Virgin's first biofuel flight - valuable research or marketing gimmick?
Posted by DavidM in Transport | 25 February 2008
News this weekend that Virgin Atlantic made the first flight using biofuel was hailed a great step forward by the company but a valueless publicity stunt by environmentalists.
The flight was from London's Heathrow to Amsterdam and one of the four engines used fuel made from a mixture of Brazilian babassu nuts and coconuts.
Sir Richard Branson claimed it a "vital breakthrough" and that it would "enable those of us who are serious about reducing our carbon emissions to go on developing the fuels of the future,"
However, environmentalists claim using the biofuel does nothing to reduce emissions. Kenneth Richter of Friends of the Earth said, "What we need to do is stop this mad expansion of aviation. At the moment it is the fastest growing source of greenhouse gases in the UK and we need to stop subsidising the industry."
Dr Doug Parr of Greenpeace said reducing air travel was the only answer.
I don't disagree that the best environmental solution to aviation is to have fewer flights using less fuel. I do think the aviation industry should pay it's fair share of duty on fuel which will raise prices and limit demand a little.
However, there will always be a significant volume of air travel and we need a wider range of solutions to minimise it's impact on the environment.
As I've written before I favour setting airports annual carbon limits which get tougher over time. This encourages fuel economy and the development of alternative fuels that have lower CO2 and other emissions levels.
I welcome any genuine research into better fuels. I don't know whether the total emissions from the production and use of babassu nuts and coconuts is better or worse than oil and I'd like to see some real analysis of that.
