How the EU Taxonomy has (fossil) fuelled aviation

Background  

The EU Taxonomy was created to reorient capital towards environmentally sustainable activities and support the EU’s target to climate neutrality by 2050.

However, new analysis by independent research consultancy CE Delft, commissioned by Opportunity Green, reveals a stark gap between the Taxonomy’s purpose and its operation. In 2025, 52.8% of reported airline capital expenditure (CapEx) was labelled as Taxonomy-aligned – but only 0.13% (€24m) related to genuinely sustainable activities.

This data reflects precisely the problem at the heart of our ongoing legal challenge Dryade and Others v Commission – conventional fossil-fuel aviation activities are wrongfully being classified as sustainable, despite failing to satisfy the Taxonomy’s stringent requirements. 

This briefing examines how permissive aviation criteria allow conventional fossil-fuel activities to qualify as sustainable investment. This issue is even more pressing in light of the Commission’s proposed revisions to the criteria and the General Court’s recent judgment in Dassault Aviation v Commission, which exacerbate the situation.

The scale of the problem 

The CapEx figures above reflect aviation’s exceptional treatment under the Taxonomy: aviation was the only one of 115 sectors examined where more than half of total CapEx was classified as aligned expenditure, with transitional activities accounting for 52.67% of the 52.8% total, despite predominantly comprising investment in new fossil-fuel-powered aircraft and aircraft maintenance.

A similar problem arises with operational expenditure (OpEx): 30.4% of reported airline OpEx (€4.3bn) was classified as Taxonomy-aligned in 2025, despite significant issues with how that alignment was calculated.

Meanwhile, six major European airline groups caused an estimated €29.6bn in climate damages in 2025.

By wrongfully classifying conventional fossil-fuel aviation activities as sustainable, the Taxonomy greenwashes these harms and directs sustainable finance towards activities that perpetuate them.

Laurent Sammouri, Legal Officer at Opportunity Green, says:

“It is essential that the Taxonomy stays true to its purpose by providing a credible, science-based classification of environmentally sustainable economic activities. Wrongfully applied, it quickly goes from being a key compass for sustainable finance, and thus for meeting the EU’s climate targets, to a tool that works in direct opposition to those objectives. With aviation expected to account for 90% of the EU’s transport emissions by 2050, it is all the more pressing that the Commission gets this right.”

What’s covered in the briefing? 

• How overly permissive aviation criteria enable greenwashing and create false market signals.
• The scale of carbon lock-in created by directing sustainable finance towards long-lived fossil-fuel aircraft.
• Why the current aviation criteria do not comply with the Taxonomy Regulation’s requirements.
• What new airline expenditure data reveals about the Taxonomy in practice, including aviation’s exceptional treatment compared with 114 other sectors.
• Why recent legal and policy developments exacerbate these problems.
• What needs to change to restore the Taxonomy to its purpose.

Our recommendations

• Ensure that all aviation activities included in the Taxonomy align with a credible 1.5°C pathway and the Paris Agreement.
• Exclude fossil-fuel aircraft from the Taxonomy as they do not satisfy the Taxonomy Regulation’s cumulative requirements.
• Avoid further delay to the transition by extending existing deadlines for fossil-fuel aircraft or delaying Taxonomy alignment for aircraft capable of operating on 100% SAF and synthetic aviation fuels.
• Strengthen sustainability criteria for aviation fuels and prioritise scalable, sustainable pathways, including synthetic fuels such as e-SAF and alcohol-to-jet fuels.
• Reform the treatment of SAF in OpEx to ensure Taxonomy alignment reflects airlines’ actual sustainable expenditure and does not allow limited SAF use to be concentrated on selected aircraft.
• Ensure that TSC are firmly grounded in conclusive scientific evidence, life-cycle assessment, and adhere to the precautionary principle.

Authors

• Lead author: Lauren Sammouri
• Co-authors: Sophie Prinz  and Aoife O’Leary on behalf of Opportunity Green, along with Boris Schellekens on behalf of Fossilvreij.

Download briefing