I know, traveling feels good. And they all like to travel, get away from it all, discover things. Questioning air flights can therefore have a demobilizing effect on the population in the fight against GHGs.
But can you take a plane without feeling bulimic about it? Because verification has been made, Canadians and Quebecers are among the largest emitters of greenhouse gases (GHG) in the world for air flights.
More precisely, the Canadians come to 2e rank of the ten countries that I was able to compare for GHGs from air transport, all things considered… ahead of the Americans. And Quebecers are close to the Canadian average, at 4e rank of comparisons. Oupelaye!
It is Australians who emit the most aerial GHGs of the countries compared, at almost one tonne per capita in 2019 (last year excluding a comparable pandemic). Canada is at 0.76 tonnes and Quebec is at 0.65 tonnes per capita.
This type of estimate, let us point out, has never been made before, to the best of my knowledge. One ton of GHGs represents the equivalent of a one-way ticket from Montreal to Paris.
On Tuesday, I presented to you a historical survey of our aerial GHGs. Basically, GHGs from Quebecers’ international flights have tripled since 1990. They now represent the equivalent of 1.8 million motor vehicles, or 31% of the fleet of light vehicles (cars and SUVs). And it would take a lot of public transportation projects to compensate.
Most of these air GHGs are explained by international flights, which are not recorded in the countries’ national inventory report (NIR), unlike domestic flights. So they go under the radar.
These GHGs are difficult to attribute to a country because we do not know what share to attribute to residents and tourists, in particular. Who is responsible for GHGs for departures and landings in Dorval or Paris?
However, I managed to make a reasonable estimate of this resident-tourist sharing for around ten countries and for Quebec. And therefore to measure GHGs by nationality. A real monk’s job…
The total GHGs emitted by kerosene from international flights are taken from a declaration – well camouflaged – from each country to the UN1. And resident-tourist sharing was possible thanks to data from Eurostat, the World Tourism Organization and five national statistics organizations.2.
An effect of fashion, of wealth?
In short, Canadians and Quebecers pollute the air much more than elsewhere, according to my estimates. Florida, Cancún, Paris, Berlin, Manila, San Francisco… air travel is increasing and leaving its mark.
Maybe it’s a fashion effect among young people or the increase in our wealth, immigration or pensions, but whatever it is, no one really cares about it in Canada, because The impact is not really measured.
As might be expected, Americans consume much more kerosene than elsewhere for domestic flights in their great country, and less for international flights.
In fact, international air GHGs attributable to American residents are around 0.23 tonnes per capita, or half as much as Canadians, according to what can be estimated with the available data (see the first graph above). Conversely, domestic flights are twice as polluting for Uncle Trump (0.5 tonnes of GHG per capita compared to 0.23 tonnes in Canada).
Another expected result: GHGs per trip (rather than per capita) are greater in Australia – on an isolated continent – and smaller for European countries.
The relative isolation of countries influences the ranking of GHGs per capita, but not always. For example, the average journey of Japanese international travelers is similar to that of Canadian travelers, with an average consumption of 0.84 tonnes of GHGs per round trip (the equivalent of Montreal-Florida-Montreal).
On the other hand, the Japanese are proportionally much less likely than Canadians to take the plane, so that air GHGs, reduced per inhabitant, are 0.13 tonnes internationally, four times less than those of Canadians3.
The average GHGs per traveler from Quebec internationally (1.1 tonnes) are greater than those of Canada (0.89 tonnes), according to my estimates, because Quebecers fly a greater distance, on average4.
Tourism in Greece
Another observation: a tourist country like Greece uses much more kerosene for its tourists than for residents. Thus, the air GHGs of international flights are very similar to those of Canada (0.38 tonnes per capita), but become very different when we take into account who is taking the plane (residents or tourists).
According to data from Eurostat and the WTO, Greeks represent less than 15% of flight passengers in Greece, compared to 66% for Canadians in Canada. In doing so, the GHGs that can be attributed to the Greeks fall to 0.13 tonnes per habitat, compared to 0.76 tonnes for the Canadians.
Obviously, Greece benefits from the arrival of tourists (and therefore their GHGs) to keep their economy going – at least as long as the heat does not become excessive – but that’s another story.
GHGs from international flights are often lower for less wealthy countries. This is the case of Hungary, Greece, and even Italy – all three at the bottom of the GHG per capita ranking. Their GDP per capita is respectively lower than that of Canada by 29%, 37% and 10%.
Ban advertising, like in Amsterdam?
In short, aerial GHGs have exploded in Canada and Quebec in recent years and they are proportionally higher than for most major countries.
Faced with the scale of the aerial phenomenon, other administrations have decided to act. This is the case of Amsterdam, in the Netherlands, and more recently of Edinburgh, in Scotland: advertisements on air flights have been banned by the city council, like those on SUVs and oil.
Should we not consider this type of measure knowing the importance of our airborne GHGs? And more broadly, are we capable, each of us, of moderating our… air transport?
Many thanks for their valuable advice and information to Jean-François Boucher, professor of ecology at UQAC, Cindy Gagné, head of special projects at Statistics Canada and Pierre-Olivier Pineau, professor specializing in energy at HEC Montréal.
1- Data on GHGs emitted by kerosene from international flights are entered in one of the 95 tabs of an Excel file submitted by each country to the UN.
See the data
2- In order, the most precise information comes from Japan, Australia, Canada and the United States, followed by the United Kingdom and other European countries (Greece, Italy, France). UK data comes from the Office of National Statistics and Eurostat. For other European countries, data comes from Eurostat and the World Tourism Organization. Data for the United States are from the International Trade Administration. Those for Japan come from Japan Tourism Statistics. Those for Canada come from Statistics Canada and those for Australia, from the Department of Home Affairs.
3- I was unable to specifically take into account the distance of flights, given the lack of data – except for Quebec compared to Canada – but the average GHGs emitted per traveler (rather than per inhabitant) of each country reflect this factor well. distance.
4- Internationally, 71% of Quebecers traveled outside the United States in 2023, compared to 48% for the Canadian average, according to Statistics Canada. On the other hand, Canadians from other provinces travel more than Quebecers within Canada, which means that their total GHGs per capita are above those of Quebecers.