U.S. Airlines Under Pressure To Fly Greener

Some members of Congress are also skeptical of the European plan. House Transportation Committee Chairman James L. Oberstar (D-Minn.) said he met in April with European leaders in Brussels and urged them to reconsider it. "It's an invasion of our sovereignty," he said.

Oberstar said he was concerned about aviation's affect on global warming and would hold hearings on emissions trading. An FAA funding bill under consideration in the House has several provisions dealing with greenhouse gas emissions, including the development of more fuel-efficient planes.

In the shadow of the global fight, U.S. airlines, international carriers and manufacturers have been pumping out press releases to highlight their efforts to be greener. They also do not hesitate to mention that they work in one of the few industries where reducing carbon dioxide emissions, the main culprit in climate change, is closely tied to their own economic well being. Fuel is the top expense for most carriers. Trade groups boast that last year U.S. airlines used about 1 billion fewer gallons of fuel than in 2000, but carried 12 percent more passengers.

"We make no bones that our saving fuel is in the company's best interest because we are saving dollars to the bottom line," American Airlines spokesman Tim Wagner said. "But the good news is that lies in a parallel direction with decreasing our environmental impact. . . . Our corporate clients have been increasingly asking about global climate change."

American and Delta Air Lines jets, for example, often taxi using one engine to reduce fuel use, and the two carriers have promoted their efforts to add swept extensions to their planes' wings to reduce drag and boost efficiency. They are also pushing to incorporate better and more fuel-efficient navigation procedures into their operations.

American launched an effort to find ways to reduce the weight of planes, removing ovens, galleys and even potable water to make them lighter. And Delta has recently arranged for passengers to make donations to an environmental group to offset the carbon they emit on a flight. The group, the Conservation Fund, uses the money to plant trees.

In a recent speech, Giovanni Bisignani, the head of the International Air Transport Association, lauded the sector's 70 percent improvement in fuel efficiency since the dawn of the jet age. While admitting that "our carbon footprint is growing, and that is not politically acceptable," he set 2050 as a goal for having a "zero emissions" plane.

Bisignani said in an interview that he was hoping to get ahead of the debate because he was concerned that politicians would target airlines to boost "their green credentials."

"We are only a small part of an important problem," Bisignani said.

Aircraft and engine makers are also jumping on the green bandwagon in hope of avoiding more regulations.

At the recent Paris Air Show, the industry's major trade meeting, Boeing, Airbus and engine makers promoted technologies and their efforts to reduce carbon emissions. A few weeks ago, Boeing launched its 787 Dreamliner, which it says will be 20 percent more fuel efficient than the plane it is replacing. Airbus has also lauded the fuel efficiency of its new super-jumbo A380.

Under pressure from clients who want fuel-efficient planes, Boeing representatives said the company will not introduce a plane unless it is at least 15 percent more efficient than the one it is replacing.

Rolls-Royce, which is supplying engines for the 787, also is trying to find new ways to make planes more fuel efficient. Richard J. Parker, the company's director of research and technology, said that most in aviation circles "feel a little shell-shocked" by the public outcry over the industry's contribution to climate change because they have made such strides in improving fuel burn.

Airplane and engine makers have set a goal of reducing carbon emissions on the next generation of jets by 50 percent by 2020, Parker said, adding that those reductions could come with trade-offs.

If engineers focus on reducing carbon dioxide emissions, new engines might be noisier or produce more nitrogen oxides, gases that mostly harm local air quality.

"Will people living near airports win out, or will the planet as a whole win out?" Parker said.