AVIATION & THE ENVIRONMENT

AVIATION & THE ENVIRONMENT

Ian A. Waitz Professor and Deputy Head

Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

© 2003 Waitz 1

LECTURE OUTLINE

• Overview of environmental effects of aircraft

• Aircraft noise

– Impacts and regulatory issues

– Technology trends

• Aircraft pollutant emissions


– Technology and emissions trends

• Summary and references © 2003 Waitz 2

Noise

None applicable

Compatibility with nearbyland uses

Air quality

Most serious problem currently

Most serious problem in the future

Wetlands

29AIRPORT Noise22RANKING OF

ENVIRONMENTAL 12

Water quality

ISSUESWater Quality

6

6

Air QualityCurrent and Future 16

2Compatibility with Land-use limitations 4

1

None Applicable 0

0

Wetlands2

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Number of airports

Most serious problem currently Most serious problem in future

Source: GAO’s survey of the nation’s 50 busiest commercial service airports. © 2003 Waitz (GAO, 2000) 3

CHARACTERISTICS OF NOISE AND EMISSIONS ISSUES

• Noise

– Local

– Persistence = minutes

– Well-established metrics

– Impacts: annoyance, sleep disturbance, domestic animals?, endangered species?, health impacts?

• Emissions

– Local, regional, global

– Effluents: CO2, H2O, NOx, CO, VOC’s, soot, others

– Persistence = 1 day -1000 years

– Drastic change in public/scientific perception and regulatory frameworks

– Impacts: human health, ecosystem health© 2003 Waitz 4

AVIATION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

• “EXTERNALITIES”

– A large fraction of current aviation health and welfare impacts are real costs to society but are not accounted for by the providers or users of the service

“The government’s objectives for aviation are that…the polluter should pay and aviation, like other industries, should meet its external costs, including environmental costs.”

(From UK Department of Transport, Aviation and the Environment, Using Economic Instruments, March 2003)

© 2003 Waitz 5

EXTERNAL COSTS OF AVIATION

VALUATION SOCIAL INSTITUTIONAL BASIS (industry + affected public) (regulatory policy)

Impact Area (objective)

Total $ $ / capita Total $ $ / capita % of Total $

addressed by regulation

Noise $ 26B $ 2100 $ 2.9B $ 6000 11% (quiet environs)

Air Quality $ 11B $ 140 $ 2.5B $ 30 22%(safe air)

Climate Change ~$100B $ 345 $ 0.0B $ 0 0% (stable climate)

TOTAL ~$137B $ 5.4B 5%

• Regulatory framework currently accommodates ~ 5% potential

internalization of external costs

• Noise cost per capita greater than emissions aligns with public

opinion and institutional attention

– Most vociferous opposition to noise, but air quality becoming

more of an issue (GAO 2000) >>PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES ONLY<<

Lukachko, 2003 © 2003 Waitz 6

GROWTH IN MOBILITY PROVIDED BY U.S. AVIATION INDUSTRY (DOT Form 41 data)

Fastest Growing Mode of Transportation (4-6%/yr)

Revenue Passenger Miles Performed by All Airlines Operating Aircraft with >60 Seats

8E+11

7E+11

6E+11

5E+11

4E+11

3E+11

2E+11

1E+11

01965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Year

© 2003 Waitz 7

AIR TRAVEL PROJECTED TO BE FASTEST GROWING MODE OF TRANSPORTATION (4-6%/yr)

- DRIVEN BY POPULATION AND GDP GROWTH, AND AVAILABLE DAILY TRAVEL TIME -

AutomobilesBuses

RailwaysAircraft

1960 1990 2020 2050

5.5×1012 RPK 23 ×1012 RPK 54 ×1012 RPK 105 ×1012 RPK

Source: Schafer et al. (1998), GDP/cap growth rates from IPCC IS92a Scenario © 2003 Waitz 8

MOBILITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT

“ Environmental issues are likely to impose the fundamental limitation on air transportation growth in the 21st century. ” U.S. National Science and Technology Council, 1995

72%

28% 25%

75%

Expansion Projects Delayed due to Environmental Issues

Source: GAO (2000) survey of 50 busiest commercial airports. N=33 for this question, 1 airport did not respond.

28% (9 airports) with no impact

projects delayed at 72% (23 airports)

Expansion Projects Cancelled or Indefinitely Postponed due to Environmental Issues

25% (12 airports) with at least 1 project affected

no impact at 75% (36 airports)

Source: GAO (2000) survey of 50 busiest commercial airports. N=50 for this question, 2 airports with no projects planned.

© 2003 Waitz 9

AIRPORTS ARE REACHING CAPACITY LIMIT Figure 2: Anticipated Date for Airports to Reach Capacity

Number of airports

14

13

11

5

2

8

7

4

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

Already 1-2 years 3-4 years 5-6 years 7-9 years 10 or Otherat or moreabove yearscapacity

Estimated time to reach capacity

Source: GAO’s survey of the nation’s 50 busiest commercial service airports. © 2003 Waitz 10

DOD ENCROACHMENT

• External factors such as urbanization, increasing environmental restrictions, and competition with civilian demands on airspace, land, seaspace, and radio frequencies

“The overall trends are adverse because the number of external inputs is increasing, and the readiness impacts are growing. Future testing and training needs will only further exacerbate these issues, as the speed and range of test articles and training scenarios increase…” (DOD Sustainable Ranges Outreach Plan, SROC)

Examples: JSF basing, Oceana operations, Navy in Japan

• Senior Readiness Oversight Council (SROC) action plans: – Endangered species, ordnance, frequency encroachment, the

maritime sustainability, airspace restrictions, air quality, airborne noise and urban growth

• House of Representatives proposal (2002): National Security Impact Statement with all Environmental Impact Statements

© 2003 Waitz 11

REGULATIONS: BALANCING PUBLIC GOALS

• Economy and Mobility vs. National Security vs. Environment • State vs. National interests and control

• Federal Noise Control Act + local noise restrictions – Commercial yes– Military no (Nat. Sec. Exemption, but NEPA EIS)

• Federal Clean Air Act + State Implementation Plans – Military yes (General Conformity Rule) – Commercial “no” (Interstate Commerce & Trade exemption)

• Endangered Species and Marine Mammal Protection Acts – Military “yes” (Nat. Sec. Exemption, but never used) – Commercial yes

© 2003 Waitz 12

GROWTH OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION

Reflects increasing environmental impacts and increasing valuation of the environment

Materiel Developer’s Guide for Pollution Prevention,

Cumulative Number of Federal Environmental Laws

World-wide Civil Aircraft Noise Restrictions

NAP

Charges

QuotasBudgetsCH2 PO CH2 Rest. CH3 Rest.

19700

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

1980 1990Year

Nu

mb

er o

f R

estr

icti

on

s

2000

Curfews

Levels

Army Acquisition Support Office, 1994 www.boeing.com

© 2003 Waitz 13

AIRCRAFT REGULATIONS - Local , National, International -

• Noise

– Certification standards

– Phase-outs

– Curfews

– Flight control

– Landing fees

– Ticket taxes

• Emissions

– Certification standards

– Phase-outs

– Limited local rules in place

© 2003 Waitz 14

LECTURE OUTLINE


• Aircraft noise







AIRCRAFT NOISE GENERATION

AIRFRAMENOISE

ENGINENOISE

SONICBOOM?

ATMOSPHERIC PROPAGATION

SPECTRUM, MAGNITUDE, DIRECTIVITY, DURATION FREQUENCY OF OCCURENCE, TIME OF DAY, LOCATION

HUMAN ANNOYANCE

© 2003 Waitz 16

NOISE EFFECTS ON PEOPLE

(FICON, 1992)

© 2003 Waitz 18

Effects Hearing Loss Annoyance

Day-Night

AverageSound

Level in Decibels

QualitativeDescription

% of Population

HighlyAnnoyed

AverageCommunity

Reaction

General Community Attitude Towards Area

75 and above

May begin tooccur 37% Very Severe

Noise is likely to be mostimportant of all adverse aspects of

the community environment

70 Will not likelyoccur 22% Severe

Noise is one of the most adverseaspects of the community

environment

65 Will not occur 12% Significant Noise is one of the adverse aspectsof the community environment

60 Will not occur 7% Moderate to slight

Noise may be considered an adverse aspects of the community

environment

55 and below Will not occur 3% Moderate to

slight

Noise considered no moreimportant than various other

environmental factors

COMMERICAL AIRPORT NOISE EXPOSURE MAP (DNL levels)

(INM, 1999)

© 2003 Waitz 19

NOISE IMPACT TRENDS •Phase-out

–55% of U.S. fleet

–94% reduction in impact

–During 6X mobility growth

–$10B US cost

–

–TECHNOLOGY foundation

•$1B/yr in US for sound abatement

–

–Low cost effectiveness

$43/person/DNLdB

$960/person/DNLdB

© 2003 Waitz 20

COMMERCIAL AND MILITARY NOISE IMPACTS

Norfolk Intl. Airport

210 TO/day

Oceana121 TO/day 7 FCLP/day

Fentress20 TO/day

354 FCLP/day

http://www.norfolkairport.com, http://www.nasoceana.navy.mil/aicuz

© 2003 Waitz 21

AIRCRAFT NOISE TECHNOLOGY TRENDS

© 2003 Waitz 22

AIRCRAFT NOISE SUMMARY

• Difficult connection between human annoyance and physics

– Public becoming more sensitive to aviation noise

– Relatively mature regulatory history

• Step changes in fleet unlikely

• Increased commercial certification stringency likely but probably within current technological capabilities

• Growing problem for the military

• Local restrictions make noise a product differentiator

– For GE-90 powered B-777 (-6EPNdB cumulative relative to other engines) twice as many t/o and landings allowed at Heathrow

– Manufacturers willing to trade 2% fuel burn for 2 dB (A380)

© 2003 Waitz 23

LECTURE OUTLINE


• Aircraft noise







EMISSIONS IMPACTS

• Local air quality (NOx, CO, UHC, PM)

– Focus of current regulations

• Regional/global atmospheric effects

1) Stratospheric ozone depletion (time-scale=10 years)

– Largely a concern for supersonic aircraft (NOx)

2) Climate change (time-scale = 100-1000 years)

– Subsonic and supersonic aircraft

– CO2 and H2O

– NOx through ozone production

– Particulates (SOx and soot) through heterogeneous chemistry and cloud nucleation

© 2003 Waitz 25

AIRCRAFT ENGINE EXHAUST

• Composition

– Reservoir and primary combustion products

CO2, H2O, N2, O2: O(10000-100000) ppmv

– Secondary products and pollutant emissions

CO, NOx, HC, soot: O(1-100) ppmv

– Trace species constituents

NOy, SOx, HOx: O(0.0001-0.1) ppmv

• Most constituents play some role in atmospheric processes

– e.g. If 100% of SO2 in engine oxidizes to SO3 it may double stratospheric ozone depletion

– Primary and secondary species relatively well-understood

– Relative magnitudes and engine/operations effects on trace species poorly characterized

© 2003 Waitz 26

LOCAL AIR QUALITY

• Approx. 1% of US mobile source NOx emissions are from aircraft

• NOx, particulate matter, VOCs, CO -- ozone

– Lung function, cardiovascular disease, respiratory infection

© 2003 Waitz 27

28© 2003 Waitz

PM-10

LeadCO

Ozone

SO2

Notes: Incomplete data, not classified, and Section 185(a) areas are not shown. Ozone nonattainment areas on map based on pre-existing ozone standard. Nonattainment designations based on revised 8-hour ozone standard will not be designated until 2000. PM-10 nonattainment areas on map are based on pre-existing PM-10 standards. Nonattainment designations based on revised PM-10 standards have not yet been made. Source: U.S. EPA, National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report, 1997 .

LOCATION OF “NON-ATTAINMENT” AREAS FOR CRITERIAPOLLUTANTS AS OF SEPTEMBER, 1998

(Chang, 1999)

% r

eg m

obile

sou

rce

emis

s AIRCRAFT CONTRIBUTION TO REGIONAL MOBILE SOURCE NOX

EMISSIONS AT SELECTED US CITIES IS ESTIMATED TO INCREASE

Estimated commercial aircraft contribution to regional mobile source emissions of NOx

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

LA DC

Atlanta

Boston

Charlotte

ChicagoHousto

n NY

Phila.

Phoenix

1990 2010

Source: Table 4-2, EPA 420-R -99-013, "Evaluation of Air Pollutant Emissions from Subsonic Commercial Jet Aircraf t," April, 1999

(Chang, 1999)

© 2003 Waitz 29

30© 2003 Waitz

AIRCRAFT AND OZONE

(NOAA, NASA, UNEP, WMO, “ScientificAssessment of Ozone Depletion: 1994”)

• Aircraft: NEGATIVEEFFECT AT ALLALTITUDES

– Subsonics: +0.9% totalcolumn ozone (globalwarming)

– Supersonics (1000, <5% of fleet): -1.3% totalcolumn ozone

– Combined fleet: -0.4%total column ozone

(IPCC, 1999)

SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING IN 2003 vs. 1999

Green bars are updated values, with arrows updateduncertainty.

© 2003 Waitz 32

NOTES ON CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS

• Burning a gallon of fuel at 11km has about double the radiative impact of burning a gallon of fuel at sea-level

• Burning a gallon of fuel at 19km has about 5 times the impact at sea-level

• CO2 is not the biggest global concern (potential impacts from contrails and cirrus clouds are greater).

• Large imbalance between northern and southern hemisphere

• Improving engine efficiency tends to make NOx and contrails worse

• High uncertainty

© 2003 Waitz 36

THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY: CHARACTERISTICS OF AVIATION SYSTEMS

• Safety critical

• Weight and volume limited

• Complex

• 10-20 year development times

• $30M to $1B per unit capital costs

• 25 to 100 year usage in fleet

• Slow technology development and uptake

© 2003 Waitz 37

TECHNOLOGY CHOICES: BOEING

“Boeing is focusing its product development efforts on a super efficient airplane. This is the airplane that airline customers around the globe agree will bring the best value to an industry in need of improved performance. The advanced technologies that allowed the Sonic Cruiser configuration to provide 15 to 20 percent faster flight at today’s efficiencies now will be used to bring 15 to 20 percent lower fuel usage at the top end of today’s commercial jet speeds. Boeing believes that in the future airlines will again be interested in faster flight and we will be ready with a concept and technologies to meet this need.” (www.boeing.com, March, 2003)

© 2003 Waitz 38

COMMERCIAL vs. MILITARY FLEET TRENDS

• Demand growth for civil aviation (3.8%/year in US)

• Military fleet contraction

• Ops tempo (4.3/day commercial, 0.35/day military)

Number of Aircraft Flights/day

© 2003 Waitz 40

FUEL CONSUMPTION TRENDS

Aircraft responsible for 2%-3% of U.S fossil fuel use

© 2003 Waitz 41

COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT EFFICIENCY

Average Age = 13 yrs

© 2003 Waitz 42

MILITARY AIRCRAFT FUEL BURN

Average Age 21 yrs

© 2003 Waitz 43

ENERGY EFFICIENCY

• Function of performance of entire system

– Aircraft technology (structures, aerodynamics, engines)

– Aircraft operations (stage length, fuel load, taxi/take-off/landing time, flight altitude, delays, etc.)

– Airline operations (load factor)

• Each component of system can be examined independently for reduced fuel burn and impacts on local air quality and regional/global atmospheric effects

© 2003 Waitz 44

⋅⋅

⋅⋅

RANGE EQUATION Technology and Operations

Stage Length V L D

g SFC W

W W W fuel

payload structure reserve

= ( ) ⋅

+ + +

ln 1

= Technology = Operations

EfficiencyW StageLength

W

ASKkg

Stagelength seats

payload

fuel

fuelW

gf

∝∝

==

,

#

Use data to separate effects and understand influences of technology

© 2003 Waitz 45

TRENDS IN LOAD FACTOR

Lo

ad F

acto

r 0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0

Regional Jets

Turboprops

Large Aircraft

1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Year

Babikian, Raffi, The Historical Fuel Efficiency Characteristics of Regional Aircraft From Technological, Operational, and Cost Perspectives, SM Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, June 2001

© 2003 Waitz 46

FLIGHT AND GROUND DELAYS R

atio

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0

Airborne to Block Hours Minimum Flight to Airborne Hours Mininum Flight to Block Hours

1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Year

© 2003 Waitz 47

HISTORICAL TRENDS Aerodynamic Efficiency

L/D

max

25

20

15

10

5

01955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

abikian et al. (2002) Data Unavailable For: EMB-145 FH-227

BAE RJ85 SA-226

CV-600 DHC-7

Turboprops CV-880 Nihon YS-11

Regional Jets Beech 1900 DHC-8-100Large Aircraft CV-580 L-188

DHC8-300

D328

J41

ATR42 BAE-ATP

ATR72F27 BAC111-200/400 B767-200/ER

S360

J31

SA227

S340A

F28-1000 F28-4000/6000

BAE146-100/200/RJ70B727-200/231A BAE-146-300

B757-200 F100 B747-400RJ200/ER B777

B707-100B/300 B707-300BB737-100/200 L1011-1/100/200

A300-600

DC9-30 B737-300

DC10-40

MD11

B737-400

A320-100/200A310-300

DC10-30 L1011-500 B767-300/ER

B747-100/200/300

DC10-10 MD80 & DC9-80 EMB120 B737-500/600

B

Year© 2003 Waitz 48

HISTORICAL TRENDS Engine Efficiency

TS

FC

(m

g/N

s)

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

B707-300

B720-000

B727-200/231A

F28-4000/6000BAC111-400 DC9-40BAE146-100/200/RJ70

CV880 F28-1000

BAE-146-300

F100RJ85

B737-100/200DC9-30

DC9-10DC9-50

MD80 & DC9-80

B737-300

D328 EM170

RJ200/ERF27

CV600

DC10-30

DC10-40

L1011-500

B767-200/ER MD11B747-400

B737-400 B737-500/600

A300-600

B767-300/ERB757-200

L1011-1/100/200B747-100

B747-200/300

DC10-10

EMB145

EMB135RJ700

J31L188A-08/188C A320-100/200A310-300 B777

D328

J41

ATR72

DHC7S360

B1900

CV580

SA226 SA227

EMB120ATR42

DHC8-300BAE-ATPDHC8-100

DHC8-400

Turboprops

S340A

bikian et al. (2002)Ba

Regional Jets Large Jets New Regional Jet Engines New Turboprop Engines

1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year

© 2003 Waitz 49

HISTORICAL TRENDS Structural Efficiency

OE

W/M

TO

W

0.70

0.60

0.50

0.40

0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00

DC9-40

B737-100/200

B727-200/231A

DC9-10 DC10-10

BAC111-200F28-1000

BAC111-400

F27FH227

CV600

L188A-08/188C DC10-40

DC9-50

MD80 & DC9-80

B767-200/ER

B777B747-400

B737-400

B737-500/600

A320-100/200

A300-600A310-300

B767-300/ER

B737-300B757-200

L1011-1/100/200

B747-200/300

F28-4000/6000

BAE146-100/RJ70

BAE146-200

BAE-146-300F100

RJ85

RJ200/ER

EMB145

DHC8-300D328

J41BAE-ATP

ATR72DHC7 S360

B1900

J31

DHC8-100

SA226

SA227 EMB120 S340A

ATR42

DC9-30CV880 L1011-500DC10-30 MD11

B747-100

Turboprops

B707-300B

bikian et al. (2002)Ba

Regional Jets Large Aircraft

1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Year

© 2003 Waitz 50

EFFICIENCY Regional Jets Versus Turboprops

6E

ner

gy

Usa

ge

(MJ/

AS

K)

5Regional

BAC111-400 Jet Fleet Regional

4 CV880 Aircraft Fleet

BAC111-200

CV600

3 RJ200/ERB1900F28-1000L188A-08/188C

BAE146-100 RJ85F28-4000/6000

F27 J31DHC7

SA226S360 SA227 BAE-146-300

F100 EMB1452 J41 D328Turboprop BAE146-200DHC8-300Fleet

DHC8-100ATR72S340ABabikian et al. (2002)

EMB120

1 ATR42 BAE-ATP

TurbopropsRegional Jets

01955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Year© 2003 Waitz 51

ENERGY USAGE Total Versus Cruise

0

1

2

3

4

5M

J/A

SK

EU,CR Large Aircraft Total EU Large Aircraft EU,CR Regional Aircraft Total EU Regional Aircraft

Babikian (2001)

1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Year 52 © 2003 Waitz

COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT ENERGY INTENSITY TRENDS

• New technology energy intensity has been reduced 60% over last 40 years (jet age)

– 57% due to increases in engine efficiency

– 22% due to increases aerodynamic performance

– 17% due to load factor

– 4% due to other (structures, flight time efficiency, etc.)

– Structural efficiency constant (but traded for aero, passenger comfort, noise and SFC)

– Flight time efficiency constant (balance of capacity constraints and improved ATM)

• Fleet average energy intensity has been reduced 60% since 1968

– Lags new technology by 10-15 years

© 2003 Waitz 53

SHORT HAUL AIRCRAFT Facing Increasing Scrutiny

EU

(M

J/A

SK

)

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0

JetsTurboprops

Aircraft introduced during or after 1980 only

(Babikian, 2002)

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000

Stage Length (km)

Royal Commission on the Environment (2002)

the prospect of continuing rapid increases in air transport, particularly an increase in short haul flights…”

government should divert resources...encouragingand facilitating a modal shift from air to high-

“…deeply concerned at

“It is essential that the

speed rail.”

© 2003 Waitz 55

IMPACT OF NASA TECHNOLOGY SCENARIOS G

lob

al C

O2

Em

itte

d p

er Y

ear

Billion Kg Effect of Proposed Environmental CO2 Goals2000

1750

1500

1250

1000

750

500

250

0

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

No Improvement Beyond 1997 Technology 25% Reduction Introduced in 2007 50% Reduction Introduced in 2022 Zero CO2 Emission A/C Introduced in 2027 Zero CO2 Emission A/C Introduced in 2037

+340%

+140%

+230%

+40%

Change Relative to 1990:

Emission inventories

U.S. DOE reported fuel use

1990-5% Level

-20%

( - GA and Military Emissions based on Boeing forecast

- IPCC IS92a based ICAO demand model - No retrofit of technologies)

Kyoto Protocol Timing For Reductions

Year

J. E. Rohde, NASA 1999© 2003 Waitz 56

IMPACTS OF MISSION REQUIREMENTS (NOx & Noise)

• Range/payload ~ fuel efficiency (commercial and military) High pressures and– Thermal efficiency temperatures High NOx

– Propulsive efficiency velocity change Large mass flow with small

Low Noise

• Maneuverability (military) High energy conversion per

– High thrust-per-weight, unit volume (high small compact engine temperatures and

pressures)High NOx

• Supersonic flight (military) velocity change– Low drag, small compact

engine

Small mass flow with large

High Noise

© 2003 Waitz 57

HISTORICAL FLEET CRUISE EMISSIONS PER PASSENGER PER KILOMETER

1.0

Rel

ativ

e E

mis

sio

n /

Pas

s-km

0.5

0

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995

NOx

CO2,H2O

CO

HC

Year (DuBois, Boeing)

© 2003 Waitz 60

TECHNOLOGY AND EMISSIONS

• Improvements will not keep up with growth

• Aircraft typically have greater impact per unit of fuel burned

• “Solutions” for global climate will require unprecedented action (demand management/regulations, electric vehicles, contrail avoidance, etc.)

• Current understanding is that hydrogen makes problem worse

• High uncertainty relative to global impacts

• Engine efficiency improvements exacerbate NOx and contrails

• Significant improvements in structural efficiency, aero and operations are possible

– Improvements in these areas do not exacerbate other problems

© 2003 Waitz 61

SUMMARY

• Broad range of environmental impacts from aircraft

– Social costs of same order as industry profits

– Currently not internalized

– Current technology path and regulations not aligned with social costs

• Strong growth in demand

• Increasing public concern/regulatory stringency

• High uncertainty

• Many competing trades

– Environmental impacts

– Design, operations © 2003 Waitz 62

SELECTED REFERENCES

• Babikian, R., Lukachko, S. P. and Waitz, I. A. "Historical Fuel Efficiency Characteristics of Regional Aircraft from Technological, Operational, and Cost Perspectives,” Journal of Air Transport Management, Volume 8, No. 6, pp. 389-400, Nov. 2002

• Lee, J. J., Lukachko, S. P., Waitz, I. A., and Schafer, A., “Historical and Future Trends in Aircraft Performance, Cost and Emissions,” Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, Volume 26, 2001. (Available on Waitz web page)

• Waitz, I. A., Lukachko, S. P., and J. J. Lee, "Military Aviation and the Environment: Historical Trends and Comparison to Civil Aviation," AIAA-2003-2620, invited contribution to AIAA/ICAS International Air and Space Symposium and Exposition, Dayton, Ohio, July 14-17, 2003.

• Marks, D. H., et al., "Mobility 2001", World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Switzerland, 2001. (Available on Waitz web page)

• Miake-Lye, R.C., Waitz, I.A., Fahey, D.W., Kolb, C.E., Wesoky, H.L., and Wey, C.C., “Aviationand Climate Change,” Aerospace America, September, 2000. (Available on Waitz web page)

• Penner et al., United Nations Environment Programme, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Special Report on Aviation and the Global Atmosphere, 1999. (Summary for Policy Makers available on Waitz web page)

• RCEP, “The Environmental Effects of Civil Aircraft In Flight,” Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP), England, December, 2003

• Waitz web page: http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/www/people/iaw/bio.html

© 2003 Waitz 63

AVIATION & THE ENVIRONMENT

Documents

Transcript of AVIATION & THE ENVIRONMENT