The Dutch government has today announced that it’s moving forward with a new “green” flight cap, with the plan being to implement it as of 2024. Let’s go over the details, and talk about what this means for airlines and travelers.
In this post:
Amsterdam Schiphol proceeding with new flight cap
The Dutch government is making preparations to reduce flight capacity at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport to 452,500 flights per year, which is bad news for airlines serving the airport (and in turn, for passengers). This policy is expected to be implemented as of 2024, though an exact date is subject to this plan being approved by the European Commission.
This means that some flights that are already on sale may need to be canceled. For context, this plan for Amsterdam Schiphol Airport was first announced by the Dutch government in June 2022. Just to recap some of the numbers:
- The airport can currently accommodate up to 500,000 flights per year
- The previous plan was for the airport to grow to 540,000 flights per year
- The new cap limits the airport to 454,500 flights per year
- In other words, this represents a reduction of 10% compared to the current cap, and a reduction of around 16% compared to what the cap was supposed to be in the future
This ban is intended as an environmental measure, as part of the Netherlands’ climate goals. As you’d expect, this got quite a bit of pushback from airlines. In April 2023, a Dutch court blocked this new flight cap, arguing that the government did not follow the correct procedure. That’s because the government unilaterally made the decision, and didn’t follow European Union rules that require consulting stakeholders, including airlines.
Unfortunately that was just temporary relief for airlines, and in July 2023 an appeals court ruled that the government could move forward with the new flight cap.
KLM isn’t happy about this new flight cap
KLM CEO Marjan Rintel has today issued a statement regarding the government’s plans:
We are proud of KLM’s contribution to the accessibility of the Netherlands, serving close to 170 direct destinations worldwide from our Schiphol hub. We satisfy the needs of millions of people wanting to discover places around the world – to conduct business, to reunite families and to transport critical cargo. We hope to continue doing so in balance with the local surroundings.
Minister Harbers asked us to reduce noise by 20%. To this end, we submitted the cleaner, quieter and more efficient plan. In it, we show that we can achieve the noise reduction targets while maintaining the current number of flight movements, maintaining the connection between the Netherlands as a trading nation and the rest of the world. Nonetheless, the minister remains fixated on capacity reductions.
It is hard to imagine such a drastic decision being taken by an outgoing government, while the Dutch House of Representatives is set to vote on 12 September about which files are to be declared controversial. As an outgoing minister, you don’t mind the shop by closing it!
This has major implications for airlines & passengers
While I can appreciate the desire to reduce emissions, I feel like this solution won’t actually accomplish a whole lot. Whether the Dutch government likes it or not, the global demand for air travel is continuing to grow over time:
- A lower flight cap will simply allow fewer nonstop links between Amsterdam and destinations around the globe, which isn’t good for the Dutch economy
- This will not only hurt airlines, but it will also translate to higher fares for consumers over time
- If the goal is to reduce emissions, how about instead restricting the types of planes flying to the airport? This cap will reduce flights by 10-16%, while new generation aircraft often have 20% reductions in emissions, which would have an even bigger impact
- Speaking of emissions, how about just adding some sort of a carbon offset tax with each ticket, used to fund projects that can have a positive impact on the environment?
- Climate change and environmental initiatives can’t really be viewed in isolation; this will simply cause traffic to be redirected through other airport hubs in the region
Only time will tell how this plays out. I wouldn’t be surprised if this isn’t the end of the saga…
Bottom line
The Dutch government plans to move forward with its new “green” flight cap for Amsterdam Schiphol Airport. With this, we’ll see flights at the airport reduced from 500,000 to 454,500 annually, representing a major reduction.
Now the European Commission needs to approve this plan, in which case we should see airlines start to slash their schedules at the airport.
What do you make of this new Dutch flight cap?
More governments should do that. Reduce even further. The sky is filled with flying trash called airplanes that torture and abuse noise sensitive neurogivergent people. The day noisy gas powered airplanes are gone forever will be the day to celebrate.
A regressive solution by a so-called ‘progressive’ group of politicians. WOW. WHO would have thought!
Just more green hysteria to control the masses. People need to educate themselves on the false climate change narrative. At its core are climate models that are have overstated man’s effect on the climate. Then add in the CCP’s coal fired power plants and all of these restrictions have 0 impact. Wake up!
It's a ridiculous idea.
No doubt that we as human society need to reconsider the way we travel, eat, work, recreate and so on. We should really look in the mirror if we could do a bit less consumption. The Earth's resources are limited, and we use more than the Earth can supply every year. It is like spending on credit, eventually you cannot pay back and you are bankrupt.
The problem is, that green intellectuals want to...
No doubt that we as human society need to reconsider the way we travel, eat, work, recreate and so on. We should really look in the mirror if we could do a bit less consumption. The Earth's resources are limited, and we use more than the Earth can supply every year. It is like spending on credit, eventually you cannot pay back and you are bankrupt.
The problem is, that green intellectuals want to force society to pay more taxes and reduce our CO2 footprint. People do not like to do this by force, so it needs to be done by consensus. What doesnt help is that these green elites travel themselves around the world, and dont care about paying as they are rich enough.
This ruling for Schiphol is just poorly timed, will cost business and jobs, and does the opposite to the normal people. In short, people in east NL will fly from Weeze, Bremen,Dusseldorf and south NL will use Brussel or Cologne. More car miles will be made and there will be anger under the lower incomes and that makes it even harder to implement further regulations unless by force.
Polarisation is already high and it will become worse.
I think the Dutch simply don’t want AMS to be true connecting hub, but focus on O&D. Aldo, they are trying to discourage tourists for weekend party people. And it’s not just flights, they reducing the number of cruise ships that visit AMS. I’m not sure so many non Dutch citizens on here are are angry. It’s their country and the government will run it based on their needs, not people that visit every so often.
What will this really do to change climate change. When you have China and other countries that are the major contributors to climate change. It will however hurt Amsterdam as they will lose revenue from flights and tourists along with KLM. People are doing there research and this is Just avail attempt to look like that they're making changes.
Because our politicians are “bought and paid for” by CCP influence.
Democracy was a mistake
So were you. I guess you would prefer to live in autocratic regime?
I applaud this policy. I also agree that emissions should be regulated at the airport also. This ridiculous fixation about getting up every day and globe trotting while ignoring the damage you do to the have have nots shows a callous ignorance of the reality of climate change. You can just turn your air conditioning on or jet off to another location while others have to clean up your mess! Oil is the new tobacco and frequent fliers are the new devil!
Go and rant on another blog Greta . Some of us have friends and families on the other side of the world. If you don’t want to travel stay home and use a bike. Some of us want it have to, so don’t tell us what to do.
Has anyone considered realigning the runways at AMS. Looks like some mighty long taxi ways to get to a spaghetti of runways. Align like DFW or LAX. Enough fuel saved to bring back the lost 10% plus keep the migrants off the dole and working on aligned runways a greener Netherlands.
This "green" flight cap is just "greenwashing" something. It's fake.
If they are worried about pollution at Schiphol, then see about developing another hub as a counterbalance...say in either Luxembourg or Belgium if not Netherlands.
How big is Rotterdam or The Hague as far as the airports?
Warning: rant ahead. Here’s the TLDR: The only government action I support is that which actually benefits the public (and this isn’t possible without proper information on climate change/global warming), and isn’t achievable profitably via private companies.
This is a textbook example of the government interfering in the economy for the purpose of virtue signaling.
I’d also like to call out environmentalism’s obsession towards aviation. While it it part of the most polluting...
Warning: rant ahead. Here’s the TLDR: The only government action I support is that which actually benefits the public (and this isn’t possible without proper information on climate change/global warming), and isn’t achievable profitably via private companies.
This is a textbook example of the government interfering in the economy for the purpose of virtue signaling.
I’d also like to call out environmentalism’s obsession towards aviation. While it it part of the most polluting industry, it accounts for 1.9% of global GHG emissions. Within the transportation industry, cars and other forms of road transit are far more harmful, meaning those (among other separate industries) should also be called out (not necessarily by the government, just the public in general).
But, in any case, I think the private sector is much more fit than the government to make environmentally conscious decisions and lower emissions across the board. History has shown that market incentives work.
Finally, there’s also the question of how much of a role humans play in climate change. This is something that isn’t completely known yet, and, as I said above, you can’t make decisions on it if there’s not enough information.
While it is true that more pollution comes from cars than planes, there's many many many more passenger miles traveled in cars, so that's to be expected. On a per passenger mile basis, planes release a lot more Co2, due to that whole having to lift a plane 30,000 feet into the air thing.
The likeliest outcome is that this increases traffic to Frankfurt, London, Paris, and other nearby international gateways... And in turn, they start flying bigger aircraft on their shorthauls. Amsterdam will probably see all of their shorthauls flights being operated by large longhaul aircraft. Unfortunately reducing supply isn't going to help if they aren't fundamentally curtailing demand :/
They might reduce carbon emissions in the Netherlands but I expect this would raise emissions in Europe as a whole: some of the passengers are flying to Amsterdam because it has excellent rail connectivity.
If they cut flights, passengers may then fly to London or Frankfurt or Paris and then take another flight to their actual destination rather than a train for the final leg.
Well, the only upside is that this might lead to less delays. AMS can only operate today's number of flights, if meteorological conditions are fine. In case of fog or high winds, they can't cope. Reducing the number of flights per hour will help in this sense.
Like big tobacco in the 80s, the big polluters are terrified of people learning the truth about climate change so they propagate a stream of lies - first say climate change doesn't exist, now that's discredited, saying climate change isn't our fault, no that's also discredited, ok tell them we can't fix climate change, or that whatever measure is introduced to change people's behaviour, it's pointless and won't work.
Watch the bots come out of...
Like big tobacco in the 80s, the big polluters are terrified of people learning the truth about climate change so they propagate a stream of lies - first say climate change doesn't exist, now that's discredited, saying climate change isn't our fault, no that's also discredited, ok tell them we can't fix climate change, or that whatever measure is introduced to change people's behaviour, it's pointless and won't work.
Watch the bots come out of the woodwork with a stream of objections
Aviation accounts for 2.5% of emissions.
Go and target these:
Agriculture and land use 18%
Waste over 3%
Crop burning 3.5%
Livestock and manure almost 6%
Energy use in buildings over 17%
You do realise that the more people moan about something it’s often counterproductive as they become bored with being your the same old same old.
For example I took an interest in Greta Thunberg when she...
Aviation accounts for 2.5% of emissions.
Go and target these:
Agriculture and land use 18%
Waste over 3%
Crop burning 3.5%
Livestock and manure almost 6%
Energy use in buildings over 17%
You do realise that the more people moan about something it’s often counterproductive as they become bored with being your the same old same old.
For example I took an interest in Greta Thunberg when she started. She had a point and was passionate. Now I cannot stand her.
Perhaps go and nag
Ps Some words mixed as no edit function.
Nag elsewhere
2.5 percent is a lot compared to 18 percent when the 18 percent feeds 7 billion people and the 2.5 percent flies around a tiny fraction of them.
The point is it’s one of the smallest contributiors. That 18% is causing significantly more damage. Green parties want to make out as though it’s not.
If you don’t want to fly, don’t, however don’t impose your beliefs on others, especially on an airline related site.
Here in the USA we think the Biden Administration is destroying the economy with their so called green initiatives but I see that Dutch politicians are just as stupid.
How’s prisoner P01335809 doing ? Lol
All this silly nonsense and the climate will continue to change. Why? Because we can't control the environment. How vain must you be to think we have that sort of power. It's just another way to exercise power over people, many who are dumb enough to buy into this.
Hi Ben
Please don't even suggest a carbon tax. There is no jurisdiction in the world that ever saw a carbon tax reduce use of fossil fuels. Australia and Canada are prime examples of the fallacy. Australia cancelled their carbon tax when they discovered through scientific monitoring that the tax did nothing but enhance the tax coffers at the detriment to the cost of living and wealth of the nation. Canada with it's woke PM...
Hi Ben
Please don't even suggest a carbon tax. There is no jurisdiction in the world that ever saw a carbon tax reduce use of fossil fuels. Australia and Canada are prime examples of the fallacy. Australia cancelled their carbon tax when they discovered through scientific monitoring that the tax did nothing but enhance the tax coffers at the detriment to the cost of living and wealth of the nation. Canada with it's woke PM and cabinet watch with glee the destruction of our economy and impoverishment of the Canadian public. GHGasses have increased exponentially since the Carbon tax was introduced. Like the Netherlands, virtue sharing is a great game provided you have your private jet and government paid food and housing.
Australia never had a carbon tax, it had a a cap and trade mechanism with an initial fixed price floor on credits and it did reduce carbon emissions over the short period it was in force. Those emisssions returned when the mechanism was abolished. Setting Australia’s clean energy transition back a decade and costing energy consumers a fortune.
Is this partially a solution to the meltdown of AMS last summer with too many passengers and not being able to clear capacity?
Certainly there’s some significant other ways to reduce emissions though - in addition to newer generation planes, switching to higher capacity planes reduces the per-person emissions.
No, the Dutch government was talking about this plan even before that happened.
The irony is that many Dutch government ministers who want the cap are members of loyalty programmes, specifically Flying Blue, and fly frequently.
This is super awesome. The Netherlands are really setting an example here. I am so envious.
Shouldn't you be on a site that discusses trains?
Sarcasm mate
This news is part of the European Union's plan to attack air transport, in France they prohibit domestic flights of less than 3 hours by train, in Spain new air taxes are created and in the Netherlands they reduce airport flights
Nothing is set in stone here - after the cabinet collapsed earlier in the summer there will be a general election in November. Who knows what the new government will come up with.
Something similar is happening at Mexico City's international airport, flights will be reduced from 60 to 42 per hour. In this case the reason is to force airlines to move to the new Felipe Angeles airport.
As many others have pointed out, this is more likely to INCREASE overall emissions, as AMS is probably the most direct path to connect from Europe to North America.
Time to move all of the LCC and ULCC to Rotterdam or Eindhoven.
I guess the Netherlands have the best and worst of being the only hub in the country.
Would something like this happen if there was more than 1 airport being used in the Netherlands?
AMS movement being spread throughout Rotterdam, for instance.
I'm not sure that it is clear at all how many flights would have to be cut.
And remember that KLM is part of the Air France/KLM Group and they have already shifted some flights to Paris.
The real fight is about arbitrary, supposedly environmentally driven caps on aviation that could be arbitrarily cut even further.
There are alot of things that COULD be done to achieve legitimate goals- but logic or planning are not what this is about.
Shift what to Paris? AMS-AUA or AMS-PMB?
See the routes of AF/KL. KL strong on areas AF is not.
If KL has to reduce ABZ, KRS, GDN, LCY, BRE etc Paris is not a solutions cos AF can’t even serve those destinations.
Why can’t they serve these destinations?
Economics. AF used to have ABZ and was not profitable. KL operates 5 x/day and it works out. Go figure…
So these people, who work in the "air" line industry, think air stays in one place and by lessening the "air" traffic to save the air in one place that air will stay there and be better air for that place and no naughty air will come from the bad air places and invade their good air and... oh I give up.
The aviation industry accounts for just 2.5% of emissions.
People want to target airlines all the time for compensation any way they can as they are greedy. If it’s not €600 under EC261 when they paid €300 for a ticket, they try and sue airlines any way which they can and probably more so than any other industry.
Meanwhile rail companies cancel and delay trains in Europe and are obliged to reroute...
The aviation industry accounts for just 2.5% of emissions.
People want to target airlines all the time for compensation any way they can as they are greedy. If it’s not €600 under EC261 when they paid €300 for a ticket, they try and sue airlines any way which they can and probably more so than any other industry.
Meanwhile rail companies cancel and delay trains in Europe and are obliged to reroute and offer accommodation if necessary but they rarely if ever do.
Perhaps target other industries that create far more pollution.
In addition, target the countries producing more but do virtually nothing. The main culprits being India and China
Aviation brings billions upon billions to economies, creates tens of millions of jobs and allows friends and families to gather when they live on other sides of the globe.
The phone or computer you’re using, the food you’re eating, the clothes you’re wearing maybe due to airlines.
If you don’t want to fly, then don’t.
However I cannot stand those who preach to others about the negativity of the aviation sector.
Then go and demonstrate in front of the National People’s Congress in Beijing and see how far that gets you.
Funny how you never see Greta Thunberg demonstrating in China. Lol
China is adding more renewable energy then the rest of the world combined. They are now at 50.9% of energy coming from renewable sources. They are the world leaders in wind and solar. There's a lot wrong with China... but they are doing something about their emmisions so you're barking up the wrong tree here...
Airlines may be 2.5 percent of the total emissions, but they are in the lead when it comes to emissions per person served.
7 billion people eat off of the 18 percent of emissions generated by agriculture. How many people fly for the 2.5 percent?
They should cap flights even more. Cap them to 3650 flights per year. Then move all the flights to Brussels, Antwerp, Charleroi, and Liege. Then fly loaded A380's from those cities to Schiphol.
There is not anything dumber happening in Earth today (except maybe the war in Ukraine) then government responses to climate change. You cannot fix stupid and as liberals take over the world , economies will fall hard on policies that make no sense. Disgusting on the Dutch gov't part.
Airplanes are a far greener way to travel the car per passenger. Electric cars are far worse for the environment then gas and pretty much...
There is not anything dumber happening in Earth today (except maybe the war in Ukraine) then government responses to climate change. You cannot fix stupid and as liberals take over the world , economies will fall hard on policies that make no sense. Disgusting on the Dutch gov't part.
Airplanes are a far greener way to travel the car per passenger. Electric cars are far worse for the environment then gas and pretty much no one who is making these policies has any real data to go on. This is all about power and control over the people.
There goes continuous gaslighting of common folks while the rich continue to fly in their private jets and "preaching" about climate change. I understand we all have to do our part tackling climate change, but I am not going to sit around thinking about emissions when a loved is dying where I have to take an immediate flight. These kind of policies are ruining the cause.
What does that has to do with the post. There are plenty of options to fly other than Amsterdam airport.
Why people are always dramatic using exemples of dying love ones for every issue in the world?
So if I need to book a flight departing AMS in July 2024...should I wait a few weeks to see if current schedules receive major adjustments? Or worth booking now and leveraging any schedule changes to my benefit? Was planning to book sometime in September.
Or just plan your life without thinking about how you can benefit from the situation? Why people always looking to profit?
we have to show the public we are doing something. so less flights for them. we will still fly on our private planes. the rules dont apply to us. soon no A/C in the summer and no heat in the winter. just wait for it
Well said!
Lufthansa, rather than environment, will be the beneficiary of this particular decision…
Possibly however on the contrary Charles de Gaulle Airport has room to expand. So they will transfer capacity to Air France, and low cost and charter carriers currently operating at Schiphol should move to Rotterdam and Eindhoven.
The Dutch government doesn’t really care about KLM, compared with years ago, whereas the French government is very much supportive of Air France.
Or rather Lufthansa Group: Opportunities for Eurowings at Düsseldorf and Brussels Airlines at Brussels. BRU already has problems with parking space due to Dutch people driving there. Now the Dutch Railways have cancelled their train routes to BRU, making the problem even bigger. But the airport itself has enough capacity. The potential of a US Border Pre-Clearance at BRU could be a real game-changer if that ever becomes a reality.
Assholes.
right on... the green political agendas are more harmful to all in time,comfort and expense$$$$$$