Document · PDF

Bijlage 2 CO2 reduction targets for AAS based on remaining IPCC CO2 budgets up to 2050

Raadscommissie Financiën, Kunst en Diversiteit 21 maart 2024, gemeente AmsterdamBij agendapunt: Bespreken van het bericht 'Schiphol hield explosief rapport over krimp luchthaven onder de pet na dreigement KLM9.841 woorden

Open het PDF bij de gemeente ↗Naar de vergadering →

Tekst van het document

Uit het bestand gehaald, zonder opmaak, tabellen en afbeeldingen

CO2 reduction targets for Amsterdam Airport Schiphol based on remaining IPCC CO2 budgets up to 2050 January 2024

Stringent reductions in CO2 emissions – and demand – required for Schiphol to meet Paris goal of 1.5˚C global warming •

•

Current in-sector decarbonisation measures, excluding offsetting, are not enough to meet IPCC derived carbon budgets compatible with 1.5˚C global warming for Amsterdam Airport Schiphol. Significant demand management measures, to be implemented by 2030 at the latest, seem the only viable way out. Demand in flights beyond a certain distance could be targeted in particular. -32% up to -66% v. 2019 required CO2 reduction

Net-zero with carbon removals

current goal Duurzame Luchtvaarttafel: -9% v. 2019 current measures: -20% v. 2019

2023 Current measures Additional measures

2030

✓ Fleet renewal ✓ Operational improvements ✓ SAF (up to 10%)

2040

2050

✓ Continued efficiency improvements ✓ Increased use of SAF (ReFuelEU Aviation)

➢ Significant demand management measures from 2025 Potentially by reduction of long-distance, high emission flights from 2025

CO2 reduction targets for Amsterdam Airport Schiphol based on remaining IPCC CO2 budgets up to 2050

CLASSIFICATION Public DATE January 2024

KNOWLEDGE AREAS Air transport emissions Sustainable aerospace operations Third party risk and policy support KEYWORDS CO2 emissions Carbon budget Paris Agreement

This report has been discussed with various experts from CE Delft, in particular to define the input assumptions and methodology. The authors are grateful for their useful suggestions and additions. Ownership and responsibility of the analysis presented lies with NLR.

The owner and/or contractor have granted permission to publish this report. Content of this report may be cited on the condition that full credit is given to the owner and/or contractor. Commercial use of this report is prohibited without the prior written permission of the owner and/or contractor. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

How much aviation fits in a Paris-compatible CO2 budget? A study commissioned by Royal Schiphol Group, to inform decision making about a 2030 emissions target In 2015, the world committed to limit global warming through the Paris Agreement

Since this commitment, the IPCC has stressed the relevance of cumulative emissions and has determined global CO2 budgets: how much more emissions can we have in order not to surpass the Paris-targets? Although international aviation is not part of Nationally Determined Contributions, its emissions do count towards these budgets, as these encompass all man-made CO2. Hence, it also has to contribute in reducing emissions.

Crucially, net-zero roadmaps do not address this, as these look at emissions in a particular year – and not at the ‘area below the curve’. This research first determines possible CO2 budgets for flights departing from Amsterdam Airport Schiphol in the period 2020 – 2050, based on various temperature scenarios and budget shares allocated to aviation. Then, this work explores ‘how much aviation activity’ fits within these budgets. This is a crucially relevant question, as activity growth has historically out-paced efficiency improvements 10 to 1 (Annex III.A).

Ultimately, implications for 2030 emission levels are derived. Definitions • Emissions Unless indicated otherwise, all emissions are tank-to-wake. Life cycle emissions reductions of SAF are taken into account using the ICAO CORSIA methodology, in which life cycle savings are evenly distributed over well-to-tank and tank-to-wake quantities. An emission index of 3.16 kg CO2 per kg of fuel is used. •

Net in-sector emissions Net emissions by the aviation sector, including net emissions reduction by the use of SAF, but excluding out-of-sector carbon removal (offsetting, compensation, ...)

•

The IPCC has set CO2 budgets, which specify how much CO2 we can emit in order to limit warming to various temperature scenarios Limiting global warming to a certain temperature with a certain likelihood yields a global carbon budget. For 2020 – 2050, IPCC has determined these to be the following. ⁰C

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

500 Gt

400 Gt

300 Gt

1.7

850 Gt

700 Gt

550 Gt

1350 Gt

1150 Gt

900 Gt

This research zooms in the two bold-printed budgets for 50%/1.5˚C and 66%/1.7˚C. The first budget is also largely in line with 83%/ 1.7˚C.

Scenarios with 2˚C warming and 1.7˚C warming with a likelihood of 50% are not explored, as • the Paris Agreement stipulates warming “well below 2˚C” • the risk of reaching dangerous tipping points increases at higher levels of global warming (e.g. Lenton et al., 2023; Armstrong McKay et al., 2022) • the consequences if targets are overshot, and likelihood of this happening (e.g. Beevor & Alexander, 2022)

The graph below (based on Armstrong McKay et al., 2022 and Carrington, 2022) shows the “estimated range of global heating needed to pass tipping point temperature”. It illustrates the marked differences between 1.5˚C, 1.7˚C and 2˚C.

From global CO2 budgets, CO2 budgets for aviation in general and CO2 budgets for flights departing from Schiphol are derived Various sources provide a share of the budget allocated to aviation. Van den Berg et al., (2020) show various ways to address that allocation problem, based on different equity principles. This is a fundamental societal and political choice. This research explores two principles: 1. If the current share of emissions is maintained, the budget for all aviation would be 2.4% (ICCT, 2020). 2. If one takes into account that aviation is hard / costly to abate, a larger share could be justified. In the IEA Net Zero scenario (2021), the aviation budget is 3.9%.

The share of the budget for aviation at Schiphol depends on the share of aviation activity in the Netherlands (vs. global). Currently, this is 1.16%. As other regions will see higher traffic growth, this share will reduce over time (in line with a reducing share of Europe). Anticipated future share

1.05%

The share of the budget for Schiphol depends on the share of traffic at Schiphol compared to the Netherlands. Share of Schiphol vs. NL Multiplying these, the share used in analysis is

96%

1.01%

Schiphol (×100) all aviation (×10) IEA / ICCT global The illustration above shows the global, aviation and Schiphol CO2 budgets – the latter two magnified 10 and 100 times to be visible. It also captures the substantial difference between a 2.4% (ICCT) or 3.9% (IEA) share for aviation. If global aviation today would be responsible for 3.9% of global CO2 emissions, flights departing from the Netherlands would emit more than 10% of the rest of the Dutch economy. The used share of 1.01% in this analysis is conservatively taken to determine the total cumulative budget instead of differentiating from 1.11% in 2019 to 1.01% in 2050. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

In-sector emissions between 2020 and 2050 are calculated, modelled and estimated based on suitable data and methods 2020

2023

calculated from fuel bunkers

Known

2030 modelled, based on

• planned fleet renewal, including upgauging depending on plans • operational improvements • SAF usage Lower uncertainty

2040

2050

estimated, based on

• Mandated SAF uptake (ReFuelEU Aviation, increased to 10% SAF in 2030 following Clean Skies for Tomorrow), expected emissions reduction factor (Destination 2050: 72% in 2025, linearly increasing to 95% by 2050) • Literature-derived figures for efficiency improvement (1.3 – 1.7% p.a., in line with historical average or maximum attainable improvement), delivered by improvements in aircraft and engine technology and improvements in operation Greater uncertainty

Key observation: 2030 emissions level is the key determinant for cumulative emissions over the 2020 – 2050 period. Period up to 2030 already includes anticipated decarbonisation actions. In-sector net emissions reduce rather quickly from 2031 thanks to ReFuelEU Aviation, but limited by efficiency improvement (1.3 – 1.7% p.a.). • Resulting cumulative emission values are then compared to IPCC-derived CO2 budgets for aviation at Schiphol • Remaining net in-sector emissions in 2050 are compared to anticipated share of out-of-sector carbon removal in Destination 2050 © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

In-sector action between now and 2030 reduces cumulative CO2 emissions but overshoots majority of airport carbon budgets 400 350

Budget 2020-2050

In-secor net MtCO2

300

66%/1.7˚C/3.9%

250

3 50%/1.5˚C/3.9%

200

66%/1.7˚C/2.4%

150

50%/1.5˚C/2.4%

100

2020-2023 2024-2030 2031-2050

50 0 Maintaining 2019 emissions level 0% CO2 in 2030 v. 2019

Slim & Duurzaam / DLT: 2030 = 2005 -9% CO2 in 2030 v. 2019

Best estimate for 2030

-20% CO2 in 2030 v. 2019

Constant traffic network of 500k flights (2019)

1. Maintaining emissions at 2019 level (11.5 MtCO2) overshoots all budgets 2. Best-estimate for 2030 CO2 emissions, including fleet renewal, operational improvements and SAF uptake is below current DLTtarget (2030 = 2005). 3. All airport specific carbon budgets are overshot between 2030 and 2050 except those derived for 66% likelihood of 1.7˚C with 3.9% share.

Maintaining 2019 emissions level: 0% CO2 reduction with respect to 2019: recovery to 2019 CO2 (11.5 Mt) in 2024, maintained until 2050. // All others include SAF from 2025 (ReFuelEU Aviation, increased to 10% in 2030), 1.3% p.a. efficiency improvement between 2031 and 2050. // Slim & Duurzaam / DLT 2030 = 2005: Recovery to 2019-level of emissions (11.5 Mt) in 2024, linearly reduced to 2005-level (10.5 Mt) in 2030. // Best estimate for 2030: Traffic recovery to 2019-level in 2024, emissions modelled based on best estimate of pathway for 2020 – 2030 (fleet renewal, operational improvements, 10% SAF) // Fit for 55 and Destination 2050 scenarios are most comparable to ‘best estimate for 2030’ (Destination 2050 anticipates -12% CO2 in 2030 v. 2019). © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

CO2 emissions in 2030 have to reduce by 32%, 44% and 66% compared to 2019 to meet more ambitious airport carbon budgets Budget 2020-2050

300

66%/1.7˚C/3.9%

In-secotr net MtCO2

250 200

50%/1.5˚C/3.9% 66%/1.7˚C/2.4%

150

50%/1.5˚C/2.4%

100 50

2020-2023

2024-2030 2031-2050

-9% -20% -32% DLT Best estimate for 2030

-44%

-66%

1. Cumulative emissions 2020 to 2030 are governed by fleet renewal, operational improvements, SAF blending and network. 2. Cumulative emissions 2031 to 2050 are governed by ReFuelEU Aviation, annual efficiency improvement and 2030 emissions level (‘starting point’). Network is assumed constant from 2030 onwards.

Required change in in-sector net cumulative CO2 emissions for 2030 (v. 2019) Cumulative emissions between 2020 and 2023 are constant across all scenarios. // Best estimate for 2030: best estimate of pathway for 2020 – 2030; SAF from 2025 (ReFuelEU Aviation, 10% in 2030); 1.3% p.a. efficiency improvement 2031 – 2050. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

The level of CO2 emissions in 2030 is the key determinant for cumulative emissions over the 2020 – 2050 period Budget 2020-2050

300

66%/1.7˚C/3.9%

In-secotr net MtCO2

250 200

50%/1.5˚C/3.9% 66%/1.7˚C/2.4%

150

50%/1.5˚C/2.4%

100 50

2020-2023 2024-2030 2031-2050

-20% -32% -9% DLT Best estimate for 2030

-44%

-66%

Required change in in-sector net cumulative CO2 emissions for 2030 (v. 2019)

Cumulative emissions between 2020 and 2023 are constant across all scenarios. // Best estimate for 2030: best estimate of pathway for 2020 – 2030; SAF from 2025 (ReFuelEU Aviation, 10% in 2030); 1.3% p.a. efficiency improvement 2031 – 2050. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

Additional SAF, better SAF or further efficiency improvement only make a limited (2–8%) impact on cumulative CO2 for 2031 – 2050

Emissions levels in 2030 are hence of crucial importance Additional SAF

Higher quality SAF

Higher efficiency improvement

ReFuelEU Aviation blending mandate scaled by 1.2 × from 2035 onwards

SAF emissions reduction values (from Destination 2050) scaled by 1.2 × for 2030, and set to 100% for 2050

Efficiency improvement of 1.7% per annum, based on Destination 2050 and ICAO LTAG IS3 (“maximum possible effort in terms of future technology rollout, operational efficiencies”)

Year 2035

Base

Alternative

estimate

20%

24%

Year

Base

Alternative

estimate

Base

Alternative

72%

86%

estimate

1.3% p.a.

1.7% p.a.

123 MtCO2

119 MtCO2

2040

34%

41%

2030

2045

42%

50%

2050

95%

100%

2050

70%

84%

Result

123 MtCO2

120 MtCO2

Result

123 MtCO2

113 MtCO2

– 2%

Result

– 3%

– 8% The base estimate is used throughout the analysis; the alternative estimates presented here are used to determine the impacts of additional SAF, higher quality SAF and higher efficiency improvements on the budget use. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

Given no more in-sector decarbonisation opportunities, demand management remains as only option to reduce 2030 CO2 levels v. 2019

Various compatible scenarios exist, based on vastly different emissions impacts of various flights 80% of flights are intra-EU and contribute about 20% of CO2 As such: demand management measures in ICA prevent more CO2 emissions than measures in EUR 100%

About 15% longest distance flights (> 5000 km) contribute some 75% of CO2 As such: demand management measures targeting long distance flights are more effective than measures reducing total demand 100%

80%

15%

80%

60%

75%

40%

20%

Share of flights Share of CO2

0% Share of flights

Share of CO2 EUR

ICA

2.000

4.000

6.000

Distance

8.000

10.000

12.000

Demand management can be achieved by more generic capacity reductions or specifically targeting the longest flights Flight distance restrictions

Capacity reductions 2019

-32% CO2

-44% CO2

500k

489k

477k

1.5˚C/3.9%

500k 450k

458k

1.7˚C/2.4%

417k

1.5˚C/2.4%

90% 70% 50%

338k

40%

300k -17%

-6%

30%

0% -12%

150k

211k

-30%

200k

-24% -58%

100k 50k

-5% -3%

60%

349k

350k

250k

-11%

100% 80%

447k

416k

400k

Movements

-66% CO2

20% 10% 0% 0

MXP

KEF

2.000

CAI

4.000

DOH JFK DEL

6.000

Distance

-15% -18% -11%

-31% -36% -23%

0k ICA

-57% -66% -53%

EUR

Differences shown are with respect to 2019. Scenarios assume as-equal-aspossible demand reductions for all flights (left), or differences between EUR or ICA segments (middle) with equal demand induced network reductions across each segment, or targeted reduction of long-distance flights (right). Modelling does not consider network effects nor CO2 leakage to other areas. Capacity reductions modelled from 2025 onwards.

Share of flights Share of CO2 2019 Share of CO2 2030 v. 2019

DFW LAX BKK SIN

8.000

10.000

EZE

12.000

- 32% CO2 v. 2019 - 44% CO2 v. 2019 - 66% CO2 v. 2019

CO2 budgets for 2030 can be respected by limiting maximum flight distance – reducing flights by 3%, 5% or 11%, respectively. The modelling assumes these long-distance flights are not replaced by shorter flights. Also, it must be noted that by reducing long-haul flights, CO2 emissions may be transferred to other geographic locations and respective budgets. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved. 13

In the least ambitious scenario, twice as much carbon removal is required by 2050 as in the most ambitious scenario

Achieving net-zero CO2 emissions required additional out-of-sector carbon removal

Destination 2050 anticipates 8% contribution by carbon removal in the year 2050, compared to the ‘hypothetical no-action growth’ scenario.

In-sector net CO2 [Mt]

6 5 4 3 2

2.5 Mt; 16% 2.2 Mt; 14% 1.8 Mt; 11%

1.1 Mt; 7%

0 2040

2041

2042

2043

2044

-20% Best estimate for 2030

2045

Year

2046

-32%

2047

2048

-44%

2049

2050

-66%

Non-linear behaviour caused by non-linearly increasing ReFuelEU Aviation SAF blending mandate (2040: 34% // 2040: 42% // 2050: 70%).

For flights departing from Schiphol, 2050 emissions in this ‘hypothetical no-action growth’ equal 16.2 MtCO2. Remaining emissions exceed the 8% figure in two out of three budget-compatible cases. There, more out-of-sector carbon removal is required to meet netzero goal. Alternatively, 2030 emissions could be reduced beyond indicated percentages. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

In the least ambitious scenario, the share of energy required for aviation grows from 4.2% to 6.0% of the primary Dutch supply • Bio-SAF at 55% process efficiency (Van der Sman et al., 2021) and synthetic SAF at 45% process efficiency (Van der Sman et al., 2022) are assumed to be used in equal ratio. • CO2 can be removed out-ofsector for which 9.97 PJ/MtCO2 is required (Beuttler et al., 2019; Keith et al., 2018; Sustainable Aviation UK, 2023). • Total primary energy supply in the Netherlands in 2050 (den Ouden et al., 2020). In 2015, the total energy share of aviation of the primary energy supply was 4.2% (CBS, 2023).

SAF

Carbon

removal

Scenario

2050

in 2050

50% 1.5˚C

0.7 Mt

1.1 Mt

2.4%

61 PJ

11 PJ

50% 1.5˚C

1.4 Mt

2.2 Mt

3.9%

120 PJ

22 PJ

66% 1.7˚C

1.1 Mt

1.8 Mt

2.4%

98 PJ

18 PJ

66% 1.7˚C

1.6 Mt

2.5 Mt

3.9%

142 PJ

25 PJ

Total primary energy

Total energy share of aviation of

required in 2050

primary energy supply in 2050

SAF, carbon removal

SAF, carbon removal, fossil fuel

72 PJ 142 PJ 116 PJ 167 PJ

2.7% (– 36% v. 2015) 5.2% (+ 24% v. 2015) 4.3% (+ 2% v. 2015) 6.0% (+ 43% v. 2015)

Figures for primary energy supply (i.e., including process losses, including imports) in the Netherlands by den Ouden et al. include non-energy uses, to which energy for maritime bunkers (including production of synthetic fuels and associated energy required for direct air capture) and aviation energy (SAF, carbon removal and fossil fuel) has been added. Domestic and maritime energy supply figures are an average over different scenarios explored by den Ouden et al. including some maritime activity growth (+19% v. 2015). © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

Smaller airport carbon budgets require larger CO2 reductions and less flights in 2030 Warming

Budget share for aviation

50% likelihood of 1.5˚C

2.4%

(500 Gt)

3.9%

66% likelihood of 1.7˚C

2.4%

(700 Gt)

3.9%

Required CO2 reduction in 2030

–66% v. 2019 –62% v. 2005 –32% v. 2019 –25% v. 2005 –44% v. 2019 –39% v. 2005 Not required

Indicative number of annual flights compatible with required CO2 reduction (2025-2050) EUR:ICA reduced 1:1 (current)

EUR:ICA reduced 1:3 (less ICA)

210k

340k

420k

460k

350k

420k

Distance limit

450k (6450 km)

490k (9300 km)

480k (8850 km)

500k No flight distance restriction

Notwithstanding the conclusions drawn, additional and dedicated measures are required to tackle non-CO2 impact of aviation • In determining the CO2 budgets, IPCC (2022) has taken into account non-CO2 emissions, such as methane emissions from the agricultural sector. These non-CO2 emissions impact the CO2 budget (Annex I.A). • It is unclear if aviation-specific non-CO2 climate effects (NOX interactions with methane and ozone, persistent contrails and cirrus, ...) are also explicitly taken into account by IPCC. • If non-CO2 climate effects of aviation are accounted for, the current study is rightfully limited to CO2 emissions only. To align to IPCC modelling and assumptions, it is in this case required to reduce non-CO2 climate effects of aviation in line with CO2 emissions. This requires additional and dedicated measures. • If non-CO2 climate effects of aviation are not accounted for, they should be ‘paid for’ from the carbon budgets. However, in that case it also seems fair that the share allocated to aviation is increased. As non-CO2 climate effects will then appear ‘on both sides of the equation’, the conclusions presented here remain valid.

This figure, from Lee et al. (2021), shows non-CO2 effects are estimated to have been responsible for two-thirds of the total aviation climate effect between 1940 and 2018. Although this ratio might be different over other periods, the non-CO2 climate impact is nonnegligible. Additional and dedicated measures will be required to address these non-CO2 effects. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

Fully engaged

NLR - Netherlands Aerospace Centre

Anthony Fokkerweg 2 1059 CM Amsterdam The Netherlands

Voorsterweg 31 8316 PR Marknesse The Netherlands

p ) +31 88 511 31 13 e ) info@nlr.nl i ) www.nlr.org

p ) +31 88 511 44 44 e ) info@nlr.nl i ) www.nlr.org

Annexes I.

Background information A. IPCC global carbon budgets B. Aviation growth, CO2 intensity and cumulative CO2 emissions C. Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi)

II.

Carbon budgets and comparison to aviation decarbonisations pathways A. Comparison of ICAO decarbonisation pathways to carbon budgets B. Carbon budgets for aviation in the Netherlands and Schiphol

III.

Supplementary methods and results A. Approaches to emission shares B. Relevance of economic measures and accounting principles adhered to C. Decarbonisation modelling D. Summarised results for net CO2 emissions for 2020 – 2030 E. Required CO2 emissions reductions by 2030 in case of 1.7% p.a. efficiency improvement F. Required reduction in net in-sector CO2 emissions in 2030 for temperature targets depends on SAF

IV.

Detailed results A. Best estimate for 2030, compared to 1.5˚C/3.9% and 1.7˚C/3.9% B. -32% CO2 emissions in 2030 v. 2019; in line with 1.5˚C/3.9% C. -44% CO2 emissions in 2030 v. 2019; in line with 1.7˚C/2.4% D. -66% CO2 emissions in 2030 v. 2019; in line with 1.5˚C/2.4%

References

I: Background information

A: IPCC global carbon budgets Carbon budgets as used in this report “can be defined as the remaining amount of CO2 emissions that can still be emitted while keeping the global average temperature increase due to human activities to below a specific temperature limit” (Rogelj et al., 2019). It is stressed that CO2 budgets are not legally or scientifically ‘binding’ CO2 ‘allowance’, but should rather be seen and used as a concept that allows to check whether (projected) cumulative emissions are (reasonably, i.e., respecting uncertainties and probabilities) in line with temperature targets. The budgets are presented in IPCC (2022) are shown in the figure on the right. Budgets used in this work are outlined.

A: IPCC global carbon budgets As shown in the figure by IPCC (2022) on the previous page, anticipated reductions in non-CO2 emissions (such as methane emissions from the agricultural sector) are taken into account in determining the CO2-budgets. As indicated by IPCC, “higher or lower reductions in accompanying non-CO2 emissions can increase or decrease the values on the left [the CO2-budgets]”. The figure on the right (based on Rogelj et al., 2019, Fig. 1) illustrates in a simplified manner how an ‘allowed’ amount of CO2 emissions is determined from an amount of remaining warming. Relevant to note is the ‘split’ of the total emissions or impacts over contributions by CO2 and non-CO2. As the IPCC (2022, Table SPM.2) explicitly notes, higher or lower reductions in non-CO2 emissions also impact the remaining CO2 budget, quantifying that uncertainty as “220Gt or more” (equivalent to 44% of the 500 Gt budget corresponding to a 50% likelihood of 1.5⁰C warming).

Remaining warming until temperature limit Corresponding amount of CO2 and non-CO2 emissions / impacts CO2 CO2 budget

Non-CO2

ratio subject to uncertainty

A: IPCC global carbon budgets Given the relevance of monitoring (proxies for) warming in light of international targets, the notable uncertainties and the publication interval of IPCC reports (5 – 10 years) in combination with the need for swift and decisive action, various intermediate scientific publications (e.g. Forster et al., 2023 and Lamboll et al., 2023) have provided updates to the carbon budgets – taking into account both emissions as they happened between 2020 and present-day, modelling refinements and improved insights. Aforementioned studies indicate that the CO2 budget for limiting warming to 1.5⁰C with a 50% likelihood is not 500 Gt but 400 Gt over the period from 2020 up to and including 2050 (-20%) and that the budget for limiting warming to 1.7⁰C with a 66% likelihood is not 700 Gt but 500 Gt over the period from 2020 up to and including 2050 (-14%). For the period from 2023 up to and including 2050, respective budgets would be 250 Gt and 500 Gt (Forster et al., 2023, Table 7). Notwithstanding the fact that Forster et al. (2023) stress to “follow methods as close as possible to those used in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) Working Group One (WGI) report”, the present analysis of CO 2 budgets for aviation has opted to primarily refer to the (‘original’) budgets as published by the IPCC (2022) in order to avoid – in the words of Rogelj et al.

(2019) – “diversity that may confuse”. Put simply: the authors of this present work cannot judge whether “follow[ing] methods as close as possible to those used [by] the IPCC” is ‘close enough’. A short exercise shows that the required reduction in CO2 emissions by 2030 based on the reduced budget for limiting warming to 1.5⁰C with a 50% likelihood of 400 Gt over the period from 2020 up to and including 2050 would mean a shift from -32% to -49%.

B: Aviation growth, CO2 intensity and cumulative CO2 emissions Activity growth in revenue passenger kilometre (RPK)

Between 1970 and 2019, revenue passenger kilometres (RPKs) have grown by a factor 20. CO2 intensity per revenue passenger kilometre has, however, decreased by a factor 11 since 1960. Global financial crisis

9/11

Gulf war

Our World in Data (2022)

B: Aviation growth, CO2 intensity and cumulative CO2 emissions CO2 intensity in CO2 per revenue tonne kilometre (RTK)

This figure shows that fuel consumption of new aircraft has reduced by 41% over the past 50 years (1970 = 100), corresponding to a 1.0% compound annual reduction rate. Over the period from 1960 to 2019, the compound reduction rate was even higher at 1.3%, due to the introduction of widebody aircraft.

Zheng & Rutherford (2020)

B: Aviation growth, CO2 intensity and cumulative CO2 emissions Cumulative aviation CO2 emissions The figure below shows annual global CO2 emissions from global aviation and indicates the share of total cumulative emissions in each 20-year period.

EASA European Aviation Environmental Report 2022

C: Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) The Science Based Targets initiative is a partnership that “drives ambitious climate action in the private sector by enabling organizations to set science-based emissions reduction targets”. At the moment of writing, 26 airline companies are involved and 12 have an approved target (all “well-below 2˚C”). The Aviation sector guidance for setting well-below 2˚C targets notes that “[t]o align with the Paris agreement [of well-below 2˚C], the aviation sector is required to reduce average carbon intensity by ~35-40% between 2019-2035, or ~65% from 2019-2050” – from approximately 1000 gCO2/RTK today, to some 350 gCO2/RTK in 2050. Long-term industry activity forecasts are based on the IEA ETP Sustainable Development Scenario (SDS), which anticipates an annual growth forecast of 2.9% per annum (2019-2050). The SBTi methodology is insensitive to regional growth differences and is, accordingly, more lenient towards established airlines, anticipating below-average growth rates. As of recently, airlines can only submit targets that are in line with 1.5˚C (50% likelihood) using an ‘interim pathway’. A revised 1.5˚C is currently in development. The interim pathway is based on the Breakthrough scenario of ICCTs Vision 2050.

Whereas this Breakthrough scenario was developed to be compatible with 67% likelihood of 1.75˚C warming, its “cumulative emissions [...] over the time period 2019-2050 [19.6 GtCO2] are lower than those of the IEA NZE scenario [20.5 GtCO2], which is consistent with limiting global temperature increase to 1.5°C without overshoot” (p. 3 of the 1.5˚C technical report), SBTi deems the Breakthrough scenario compatible with 1.5˚C. The difference is likely caused by the different shares of carbon budget allocated to aviation (3.9% in case of IEA, 2.9% in case of ICCT, the latter including WtW emissions). Further differences between these pathways are noted in Table 1 (p. 4) of the technical report, shown on the next page. Whereas technology and alternative fuel assumptions of IEA are fairly well in line with assumptions made in this report, the ICCT Breakthrough scenario Science Based Targets initiative: About, Dashboard, Aviation sector guidance (August 2021), Interim 1.5˚C pathway technical report (February 2023). ICCT Vision 2050,

C: Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) clearly surpasses these – to the extent of assuming annual efficiency improvement figures that are higher than what ICAO refers to as the “maximum possible effort” (IS3). This is the likely reason that a higher activity growth (compared to the IEA scenario) can be sustained at a lower (cumulative) emissions level. Notwithstanding the ‘interim’ status of the 1.5˚C SBTi pathway, the target-setting tool for that warming scenario outlines a 2050 sector intensity target of 24 gCO2/RTK (N.B.: per revenue tonne kilometre; -98% versus current CO2 intensity). By 2050, global sector emissions should be reduced to about 100 MtCO2. Compared to the analysis presented here, the current (interim) 1.5˚C SBTi pathway will likely lead to a somewhat higher carbon budget, as regional growth differences are not taken into account by SBTi. Moreover, the targeted CO2 intensity reduction of 98% compared to 2019 levels seems more technology-optimistic compared to the analysis presented here. The ‘kink’ in the sector emissions pathway (graph on the right) from 2030 seems to match that technology-optimism. Science Based Targets initiative: About, Dashboard, Aviation sector guidance (August 2021), Interim 1.5˚C pathway technical report (February 2023). ICCT Vision 2050,

II: Carbon budgets and comparison to aviation decarbonisation pathways A. Global aviation: comparison of ICAO decarbonisation pathways to carbon budgets

B. Dutch aviation: Carbon budgets for aviation in the Netherlands and Schiphol

A: Comparison of ICAO decarbonisation pathways to carbon budgets Approach and input Decarbonisation pathways

Carbon budgets

• Sourced from ICAO LTAG study • Limited to international aviation only Integrated scenario 2 (IS2): “middle readiness / attainability and middle aspiration” • Mid traffic forecast (2.6% - 3.8% p.a. in RPK) • Cumulative emissions 2020 – 2050: – 17 GtCO2 (range 14 - 20 GtCO2) • Cumulative emissions 2020 – 2070: – 28 GtCO2 (range 23 - 34 GtCO2) Integrated scenario 3 (IS3): “represents the maximum possible effort in terms of future technology rollout, operational efficiencies, and fuel availability” • Mid traffic forecast (2.6% - 3.8% p.a. in RPK) • Cumulative emissions 2020 – 2050: – 12 GtCO2 (range 9 - 15 GtCO2) • Cumulative emissions 2020 – 2070: – 16 GtCO2 (range 12 - 20 GtCO2)

• Various warming scenarios and two budget shares for aviation (2.4% and 3.9%) – as used in main study • Further reduced by the share of international to all global aviation (61.3% (ICCT,2020) > 1.5% and 2.4%) ⁰C,

Likelihood

1.5% share

50%

66%

83%

1.5

7.4 Gt

5.9 Gt

4.4 Gt

1.7

12.5 Gt

10.3 Gt

8.1 Gt

19.9 Gt

16.9 Gt

13.2 Gt

⁰C, 2.4% share

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

12.0 Gt

9.6 Gt

7.2 Gt

1.7

20.3 Gt

16.7 Gt

13.1 Gt

32.3 Gt

27.5 Gt

21.5 Gt

A: Comparison of ICAO decarbonisation pathways to carbon budgets International aviation share resulting from cumulative CO2 emissions of LTAG scenarios with a low traffic forecast Global aviation share (2.4% and 3.9%) x share of international to global aviation (61.3%) = international aviation share (1.5% and 2.4%)

Key: < 1.5% / 1.5% – 2.4% / > 2.4% Integrated scenario 2

Integrated scenario 3

Based on cumulative emissions up to 2050 – 14 GtCO2

Based on cumulative emissions up to 2050 – 9 GtCO2

⁰C

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

2.8%

3.5%

4.7%

1.7

1.6%

2.0%

1.0%

1.2%

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

1.8%

2.3%

3.0%

2.5%

1.7

1.1%

1.3%

1.6%

0.7%

0.8%

1.0%

Based on cumulative emissions up to 2070 – 23 GtCO2

Based on cumulative emissions up to 2070 – 12 GtCO2

⁰C

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

4.6%

5.8%

7.7%

1.7

2.7%

3.3%

1.7%

2.0%

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

2.4%

3.0%

4.0%

4.2%

1.7

1.4%

1.7%

2.2%

2.6%

0.9%

1.0%

1.3%

A: Comparison of ICAO decarbonisation pathways to carbon budgets International aviation share resulting from cumulative CO2 emissions of LTAG scenarios with a mid traffic forecast Global aviation share (2.4% and 3.9%) x share of international to global aviation (61.3%) = international aviation share (1.5% and 2.4%)

Key: < 1.5% / 1.5% – 2.4% / > 2.4% Integrated scenario 2

Integrated scenario 3

Based on cumulative emissions up to 2050 – 17 GtCO2

Based on cumulative emissions up to 2050 – 12 GtCO2

⁰C

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

3.4%

4.3%

5.7%

1.7

2.0%

2.4%

1.3%

1.5%

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

2.4%

3.0%

4.0%

3.1%

1.7

1.4%

1.7%

2.2%

1.9%

0.9%

1.0%

1.3%

Based on cumulative emissions up to 2070 – 28 GtCO2

Based on cumulative emissions up to 2070 – 16 GtCO2

⁰C

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

5.6%

7.0%

9.3%

1.7

3.3%

4.0%

2.1%

2.4%

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

3.2%

4.0%

5.3%

5.1%

1.7

1.9%

2.3%

2.9%

3.1%

1.2%

1.4%

1.8%

A: Comparison of ICAO decarbonisation pathways to carbon budgets International aviation share resulting from cumulative CO2 emissions of LTAG scenarios with a high traffic forecast Global aviation share (2.4% and 3.9%) x share of international to global aviation (61.3%) = international aviation share (1.5% and 2.4%)

Key: < 1.5% / 1.5% – 2.4% / > 2.4% Integrated scenario 2

Integrated scenario 3

Based on cumulative emissions up to 2050 – 20 GtCO2

Based on cumulative emissions up to 2050 – 15 GtCO2

⁰C

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

4.0%

5.0%

6.7%

1.7

2.4%

2.9%

1.5%

1.7%

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

3.0%

3.8%

5.0%

3.6%

1.7

1.8%

2.1%

2.7%

2.2%

1.1%

1.3%

1.7%

Based on cumulative emissions up to 2070 – 34 GtCO2

Based on cumulative emissions up to 2070 – 20 GtCO2

⁰C

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

6.8%

8.5%

11.3%

1.7

4.0%

4.9%

2.5%

3.0%

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

1.5

4.0%

5.0%

6.7%

6.2%

1.7

2.4%

2.9%

3.6%

3.8%

1.5%

1.7%

2.2%

A: Comparison of ICAO decarbonisation pathways to carbon budgets Comparison over time for mid traffic forecast

IS3 as % IPCC 1.5C

14%

IS2 and IS3 do not follow the 1.5⁰C pathways

12%

IS3 as % IPCC 2C IS2 as % IPCC 1.5C

10%

IS2 as % IPCC 2C

2019 int. aviation share IEA NZE int. aviation share

IS2 does not follow the 2⁰C pathways

IS3 more aligned with the 2⁰C pathways

2% 0% 2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

B: Carbon budgets for aviation in the Netherlands and Schiphol Carbon budgets for aviation in the Netherlands

Carbon budgets for aviation at Schiphol

• Various warming scenarios (1.5˚C and 1.7˚C) and two budget shares for aviation (2.4% and 3.9%) – as used in main study • Further reduced by the anticipated future share of NL to all global aviation (1.05% > 0.0252% and 0.0410%)

⁰C,

0.252% share 1.5

Likelihood 50%

66%

83%

126 Mt

0.0241% share 1.5

Likelihood 50%

66%

121 Mt

1.7

176 Mt

1.7

169 Mt

⁰C,

Likelihood

⁰C,

Likelihood

0.410% share 1.5 1.7

50%

66%

205 Mt

83%

0.0393% share 1.5

287 Mt

1.7

83%

50%

66%

83%

III: Supplementary methods and results

A: Approaches to emission shares The carbon budget for aviation can be derived via various approaches relating to questions about the societal views on the importance of aviation and the difficulty for other sectors and countries to reach the climate targets. The 2.4% share for aviation used in this analysis is an example of the Grandfatheringapproach. The 3.9% share for aviation, based on the IEA Net Zero Emissions scenario, can be considered in line with the Cost-optimal approach.

Climate advisory board EU, based on Van den Berg et al. (2020)

B: Relevance of economic measures and accounting principles adhered to EU ETS

CORSIA

The EU ETS is a cap-and-trade system. Parties that emit CO2 need to have an allowance (‘permit’) to do so (Van der Sman et al., 2021).

ICAOs CORSIA is an offsetting scheme, designed to keep CO2 emissions of international aviation at 85% of the 2019 emissions level. Airlines are then required to purchase a particular amount of offsets. If these offsets concern carbon removal projects (of which permanence and additionality are guaranteed), such offsets can be used to ‘claim’ a reduction in net airline emissions.

Parties can buy allowances from: A. Other parties, if these have allowances in excess, after they have reduced carbon emissions. The carbon reduction realised this way is ‘claimed’ by the other party. B. Auctions. Revenues go to climate change mitigation and adaptation causes (e.g. EU ETS Innovation Fund), but do not necessarily correspond one-to-one to an equivalent emissions reduction.

As such, emissions for which EU ETS allowances are surrendered, are still counted as net in-sector emission, ‘funded’ from the budget.

In this study, offsets are not taken into account, as the baseline emissions level (85% of 2019) is not compatible with the Paris Agreement. If parties would purchase additional (high-quality, carbon removal) offsets, these could be used to counterbalance emissions, reducing the rate of depletion of the carbon budget. This does require the availability of such offsets, and (in case of industrial carbon removal) the associated availability of sufficient renewable energy. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

C: Methods Decarbonisation modelling / Constant factors across scenarios

– Fleet renewal (based on operator announcements and NLR research), including limited upgauging due to planned replacement by larger aircraft – Operational improvements: – improved ATM efficiency – increased CDA application – (some) alternative taxiing – SAF uptake, modelled to linearly increase between – 2025: 2% – 2030: 10% (increased from ReFuelEU Aviation, based on Clean Skies for Tomorrow, JetZero, etc.)

– Annual efficiency improvement of 1.3% – SAF uptake according to ReFuelEU Aviation – 2035: 20% – 2040: 34% – 2045: 42% – 2050: 70%

Illustration: SAF blending and annual efficiency improvement reduce net CO2 12 10

-1.3%

6 4 2 0 -2

10%

20% 34%

-4

42%

-6

70%

2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050

2031 – 2050

In-sector net MtCO2

Up to 2030

Year Gross in-sector [MtCO2]

Reduced by SAF [MtCO2]

Net in-sector [MtCO2]

D: Summarised results for net CO2 emissions for 2020 – 2030 Compared to carbon budgets for 2020 – 2050, showing remaining budget shares in % 300

63%

66%

70%

Budget 2020-2050

75%

66%/1.7˚C/3.9%

250

In-secotr net MtCO2

200

150

48%

53%

58%

65%

40%

45%

50%

60%

16%

23%

31%

44%

103

100

101

AVG: 102 Mt up to 2030

50%/1.5˚C/3.9% 66%/1.7˚C/2.4%

50%/1.5˚C/2.4% 94

AVG: 93 Mt up to 2030

AVG: 84 Mt up to 2030

AVG: 68 Mt up to 2030

6% SAF 10% SAF 14% SAF

-20% Best estimate for 2030

-32%

-44%

-66%

E: Required CO2 emissions reductions by 2030 in case of 1.7% p.a. efficiency improvement Budget 2020-2050

300

66%/1.7˚C/3.9%

In-secotr net MtCO2

250

50%/1.5˚C/3.9%

200

66%/1.7˚C/2.4%

150 50%/1.5˚C/2.4% 100 2020-2023 2024-2030 2031-2050

0 -20% Best estimate for 2030

-30%

-43%

-65%

Required change in in-sector net CO2 emissions for 2030 (v. 2019)

F: Required reduction in net in-sector CO2 emissions in 2030 for ... airport carbon budgets depends on SAF Budget 2020-2050

300

66%/1.7˚C/3.9% 250

In-secotr net MtCO2

46 200

50%/1.5˚C/3.9%

66%/1.7˚C/2.4%

150 23

50%/1.5˚C/2.4%

100

2020-2023 2024-2030 2031-2050 Reduced by SAF

0 -20% Best estimate for 2030

-32%

-44%

-66%

Required change in in-sector bruto CO2 emissions for 2030 (v. 2019)

IV: Detailed results CO2 emissions in the year 2030 Cumulative CO2 emissions 2020 – 2030 Budget and CO2 pathway 2031 – 2050 For scenarios: A. Best estimate for 2030 compared to 1.5˚C/3.9% and 1.7˚C/3.9% B. -32% CO2 emissions in 2030 v. 2019; in line with 1.5˚C/3.9% C. -44% CO2 emissions in 2030 v. 2019; in line with 1.7˚C/2.4% D. -66% CO2 emissions in 2030 v. 2019; in line with 1.5˚C/2.4%

A: CO2 emissions in the year 2030 Best estimate for 2030: 10% SAF, EUR -0%, ICA -0%, compared to 50%/1.5˚C/3.9% & 66%/1.7˚C/3.9% 500k

450k 400k

350k 300k 250k

200k 150k

100k 50k 0k

Flights EUR Flights ICA

2019

Total

2030

Fleet renewal based on operator announcements and additional NLR research. \\ Operational improvements include improved ATM efficiency, increased CDA application and (some) alternative taxiing. \\ SAF according to ReFuelEU (linear interpolation). \\ 2019 network maintained.

A: Cumulative CO2 emissions 2020 – 2030 Best estimate for 2030: 10% SAF, EUR -0%, ICA -0%, compared to 50%/1.5˚C/3.9%

In-sector net MtCO2

14 12 10 8

9,1 6,5

-7%

-10%

-12%

-14%

-16%

-18%

-20%

10.8

10.4

10.2

9.9

9.7

9.5

9.3

9,5

7,1

2030:

9.3 Mt

Total budget 50%/1.5˚C/3.9%: 197 Mt 2020 to 2030: 102 Mt

4 2 0 2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

Budget for 2031 to 2050:

95 Mt

Year Actual Projected

Fleet renewal Operations

SAF

Cumulative emissions based on actual traffic 1/1/2020 to 30/6/2023; modelled between 1/7/2023 and 31/12/2030. SAF uptake based on ReFuelEU aviation.

A: Budget and CO2 pathway 2031 – 2050 Best estimate for 2030: 10% SAF, EUR -0%, ICA -0%, compared to 50%/1.5˚C/3.9% 12

Budget: Used:

10 8

MtCO2

Budget overrun by 28 Mt Budget overrun after 2043

4 2

Required SAF between 2031-2043: 8 Mt

-2 10% 12% 14% 16% -4

102 Mt 123 Mt

18% 20% 23%

26% 28% 31%

34% 36% 37% 39% 40%

-6

Gross in-sector [MtCO2] Reduced by SAF [MtCO2] Net in-sector [MtCO2]

Year

42% 48%

53% 59%

64% 70%

Gross in-sector over-budget [MtCO2] Reduced by SAF over-budget [MtCO2] Net in-sector over-budget [MtCO2]

Required out-of-sector removal starting from 2044: 5.4 Mt

Cumulative emissions based on actual traffic 1/1/2020 to 30/6/2023; modelled between 1/7/2023 and 31/12/2030. SAF uptake based on ReFuelEU aviation; capacity restrictions introduced from 2025.

A: Cumulative CO2 emissions 2020 – 2030 Best estimate for 2030: 10% SAF, EUR -0%, ICA -0%, compared to 66%/1.7˚C/3.9%

In-sector net MtCO2

14 12 10 8

9,1 6,5

-7%

-10%

-12%

-14%

-16%

-18%

-20%

10.8

10.4

10.2

9.9

9.7

9.5

9.3

9,5

7,1

2030:

9.3 Mt

Total budget 66%/1.7˚C/3.9%: 169 Mt 2020 to 2030: 102 Mt

4 2 0 2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

Budget for 2031 to 2050:

65 Mt

Year Actual Projected

Fleet renewal Operations

SAF

Cumulative emissions based on actual traffic 1/1/2020 to 30/6/2023; modelled between 1/7/2023 and 31/12/2030. SAF uptake based on ReFuelEU aviation.

A: Budget and CO2 pathway 2031 – 2050 Best estimate for 2030: 10% SAF, EUR -0%, ICA -0% compared to 66%/1.7˚C/3.9% 12

Budget: Used:

10 8

MtCO2

Budget overrun by 58 Mt Budget overrun after 2038

4 2

Required SAF between 2031-2038: 4 Mt

-2 -4

102 Mt 123 Mt

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

23%

26%

28%

31%

34%

-6

Gross in-sector [MtCO2] Reduced by SAF [MtCO2] Net in-sector [MtCO2]

Year

36%

37%

39%

40%

42%

48%

53%

59%

64%

70%

Gross in-sector over-budget [MtCO2] Reduced by SAF over-budget [MtCO2] Net in-sector over-budget [MtCO2]

Required out-of-sector removal starting from 2039: 6.6 Mt

Cumulative emissions based on actual traffic 1/1/2020 to 30/6/2023; modelled between 1/7/2023 and 31/12/2030. SAF uptake based on ReFuelEU aviation; capacity restrictions introduced from 2025.

B: CO2 emissions in the year 2030 -32% CO2: 10% SAF, EUR -17%, ICA -15%, in line with 50%/1.5˚C/3.9% 500k

450k

-17%

400k 350k

-17%

300k 250k 200k 150k -15%

100k

50k 0k Flights EUR Flights ICA 2019

Total

2030

Exemplary traffic scenario resulting in required -32% CO2 in 2030 (v. 2019)

B: Cumulative CO2 emissions 2020 – 2030 -32% CO2: 10% SAF, EUR -17%, ICA -15%, in line with 50%/1.5˚C/3.9%

In-sector net MtCO2

14 -7%

12 10

-26%

-27%

-29%

-30%

-32%

8.8

8.6

8.4

8.2

8.0

7.9

10.8

-24%

9,1 6,5

9,5

7,1

Efficiency of 1.7% CO2 in improvement 2030: 7.9 Mt per annum, based on Destination 2050 and ICAO LTAG IS3 (“maximum possible effort in Total budget: .197 Mt terms of future technology rollout, 2020 operational to 2030: efficiencies”) 193 Mt

Budget for 2031 to 2050:

2 0 2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

104 Mt

2030

Year Actual Projected

Fleet renewal Operations

SAF

EUR ICA

Cumulative emissions based on actual traffic 1/1/2020 to 30/6/2023; modelled between 1/7/2023 and 31/12/2030. SAF uptake based on ReFuelEU aviation; capacity restrictions introduced from 2025.

B: Budget and CO2 pathway 2031 – 2050 -32% CO2: 10% SAF, EUR -17%, ICA -15%, in line with 50%/1.5˚C/3.9%

Budget: Used:

10 8

MtCO2

104 Mt 104 Mt

Required SAF between 2031-2050: 14 Mt

2 0 -2 -4

10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 23% 26% 28% 31% 34% 36% 37% 39% 40% 42%

-6

48%

53% 59% 64% 70%

Year Gross in-sector [MtCO2]

Reduced by SAF [MtCO2]

Required out-of-sector removal starting from 2050: 2.2 Mt

Net in-sector [MtCO2]

Cumulative emissions based on actual traffic 1/1/2020 to 30/6/2023; modelled between 1/7/2023 and 31/12/2030. SAF uptake based on ReFuelEU aviation; capacity restrictions introduced from 2025.

8% contribution compared to ‘hypothetical no-action growth’ scenario by out-of-sector carbon removal anticipated by Destination 2050. 2.2 Mt equals 14%, requires additional out-of-sector removal or traffic reduction. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

C: CO2 emissions in the year 2030 -44% CO2: 10% SAF, EUR -30%, ICA -31%, in line with 66%/1.7˚C/2.4% 500k 450k 400k

-30%

350k 300k

-30%

250k 200k 150k 100k

-31%

50k 0k Flights EUR Flights ICA

2019

Total

2030

Exemplary traffic scenario resulting in required -44% CO2 in 2030 (v. 2019)

C: Budget and CO2 pathway 2031 – 2050 -44% CO2: 10% SAF, EUR -30%, ICA -31%, in line with 66%/1.7˚C/2.4%

Budget: Used:

8 6

MtCO2

4 2

Required SAF between 2031-2050: 11 Mt

0 -2

10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20%

-4

23% 26% 28% 31% 34% 36% 37% 39% 40% 42% 48% 53% 59%

64% 70%

-6

Year Gross in-sector [MtCO2]

Reduced by SAF [MtCO2]

85 Mt 85 Mt

Required out-of-sector removal starting from 2050: 1.8 Mt

Net in-sector [MtCO2]

Cumulative emissions based on actual traffic 1/1/2020 to 30/6/2023; modelled between 1/7/2023 and 31/12/2030. SAF uptake based on ReFuelEU aviation; capacity restrictions introduced from 2025.

8% contribution compared to ‘hypothetical no-action growth’ scenario by out-of-sector carbon removal anticipated by Destination 2050. 1.8 Mt equals 11%, requires additional out-of-sector removal or traffic reduction. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

D: CO2 emissions in the year 2030 -66% CO2: 10% SAF, EUR -58%, ICA -57%, in line with 50%/1.5˚C/2.4% 500k 450k 400k 350k 300k 250k 200k

-58%

150k 100k

-57%

50k 0k

Flights EUR Flights ICA

2019

Total

2030

Exemplary traffic scenario resulting in required -66% CO2 in 2030 (v. 2019)

D: Cumulative CO2 emissions 2020 – 2030 -66% CO2: 10% SAF, EUR -58%, ICA -57%, in line with 50%/1.5˚C/2.4%

In-sector net MtCO2

14 -7%

12 10

-62%

-63%

-64%

-65%

-66%

10.8

-61%

9,1 6,5

9,5

4.0 Mt

Total budget: 2020 to 2030:

121 Mt 68 Mt

budget for 2031 to 2050:

53 Mt

7,1

4.4

4.3

4.2

4.1

4.0

0 2020

2030:

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

Year Actual Projected

Fleet renewal Operations

SAF

EUR ICA

Cumulative emissions based on actual traffic 1/1/2020 to 30/6/2023; modelled between 1/7/2023 and 31/12/2030. SAF uptake based on ReFuelEU aviation; capacity restrictions introduced from 2025.

D: Budget and CO2 pathway 2031 – 2050 -66% CO2: 10% SAF, EUR -58%, ICA -57%, in line with 50%/1.5˚C/2.4%

Budget: Used:

5 4

MtCO2

53 Mt 53 Mt

Required SAF between 2031-2050: 7 Mt

1 0 -1

10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20%

-2

23% 26% 28% 31% 34% 36% 37% 39% 40% 42%

-3

48%

53%

59%

64%

70%

Year Gross in-sector [MtCO2]

Reduced by SAF [MtCO2]

Required out-of-sector removal starting from 2050: 1.1 Mt

Net in-sector [MtCO2]

Cumulative emissions based on actual traffic 1/1/2020 to 30/6/2023; modelled between 1/7/2023 and 31/12/2030. SAF uptake based on ReFuelEU aviation; capacity restrictions introduced from 2025.

8% contribution compared to ‘hypothetical no-action growth’ scenario by out-of-sector carbon removal anticipated by Destination 2050. 1.1 Mt equals 7%, requires additional out-of-sector removal or traffic reduction. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

V: References •

Armstrong McKay et al. (2022). Exceeding 1.5°C global warming could trigger multiple climate tipping points. Science 377(6611).

•

Beevor & Alexander (2022). Missed Targets: A brief history of aviation climate targets of the early 21st century.

•

Beuttler et al. (2019). The Role of Direct Air Capture in Mitigation of Anthropogenic Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Frontiers in climate 1

•

Carrington (2022). World on brink of five ‘disastrous’ climate tipping points, study finds. The Guardian.

•

CBS (2023). StatLine: Motorbrandstoffen; afzet in petajoule, gewicht en volume, 1946-april 2021.

•

den Ouden et al. (2020). Klimaatneutrale energiescenario’s 2050: Scenariostudie ten behoeve van de integrale infrastructuurverkenning 2030-2050. Forster et al. (2023). Indicators of Global Climate Change 2022: annual update of large-scale indicators of the state of the climate system and human influence. Earth System Science Data 15(6), 2295–2327. ICCT (2020). Vision 2050: Aligning Aviation with the Paris Agreement. International Energy Agency (2020). Net Zero by 2050 – A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector.

• • • •

IPCC (2022). Climate Change 2022 Mitigation of Climate Change – Summary for Policymakers (Working Group III contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report)

•

Keith et al. (2018). A Process for Capturing CO2 from the Atmosphere. Joule 2, 1573–1594.

•

Lamboll et al. (2023). Assessing the size and uncertainty of remaining carbon budgets. Nature Climate Change 13, 1360–1367.

•

Lee et al. (2021). The contribution of global aviation to anthropogenic climate forcing for 2000 to 2019. Atmospheric Environment 244, 117834.

• •

Lenton et al. (2023). The Global Tipping Points Report 2023. University of Exeter, Exeter, UK. NLR (2022). Fleet development in the Netherlands. Presented at Airneth seminar “Airline fleet renewal strategies”, July 2022. © Royal NLR 2024 - All rights reserved.

V: References

•

ReFuelEU Aviation (2023/05/08). REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMANT AND OF THE COUNCIL on ensuring a level playing field for sustainable air transport. Analysis of the final compromise text with a view to agreement. Interinstitutional File 2021/0205 (COD).

•

Rogelj et al. (2019). Estimating and tracking the remaining carbon budget for stringent climate targets. Nature 571, 335–342.

•

Sustainable Aviation UK (2023). NET ZERO CARBON ROAD-MAP SUMMARY REPORT. Enabling delivery of a UK-led zero carbon aviation revolution.

•

United Nations (2015). Paris Agreement.

•

van den Berg et al. (2020). Implications of various effort-sharing approaches for national carbon budgets and emission pathways. Climatic Change 162, 1805–1822.

•

van der Sman et al. (2021). Destination 2050 – A Route To Net Zero European Aviation. NLR-CR-2020-510, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

•

van der Sman et al. (2022). Energiebehoefte voor synthetische kerosine voor de Nederlandse luchtvaart in 2030 en 2050. NLR-TR-2022341, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

De tekst is automatisch uit het bestand gehaald en kan afwijken van het origineel (kolommen, tabellen en koppen lopen door elkaar). Het officiële stuk bij de gemeente is leidend. Bron: https://api.notubiz.nl/document/13901282/1