, there will be a wider than expected variance between operators. “While some airlines will receive 20-30% for free, some airlines may receive up to 90-100% for free,” he said.
Since the free allocation benchmarking announcement, Dufour has carried out an assessment on behalf of VerifAvia’s aircraft operator clients, basing his calculation on an assumed increase in emissions of 10% between 2010 and 2012.
The chart below from VerifAvia shows the percentage of free allowances for its 70 clients ranges from a few per cent to nearly 100%, with an average of less than 60%.
(source: VerifAvia)
“The EU ETS will definitely penalise regional and medium-haul airlines,” he said. “Long-haul and charter airlines will be better off, which makes sense because long-haul airlines have a better fuel efficiency as the fuel burn during the landing/take-off (LTO) cycle is spread out over a greater distance. In addition, long-haul flights generally have a higher load factor.
“Charter airlines are also on the high side because they generally depart fully loaded. Medium-haul and regional airlines typically have a lower load factor and can only spread the LTO cycle fuel burn on a shorter distance, which penalises them.”
The big losers, points out Dufour, will be the non-commercial operators – the so-called small emitters – who will average only around 4% of allowances free of charge. [...]
EC publishes historical ETS allocations
[ATW, 15-mars-2011] [...] VerifAvia CEO Julien Dufour told ATW’s Eco-Aviation Today that “there are no surprises in the figures. I don't think this will have any implication, other than an official figure for people who had never seen any estimates.” He said that “what really matters is the tonne-kilometer benchmark, which is extremely difficult to estimate. Without the TK benchmark, the baseline has little value.” All operators must submit verified emissions and TK data by the end of March to their respective authorities and the benchmark will be published by Sept. 30 with the scheme to start on Jan. 1. [...]
European Commission publishes historical aviation emissions figure on which EU ETS allocations are to be based
[GreenAir Online, 07-mars-2011] [...] According to VerifAvia CEO Julien Dufour, there is no surprise in the figure. “I don't think this will have any implication to anybody, other than provide an official figure for people who had never seen any estimate before,” he said. “But anyway, what matters most is the tonne-kilometre (TK) benchmark, which is extremely difficult to estimate. Without the TK benchmark, the baseline has little value.” [...]
The effect of ETS on aircraft purchasing
[Regional International, 01-janv.-2011] Tobias Konik of VerifAvia asks whether ETS incentivises airlines to buy cleaner aircraft.
From 2012 onwards, aircraft operators will have to surrender emissions allowances for all flights arriving and departing from EU airports. Consequently, they are obliged to pay for every single tonne of carbon dioxide emitted on flights that fall under the scheme (less any free allowances they are entitled to). [...]
Now Is The Time To Think About EU ETS Verification
[Aviation & Allied Business Publications, 01-déc.-2010] Since January 2010, airlines affected by the European Union (EU) Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) must monitor their aircraft emissions and tonne-kilometer data according to their monitoring plans. Only airlines that operate more than a daily round-trip flight on average to, from or within the EU must comply with the EU ETS regulations. Affected airlines (from the African region) include Royal Air Maroc, Air Arabia Morocco, Jet4You, Air Algérie, Tunisair, Nouvelair Tunisie, Afriqiyah Airways, Air Cairo, Air Madagascar, Air Mauritius and Air Seychelles (administered by France); Libyan Airlines, Egyptair, Kenya Airways and South African Airways (administered by the UK); and Ethiopian Airlines (administered by Italy). [...]
Aviation EU ETS deadline concentrates minds as aircraft operators and verifiers gear up for critical first reports
[GreenAir Online, 26-nov.-2010] [...] Julien Dufour of VerifAvia highlights the different positions across Europe:
- France: A site visit is not mandatory, provided the operator submits to the verifier a paper or electronic copy of any extract required data source used in the reports, and any other information requested to the satisfaction of the verifier.
- UK: A site visit for Aviation EU ETS small emitters is not a mandatory requirement, but may be required if appropriate.
- Ireland: Where the operator is eligible to use the simplified procedure for monitoring and reporting and has opted to use a Commission-approved tool, if the verifier in their strategic analysis and risk analysis has determined that a site visit is not necessary then this will be acceptable to the Competent Authority.
- Germany: The German DEHSt considers that an on-site visit is required.
- The Netherlands: There is no policy or criteria for waiving site visits for verification of emissions reports.
“Our view is that a site visit for small emitters is not required provided that it is agreed by the Competent Authority and the operator can provide all required data and document remotely,” says Dufour, whose organization is approved to handle Aviation EU ETS verifications in 20 European countries following its recently received ISO 14065 accreditation from UKAS, the UK’s accreditation body. To help in what could be a costly process, VerifAvia claims to offer small emitters the lowest available rates for verification.
[...] According to VerifAvia’s Dufour, the Compliance Forum – a task force of stakeholders, including policy makers and Competent Authorities, set up to implement the Aviation EU ETS directive – is preparing a verification guidance document that is hoped will sort out the anomalies. [...]
Julien Dufour of VerifAvia highlights the different positions across Europe:
- France: A site visit is not mandatory, provided the operator submits to the verifier a paper or electronic copy of any extract required data source used in the reports, and any other information requested to the satisfaction of the verifier.
- UK: A site visit for Aviation EU ETS small emitters is not a mandatory requirement, but may be required if appropriate.
- Ireland: Where the operator is eligible to use the simplified procedure for monitoring and reporting and has opted to use a Commission-approved tool, if the verifier in their strategic analysis and risk analysis has determined that a site visit is not necessary then this will be acceptable to the Competent Authority.
- Germany: The German DEHSt considers that an on-site visit is required.
- The Netherlands: There is no policy or criteria for waiving site visits for verification of emissions reports.
“Our view is that a site visit for small emitters is not required provided that it is agreed by the Competent Authority and the operator can provide all required data and document remotely,” says Dufour, whose organization is approved to handle Aviation EU ETS verifications in 20 European countries following its recently received ISO 14065 accreditation from UKAS, the UK’s accreditation body. To help in what could be a costly process, VerifAvia claims to offer small emitters the lowest available rates for verification.
VerifAvia (UK) Ltd. received ISO14065:2007 accreditation from the UK Accreditation Service
[ATW, 15-nov.-2010] VerifAvia (UK) Ltd. received ISO14065:2007 accreditation from the UK Accreditation Service to provide greenhouse gas verification for the aviation sector under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. ISO14065:2007 is an international standard that specifies the principles and requirements for bodies that undertake validation or verification of GHG assertions. It is used by most national accreditation bodies to certify companies that want to provide EU ETS verification services.
Since January, the 2,500 or so aircraft operators included in the EU ETS have started to monitor their aircraft emissions and tonne-kilometer data according to their approved monitoring plans and the EU ETS regulations. The annual emissions and tonne-kilometer reports must be verified by an independent accredited verifier before being submitted to the relevant EU competent authority. The aim of verification is not only to ensure with reasonable assurance that the reported data is free from material misstatements but also that the procedures in place conform to the regulations.