Prior to the recent cancellation of Singapore Airlines’ (SIA) plans of ‘flight to nowhere’, there was much debates revolving around the alternative solutions in bailing out Singapore Airlines from the current economic and health crisis. The intentions of environmentalist against the ‘flights to nowhere’ were directed towards the carbon emissions for a purpose deemed unnecessary, which was to take passengers on the Airbus A-350 for a 3-hours non-essential joy ride. However, we felt that more could be discussed around the actual facts and figures of these flights and it’s environmental impact, putting it into scale.
To put things into perspective, a 3-hr joy ride, which is estimated to be the same flight time require between Singapore to Chiang Mai (Thailand), is expected to produce 0.28 metric tons of carbon dioxide per passenger, according to carbonfootprint.com. 0.28 metric tons (280 kg) of carbon dioxide is closely equivalent to a 1,600km journey on an average petrol powered car. Now that we understand the extent of environmental impact created by a single 3-hour flight, it may be worth noting that in 2019, Singapore’s prestigious Changi Airport served 382,000 flights, which is an average of 1,046 flights per day, or 1 flight every 80 seconds! Shedding light on the extent of air travel on a regular basis, makes the environmental issue regarding the ‘flights to nowhere’ seem like consolation by mother earth, given the substantial cut in air travel due to Covid-19.
Through understanding the extent of this environmental issue, it is not undermine the efforts and suggestions made by environmentalist, but it is good to consider the implication of things through a wider perspective and a larger scale. Other implications are equally important in considering the best option, such as economical and operational considerations like the requirements for pilots to fly in order to retain licenses. According to the Air Transport Action Group (ATAG), new fuel efficient aircrafts like the Airbus A380 and A220 have the fuel efficiency of most modern compact cars, which is a step in the right direction, given that air transport would probably remain as a necessity for mankind. With that said, the attention given to SIA’s ‘flight to nowhere’ has was indeed a step towards combating environmental issues, mainly carbon emissions and climate change, as it brought positive attention towards climate change, with participation from the community. Such attention and participation from both the community and corporations will go along way in educating and changing the mindsets of consumers and organisations in the long run and the benefits would probably far exceed the reduced carbon emissions from the ‘flights to nowhere’.
References
Air Transport Action Group. (2020). Facts and Figures. Retrieved from https://www.atag.org/facts-figures.html#:~:text=The%20global%20aviation%20industry%20produces,carbon%20dioxide%20(CO2)%20emissions.&text=Aviation%20is%20responsible%20for%2012,to%2074%25%20from%20road%20transport.
Carbon Footprint. (n.d.). Carbon Calculator. Retrieved from https://www.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx
Changi Airport Group. (2020). Traffic Statistics. Retrived from https://www.changiairport.com/corporate/our-expertise/air-hub/traffic-statistics.html
Climate Action Tracker. (2020, 30 July). Current Policy Projections. Retrieved from https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/singapore/current-policy-projections/
Energy Efficient Singapore. (2020). Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change. Retrieved from https://www.e2singapore.gov.sg/overview/climate-change
Toh, T. W. (2020, September 13). SIA eyeing ‘flights to nowhere’ to give a life to ailing business. The Straits Times. Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/sia-eyeing-flights-to-nowhere-to-give-a-lift-to-ailing-business