Published on

'Madness': Dozens of Groups Push Back Against Trump Proposal to Bring Back Supersonic Planes

"The world is burning, and supersonic planes would pour jet fuel on the fire."

A artist's rendetion of the Cygnus M3, billed as one of the supersonic passengers jets of the future.

A artist's rendetion of the Cygnus M3, billed as one of the supersonic passengers jets of the future. (Photo: Cyngus/Promotional)

Over two dozen environmental advocates on Tuesday pushed back against a move by the Trump administration to facilitate the return of supersonic planes.

"The world is burning, and supersonic planes would pour jet fuel on the fire," said Clare Lakewood, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, in a press statement. "It would be madness to sabotage our shot at preserving a livable climate so the ultra-rich can take faster flights."

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued a notice of a proposed rule in June that stated that the agency "is proposing to modernize the procedure for requesting these special flight authorizations."

In remarks just ahead of that announcement, FAA administrator Daniel Elwell said the rule "will provide a streamlined, clear line of sight on how to gain approval to conduct flight testing. This is a necessary, key step for further research and development in an emerging segment—and ultimately bring their aircraft to market."

The proposal referenced "renewed interest in supersonic aircraft development," and an article published Wednesday in Condé Nast Traveler flushes out some of that interest.

Titled "The Competition to Bring Back Suerpsonic Flight Is Heating up," the article notes how Lockheed Martin and NASA are jointly developing supersonic aircraft to limit the deafening sonic boom such aircraft emit. Denver-based Boom Supersonic is also moving forward with the development of aircraft that would achieve supersonic speeds on transatlantic flights, and it's already got pre-orders from Japan Airlines.


Never Miss a Beat.

Get our best delivered to your inbox.

But in their letter (pdf) to Elwell sent Tuesday—the last day for public comment on the proposal—the Center for Biological Diversity and other groups including Friends of the Earth and Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments said "there is no way to advance 'safe and efficient operation of supersonic aircraft.' Supersonic aircraft would fuel the global climate crisis and threaten Americans with lasting damages from extreme air and noise pollution."

Apart from concerns to people and wildlife from the noise of breaking the sound barrier along the entirety of supersonic flight route, the groups say that "allowing a new class of super-polluting aircraft to enter the sky would be madness" given the "climate emergency."

"New commercial supersonic planes are expected to burn 5 to 7 times as much fuel per passenger as comparable subsonic designs, and exceed international subsonic aircraft carbon dioxide (CO2) emission limits by 70 percent," they wrote.

"Analysis shows that supersonic aircraft under development," they added, "will likely exceed international nitrogen oxide (NOx) standards for subsonic aircraft by 40 percent."

The FAA, said the groups, must abide by its obligations to protect public health and welfare.

“In the heat of the climate crisis," said Marcie Keever, legal director at Friends of the Earth US, "resurrecting super-polluting supersonic passenger aircraft makes no sense."

Our pandemic coverage is free to all. As is all of our reporting.

No paywalls. No advertising. No corporate sponsors. Since the coronavirus pandemic broke out, traffic to the Common Dreams website has gone through the roof— at times overwhelming and crashing our servers. Common Dreams is a news outlet for everyone and that’s why we have never made our readers pay for the news and never will. But if you can, please support our essential reporting today. Without Your Support We Won't Exist.

Please select a donation method:

Share This Article