All in all, this is good news for the climate. But many people on low and middle incomes who used to travel around the EU will no longer be able to do so, or at least will be able to do so much less frequently.

Crucially, the same policies will have little or no impact on the use of much more polluting private jets, which normally cover distances served by commercial airlines and trains. This is a case of unfair sacrifice for climate action. Addressing this injustice must be a top priority for the next EU legislature if we are to achieve a just and inclusive climate transition.

Rising prices...
According to European Commission data, intra-EU airfares last summer were on average 20% to 30% higher than they were before Covid-19. The main reasons are high consumer demand, rising fuel costs and disruptions in supply chains - the latter two at least partly due to the geopolitical turmoil of recent years.

Prices are likely to continue to rise in the coming years as a result of three factors. Firstly, the reform of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), which is at the heart of the "Fit For 55" policy package proposed by the European Commission in the summer of 2021 and partially adopted in the spring of 2023.

Since 2012, intra-EU aviation emissions have been part of the EU ETS, the market-based system introduced by the EU in 2005 to limit emissions from certain EU sectors, namely energy-intensive industries, electricity generation and aviation. Like industry, aviation has so far benefited from free allowances - until last year, less than 20% of aviation allowances were auctioned.

Under the new ETS reform, free allowances will be phased out between 2024 and 2026. This means that airlines will have to bear not only the private cost of fuel, but also the social cost of their operations.

Although the EU ETS reform maintains free allowances for operators using less polluting fuels, these are more expensive than traditional fuels. In addition, the annual ETS emissions cap will be gradually reduced over the coming years, leading to an increase in the price of auctioned allowances (since 2021, the UK has had its own ETS).

Secondly, the EU institutions are currently working on a reform of the 2003 Energy Tax Directive (ETD). More specifically, the ETD was intended to introduce minimum levels of taxation on electricity and motor and heating fuels, both to avoid market distortions in the EU and to promote the decarbonization of these sectors.

However, to date, both kerosene used by aircraft and heavy fuel oil used by the shipping industry have been exempt from taxation under the ETD. As part of the "Fit for 55" package, the European Commission has also proposed an update to the ETD, which is still awaiting adoption and which, among other things, would remove the above-mentioned exemptions. Thirdly, some countries, notably France, have defended the idea of a fixed minimum price for intra-EU flights. It remains to be seen whether these proposals will be adopted in the future.

...and falling demand
According to Airlines for Europe, the EU's largest airline association, the cost to airlines of complying with the above-mentioned EU rules will be 13 to 14 times higher in 2030 than in 2019.

According to research center SEO Amsterdam Economics, if these price increases are fully passed on to consumers, demand for flights will fall, leading to a reduction in intra-EU air traffic of more than 8% in 2030 and around 12% in 2035, compared to the absence of such reforms.

Those concerned about climate change can breathe a sigh of relief. Rising ticket prices will reduce the number of air passengers and the frequency of flights. This is inevitable if the EU is to achieve its goal of zero net CO2 emissions within a few decades.

However, in recent years, low-cost airlines have made it possible for people on low incomes to travel between EU countries - something that was previously very uncommon. In a way, low-cost airlines have democratized travel, allowing poorer people to gain international experience and maintain emotional and family ties (think of how many parents now have children studying or working in other EU countries, or how many couples live and work in different places). What's more, as Greenpeace pointed out in a recent study, traveling by train in the EU is still significantly more expensive than traveling by plane.

An unfair transition
It could be said that these concerns are minor compared to the climate threat. To date, low-cost airlines have produced an excessive amount of CO2 for purposes that ultimately have nothing to do with subsistence.

However, if the climate threat justifies people on low incomes not traveling, or at least traveling much less than before, then it must also justify wealthy EU travelers abandoning private flights, which emit on average up to 14 times more CO2 per passenger than a regular flight, and using airlines or, better still, high-speed trains. The main problem with the EU's one-size-fits-all approach to climate policy is that many wealthy jet-setters will simply be indifferent to the continuous increases in the price of emission allowances.

Asking people on low incomes to give up something that is valuable to them - travel - for the sake of the collective good, while the rich continue to enjoy a superfluous luxury, is the furthest thing from the just and inclusive transition that the EU institutions have set as their goal. What's more, the more the rich contribute to the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere with their luxury emissions, the greater the behavioral sacrifice that will have to be made by everyone else to keep global warming within more or less acceptable limits.

According to a recent study commissioned by Geenpeace from CE Delft, the number of private flights in Europe increased from just under 120,000 in 2020 to over half a million in 2022. More than half of these flights are short to medium-haul, comparable to the distance between Paris and Marseille (around 750 km), which in the vast majority of cases can be reasonably replaced by alternative means of transport.

The four main private flight routes in Europe are, in order, London-Paris (just over two hours by high-speed train), London-Nice (several scheduled flights a day), Paris-Geneva (just over three hours by high-speed train) and Paris-Nice (many scheduled flights or just over five hours by high-speed train).

Several national initiatives to ban luxury flights
A group of EU countries, namely Austria, the Netherlands and France, recently wrote to the EU institutions asking for new regulations on the use of private jets (supported by Ireland and Belgium). The current European Commissioner for Transport has indicated that this will not happen, at least for the time being. According to press reports, the European Commission's approach is to legislate on aviation in general, rather than introducing specific rules for private jets.

Some EU countries are trying to bridge this regulatory gap at EU level with national measures. France, for example, has debated a ban on private flights (proposed by the left-wing coalition La France Insoumise (LFI) and supported by the Greens) and a surcharge for luxury flights (favored by Emmanuel Macron's centrist government).

The Dutch airport of Amsterdam Schiphol is planning to restrict access to private planes. Spain is considering a ban on short-haul private flights as part of its plan to achieve net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050. There is every reason for the next European Commission to take over the climate leadership baton from the current Commission and close the regulatory loophole that private aviation currently enjoys. For ambitious and accelerated climate action, everyone, including the richest, must be involved.