How the federal government can fight climate change and preserve jobs

The contribution of civil aviation to climate change is generally estimated at about five per cent of all human contributions. Roughly two per cent comes from carbon dioxide, while there is considerable scientific uncertainty in the estimates of the other two largest contributors, condensation trails and oxides of nitrogen. Over the past several decades, growth in demand for air travel has been around four to five per cent annually, while annual improvements in fuel efficiency through improved aircraft and engine technologies have been one to two per cent. If this growth in demand continues in the post-pandemic world, then civil aviation’s contribution to climate change will grow significantly unless additional steps are taken. While biofuels and possibly hydrogen represent potential long-term solutions, nearer term reductions in emissions can be achieved by accelerating aircraft fuel efficiency improvements through new technologies. The U.K., EU, and U.S. are investing heavily in R&D toward such technologies. Despite the growing public concern caused by aviation’s rising contributions to climate change, the Government of Canada has invested relatively little in research to address aviation’s sustainability. The federally supported Green Aviation Research and Development Network (GARDN), which facilitated collaborative university-industry research, has not been renewed, even though the importance of its work continues to increase. Aviation’s impact on climate change has made it a popular target based on the perception that aviation is primarily for leisure travel by a small fraction of the population. This perception severely underestimates aviation’s many important benefits to society, including both cross-cultural experiences important to global cooperation and tourism revenues that are critical for the economies of many countries. However, aviation’s contribution to climate change does not seem to be sufficiently large to attract significant government investment in research to address the challenge and enable us to fly sustainably. Why has the Government of Canada failed to invest significantly in research toward technology development to reduce the environmental impact of aviation? One reason is that Canadian media have popularized the notion that subsidies to aerospace are not economically justified. Many of the world’s strongest economies whose aerospace industries receive government subsidies of various kinds, such as Germany and the U.S., do not appear to subscribe to this theory. Subsidies of various kinds are not unique to aerospace, but it is true that if a country is going to be competitive in aerospace, its government must step up. What does it say about Canada’s ability to support innovation that we gave up arguably the most innovative product ever developed in Canada, the C-Series aircraft? Canada’s high global ranking as an aerospace power is not adequately appreciated in Canada for its value in inspiring young people and providing high-value jobs of various kinds. It is unacceptable that many of our best and brightest young aerospace engineers are forced to leave Canada to find suitable employment opportunities. How should the Government of Canada invest in research toward sustainable aviation? Through the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, which funds research at universities and colleges, the National Research Council of Canada, which can provide a bridge between university research and industry, and by renewing GARDN’s mandate. Canada’s failures in innovation are often discussed, but our inability to maintain our successful technology companies over the long term is truly lamentable. We are spending plenty of money in hot areas like artificial intelligence, where there is already considerable private-sector funding, while ignoring aerospace, where we have a valuable industry that needs help to remain competitive. Although R&D spending in aerospace is much higher than that in most sectors, it is limited by low profit margins and is insufficient to address the present challenge of environmental sustainability. Given the immense societal benefit of flying sustainably, this is where the government must step in. By investing in university research and the National Research Council, the government can provide the needed assistance to the aerospace sector without providing direct subsidies to particular companies, while providing educational opportunities to develop highly qualified young people capable of contributing to a future Canadian economy that includes a vibrant manufacturing sector. The National Research Council should be provided with an internationally competitive level of funding targeted toward sustainable aviation, say ten percent of what NASA spends on sustainable aviation research. Given the importance of aerospace to the Canadian economy, it is long overdue that aerospace be made a strategic area for university research so that Canadian aerospace researchers can have as much opportunity to conduct world-class research as, for example, artificial intelligence researchers, and we can keep talented young aerospace engineers in Canada. What better investment in Canada’s future than contributing to climate change mitigation while at the same time retaining talent and helping an inspiring Canadian industry sector to remain globally competitive? David Zingg is a professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for Aerospace Studies, where he serves as director of the Centre for Research in Sustainable Aviation and the Centre for Computational Science and Engineer. The Hill Times