Air cargo players want 'cohesion and consistency' in how aviation reports emissions

Current CO2 air cargo emission calculating methodology has been compared to the VW emissions scandal, with a lack of standardisation allowing passenger ‘greenwashing’ at the expense of cargo.

The disparity between IATA and ICAO’s baseline figures for calculating air cargo emissions could be resulting in false sustainability data, making passenger operations look cleaner and contributing to global warming.

Calculating emissions from a given flight is done by dividing fuel burn by the weight, attributed to passengers and cargo, and distance of a flight. Fuel burn is then multiplied by a conversion factor to equate to CO2 produced.

Shippers can work out their share of emissions by the weight of their cargo as a percentage of the flight’s overall cargo weight. The resulting CO2 output can then be factored into their sustainability reports – which are becoming increasingly important to customers, and therefore shareholders.

However, the weight of the aircraft and onboard infrastructure also need to be considered when calculating overall emissions, particularly on a passenger flight, as there is more associated additional weight that shippers with cargo in the belly-hold, are not responsible for.

The United Nations agency ICAO’s 2017 method for emissions calculation assumes the “weight allocation of an average passenger mass with baggage” is 100kg, plus a 50kg add-on “to account for the onboard equipment and infrastructure associated with passenger use; for example, the weight of seats, toilets, galleys and crew”.

However, IATA edited its calculation method in 2022 to omit the 50kg add-on, unless “required due to local regulations”. Consequently, a larger percentage of fuel burn and, consequentially, CO2 emissions on a given passenger flight shifted to the belly-hold cargo.

One air cargo source explained that, in terms of CO2, this makes belly cargo look worse and dedicated freighter flights look better “on a spreadsheet”.

“In reality, it is more carbon-efficient to optimise the load factor of passenger aircraft. This new IATA formula could lead to wrong decisions being made when routing air cargo,” they said.

Indeed, a spokesperson from data and emissions calculation platform Cargo Ai told The Loadstar: “We’ve observed that recent updates to the calculation methodology by IATA raise concerns, as they now appear to favour freighter flights over utilising the belly space of passenger flights.

“This shift could potentially contribute to increased global warming, which goes against our sustainability objectives.”

The EC had labelled “presenting consumers with a comparison of flights regarding their CO2 emissions, without providing sufficient and accurate information on the elements the comparison is based on” as a “greenwashing tactic”.

Further, it dubbed “presenting consumers with a ‘calculator’ for the CO2 emissions of a specific flight, without providing sufficient scientific proof on whether such calculation is reliable”, as another.

Therefore, with two different baseline weight figures in the market, companies and airlines could be unwittingly complicit in ‘greenwashing tactics’.

The spokesperson from Cargo Ai added: “We’ve made the decision not to adopt the recent updated calculation methodology. We refuse to be complicit in directing bookings towards environmentally unfavourable options. We use [ICAO’s] method because it allows us to generate accurate and reliable emissions data that reflects the actual environmental impact of air cargo transportation.”

However, another stakeholder informed The Loadstar it adhered to IATA’s 2022 fuel-based calculation methodology, explaining: “This is on the recommendation of the Smart Freight Centre and is in adherence to the GLEC Framework.”

But they added that when their customers could provide information such as aircraft model and airline, they adhered to the ICAO fuel-based calculation.

Background

In 2014, IATA and ICAO created the initial standard – which is still ICAO’s current guideline. It was approved and adopted by airlines, “which is hard to do when making a standard”, a person familiar with the subject said.

“There’s not always an easy consensus, but this was accepted.”

Then, in 2022, IATA removed the assumed 50kg for passenger facilities from its recommended practice for cargo stakeholders. This method was outlined in the GLEC Framework v2 in 2019 and was established in the ISO 14083, but has not been adopted by ICAO.

One senior air cargo source told The Loadstar: “IATA’s change was motivated by the fact that if you remove seats from the equation, it can cut emissions for passengers by 15%-20%.

“It’s a bit like the VW emissions scandal,” they added. “IATA wants passenger emissions to look lower, and it’s not just greenwashing at this point, it’s straight up manipulation.”

Another source claimed that IATA had changed its passenger standard weight assumption and “forgot to consider cargo at the time”, which “resulted in IATA operating with two different standards that didn’t align”, forcing it to later edit its cargo guidance to the 100kg it is now.

Its new methodology is used for its commercial product, IATA CO2 Connect. While the association suggests it could be useful for freight forwarders, among other stakeholders, it also noted that the calculator was powered by its Recommended Practice per Passenger CO2 calculation – ie, was signed off by the passenger side, rather than cargo.

Next steps

IATA told The Loadstar: “IATA is working with its members and aviation stakeholders to provide CO2 emissions on a per flight basis for both passengers and cargo operations. The industry-recommended practice promotes the use of airline-specific and actual fuel burn and actual load factors.

“Some cargo operators have expressed concerns with aspects of the methodology, and IATA is looking into the calculation. We welcome these discussions and challenges from the industry to improve our CO2 emissions calculations and reach a consensus aiming to provide the most accurate calculations.

“IATA is reviewing its approach and methodology and will inform its stakeholders accordingly,” it added.

So, whether ICAO needs to update its guidance, or IATA needs to revert to its previous guidance, is up for discussion – but either way, the air cargo industry is pleading for standardisation.

And, while two opposing guidance figures for stakeholders to calculate and report their emissions exist, any genuine effort to be sustainable and transparent is significantly hindered.

“The use of different formulae for emissions calculations across the industry creates a lack of cohesion and consistency in reporting environmental performance,” said the Cargo Ai spokesperson

And Glyn Hughes, director general of The International Air Cargo Association (TIACA), told The Loadstar: “In order to achieve net zero emissions by 2050… it is crucial that consistent measurement methodology and tools exist to enable transparent measurement and reporting.

“ICAO is the global forum under the United Nations that develops policies and standards to achieve the sustainable growth of the global civil aviation system… It is therefore imperative that a single standard, the ICAO standard, is embraced by all parties to avoid market confusion and alleviate the risk of divergent measurements.”

Mr Hughes also highlighted a recent IATA chart titled ‘Older cargo fleet hampers emissions reductions’.

“Together with the change of formula penalising belly cargo, you must ask, what is the overall objective? Surely this is a topic where we should stand together rather than taking divisive actions.

“We must stand united as an industry to collectively address this critical area which is so important for our sustainable future,” he concluded.

By: Charlotte Goldstone
Source: The Loadstar.com