Agreed, even if you could reduce fuel consumption by that much, the result should be lower fares, inducing more people to travel by air.
Unpopular opinion, but we could tax fuel at a higher rate than we do now (or stop subsidizing pollution, depending on how you view it).
Surely at some point demand is effectively satisfied?
I think the market for air-commuters is far from saturated.
Then again there are only so many planes that can land on a given airport in the course of one day.
If we've learned anything from modern airline capitalism, it's that they'll charge the same price and just pocket the increased profits.
Why shouldn’t they? They’re providing a service that people pay for because they find more value in taking the flight than an alternative use for that money. Presumably, the value of that trip is largely uncorrelated with the type of aircraft, provided the inflight experience is bearable.
If we want to transition to hybrid planes, or entirely electric planes, these sort of efficiency increases will be very useful. I would consider the '20% efficiency increase' in that context.
That's mostly from a global perspective. From a business perspective, increasing efficiency without sacrificing customer satisfaction increases your competitive position, and would be a good thing, not?