FOR Greener Skies

Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation

Committee on Aeronautics Research and Technology for Environmental Compatibility

Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

National Research Council

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation FOR Greener Skies Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation Committee on Aeronautics Research and Technology for Environmental Compatibility Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C.

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration under Contract No. NASW 99037. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number: 0-309-08337-0 Available in limited supply from: Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board, HA-292, 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20418, (202) 334-2855. Additional copies available for sale from: National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055, (800)-624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area), http://www.nap.edu Cover artwork by Nila Rusnell Oakes. Stratus Composition, 1999, oil on canvas, 48” × 48”. Internet: http://www.nilaoakes.com Copyright 2002 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES National Academy of Sciences National Academy of Engineering Institute of Medicine National Research Council The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation COMMITTEE ON AERONAUTICS RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPATIBILITY JOHN A. DUTTON, Chair, Pennsylvania State University, University Park DONALD BAHR, NAE, GE Aircraft Engines (retired), Cincinnati, Ohio FRANK BERARDINO, GRA, Inc., Jenkintown, Pennsylvania BENJAMIN A. COSGROVE, NAE, Boeing Commercial Airplane Group (retired), Seattle, Washington RANDALL GUENSLER, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta (resigned, effective January 2001) S. MICHAEL HUDSON, Rolls-Royce North America Holdings (retired), Indianapolis, Indiana NICHOLAS P. KRULL, Federal Aviation Administration (retired), Tulsa, Oklahoma RICH NIEDZWIECKI, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (retired), Brunswick, Ohio AKKIHEBAL R. RAVISHANKARA, NAS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, Colorado BRADFORD STURTEVANT, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena (deceased) RAY VALEIKA, Delta Air Lines, Atlanta, Georgia IAN A. WAITZ, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board Liaison to the Committee ANTHONY J. BRODERICK, Aviation Safety Consultant, Catlett, Virginia Staff JENNIFER PINKERMAN, Study Director GEORGE LEVIN, Director, Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board ALAN ANGLEMAN, Senior Program Officer MARVIN WEEKS, Senior Project Assistant MARY LOU AQUILO, Senior Project Assistant/Financial Assistant

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ENGINEERING BOARD WILLIAM W. HOOVER, Chair, U.S. Air Force (retired), Williamsburg, Virginia A. DWIGHT ABBOTT, Aerospace Corporation, Los Angeles, California RUZENA K. BAJSCY, NAE, IOM, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia WILLIAM F. BALLHAUS, JR., The Aerospace Corporation, Los Angeles, California JAMES (MICKY) BLACKWELL, Lockheed Martin Corporation (retired), Marietta, Georgia ANTHONY J. BRODERICK, Aviation Safety Consultant, Catlett, Virginia DONALD L. CROMER, U.S. Air Force (retired), Lake Arrowhead, California ROBERT A. DAVIS, The Boeing Company (retired), Blaine, Washington JOSEPH FULLER, JR., Futron Corporation, Bethesda, Maryland RICHARD GOLASZEWSKI, GRA, Inc., Jenkintown, Pennsylvania JAMES M. GUYETTE, Rolls-Royce North America, Reston, Virginia FREDERICK H. HAUCK, AXA Space, Bethesda, Maryland JOHN L. JUNKINS, NAE, Texas A&M University, College Station JOHN K. LAUBER, Airbus Service Company, Miami Springs, Florida GEORGE K. MUELLNER, The Boeing Company, Seal Beach, California DAVA J. NEWMAN, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge JAMES G. O’CONNOR, NAE, Pratt & Whitney (retired), Coventry, Connecticut MALCOLM R. O’NEILL, Lockheed Martin Corporation, Bethesda, Maryland CYNTHIA SAMUELSON, Logistics Management Institute, McLean, Virginia WINSTON E. SCOTT, Florida State University, Tallahassee KATHRYN C. THORNTON, University of Virginia, Charlottesville ROBERT E. WHITEHEAD, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (retired), Henrico, North Carolina DIANNE WILEY, Boeing Phantom Works, Huntington Beach, California THOMAS L. WILLIAMS, Northrop Grumman, EL Segundo, California Staff GEORGE LEVIN, Director

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation Preface Each new generation of commercial aircraft produces less noise and fewer emissions per passenger-kilometer (or ton-kilometer of cargo) than the previous generation. However, the demand for air transportation services grows so quickly that total aircraft noise and emissions continue to increase. Meanwhile, federal, state, and local noise and air quality standards in the United States and overseas have become more stringent. It is becoming more difficult to reconcile public demand for inexpensive, easily accessible air transportation services with concurrent desires to reduce noise, improve local air quality, and protect the global environment against climate change and depletion of stratospheric ozone. This situation calls for federal leadership and strong action from industry and government. U.S. government, industry, and universities conduct research and develop technology that could help reduce aircraft noise and emissions—but only if the results are used to improve operational systems or standards. For example, the (now terminated) Advanced Subsonic Technology Program of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) generally brought new technology only to the point where a system, subsystem model, or prototype was demonstrated or could be validated in a relevant environment. Completing the maturation process—by fielding affordable, proven, commercially available systems for installation on new or modified aircraft—was left to industry and generally took place only if industry had an economic or regulatory incentive to make the necessary investment. In response to this situation, the Federal Aviation Administration, NASA, and the Environmental Protection Agency, asked the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board of the National Research Council to recommend research strategies and approaches that would further efforts to mitigate the environmental effects (i.e., noise and emissions) of aviation. The statement of task required the Committee on Aeronautics Research and Technology for Environmental Compatibility to assess whether existing research policies and programs are likely to foster the technological improvements needed to ensure that environmental constraints do not become a significant barrier to growth of the aviation sector. This assessment was required to answer the following questions: What lessons can be learned from previous U.S. research investments in environmental controls for the aviation sector? Where are the most attractive opportunities for research and technology investments to ensure that expected growth in the aviation sector will be consistent with environmental protection goals? What approach should the U.S. government use and how should it interact with the private sector and other research establishments (in the United States and overseas) to carry out governmental responsibilities for investing in technology for mitigating the environmental effects of aircraft noise and emissions? The goal of this assessment was to recommend a framework for government research policies and programs aimed at achieving technological change fast enough for commercial aviation to grow in an environmentally sustainable manner. The recommended approach should be consistent with agency roles and missions as defined in existing legislation. The focus of the study was on commercial aviation and did not include intermodal issues, such as how the air transportation system could be modified in concert with other elements of the total transportation system to reduce the overall environmental impact of transportation. The tragic attacks of September 11, 2001, on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon had a serious and immediate impact on the U.S. air transportation system. The long-term implications remain to be seen. This study is based on the expectation that the reduction in air travel following the attacks is a temporary perturbation of the historic trend of increasing demand for air travel. Thus, the current period of

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation reduced air travel does not solve the environmental challenges associated with aviation, although it may provide additional time to address those challenges. John A. Dutton, Chair Committee on Aeronautics Research and Technology for Environmental Compatibility

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation Acknowledgment of Reviewers This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the Report Review Committee of the National Research Council (NRC). The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Richard Anthes, University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Meyer Benzakein, NAE, General Electric Aircraft Engines Alexander H. Flax, NAE, Consultant William Galloway, NAE, Consultant Christopher Grant, Embry-Riddle University Michael Prather, University of California at Irvine Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Robert Frosch, NAE, Harvard University. Appointed by the NRC, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation Acknowledgment of Participants and Contributors The committee appreciates the assistance of the following individuals, who provided information to the committee at its information-gathering meetings. Scott Belcher, Air Transport Association of America Meyer (Mike) Benzakein, GE Aircraft Engines Larry Craig, The Boeing Company Jim DeLong, Research, Engineering, and Development Advisory Committee of the Federal Aviation Administration Charles Kolb, Aerodyne Research, Inc. Richard Marchi, Airports Council International – North America Cindy Newberg, Environmental Protection Agency Robert Pearce, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Joyce Penner, University of Michigan Ram Uppuluri, Environmental Defense Howard Wesoky, Federal Aviation Administration

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation Contents     EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   1 1   CONTEMPORARY REALITIES OF AVIATION, THE ECONOMY, AND THE ENVIRONMENT   7     Introduction   7     Energy Consumption and Its Consequences   8     Regulatory Goals   12     Industry Responses and Responsibilities   12     Supersonic Aircraft   13     Research Strategies   13     References   14 2   NOISE   15     Trends in Aviation Noise   15     Government Goals, Strategies, and Policies   23     References   29 3   EMISSIONS   30     Aircraft and Engine Technology   30     Atmospheric Aspects   33     References   38 4   ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS AND BENEFITS   39     Incentives   39     Costs of Noise and Emissions   40     Summary   41     References   41 5   A CALL FOR VIGOROUS FEDERAL LEADERSHIP   42     Contemporary Funding Patterns   42     Key Elements of a Research Strategy   44     Focusing on a National Strategy and a Federal Plan for Action   44     References   46     FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS   47     APPENDICES         A BIOGRAPHIES OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS   53     B ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS   56

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation Tables, Figures, and Boxes TABLES 1-1   U.S. Energy Consumption Fractions, 1999,   9 1-2   Estimated Time for the 50 Busiest U.S. Airports to Reach Capacity,   11 1-3   Perceived Priorities of Consumers and Industry,   12 1-4   NASA’s Goals for Reducing the Environmental Effects of Future Aircraft,   13 2-1   Effects of Noise on People,   18 2-2   Nongovernmental Organizations Devoted to Reducing Aviation Noise,   23 2-3   Goals, Objectives, and Approaches for Elements of NASA’s Quiet Aircraft Technology Program,   27 3-1   Typical Aircraft Turbine Engine Exhaust Gas Composition at Cruise Operating Conditions,   33 3-2   Global, Regional, and Local Effects of Aircraft Emissions,   34 5-1   Comparison of Federal Expenditures for Noise Abatement (by the FAA) with Expenditures for Noise and Emissions Research and Technology (by the FAA and NASA),   43 FIGURES ES-1   Historical trends in aircraft noise compared with NASA’s noise goals,   3 ES-2   Decadal trends for demand, efficiency, and fuel usage,   4 1-1   Environmental issues that most concern officials at the 50 busiest U.S. airports,   8 1-2   Sources of energy in the United States,   9 1-3   Decadal trends for demand, efficiency, and fuel usage,   10 1-4   Effects of demand (in terms of revenue-passenger-kilometers) on the production of NOx and CO2 and on fuel consumption,   11 2-1   Trends in aircraft noise levels: effective perceived noise level during takeoff for aircraft at maximum takeoff weight as a function of certification date,   17 2-2   Extent of high-noise areas around San Francisco International Airport, 1998-1999,   19 2-3   Estimated trends in number of people affected by aircraft noise in the United States,   20 2-4   Historical growth in mobility provided by U.S. commercial aviation,   21

OCR for page R1
For Greener Skies: Reducing Environmental Impacts of Aviation 2-5   Trends in aircraft noise regulation: Number of airports worldwide imposing various constraints and charges as a function of time,   22 2-6   NASA technology readiness levels,   24 2-7   Federal investments to reduce source noise,   24 2-8   Federal investments in noise abatement,   25 2-9   Ratio of federal funds spent on local noise abatement projects to funds spent by the FAA and NASA on noise research and technology,   25 2-10   Historical trends in aircraft noise compared with NASA’s noise goals,   26 2-11   Changes in the composition of the commercial fleet, 1994 to 2011,   28 3-1   Funding for emissions research,   32 3-2   Allocations of NASA’s emissions research funding,   32 3-3   Radiative forcing caused by the global fleet of commercial subsonic aircraft as of 1992,   37 5-1   Comparison of federal expenditures for noise abatement (by the FAA) with expenditures for noise and emissions research and technology (by the FAA and NASA),   43 BOXES 1-1   Federal Responsibilities,   8 2-1   Example of Delays in Runway Expansion Due in Part to Aviation Noise,   16 2-2   Examples of Flight Delays and Cancellations Directly Caused by Aircraft NoiseRestrictions,   16 2-3   Aviation Noise Challenges,   19