14 200 km is a little further than London to Cape Town 10 000 km and London to Los Angeles 9000km, s

1
(No Transcript)
2
(No Transcript)
3

• 14 200 km is a little further than London to Cape
  Town (10 000 km) and London to Los Angeles
  (9000km), so lets
• scale down the distance to 10 000 km
• assume the plane is only 80 full
• Instead of 33 kW/h per day, we get
• 33 X (10 000/14 200) x (100/80) 30 kWh /
  day
• Lets make clear what this means.
• Flying once per year has an energy cost slightly
  bigger than
• leaving a 1 kW electric fire on, non-stop, 24
  hours a day, all year (24 kWh/d)
• but only 25 less than
• driving a car 15 miles to work and back each
  day for a year (40 kWh/d)
• Remember the energy cost of preparing the fuel
  and maintaining the aircraft

4
Technical Questions (Chapter C)
would air travel consume significantly less
energy if we travelled in slower planes? no
in contrast to wheeled vehicles, which can get
more efficient the slower they go, planes are
already almost as energy-efficient as they could
possibly be. Planes unavoidably have to use
energy for two reasons they have to throw air
down in order to stay up, and they need energy to
overcome air resistance. No redesign of a plane
is going to radically improve its efficiency. A
10 improvement? Yes, possible. A doubling of
efficiency? Id eat my complimentary socks.
5
No. The comfortably greener Bombardier Q400
NextGen, is the the most technologically
advanced turboprop in the world, according to
its manufacturers
6
The Q400 NextGen uses 3.81 liters per 100
passenger-km (at a cruising speed of 667 km/h),
which is an energy cost of 38 kWh per 100 p-km.
A full 747 has an energy cost of 42 kWh per 100
p-km. So both planes are twice as
fuel-efficient as a single-occupancy car (33
mpg). How so? Recall that 1 car driven per day
(30 miles 50 km) takes 40 kWh per person per
day 40 kWh x 100/50 80 kWh per 100 p-km
7
Is flying extra-bad for climate change in some
way? Yes, thats the experts view, though
uncertainty remains about this topic 3fbufz.
Flying creates other greenhouse gases in
addition to CO2, such as water and ozone, and
indirect greenhouse gases, such as nitrous
oxides. If you want to estimate your carbon
footprint in tons of CO2 - equivalent, then you
should take the actual CO2 emissions of your
flights and bump them up two- or three-fold.
This books diagrams dont include that
multiplier because here we are focusing on our
energy balance sheet.
8
The fine print (notes, p. 36) Short-haul flights
In 2007, Ryanair, Europes greenest
airline, delivered transportation at a cost of
37 kWh per 100 p-km 3exmgv. This means that
flying across Europe with Ryanair has much the
same energy cost as having all the passengers
drive to their destination in cars, two to a car.

St. Louis to New York is 1400 km St. Louis to
Miami is 1698 km. So a round-trip to NY has an
energy cost of 1000 kWh, and a round-trip to
Miami costs 1200 kWh. If you pop over from
St. Louis to NY and Miami once per year, your
average power consumption is 6.3 kWh/d with the
greenest airline, and perhaps 12 kWh/d with a
less green one.
9
The fine print (notes, p. 35) Frequent flyer miles
To get a silver frequent flyer card from an
intercontinental airline, it seems one must fly
around 25 000 miles per year in economy class.
Thats about 60 kWh per day, if we scale up the
opening numbers from this chapter and assume
planes are 80 full.
10
The fine print (notes, p. 35) Other comparisons
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
yrnmum a full 747-400 travelling 10 000 km
with low-density seating (262 seats) has an
energy consumption of 50 kWh per 100 p-km. In a
high-density seating configuration (568 seats)
and travelling 4000 km, the same plane has an
energy consumption of 22 kWh per 100 p-km. A
short-haul Tupolev-154 travelling 2235 km with
70 of its 164 seats occupied consumes 80 kWh
per 100 p-km.
11
The fine print (notes, p. 35) No redesign of a
plane is going to radically improve its
efficiency.
The Advisory Council for Aerospace Research in
Europe (ACARE) target is for an overall 50
reduction in fuel burned per passenger-km by
2020 (relative to a 2000 baseline), with 1520
improvement expected in engine efficiency. As
of 2006, Rolls Royce is half way to this engine
target 36w5gz. Dennis Bushnell, chief
scientist at NASAs Langley Research Center
There is not much left to gain except by the
glacial accretion of a per cent here and there
over long time periods. (New Scientist, 24
February 2007, page 33.) The radically reshaped
Silent Aircraft silentaircraft.org/sax40, if
it were built, is predicted to be 16 more
efficient than a conventional-shaped plane
(Nickol, 2008).
12
Concept design of an ultra low noise, fuel
efficient aircraft The concept aircraft SAX-40
(Silent Aircraft eXperimental) is a result of an
iterative design process (SAX-01 to SAX-40) to
achieve low noise and improved fuel burn. We
predict 149 passenger-miles per UK gallon of
fuel (compared with about 120 for the best
current aircraft in this range and size). This
is equivalent to the Toyota Prius Hybrid car
carrying two passengers. A noise of 63 dBA
outside airport perimeter. This is some 25dB
quieter than current aircraft.
13
Summary of transportation
14
The 10 greenest (US) airlines fly friendlier
skies By Ayana Meade Posted Wed Jun 10, 2009
642am PDT More from The Daily Green News
blog Flying the friendly skies has never been
particularly earth-friendly, although new airline
rankings from Greenopia help make a step in a
greener direction.                          
By some estimates air travel accounts for 11 of
greenhouse gas emissions. Greenopia's newly
released guide, which ranks the top 10 commercial
airlines operating domestic flights across
America according to their efforts to reduce
environmental harm. According to the guide,
Virgin, Continental, and Horizon are the top
three airlines making an effort to reduce their
drag on the earth. Both Virgin and Continental
have fairly new fleets, which tend to be more
fuel-efficient, and have completed flights using
biofuels. They also offer carbon-offset
services, and Virgin even serves fair-trade
coffee.
15

• Horizon has one of the most comprehensive
  recycling programs in the industry and
  incorporates some green business design in its
  offices.
• Popular airlines Delta and American came in at
  seventh and eighth respectively, largely due to
  their older, less fuel-efficient fleets.
• Criteria include fleet age, fuel consumption
  practices, carbon offsets, green building design,
  recycling programs, and organic, local, and
  sustainable food items available on flights.
• "It's a dilemma," says Greenopia founder and CEO
  Gay Browne. "People are going to travel. Whatever
  method they chose will impact the planet. Our
  readers want to know how to get to their
  destination with the smallest environmental
  footprint, especially if they are boarding a
  jumbo jet. We appreciate those airlines like
  Virgin and Continental "
• The top 10 are below
• Virgin America
• Continental
• Horizon
• JetBlue
• Southwest
• Northwest
• Delta
• American
• United
• US Airways

16
Europe Leads the Way in Greener Airlines The
airline industry will be the first in the U.S. to
face a cap on its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,
as the European Union readies a list of airlines
it will regulate under its cap-and-trade system
for carbon dioxide, reports the New York Times.
More than 700 airlines registered in the U.S.
are on the preliminary list, though smaller
carriers will likely be dropped. All
international flights landing in the European
Union will have to meet the regulations starting
in 2012, with total aviation emissions capped at
97 percent of the baseline, which will fall to 95
percent in 2013, reports the New York Times.
Fifteen percent of the CO2 allowances will be
auctioned, the remainder are free
permits. Airlines facing carbon shortfalls will
be able to purchase additional permits from the
European market or invest in clean development
mechanisms, according to the newspaper. Andreas
Arvanitakis, an analyst at the carbon market
monitor Point Carbon, said in the article that
the overall cost to the industry could be about
1.1 billion.
17
(No Transcript)