Air cargo players want 'cohesion and consistency' in how aviation reports emissions
Current CO2 air cargo emission calculating methodology has been compared to the VW emissions scandal, ...
XOM: MOMENTUMFWRD: EVENT-DRIVEN UPSIDEPEP: TRADING UPDATE OUTMAERSK: BOTTOM FISHING NO MOREDHL: IN THE DOCKHLAG: GREEN DEALXOM: GEOPOLITICAL RISK AND OIL REBOUND IMPACTZIM: END OF STRIKE HANGOVERCHRW: GAUGING UPSIDEBA: STRIKE RISKDSV: STAR OF THE WEEKDSV: FLAWLESS EXECUTIONKNIN: ANOTHER LOWWTC: TAKING PROFITMAERSK: HAMMERED
XOM: MOMENTUMFWRD: EVENT-DRIVEN UPSIDEPEP: TRADING UPDATE OUTMAERSK: BOTTOM FISHING NO MOREDHL: IN THE DOCKHLAG: GREEN DEALXOM: GEOPOLITICAL RISK AND OIL REBOUND IMPACTZIM: END OF STRIKE HANGOVERCHRW: GAUGING UPSIDEBA: STRIKE RISKDSV: STAR OF THE WEEKDSV: FLAWLESS EXECUTIONKNIN: ANOTHER LOWWTC: TAKING PROFITMAERSK: HAMMERED
The European Shippers Council is arguing, reasonably enough, that IATA’s 80:20 rule, whereby airlines lose slots at full airports if they fail to operate 80% of flights as per the schedule, should be adapted to 70:30 for freighter operations. Freighter operators need to adjust schedules and wait for cargo, whereas the 80:20 rule was designed by IATA for passenger operations. The low-cost and leisure airlines are taking up the capacity, and many are not even IATA members. But despite frequent requests for comment from both the ESC and The Loadstar, IATA has stayed uncharacteristically quiet on this one. Is it because cargo doesn’t matter much? We are starting to wonder…
Comment on this article