1 week ago
25
By Chinelo Obogo
Aviation experts have criticised the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA), describing it as a ‘ridiculous programme.’
In an article published in ‘View from the Wing’, recently, Sean Mendis, a former Chief Operating Officer of Africa World Airline, argued that CORSIA, an International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) programme under the United Nations, which requires airlines to purchase carbon offsets for international flights that exceed the average emissions levels of 2019 and 2020, unfairly penalises new entrants while benefiting incumbent airlines.
He said that the programme uses ‘legacy emissions as a baseline’, which is a disadvantage to new airlines that don’t have a historical emissions record.
He described CORSIA as an “attempted genocide of Africans,” insisting that by taxing air travel, it makes flying more expensive and pushes people toward less safe road travel.
“CORSIA is a ridiculous programme to begin with because of the way it treats legacy emissions as a baseline and penalises new entrants significantly to the benefit of incumbents. I have written extensively about it, going so far as to call it an attempted genocide of Africans by forcing them onto unsafe roads by adding taxes on safer air travel,” Mendis said.
CORSIA aims to reduce aviation emissions and does not apply to domestic flights. The program is designed to encourage airlines to invest in fuel-efficient aircraft, alternative fuels to reduce emissions. The pilot phase for the program was 2021 to 2023 and this phase is voluntary for member countries, while the first phase started in 2024 and would end in 2026. This phase is also voluntary. However, the second phase which would commence in 2027 and end in 2035 is mandatory for all ICAO member states, except least developed countries, small island states, and landlocked nations.
Critics argue that the high costs disproportionately affect new entrants and developing markets, particularly in Africa as airlines must invest in emissions tracking, reporting, and verification systems, which add to their operational costs.
Gary Leff, a business travel expert, also echoes Mendis’ sentiment, highlighting how CORSIA creates barriers for African carriers. He wrote in the same publication that starting a new airline under CORSIA requires not only purchasing carbon credits but also ‘building an extensive bureaucratic system to track emissions’. He said these costs limit the growth of African aviation, reduce the supply of seats, and increase fares for international travel. Leff argues that this effectively raises the cost of safer air travel, forcing people to opt for less safe alternatives, describing it as “statistical murder.”
“African carriers can’t start up without paying this tax, which as I noted in my earlier coverage of CORSIA isn’t just buying carbon credits but building out an extensive bureaucratic mechanism to track emissions as well. This limits growth in African aviation, limits supply of seats, and raises fares for traveling between countries. And – it’s true – that means raising the cost of safer air travel, which pushing people to travel in less safe ways. The resulting effect has long been known as statistical murder,” he said.
Leff expresses skepticism about regulations like CORSIA, arguing that they are usually done to benefit the big airlines rather than promoting competition. He further explains that CORSIA allows established airlines to appear ‘environmentally responsible’ while imposing higher costs on new competitors. This, he said, protects bigger airlines from competition, stifles innovation, and harms consumers by limiting choices and driving up prices.
“Airlines are able to say they’re limiting their emissions, while giving them a free pass on everything they were already doing, and imposing relatively higher costs on new competitors who might challenge them,” he said.
English (US) ·