Environmental Assessments Status

Presented to:ICAO Workshop: Aviation and Alternative Fuels

February 11, 2009Montreal, Canada

Lourdes MauriceCAAFI Environmental Team Lead and Federal Aviation

Administration Chief Scientific and Technical Advisor for Environment

Lourdes.Maurice@faa.gov

Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative

• CAAFI Seeks to Facilitate Introduction of Alternative Aviation Fuels to:– Secure a stable fuel supply– Reduce environmental impacts– Improve aircraft operations– Further research and analysis

Context

Assess Impact

CAAFI Environmental Panel Tasks

FAA

ATA

AIA ACI

R&D Panel

Environmental Panel Certification-Qualification Panel

Generate Ideas/Solutions

Generate Demand

Enable Supply

Business & Economics Panel

Quantify Emissions

Life Cycle Analyses

Impacts & Cost Benefit Analyses

Aircraft Emissions & Climate Change

Emissions

Adapted by J. Hileman from: Sequeira, Christopher J., An Assessment of the Health Implications of Aviation Emissions Regulations, S.M. thesis, Massachusetts Institute

of Technology, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2008.

Atmospheric Chemistry & Physics

SOx

NOx

Primary PM2.5

O3

CH4

CO2

H2OGlobal Climate

Change

CO2: 71%Water: 28%

CO, HC, NOx, SOx, Primary PM2.5: < 1%

(an extraordinarily simplified view)

Aircraft Emissions & Air Quality

Emissions

CO2: 71%Water: 28%

CO, HC, NOx, SOx, Primary PM2.5: < 1%

Population Exposure and Health Impacts

SOx

NOx

UHCCO

Secondary PM2.5

Ozone

Primary PM2.5

Atmospheric Chemistry & Physics

(an extraordinarily simplified view)

Adapted by J. Hileman from: Sequeira, Christopher J., An Assessment of the Health Implications of Aviation Emissions Regulations, S.M. thesis, Massachusetts Institute

of Technology, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2008.

Category 2009 2011 20132007 20152005

IndustrySASOL Rig Test

Quantify LTO emissions

Quantify Altitude emissions

Quantify infrastructure impacts

B-52Test Flight

AF Engine Test 2

NASA/ Industry FT Blend Rig Tests

(Level 3 - Environment Roadmap)PlannedDesired

NASA-Industry Biojet Rig Test

Comm. Engine Test Fuel 2

Comm. Engine Test Fuel 3

Comm. Engine Test Fuel 4

C130 Test

Characterize military GHE with FT fuels

FAA Parametric Studies

Altitude Test - if warranted

FT Comm. Engine

Impact analyses Impact

analyses Fuel 2

Impact analyses Fuel 3

Impact analyses Fuel 4Comm.

Equip test

Assessment of benefits of single fuel

Comm. Equip test Fuel 2

Comm. Equip test Fuel 3

Comm. Equip test Fuel 4

Fuels 2, 3, 4 etc. could be CTL, GTL, BTL via FT, other bio, etc. as defined by what fuel producers are likely to drive to

Category 2009 2011 20132007 20152005

Net environ. impacts

Compare GHG prdxn

Toxicology impacts

AF Tests

Test Fuel 2 Test Fuel 3 Test Fuel 4

FAA Scoping Study

FAA Scoping Study

Planned

Desired

If warranted heavy metal impact assessment

Heavy metal content assessment

SASOL Operational plant data

US Operational plant data

In-depth assessment

Review Other US and international data

Chinese Operational plant data

In-depth assessmentFuel 2

In-depth assessmentFuel 3

In-depth assessmentFuel 4

Operational Assessment

Operational Assessment Fuel 2

Operational Assessment Fuel 3

Operational Assessment Fuel 3

Air Canada H2 fuel cell GSE

Fuels 2, 3, 4 etc. could be CTL, GTL, BTL via FT, other bio, etc. as defined by what fuel producers are likely to drive to

(Level 3 - Environment Roadmap)

Quantify Environmental Impact- CAAFI Environmental Panel

ICAO/CAEPEngine Emissions

Certification

USAFB-52 FT Fuel

Emissions Qualification

High-Bypass Engine FT Fuel Emissions

Sponsor Life Cycle Emissions Studies

Boeing/GEBio-fuel Emissions

Engine Ground Test

Flight Demo

NASA/PWFT fuel Emissions Engine

Ground Test

PARTNER-RANDFeasibility Studies

Alternative Fuel Emissions Life Cycle

Study

Cost-benefit analyses

Dept of EnergyCO2 Sequestration Studies

Co-fired CTL/BTL Studies (NOBLIS/Princeton)

FAASupporting

Legislation for US Gov’t Funding

Sponsor Life Cycle Emissions

Studies

Emissions Measurements

Partnering with X-Prize on incentives

Sample Contributors to Activities

Quantifying LTO Emissions

-100%

-80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Percent F-T Fuel in Jet Fuel Blend

Perc

ent C

hang

e in

Prim

ary

Part

icul

ate

Mat

ter M

ass

T63 IdleT63 CruiseAverage TF33 IdleAverage TF33 Non-Idle

Measured reductions in primary PM in military gas turbine engines burning various alternative fuel blends (USAF)

y = 66.634x - 82.189R2 = 0.9342

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Engine Power Condition (%)

Perc

ent c

hang

e in

EIn

wrt

ba

selin

e JE

T A

1Results showing observed reductions in primary PM in a CFM56-7B engine burning a mixture of 50% F-T fuel and 50% Jet A-1 (PARTNER COE)

Emissions Life Cycle Analyses

Assessing uncertainties critical:– Key sources of uncertainties include feedstock properties, N2O emissions from nitrogen fertilizer use, land use change emissions, process efficiencies, allocation of co-product credits– Should use sensitivity analysis to address uncertainties– Should provide range of GHG emissions rather than a single value

Results from H.M. Wong S.M. Thesis (2008)

Sample Life Cycle Analyses (LCA)

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0

Biomass to F-T Fuel

Crude to Conventional Jet Fuel

Crude to ULS Jet Fuel

Coal to F-T Fuel (with carbon capture)

Oil Sands to Jet Fuel (surface)

Natural Gas to F-T Fuel

Oil Sands to Jet Fuel (in-situ)

Oil Shale to Jet Fuel

Palm Oils to Biojet

Coal to F-T Fuel (without carbon capture)

Soy Oil to Biojet

Life-cycle GHG Emissions Relative to Baseline Conventional Jet Fuel

In general, life-cycle emissions are not deterministic, “Point Values.” Instead, they are better defined as scenario-dependent ranges.

Potential for Biojet and BTL - Results from H.M. Wong S.M. Thesis (2008)

Enabling Carbon Neutral U.S. Aviation Growth

• Assessed potential for carbon neutral growth from 2006 to 2025.

• Analysis used biofuel life-cycle GHG emissions and yield per hectare.

• Circles show land area requirements for three existing and two hypothetical feedstocks.

• Soybean and palm requirements both exceed current production levels.

• Analysis looked at single feedstock solutions –practical approach is to consider multiple feedstock solutions.

• Need feedstocks with high yield and low life-cycle emissions that do not require arable land.

Note: Assumed no land use

change emissions with

all of the feedstocks.

Life Cycle Analyses (LCA) Conclusions

• Alternative aviation fuels from biomass offer substantial life-cycle GHG emissions reductions relative to conventional jet fuels

• Land use change impacts from the use of biomass feedstocks(particularly food crops) could potentially increase life-cycle GHG emissions

• Use of waste products and dedicated energy crops in the large-scale production of bio-jet fuel more feasible than food-based crops in terms of feedstock requirements

• Next generation biomass feedstocks with high oil yields offer promise

Next Steps for LCA

• Explore the use of any additional feedstocks that could reduce GHG emissions

• Examine overall sustainability of potential alternative jet fuelpathways to assess viability for large-scale production

• Conduct detailed, specific analysis of land use change impacts in the use of biomass feedstocks for alternative jet fuel production

• Develop an aviation-specific life-cycle analysis framework (including aircraft operation emissions analysis)

• Conduct multiple but coordinated analyses, engage stakeholders, peer review results

Aircraft operations produce

emissions

Emissions influence ambient

concentrations

Ambient concentrations

influence human health

Primary PM

Secondary PM

Fuel Sulfur Standard

NOxStandard

SNStandard

Ozone

HC Standard

SOx

NOx

VOCs

Health Incidences

Regulations affect aircraft technology

and operations

Primary PM

Impacts & Cost-Benefit Analyses (CBA)

• Yearly health costs from aviation in the USA: ~ $0.8 billion, with ~90% due to Particulate Matter (PM) exposure

• PM related to fuel sulfur dominates the PM related health cost (46% - 73%)

FOA3 Health Costs: $767 million

SOxAmmonium

Sulfate69%

NonvolatilePrimary PM

5%Organics vPM

6%

AmmoniumNitrate20%

Sulfates vPM0%

Aviation PM Impacts

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

2005

US$

x 1

09fuel cost increase: $0.04/gal

fuel cost increase: $0.07/gal

NOISE

LAQ CLIMATE

CONSUMERSURPLUS

PRODUCERSURPLUS

NETIMPACT

BET

TER

WO

RSE

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

2005

US$

x 1

09fuel cost increase: $0.04/gal

fuel cost increase: $0.07/gal

NOISE

LAQ CLIMATE

CONSUMERSURPLUS

PRODUCERSURPLUS

NETIMPACT

BET

TER

BET

TER

WO

RSE

WO

RSE

Illustrative Cost-benefit Analysis of Fuel DesulphurizationCOST DATA AFTER: Energy Information Administration, The Transition to Ultra-Low-Sulfur Diesel Fuel: Effects on Prices and Supply, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, SR/OIAF/2001-01, May, 2001.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Introduction of Cleaner-Burning Diesel Fuel Enables Advanced Pollution Control for Cars, Trucks and Buses, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, EPA420-F-06-064, October 2006. URL http://www.epa.gov/otaq/highway-diesel/regs/420f06064.htm

Illustrative Analyses of Low Sulfur Impacts

• Illustrative analyses show that U.S.-wide switch to alternative lower sulfur jet fuel would reduce annual health costs by ~$200 million and possibly be cost-beneficial, with uncertain climate impacts

• CAAFI sponsors/stakeholders plan to pursue a more detailed study to assess the environmental, safety, maintenance and cost impacts of reduced sulfur jet fuel

• Collaborating with Coordinating Research Council (CRC) – expect preliminary results by summer 2009

Next Steps for Low Sulfur CBA

• Alternative fuels exist that could both reduce lifecycle CO2and improve air quality

• Need to do life cycle GHG and costs and benefits very carefully – getting this right is critical to progress

• CAAFI environmental panel facilitating data collection and analyses to inform decisions

• CAAFI environmental panel is engaged in interagency LCA tools and rules team.

Summary

Questions?