The EconomistFebruary 13th 2021 Special reportThe future of travel 72
1clean up its act more comprehensively. The European firm hopes
to have net-zero-emission planes that can ply short-haul routes in
commercial service by 2035. The three concept aircraft it has un-
veiled, including a futuristic “blended wing” design, use hydrogen
as a fuel. In January Boeing said that by 2030 it will start delivering
commercial planes powered entirely by biofuels, another way to
cut emissions. These are already in use in limited quantities by
several airlines, blended with regular fuel, but are still prohibitive-
ly expensive—perhaps twice the price of kerosene.
Scale should bring prices down. And turning plant matter and
waste into fuel has a carbon footprint of its own. Rolls-Royce, a jet-
engine maker, nevertheless reckons a 75% reduction of carbon
emissions is possible, with more to come. Other zero-emissions
technologies are in development. Startups have been testing small
battery-powered planes. Eviation, an Israeli firm, hopes that Alice,
capable of flying nine passengers up to 800km, will fly for the first
time next year. Others, such as ZeroAvia, are trying out fuel cells
that use hydrogen to generate electricity to power engines.
Airbus expects its new plane to be powered by hydrogen di-
rectly as a fuel in new turbofans of the sort now found in large pas-
senger jets. Big investments will be needed, starting with engine
makers that must work out how hydrogen, which burns at a far
higher temperature than kerosene, can be used safely. Boeing’s
plans require some adaptation of existing engines. Given that new
planes can take seven or eight years to get from drawing-board to
commercial service, that gives Boeing what Robert Spingarn of
Credit Suisse, another bank, calls “breathing room”. Airbus is like-
ly to launch its hydrogen programme formally in 2027. So gradual-
ly, after 2030 if the timetable holds, new planes will have far lower
emissions and after 2035 short-haul jets should have net-zero
emissions. The hydrogen technology could be extended to twin-
aisle planes, all of which should be using more biofuels. No switch
will be flicked but in around a decade the journey to clean up travel
will start in earnest. 7B
usiness travelis as old as the traders who carted silks and
spices between ancient civilisations. The executive tapping at a
laptop as other flyers recline their seats and settle down with a
glass of wine is a more recent phenomenon. The physical move-
ment of goods on ships and planes and the supply chains that un-
derpin global manufacturing and services firms rely on an army of
businessfolk flying around the planet. But that army is in retreat.
Executives, diplomats and government employees, and ngo
staff still trot the globe. Bosses of big companies often spend more
time in corporate jets than with their families. At lower altitude
workers travel to fit out factories, attend trade shows and confer-
ences, launch new products or meet clients. Business class is a re-
cent arrival. Airlines pitched it between first and economy class
only in the late 1970s. Such travel has grown a lot in the past 25
years. According to Bernstein, an equity-research firm, total
spending on international and domestic travel in 1995 amounted
to $2.1trn, of which $400bn was for business. By 2019 around a
quarter of the total, or $1.3trn, was spent on business travel.
Covid-19 has hit corporate jaunts hard. A poll in January by theGlobal Business Travel Association found that 79% of its members
had cancelled all or most business travel. Credit Suisse reckons
2021 will see 65% fewer international business trips than in 2019.
Bill Gates thinks the shift will be permanent. “My prediction
would be that over 50% of business travel...will go away,” he says.
That may be too pessimistic. The boss of one aviation firm sees a
full return. Bernstein goes for up to 24% never coming back. Credit
Suisse reckons 10-20% will disappear for good. Citi, another bank,
plumps for 25%. Any recovery will be long in coming. McKinsey, a
consultancy, points out that business travel rebounded more
slowly than leisure travel after earlier disruptions, noting that
after the financial crisis the number of international business
trips from America fell by 13% (against 7% for leisure travel) and
took five years to recover, compared with two years for tourism.
Every knock that travel has taken in recent decades has been
followed by similar predictions of permanent decline. Each time it
has failed to materialise. Why is this time different? Vaccines, fast-
testing regimes and the dropping of travel bans might yet open the
door for leisure travel. But Zoom, Google hangouts, Skype and oth-
er video-conferencing services have a better chance of per-
manently replacing business-class tickets, for several reasons.
One is that companies badly hit by covid-19 will be under pressure
to cut costs—and travel is an easy target. Second, a blizzard of
pledges to cut carbon emissions and hit climate-change targets
make cutting flying “low-hanging fruit”, says Paul Flatters of the
Trajectory Partnership, a consultancy. Third, even though vaccines
may reopen borders to many travellers, so long as covid-19 is at
large firms will be reluctant to sanction trips not strictly required.
Some types of business trip are harder to conduct over a screen
and so likely to revive. Vik Krishnan of McKinsey notes that these
include sales and client meetings. Personal contact, especially
when seeking new business, is hard to replicate digitally. And once
one company resumes meetings in person, so will its competitors.
Manufacturers will struggle to monitor remotely factories in far-
flung corners of their supply chains. Trade shows and conferences
that bring many people together in close proximity are more vul-
nerable, notes Bernstein. Hybrid shows, with some people present
and others joining online may attract a larger audience who mightVideo-conferencing rules
Business travel may never fully recover from covid-19Business travelLecturing from afar