Preparing Your Airport for Electric Aircraft and Hydrogen Technologies (2022)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

46 C H A P T E R 6 6.1 Federal Airport Policies Federal Aviation Administration The FAA is the federal agency responsible for civil aviation regulations and controls in the United States. The agency is under the authority of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). Officially created in 1958, the FAA regulate all aspects of civil aviation, including aircraft manufacturers, airlines, airport operators, ground handlers, etc. Electric aircraft will impact major federal policies and missions carried out by the FAA: • Certification: The FAA is empowered to deliver certification of new aircraft, equipment, airline, pilots, and airports. All regulations are defined in Title 14 CFR Chapter 1. • Airport Planning and Funding: The FAA regulates and approves airport planning projects through documents called the Airport Master Plan and the Airport Layout Plan (ALP). In addition, the FAA funds major airport projects through programs, such as the AIP or the PFC. • Safety and Design: The FAA regulates airport safety, inspections, and standards for airport design, construction, and operation, and it takes part in the international harmonization of airport standards. • Environment: The FAA is responsible for establishing programs to control aircraft noise and other environmental effects of civil aviation. Aircraft Certification There are three aircraft types of certifications delivered by the FAA: Type Certificate (TC), Supplemental Type Certificate (STC), and Experimental Category. These three certifications are defined in Table 7. In addition, variants of existing aircraft have been retrofitted with electrified propulsion systems and have provided a growing number of demonstration flights under the Experimental Category. Note: In 2020, the Pipistrel Velis Electro was the first fully electric aircraft to receive a TC, which was delivered by EASA in the European Union. Because several aircraft manufacturers announced their business models on converting and adapting existing airframes to electric aircraft, the definition of major alteration should be understood by the stakeholders. Per 14 CFR Part 43 Appendix A: it is an alteration not listed in the aircraft, aircraft engine, or propeller specifications that might appreciably affect weight, balance, structural strength, performance, powerplant operation, flight characteristics, or other Perspectives on Federal and State Policies

Perspectives on Federal and State Policies 47   qualities affecting airworthiness or that is not done according to accepted practices or cannot be done by elementary operations. Depending on the type of aircraft, the airworthiness authorities, including the FAA, have established different regulations. For airplanes, two distinguished categories are defined by the FAA based on their MTOW: • Normal Category Airplane: MTOW of 12,500 pounds or less. • Transport Category Airplane: MTOW over 12,500 pounds. Table 8 summarizes the major policies and equivalent standards of the EASA and the ICAO regarding airworthiness standards. Advisory Circulars Advisory circulars (ACs) provide procedural guidance for the aviation industry to comply with FAA regulations and grant requirements. Updates to ACs may be required as electric aircraft are introduced across the industry in more significant numbers. Table 9 presents a selection of ACs that planners should consider when integrating future electric aircraft into airports and aviation systems. Definition Title 14 Code of FederalRegulations Type Certificate (TC) Type certification is the approval of the design of the aircraft and all component parts (including propellers, engines, control stations, etc.). It signifies the design is in compliance with applicable airworthiness, noise, fuel venting, and exhaust emissions standards. 14 CFR Part 21 Subpart B Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) An STC is a TC issued when an applicant has received FAA approval to modify an aeronautical product from its original design. The STC, which incorporates by reference the related TC, approves not only the modification but also how that modification affects the original design. 14 CFR Part 21 Subpart E Experimental Category A special airworthiness certificate in the experimental category is issued to operate an aircraft that does not have a TC or does not conform to its TC and is in a condition for safe operation. Additionally, this certificate is issued to operate a primary category kit-built aircraft that was assembled without the supervision and quality control of the production certificate holder. Special airworthiness certificates may be issued in the experimental category for the following purposes: • Research and development • Showing compliance with regulations • Crew training • Exhibition • Air racing • Market surveys • Operating amateur-built, kit-built, or light-sport aircraft • Special Airworthiness Certificate, Experimental Category for UAS and Optionally Piloted Aircraft 14 CFR Part 21 Subpart H Table 7. Types of certifications delivered by the FAA.

FAA EASA ICAO 14 CFR Part 23 – Airworthiness Standards: Normal Category Airplanes CS-23 – Normal, Utility, Aerobatic, and Commuter Aeroplanes Annex 8 Part V – Small Aeroplanes: Aeroplanes over 750 kg but not exceeding 5,700 kg for which application for certification was submitted on or after December 13, 2007 14 CFR Part 25 – Airworthiness Standards: Transport Category Airplanes CS-25 – Large Aeroplanes Annex 8 Part III – Large Aeroplanes 14 CFR Part 27 – Airworthiness Standards: Normal Category Rotorcraft CS-27 – Small Rotorcraft - 14 CFR Part 29 – Airworthiness Standards: Transport Category Rotorcraft CS-29 – Large Rotorcraft Annex 8 Part IV – Helicopters 14 CFR Part 31 – Airworthiness Standards: Manned Free Balloons CS-31GB/CS-31HB – Gas Balloons/Hot Air Balloons - 14 CFR Part 33 – Airworthiness Standards: Engines CS-E – Engines and SC E- 19 on Electric/Hybrid Propulsion System Annex 8 Part VI – Engines 14 CFR Part 35 – Airworthiness Standards: Propellers CS-P – Propellers Annex 8 Part VII – Propellers Table 8. Policies on airworthiness. AC Title Electric Aircraft Considerations AC 150/5020-1 – Noise Control and Compatibility Planning for Airports Noise control and compatibility planning reduce existing noncompatible land uses and prevent future noncompatible land uses around airports. Federal Aviation Regulation 14 CFR Part 150, “Airport Noise Compatibility Planning,” which implements portions of Title I of the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 guides noise compatibility planning efforts. 14 CFR Part 150 sets a standard metric for measuring noise exposure, or the day-night average sound level (DNL) and establishes a voluntary program governing the development of airport noise exposure maps and noise compatibility programs. Electric Aircraft: At this stage, noise emissions of electric aircraft will be significantly lower than current aircraft. Their contributions to the noise environment should be captured and with NextGen program, new flight paths could be created. AC 150/5060-5 – Airport Capacity and Delay Airport capacity and aircraft delay depends on fleet mix and air traffic control practices and are specific to each airport. Airport planners and designers calculate airport capacity and aircraft delay based on typical hourly demand expected to occur on a weekly basis. Calculations depend on a variety of inputs, including aircraft mix, number, and type of gates, gate mix, and gate occupancy times, among other inputs. Electric Aircraft: The main items that will be impacted by electric aircraft is the fleet mix, which will affect the airport capacity. AC 150/5070-6B – Airport Master Plans Long-term airport development and planning is governed by individual airport master plans. Master plans are intended to develop airports safely and efficiently by looking toward the future to dictate development and planning needs. Master plan studies include environmental considerations, facility requirements, ALPs, facilities implementation plans, and financial feasibility analyses, among other components. They require an inventory of existing conditions, including utility infrastructure and demands such as power needs, to inform quantification of future utility loads. ALPs are a product of the Master Plan Update process that show existing and future airport facilities, requiring approval by the FAA to receive federal funding. Electric Aircraft: The Master Planning Update process should consider future electricity needs associated with electric aircraft, including both aviation facility requirements and aircraft-specific power supply requirements. Updates to airport layout plans may be required to integrate infrastructure changes. As part of this report, an airport electric demand Assessment Tool is provided, and may help planners to develop the facility requirements regarding the number of electric aircraft chargers. Table 9. FAA advisory circulars and electric aircraft impact assessment.

Perspectives on Federal and State Policies 49   AC Title Electric Aircraft Considerations AC 36-1H – Noise Levels for U.S. Certificated and Foreign Aircraft Noise level data for certificated aircraft categorizes aircraft into various “stages.” Noise certification ensures that the latest available noise reduction technology, deemed safe and airworthy, is included in aircraft design to reduce noise impacts on communities. Electric Aircraft: Noise level data for future certificated electric aircraft would need to be incorporated into this guidance. AC 150/5070-7 – The Airport System Planning Process Airport system planning assesses the performance and interaction of an aviation system, including the interrelationship of airports within the system. It considers state and regional goals related to transportation, land use, and the environment. Elements of the process intended to identify how the aviation system can meet existing and future demand. Electric Aircraft: Integration of electric aviation into airport system planning processes provides an important consideration for future studies to enable effective use of federal and local aviation resources. AC 150/5300- 13A – Airport Design Airport design standards ensure a safe, efficient, and economically sound U.S. airport system. Airports, including both airside and landside infrastructure, should be designed to accommodate the range of size and performance characteristics of aircraft anticipated for use at airports and their fueling/charging needs. Electric Aircraft: Given the current trends of electric aircraft, there will not be any major impacts on design standards, but they should be considered in the future, when larger commercial electric aircraft will be in service. AC 150/5325-4B – Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design Determining recommended runway lengths relies on a five-step process. The first step involves identifying the critical design airplanes that will make regular use of the runway for a planning period of at least five years. Step two requires determining which airplanes need the longest runway length based on certificated maximum takeoff weight (MTOW). Small airplanes with MTOW of 12,500 pounds or less are categorized based on approach speeds and passenger seating. The following three steps result in obtaining a recommended runway length based on the prior inputs. Electric Aircraft: According to electric aircraft manufacturers, electric aircraft will be more performant than conventional aircraft, and will required less runway length. Table 9. (Continued). Federal Grant Programs Several federal grant programs exist to encourage industry-wide implementation of sustain- able technologies and measures at airports in the United States: • The Airport Improvement Program (AIP) is the main federal grant for the planning and development of public-use airports that are included in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS). Eligibility criteria are defined by the U.S. Congress. Projects eligible to these grants shall include improvements related to enhancing airport safety, capacity, security, and environmental concerns. To date, electric aircraft infrastructure and equipment are not eligible for AIP funding. • The Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) is a federal program allowing commercial airports to tax passengers up to $4.5 per flight segment to fund projects enhancing safety, security, capacity, noise reduction, or air carrier competition. Electric aircraft charging infrastructure could fall under the eligibility of this program. • The Airport Zero-Emissions Vehicle and Infrastructure Pilot Program intends to improve airport air quality and facilitate the implementation of zero-emission vehicles at airports. The program allows airports that are eligible for AIP grants to purchase zero-emissions vehicles and the infrastructure required to operate them. • The Voluntary Airport Low Emissions (VALE) Program improves airport air quality and provides air quality credits for future airport development. Created in 2004, VALE helps

50 Preparing Your Airport for Electric Aircraft and Hydrogen Technologies airport sponsors meet their state-related air quality responsibilities under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The program has funded projects such as electric shuttle buses, ground power units (GPUs), and preconditioned air units to support gate electrification, charging stations for eGSE, and solar panels to support airport energy flows. Under this program, airport sponsors can use AIP funds and PFCs to finance low-emission vehicles, refueling and recharging stations, gate electrification, and other airport air quality improvements. • The Continuous Lower Energy, Emissions, and Noise (CLEEN) Program was created by the FAA to accelerate the development of new aircraft and engine technologies in an envi- ronmental effort. Because environmental protection is an objective of the NextGen strategy, CLEEN is key element to achieve it. • The Green Revolving Funds (GRFs) are internal investments to finance parties within an organization for implementing energy efficiency, renewable energy, and other sustainability projects that generate cost savings. Well-utilized by institutions such as states and universities, airports can receive funding toward sustainability from grants and subsidies or rebates from utility providers. It is likely that the introduction of electric aviation would have a growing impact on tax rev- enues from fuel sales. Those effects that occur would likely stem from the long-term growth of electric and hybrid-electric aviation and the corresponding decrease in fuel consumption and purchases in the very long term (beyond 2040). While most funding for the AATF comes from passenger fees, revenue from aviation fuel taxes made up 4 percent of the AATF’s total excise tax revenue in 2018. Reductions in fuel tax, while not significant at the beginning, could affect funding availability for some projects or lead to increases in passenger fees to compensate, which could adversely affect aviation ridership. Congressional Awareness on Policy Needs The U.S. Congress has started exploring the policy needs of the new airport and airspace users with hearings gathering industry representatives. On May 8, 2019, the U.S. Senate Com- mittee on Commerce, Science & Transportation convened a hearing titled, “New Entrants in the National Airspace: Policy, Technology, and Security Issues for Congress.” The hearing examined the current state of our NAS, the status of integration efforts by the FAA for new entrants into the NAS, and the policy, technology, and security challenges that remain. This hearing was followed by another one held on April 27, 2021, on “The Leading Edge: Innovation in U.S. Aerospace.” Proposals for an Advanced Air Mobility Coordination and Leadership Act (H.R.1339 and S.516—117th Congress) were introduced into Congress in February and March 2021. The purpose of these bills is to establish a working group under the leadership of the U.S. Department of Transportation to “plan for and coordinate efforts related to the physical and digital security, safety, infrastructure, and Federal investment necessary for maturation of the AAM ecosystem in the United States.” The working group would be comprised of representatives of federal departments and agen- cies including FAA, NASA, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Energy, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Agriculture, and Department of Labor. It would engage with aviation stakeholders, including electric utilities, energy providers, and market operators. Per the S.516 bill, the working group will prepare and submit to Congress a report featuring an AAM National Strategy that includes (1) recommendations regarding the safety, security,

Perspectives on Federal and State Policies 51   infrastructure, air traffic concepts, and other federal investment or actions necessary to support the evolution of early AAM to higher levels of activity and societal benefit, and (2) a comprehensive plan detailing the roles and responsibilities of each federal department and agency necessary to facilitate implementing these recommendations. 6.2 Environmental Issues Environmental Impacts and Considerations of Electric Aircraft The aviation industry continues to seek innovative ways to improve sustainability by decreasing the environmental impacts of its operations. Electric aviation provides benefits such as reduced noise and emissions. Although the comparison to conventional aircraft would be preferable to quantify the benefits of electric aircraft, it is difficult at this point to quantify the level of noise and emissions reductions possible when electric aircraft are not yet certified. Since noise and air quality impacts are often viewed as a limiting factor for airport operations growth, these are important considerations when planning for the future of electric aviation, as well as fuel cell battery storage and disposal. Noise Aircraft noise has multiple components: • The aerodynamic noise is generated by the air flowing around the aircraft. This noise compo- nent increases with the airspeed and decreases with the aerodynamic performance of the air- craft. During the approach and landing, flaps and landing gear create additional noise when extended. Propellers generate aerodynamic noise as well. This is why the aerodynamic noise of helicopters and open-rotor aircraft (e.g., propfan) can be significant even at low speed due to the rotation of the blades. • Engines generate noise with the movement of internal parts, combustion of fuel, and—on the turbo and jet engines only—the expulsion of air at high speed. The level of noise generated by the engines can be roughly linked to the thrust. Consequently, at and around airports, takeoff is the phase of the flight where the engine noise is at its highest. Generally speaking, electric engines are quieter compared to combustion fuel engines due to their mechanical characteristics and the absence of the combustion process (with the exception of hybrid propulsion systems). Some research has attempted to quantify the noise reduction of fully electric aircraft. It is theorized that propulsion noise, the major noise source on takeoff, will be lessened with electric propulsors when compared to turbofans on modern jet aircraft. This would result in a smaller noise footprint near airports as takeoff noise would be reduced. As arrival noise is dominated by noise generated from the airframe rather than propulsion, any reductions in arrival noise would likely be less significant than takeoff noise reductions and would be achieved through other technologies or changes in flight. In addition, the tone and pitch of the noise generated by electric aircraft could change and even reduce. Although the noise is reduced, human percep- tions could be more obtrusive and degrade noise comfort. Future studies will have to confirm these potential impacts and should be considered in noise analysis studies, as well as in public education programs. Recent noise measurements performed by magniX on a DHC-2 Beaver retrofitted with an electric powertrain (eBeaver) shows a significant reduction during all phases of the flight (Figure 19). Through the NAS modernization program named NextGen, the FAA is implementing new Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) routes and procedures. These procedures include Area

52 Preparing Your Airport for Electric Aircraft and Hydrogen Technologies Navigation (RNAV) and Required Navigation Performance to provide for more efficient design of airspace and procedures which collectively result in improved safety, capacity, pre- dictability, and operational efficiency. PBN procedures will increase the accuracy and reli- ability of lateral and vertical paths, and indirectly reduce the noise footprint on the ground. Moreover, with more accurate flight trajectories, new flight tracks can be designed to avoid noise-sensitive areas. The implementation of such PBN procedures could be facilitated by electric aircraft and will give the airport more option and flexibility to reduce the airport noise footprint without impacting its capacity. Figure 20 shows results from a case study at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL). Air Quality Emissions The transition from conventional thermic-to-electric or hybrid aircraft is expected to signifi- cantly reduce direct GHG emissions as fossil fuel combustion is eliminated (i.e., jet fuel and/or aviation gas). In the case of hybrid-electric aircraft, GHG emissions reductions will vary as they depend on the proportion of the flight that is powered by electricity versus fossil fuel turbines. Compared to conventional aircraft, fully electric aircraft emit few or none of the pollutants that adversely affect local air quality. In particular, NOx and fine particulate matter will be greatly reduced due to the reduction in fossil fuel combustion. Fully electric or hybrid-electric aircraft could significantly reduce the emission of pollutants and GHGs in areas surrounding airports. Aircraft powered by a traditional jet turbine or turbo- prop engines can produce large amounts of pollutants such as NOx, volatile organic compounds (VOC), sulfur dioxides (SOx), and GHGs. Aircraft powered by piston propeller engines emit larger amounts of CO than jet turbine or turboprop aircraft. To quantify the potential emis- sions reductions using electric aircraft, the FAA Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT) version 3c was used to estimate potential emission reductions per landing/takeoff cycle of three 78 94 83 95 56 78.2 59.9 69.4 99 118 100 104 72.6 99 81.6 85.2 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Taxi, eBeaver Taxi, Standard Beaver Takeoff, eBeaver Takeoff, Standard Beaver Cruise, eBeaver Cruise, Standard Beaver Landing, eBeaver Landing, Standard Beaver So un d le ve l ( dB A ) eBeaver Peak eBeaver Average Standard Beaver Peak Standard Beaver Average Source: magniX. Figure 19. Noise comparisons between the DHC-2 Beaver and retrofitted magniX eBeaver.

Perspectives on Federal and State Policies 53   representatives of fuel-powered aircraft. The AEDT is a tool developed by the FAA used to model aircraft noise, emissions, and fuel burn and is the current standard model for all civil aviation noise and air quality analyses in the United States. Three representative aircraft were chosen as proxies to experimental electric aircraft currently in development. To keep the analysis simple, the AEDT run assumes fully electric aircraft potential emissions reductions and does not include a hybrid e-aircraft, which can vary based on the proportion of when fossil fuel and battery chargers would be used. This modeling assumed aircraft used basic straight-in straight-out tracks and AEDT default taxi in and out times at a generic medium-sized hub type airport. Only emissions below a mixing height of 3,000 feet above sea level are consid- ered in this analysis. Potential emissions reductions in pounds per landing/takeoff (simplified as pounds per flight or PPF) are shown in Table 10. Although in-flight emissions are expected to be reduced, electricity generated and consumed for charging infrastructure represents a likely increase in indirect Scope 2 emissions. Lease agreements may need to include electricity metering so that tenants can properly compensate BEFORE RNAV AFTER RNAV Figure 20. Change in departure trajectories in following PBN implementation at ATL. Case Study: Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL) PBN Implementation. Since 2010, ATL has implemented RNAV procedures for departures with the following benefits: • Increase the capacity by 9–12 departures per hour by creating more departure paths and exit points to the enroute airspace. • Increase the throughput. • Save annually approximately $30 million. Representative Aircraft Type Fuel Usage (pounds) NOx (PPF) VOC (PPF) CO (PPF) PM (PPF) SOx (PPF) CO2 (PPF) De Havilland Canada Dash 8 115.3 1.3 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.1 363.9 Cessna 208 Caravan 58.6 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 185.0 Cessna 172 15.8 0.1 0.1 16.5 0.0 0.0 49.7 Table 10. Potential emissions reductions by aircraft in tons per flight.

54 Preparing Your Airport for Electric Aircraft and Hydrogen Technologies for the amount of electricity that is used. Scope 2 emissions factors vary based on geography and the electric generation (i.e., utility) fleet mix. In addition, the construction of the charging facilities will also increase direct GHG emissions and must be considered in air quality assessments. Hazardous Materials Electric aircraft batteries raise questions regarding their storage and disposal on airport property. Airports and stakeholders should be aware of the risks associated with storing such materials on their property and how to manage them properly. The risk of leakage should also be a concern for airports, and provisions should be made on how to handle such incidents in the Airport Emergency Plan. Hydrogen fuel cells could also be problematic from an environmental point of view. Cur- rently, there are two ways of transporting gaseous hydrogen: • By truck in small, pressurized containers or in high-pressure tube trailers. • By pipeline: conventional pipeline materials have been successfully used for hydrogen up to 1,400 psi, and existing pipelines can be converted to hydrogen service with some limits on stress and pressure. Either way, the risks of leakage and corrosivity should be a primary concern. The safety of storing hydrogen at the airport should also be considered. Harvard Environ- ment, Health, and Safety Department developed a hydrogen fact sheet that lists some of the safety precautions to take when storing hydrogen. It states that, to store pressurized hydrogen containers: • Store the containers with adequate ventilation in a warehouse. • Temperature of the warehouse should not exceed 125°F (52°C). • Secure hydrogen containers and tanks to prevent falling or being knocked over. • Use of flash arrestor on tanks is recommended. • Store full and empty cylinders separately. • Building should be equipped with an automatic sprinkler or deluge system in case of fire. Environmental Regulations and Policies The following section describes environmental regulations and policies that may have an impact on the integration of electric aircraft at airports and should be considered when planning for the introduction of these aircraft in the future. National Environmental Policy Act The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to evaluate the environmental impacts of their actions and consider alternatives to mitigate potential impacts. For all new projects at airports that require federal action, a NEPA review must be conducted. Airport development projects, ALP changes, and operational changes trigger NEPA review. Federal actions can include the issuance of a federal permit or approval or the granting of federal funds. FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,” describes the envi- ronmental analyses and documentation requirements for complying with NEPA and appli- cable special purpose laws such as the CAA for aviation projects. The FAA Order 1050.1F Desk Reference gives specific technical direction for environmental analyses, including analyses of potential project air quality, climate, and noise and noise-compatible land-use impacts. In addition, FAA Order 5050.4B, “NEPA Implementing Instructions for Airport Actions,” gives added guidance for projects under the scope of the FAA’s Office of Airports.

Perspectives on Federal and State Policies 55   Infrastructure projects required to support the operation of electric aircraft, such as upgrading electrical capacity or adding charging capabilities that require FAA approval of an updated ALP, or use of federal funds, for example, would require a NEPA review. The FAA NEPA orders and accompanying desk references are periodically updated and may include guidance specific to electric aircraft in the future. Noise The FAA, in coordination with individual airports and local governments, regulates airport and aircraft noise. The FAA owns and controls national airspace, including the operation of aircraft on the airport and in the air, and regulates maximum noise levels that aircraft can emit through noise certification standards codified in 14 CFR Part 36, “Noise Standards: Aircraft Type and Airworthiness Certification.” The FAA, in collaboration with airframe/ engine manufacturers, has greatly reduced aircraft noise over time through improvements to aircraft design and technology. As of November 2020, no electric aircraft have received a noise certification. Additionally, the FAA issues grant funding, ensures compliance with NEPA, and implements 14 CFR Part 150 regulations. As described above, FAA Order 1050.1F, the accompanying Desk Reference, and Order 5050.1B are the FAA NEPA implementing orders. They describe FAA and airport obligations for assessing noise impacts of federal actions, determining projects that required detailed noise analysis for environmental review, and the models and methodologies acceptable for compliance. To summarize, 14 CFR Part 150 guides airport noise compatibility planning efforts. It sets a standard metric for measuring noise exposure, the DNL. DNL is a cumulative metric that includes a penalty for nighttime noise, representing an average annual day. For purposes of designating compatible and noncompatible land uses, the FAA set a noise level of DNL 65 dB as the threshold of significance for noise exposure. In addition, 14 CFR Part 150 established a voluntary program governing the development of airport noise exposure maps and noise compatibility programs. Noise exposure maps depict present and future cumulative noise exposure and land use compatibility via noise contours. Noise compatibility programs reduce existing incompatible land use and prevent future incom- patible land uses through a combination of measures specific to each airport, intended to mit- igate noise. Airports cannot restrict aircraft operations to reduce noise, but they are able to mitigate noise impacts through land use, program management, stakeholder engagement, and operational measures, which the FAA can approve through the Noise Compatibility Program. Part 150 describes procedures and requirements for the development, submission, and approval of noise exposure maps and noise compatibility programs. In relation to NEPA, FAA Order 1050.1F stipulates that a proposed action would have a sig- nificant noise impact if it would cause a noise-sensitive land use in the DNL 65 noise contour to experience an increase in noise of DNL 1.5 dB or more. A significant noise impact would also result if the proposed action exposed a newly noise-sensitive land use to the DNL 65 dB level due to a DNL 1.5 dB or greater increase. Noise analysis guidance defined in FAA Order 1050.1F requires the use of an FAA-approved noise model. Currently, the FAA’s AEDT is used to determine aircraft noise exposure for documenta- tion in environmental analyses. The tool models the noise performances based on the aircraft fleet mix and the number of aircraft operations. With the introduction of electric aircraft into the aviation market, the tool would have to be updated to incorporate in the aircraft fleet mix various electric aircraft, with their noise and emission performances.

56 Preparing Your Airport for Electric Aircraft and Hydrogen Technologies Air Quality At the federal level, the CAA (42 U.S.C. §§ 7401–7671q) gives the EPA authority to specify NAAQS that apply throughout the United States and its territories. Air pollutants subject to the NAAQS are known as criteria pollutants. States that do not meet NAAQS must develop and adhere to State Implementation Plans to reduce air pollution. The FAA Aviation Emissions and Air Quality Handbook provides additional guidance, procedures, and methodologies for completing air quality assessments to comply with NEPA and the CAA. FAA air quality analyses focus on the sources of emissions as in aircraft, auxiliary power units (APUs), GSE, ground access vehicles, construction, etc., as well as the types of emis- sions that include GHGs and Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs). Integrating electric aircraft to the airport operations will automatically impact these air quality analyses: emissions due to combustion engines will be reduced with these new aircraft, but the electric charging equip- ment and their constructions will generate some emissions. In addition, the upstream energy generations will have to be incorporated in future air quality analyses, unless the electricity used is metered and the airport can clearly account for the electricity used or purchased by third parties. Hazardous Materials The generation of hazardous waste during construction, operation, and maintenance of electric aircraft and their charging infrastructure must comply with the Resource Conserva- tion and Recovery Act. Hazardous waste can only be stored on-site temporarily, and special permits may be required. Airports should consider the risks associated with storing addi- tional battery materials on their property and how to manage them properly. They may need to apply for permits to store battery waste over longer periods of time and in larger quantities. The possibility of soil or groundwater contamination due to spillage or leakage of lithium-ion battery fluids during accidents and incidents is also a risk. Airports will likely need to amend their current emergency planning and reporting structures related to handling battery compo- nents under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act. Battery disposal and reuse are other considerations. General and Transportation Conformity The CAA requires federal agencies to ensure that their actions conform to the appropriate State Implementation Plan, so that they do not interfere with state air pollution management efforts. Conformity requires that a project or action adheres to the plan’s purpose of eliminating or reducing the severity and number of violations of the NAAQS and achieving expeditious attainment of such standards. Federally funded and approved actions at airports are subject to the EPA’s General Conformity regulations. The General Conformity rule applies to all federal actions except for certain highway and transit programs, which must comply with the Trans- portation Conformity Plans (40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A). The General Conformity rule includes annual emissions thresholds for projects located in EPA-designated nonattainment and maintenance areas that trigger the need for a General Con- formity determination and defines projects that are typically excluded from General Conformity requirements. A conformity determination is required if the total direct and indirect pollutant emissions resulting from a project are above de minimis emission threshold levels specified in the conformity regulations. A conformity determination is not required if the differences in emissions between the Proposed Action and the No Action alternative are below the applicable de minimis emission threshold levels, or if the proposed action is exempt or included in the FAA list of “presumed to conform activities.”

Perspectives on Federal and State Policies 57   Consider a hypothetical example in which an airport proposes to provide electric chargers for charging e-aircraft, which in and of itself would not produce any emissions. Both construction and operational emissions, including reductions from the aircraft (i.e., net benefit) from related activity including any indirect emissions associated with transport or electrical generation (i.e., from the utility) should be compared to appropriate de minimis levels as discussed above to evaluate conformity if the project is located in an EPA-designated maintenance and/or nonattainment area. For this comparison, construction emissions associated with any infra- structure related to the electric charging units and operational emissions (i.e., a net benefit of e-aircraft and indirect emissions) should be compared to de minimis levels separately. If construction-related emissions or total direct and indirect emissions are above the de minimis levels, a General Conformity determination will be required to demonstrate compliance with the NAAQS and CAA. It should be noted that, even if the airport or project is not located in an EPA-designated maintenance and/or nonattainment area, the total construction and direct and indirect emissions should also be reported under NEPA for significance. Climate Although no federal standards have been set for GHG emissions, it is well established that GHG emissions can affect climate. Based on guidance from the FAA 1050.1F Desk Reference, state and local policies and programs that address climate change should be discussed in a sepa- rate climate section of NEPA documentation. The FAA has not established a significant threshold for climate and GHG emissions, nor has the FAA identified specific factors to consider in making a significant determination for GHG emissions. No accepted methods of determining significance applicable to aviation or transit projects emissions have been developed, “as such direct linkage is difficult to isolate and to under- stand.” For disclosure purposes, GHGs associated with the alternatives should be calculated in accordance with FAA guidelines and provided in the climate section of the NEPA document. Airports that develop GHG emissions inventories for NEPA documents, state or local regu- latory requirements, or on a voluntary basis should consider how the introduction of electric aircraft may affect that process and how GHGs are categorized. For example, emissions from liquid aircraft fuel are considered Scope 3, or indirect emissions from third parties (airline tenants) under the Greenhouse Gas Protocol and the EPA guidance. Scope 2 emissions are those generated from purchased electricity consumed by an entity, in this case, airports or airlines, depending on how the airport infrastructure and leasing agreements are structured. Unless the electricity used by electric aircraft is metered and the airport can clearly account for the electricity used or purchased by third parties, then the emissions associated with its generation will be attributed to the airport. This is a consideration for airports that have GHG emissions reduction goals and/or participate in formal carbon management programs such as the Airport Carbon Accreditation, which requires that airport members demonstrate emis- sions reductions over time. Demonstrating progress on GHG emissions reduction goals will be more difficult if the GHGs generated from electricity used by electric aircraft are attributed to the airport. Storm Water Construction of electric aircraft infrastructure may require special permits from the EPA to consider the potential discharge of pollutants under the Clean Water Act. New permits may be required specifically for the potential runoff of water contaminated with toxic battery fluids. Air- ports should verify that EPA permits are applicable for the construction and permanent installa- tion of the anticipated charging infrastructure. Airports should prepare emergency procedures in case battery incidents lead to the discharge of toxic battery fluids.

58 Preparing Your Airport for Electric Aircraft and Hydrogen Technologies 6.3 Statewide Policies and Plans State Departments of Transportation Role of State Departments of Transportation State DOTs are the core of projects that span across the various travel modes for the respec- tive states. These projects include the planning, design, operations, and maintenance aspects of various transportation modes including highways, rail, and aviation. State DOTs also address a wider range of policy objectives that pertain to planning efforts including, but not limited to, economic development, GHG emissions, and traffic safety. Today, all U.S. states and territories have a division dedicated to aviation and aeronautics or serving the needs of the aviation com- munity. The role of the state DOT aviation division is to assist the respective cities and counties to acquire both federal and state funds to distribute them among the airports in the state. They also have to ensure that all revenues generated from aviation fuel taxes are used on projects that will improve the state’s air transportation system. The introduction of electric aircraft may impact some aspects of the state’s policies and plans such as the statewide aviation plans, State Block Grant Program, and fuel revenue generation. Statewide Aviation Plans States may wish to consider the future introduction of electric aircraft during the statewide aviation system planning process. State aviation system planning is a strategic process to assess all the public-use airports in a given state, determine their and their users’ current and future needs, the relationship between the airports, and their ability to meet forecast demands. These plans are also used to evaluate funding priorities and policy or regulatory changes needed to ensure the system’s safety and capacity. They often consider the economic impacts and benefits of aviation to a state’s economy, how broader industry trends are in turn affecting aviation, and future developments. The planning horizon varies but often includes both short- and long- term analyses. Some considerations for statewide aviation system planners regarding electric aircraft include: • Electric aircraft manufacturing, maintenance, and associated employment opportunities. • Impact on FBOs and fuel sales, which are a significant revenue source for general aviation airports. • Need for additional electrical meters or upgraded electrical supply infrastructure and costs to industry for those upgrades. • Benefits to flight training including the reduced cost from fuel and maintenance. • Community engagement opportunities surrounding anticipated lower noise and emissions. State Block Grant Program The State Block Grant Program, introduced and authorized by Congress in 1987, is a funding program where the FAA releases AIP funds to each individual state, and in turn, the receiving state takes over the responsibility of prioritizing and distributing the funds to small airports including non-primary commercial airports, reliever, and general aviation airports. There are currently 10 states that participate in the State Block Grant Program. The introduction of elec- tric aircraft, especially smaller ones that may primarily be used in smaller airports, may have an impact in the prioritization and distribution of these funds. State Fuel Revenue According to the FAA, state taxes on aviation fuel are considered airport revenues. Fueling revenues—in the form of sales revenue and retained fuel taxes—represent a large portion of airports’ non-passenger aeronautical revenues, making up to 18 percent (a total of $418 million)

Perspectives on Federal and State Policies 59   in 2018. These revenues are used for capital and operating costs of the airport or other facilities owned by the airport and are involved significantly in the transportation of passengers to the airport property. As the prevalence of electric aircraft grows, airports, FBOs, and fueling service providers could begin to experience reduced revenue from aircraft fueling operations. The decline in the fuel tax revenues would redirect the state policymakers to assess other means of paying for the transportation infrastructure, such as passenger fees. Aircraft Registration Fee As stated above, the introduction of electric aircraft would impact many state’s fuel tax rev- enues. The shift from aviation fuel to other greener power supplies such as electricity would reduce some revenue-generating sources such as fuel revenue as stated above. In some states, with regards to electric vehicles, there is an incentive on the registration fees for electric vehicles to encourage the purchase of more electric vehicles. For other states, a policy being considered is applying a separate registration fee for some hybrid and fully electric vehicles in addition to the standard vehicle registration fees. This additional fee would replace the losses in fuel rev- enue. Similar to this additional registration fee imposed on hybrid and fully electric vehicles, the introduction of electric aircraft may follow the same policy. However, aircraft do not typically operate within one state only, which will complicate the establishment of such policies if it is not a federal incentive. These measures will probably only concern commercial aircraft to encourage airlines switching to electric aircraft. Other Electric Aircraft Domains Electricity Generation, Distribution, and Pricing The sale of electricity in the United States is guided by various regulations across the federal, state, and local regions. For the sale of electricity and retail transactions when it comes to the electrification of the transport system, for example, electric vehicles, the regulatory jurisdiction usually falls on the state according to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Currently, it is unknown if and how electricity operators should be regulated when it pertains to the use of electric chargers for electric vehicles, which may project to that of electric aircrafts. Electricity pricing is less volatile than petroleum, which will increase stability in airport financial planning should electrification increase statewide. The price of electricity genera- tion is predicted to decrease, but the requirement of widespread distribution is likely to keep prices level. Research on electricity rates indicates that the cost of electricity varies between cities and providers and is also highly dependent on how electrical energy is drawn from the grid. Utility Submetering Several states have laws that regulate “utility submetering,” which is defined as the imple- mentation of meter systems that allow the operator or owner of a building or facility to bill tenants for individual utility usage through the installation of additional meters behind a utility meter. Some of these laws could prevent airports and states from charging an additional fee on electricity for aviation purposes. If airports and states decide to establish such taxes, they might have to restrict the use of the revenues to aviation and aeronautical purposes to prevent profit diversion and other conflicts with FAA rules. Submetering laws vary from state to state: • In some states, the choice of submetering falls on the landlords or facility operators. They usually use a master meter, where the landlord purchases energy from the utilities provider then in turn sub meters it to their tenants.

60 Preparing Your Airport for Electric Aircraft and Hydrogen Technologies • In some states, the landlord or facility operator requires approval from the public utility com- mission for submetering to be provided. • Other states, rather than submetering, authorize the use of individual metering where each tenant is individually metered directly by the utility company without the landlord or facility operator being a third party. Figure 21 shows the different electricity submetering laws across some states. Electricity Surcharges Surcharges are additional fees added to initially quoted utility, in this case electrical, bills of consumers, usually in the form of an administrative fee. These added fees are usually approved by electricity regulators to make up for costs that would impact the financial health of the individual or group that requests such fees from their customers. An example of a situation that may warrant the surcharge of electric bills could be airports that may be affected by the loss of refuel tax rev- enue due to the growth of electric aircraft, and thus the additional fees would help offset the differ- ence in revenue acquisition. Figure 22 shows the variation of surcharge laws among some states. Statewide Electric Aircraft Initiatives: Case Studies Washington Department of Transportation The Aviation Division of the WSDOT conducted an electric aircraft feasibility study to aid in the development of a roadmap to ease the introduction and implementation of the electric aircraft industry for relevant stakeholders, including airports, policymakers, industry, and the general public. The Washington state legislature directed the WSDOT Figure 21. Utility submetering laws among some states.

Perspectives on Federal and State Policies 61   aviation division to create an Electric Aircraft Working Group to study electric aircraft service statewide. The research study, which was carried out over the span of months, looked specifically into five different types of aircraft and their purpose of flight. Each type of aircraft was associated with one scenario as follows: • Regional commuters that carried fewer than five passengers over a 50-mile range. • Regional commuters that carry fewer than 15 passengers for scheduled operations. • General aviation, personal, or business use aircraft that carries between one to six passengers with an average flight time of 43 minutes. • Light cargo aircraft with a maximum load of 7,500 lbs. and a cruise speed of 200 mph. • Pilot training aircraft that carry one pilot and one passenger with a cruise speed of 125 mph. The conclusions from the study are as follows: • Infrastructure: The study determined that the major change in airport infrastructure to accom- modate the electric aircraft will be on the airfield. There will be the need for the provision of power and charging capabilities for the electric aircraft because electric aircraft will require the main- tenance and charging needs of the aircraft to be met at both the origin and destination airport. • Economic Impact: The assessment of the impact of electric aircraft on the economy of the state was positive and showed: – The introduction of electric aircraft will significantly impact passengers and cargo time and cost when traveling, especially over short and congested routes. – The reduction of carbon-emission gases attributed to aircraft operations would, in turn, reduce environmental and health costs. Figure 22. Utility surcharge laws among some states.

62 Preparing Your Airport for Electric Aircraft and Hydrogen Technologies – One very important but unknown factor for the implementation of electric aircraft into airports is the cost to provide infrastructure and facilities to accommodate electric aircraft at airports. The current state and federal grants can assist in part of the developmental cost, but other areas should be identified and looked into at the local level to support the charging infrastructure and electricity supply needs. Although there are currently no standardized or directly applicable sources of funding, the future may pave the way for funding oppor- tunities if and when public transportation and AAM infrastructure and facilities combine. • Demand Assessment: The study identified different factors that affect or will affect the demand for electric aircraft. These factors include FAA certification, public perception, market avail- ability, available routes, electrical infrastructure, airline adoption, state and federal regulation, cost of traveling, and battery capacity and density. • Workforce Development: The study also identified a number of potential job opportunities for its residents that will come with the development and implementation of the electric air- craft. They recommended that the workforce for electric aircraft can build on the existing workforce to generate new electric aviation-focused training to keep the workforce up to speed. • Selection of Beta Testing Sites: Lastly, the study looked into a few selected airports that were deemed capable of serving as beta testing sites for the demonstration of electric aircraft tech- nology functionality to determine the benefit of electric aircraft across the state of Washington. Colorado Department of Transportation The Colorado Department of Transportation is conducting an Airport Electric Charging Infrastructure study for 2021 to develop new statewide incentives as part of its Strategic Plan. Similar to the study conducted by the WSDOT, the purpose of this study is to develop a frame- work to inform and help the relevant stakeholders, including Colorado airports, flight schools, aircraft manufacturers, and the Colorado Department of Transportation itself with important information to help in the innovative development and implementation of electric aircraft. The primary focus of this project, according to the Colorado Aeronautical Board, is: • An overview of the existing state of the small electric aircraft industry. • Analyzing the various types of charging infrastructure and capacity needed by the smaller general aviation aircraft. • An inventory of the existing electrical service for four selected general aviation training intensive airports (Centennial Airport, Rocky Mountain Metropolitan Airport, Northern Colorado Regional Airport, and Colorado Springs Airport). In addition, an analysis of the capability of said service to support electric aircraft activities will also be made. • An overall cost estimate for airport electrical service upgrades to accommodate the potential elec- tric aircraft demand and follow-up analysis and evaluation of sources of funds for the upgrades. • An analysis of potential funding mechanisms that could be implemented by airports, FBOs, and aircraft operators to fund the capital and lifecycle costs of electric aircraft charging infrastructure. 6.4 Electric Aviation Policies Abroad Norway Regional air transportation is a lifeline for many communities in Norway that cannot be timely served by road or rail because of the geography and topography of the country. Moreover, aviation is crucial because of its importance for export industries and tourism; it also supports about 60,000 direct aviation jobs. Norway has committed itself, together with the European Union, to reduce carbon emis- sions by 40 percent by 2030, and then 80 to 95 percent by 2050, compared with 1990 levels.

Perspectives on Federal and State Policies 63   The Norwegian Civil Aviation Authority and Avinor, the main airport operator of the country, are working to develop initiatives and roadmaps toward zero-emission and fossil- free aviation by 2050. Fossil-free energy vectors include sustainable aviation fuel, electricity, and hydrogen. These goals do not include emissions from aircraft production and infrastruc- ture construction for aircraft. They consider that electricity from the electric grid in Norway is fossil-free. In March 2020, the Norwegian Civil Aviation Authority published a report, “Forslag til pro- gram for introduksjon av elektrifiserte fly i kommersiell luftfart” (or the Proposed Program for the Introduction of Electric Aircraft in Commercial Aviation), prepared jointly with Avinor. The first electric aircraft will be small fixed-wing aircraft, with a capacity of up to 19 seats and a short-haul range; the report considers these aircraft to be the most relevant for Norwegian con- ditions. Indeed, the Norwegian air transportation system features short-haul routes connecting airports including several 800-meter-long runways exposed to harsh winter conditions that few aircraft can operate. To meet the Norwegian climate commitments by 2050, three goals were defined: • Norway will be a driving force and arena for the development, testing, and early implementation of electrified aircraft. • By 2030, the first domestic scheduled routes will be operated by electric aircraft. • By 2040, all civilian domestic flights in Norway will be operated by electric aircraft, to reduce GHG emissions by at least 80 percent compared with 2020. To achieve these objectives, the report proposed the following recommendations: • Become a driving force and an arena for the development and implementation of zero- and low-emission aviation technology: – Continue the joint multiannual international zero-emissions program developed by the Norwegian and European civil aviation authorities (through CAA Norway and EASA). – Prepare a roadmap with a working group consisting of Avinor, airlines, aircraft manufac- turers, and public authorities to achieve the goals. – Establish an international arena/center for the development, testing, and implementation of zero- and low-emission aviation technology. – Define suitable airspace for testing purposes. – Coordinate aviation and climate objectives at a national level between government ministries and agencies, state-owned companies, and the state public support system. – Prepare an administrative and economic scheme for testing activities in Norway. – Take part in the European Union’s Horizon Europe/CleanSky research program. – Communicate the initiatives and measures that are being launched to the public. • Establish state policies and incentives to support the transition to electric aircraft: – Grant assurances to develop charging infrastructure at Norwegian airports (Enova program). – Incentives or government loads for electric aircraft purchases. – Possible state guarantee concerning residual value. – Taxes exemption for small electric aircraft used for flight schools or private pilots. • Establish state policies and incentives for aircraft operations: – Integrate the requirement of emission-based evaluation criteria for a proposed new route by a public service obligation. – Air passenger tax exemptions or reductions for zero or low-emission aircraft until 2040. – Value-added tax exemptions or reductions on airline tickets for zero- or low-emission aircraft until 2040. – Reduced aviation charges for Avinor, with European Union regulations accordance. – Reduction in electricity tax for commercial aircraft.

64 Preparing Your Airport for Electric Aircraft and Hydrogen Technologies In summer 2020, a workgroup with industrial Norwegian stakeholders presented a roadmap to the Norwegian Transportation Ministry to achieve the defined goals. Avinor published a report in October 2020, “Bærekraftig og samfunnsnyttig luftfart” (or Sustainable and Socially Beneficial Aviation), to describe this roadmap. Norwegian airlines already expressed its interest to transit to electric aircraft, and committed to strong objectives by 2030: • SAS: reduction to 50 percent of total CO2 emissions of 2005. • Norwegian: reduction by 45 percent per passenger kilometer (km) compared to 2010 through both fleet renewal and the use of sustainable fuel. • WiderØe: transition to an all-electric short-haul fleet in the period up to 2030–2035. Avinor has also committed to making its airport operations fossil-free by 2030. Since elec- trification of aviation also requires new infrastructure at airports, Avinor has promised that electrified small aircraft will receive a tax exemption and free electricity until 2025. Furthermore, Avinor has stated that the company takes responsibility for ensuring that adequate charging infrastructure is in place for charging electrified passenger aircraft when applicable. Avinor and partners are also studying how smart energy management, power production, and optimal use of the power grid can ensure the charging of electric aircraft, ships, and buses without unneces- sarily large investments in existing power grids. Finally, Avinor is thinking about using the battery of electric cars parked in its long-term parking for energy storage purposes. This elec- tricity could be released at the peak demand. Car owners would have incentives for “sharing” their battery with the airport (e.g., parking fee reduced or waived). Nordic Network for Electric Aviation In 2020, Denmark, Finland, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden gathered around the Nordic Network for Electric Aviation. The network is part of Nordic Innovation, an organi- zation under the Nordic Council of Ministers that is the official intergovernmental body for cooperation in the Nordic region. Sixteen industry stakeholders of these countries, including airlines, airport operators, aircraft manufacturers, and research institutes, worked together with four objectives: 1. Standardize electric air infrastructure in the Nordic countries. 2. Develop business models for regional point-to-point connectivity between Nordic countries. 3. Develop aircraft technology for Nordic weather conditions. 4. Create a platform for European and global collaboration. United Kingdom The United Kingdom (UK) government is targeting 2050 to achieve zero GHG emissions by aviation, consistently with the Paris Agreement. In April 2021, the government announced the objective to cut UK emissions by 78 percent by 2035 compared to 1990 levels, which will take the country more than three-quarters to the 2050 goal. To achieve these objectives, the authorities are funding several projects through two insti- tutes: the Aerospace Technology Institute and the Future Flight Challenge, both administrated by the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI). The latter is under the authority of the British government and directs research and innovation funding. Although the zero GHG emissions objective is the primary goal, several additional objectives were defined to support broader environmental aspects: increasing mobility, improving connectivity, reducing domestic con- gestion, and increasing manufacturing and service opportunities through new technology development. The country’s geography is conducive to benefit from the advantages of regional aviation transport. Knowing that the first commercial electric aircraft will be relevant to fulfill these

Perspectives on Federal and State Policies 65   missions, the UK government has pushed forward to electrify domestic flights. In this context, the UKRI started to fund several projects: • In Scotland, Highlands and Islands Airports Limited (HIAL) has launched in 2021 a £3.7 million project to develop a sustainable aviation program between remote communities. This part of Scotland is not suitable for the development of conventional, direct ground transporta- tion. The first low-carbon aviation test center will be based at HIAL’s Kirkwall Airport in the Orkney Islands. In July 2021, the initiative should start test flights with Ampaire’s Electric EEL (6 seats) between Kirkwall and Wick, two small airports 35 miles away from the other (20-min flight time). • Hydrogen Electric and Automated Regional Transportation is a project led by a consortium of nine UK organizations. It aims to develop an automated zero-carbon regional air transporta- tion network, through advanced autonomous controls on Britten-Norman BN-2 Islander aircraft equipped for single-pilot operations, and with a hydrogen-powered aircraft, with a capacity of up to 19 seats and a range up to 500 NM. The project is not only focusing on the aircraft itself, but it will also consider hydrogen production and distribution infrastructure. UKRI funded the project with £3.74 million ($5.14 million). • 2ZERO (Towards Zero Emissions in Regional Aircraft Operations) is led by Ampaire and ran by a consortium of different aviation stakeholders, universities, and utility pro- viders, to demonstrate the feasibility of regional electric aviation transport in the south- west of England. This initiative is similar to the HIAL pilot project and will also include Ampaire Electric EEL aircraft in the first phase, and then a 19-seat Eco Otter SX, which is a hybrid-electric conversion of the Twin Otter commuter aircraft. This project is funded by £30 million from the UKRI and aims to model and simulate a point-to-point route system for regional flights. Other Initiatives Other technologies for researching and developing electric aircraft technologies include the following: • Clean Sky: In 2008, the European Union created Clean Sky, the largest European research program for aviation research and innovation, to significantly reduce aircraft emission and noise levels. This public-private partnership between the European Commission and the aviation industry was launched as an aeronautical research program to coordinate research and innovation between the industry, research centers, and academic partners. The first phase of the program, Clean Sky 1, had a budget of 1.6 billion EUR and ended in 2017. Started in 2014, Clean Sky 2, the second phase of the program, explored innovative technologies related to aircraft design, but also specific aircraft components, such as engines, airframe, avionic systems, etc. Clean Sky 2 has a 4 billion EUR budget and still runs until 2024. The purpose of this second phase is to respond to the Flightpath 2050 goals set by the ACARE with a 75 percent reduction in CO2 emissions, 90 percent reduction in NOx, 65 percent noise reduction, and design/manufacture aircraft components with recyclable materials, to mitigate the envi- ronmental impact of the lifecycle of aircraft. Clean Sky 2 includes research on the replace- ment of conventional engines at the 2035 horizon for meeting Airbus A320 requirements: 150 passengers, a Mach 0.78 cruise, and a 1,200 NM (2,200 km) range. Three hybrid-electric propulsion engines were presented in 2019. Hydrogen technologies were also investigated by the program, and a report, “Hydrogen-powered aviation: preparing for takeoff,” was delivered in 2020. Clean Sky 3 that was scheduled to begin in 2021 continues these efforts toward greener aviation technologies. • Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) Electrification Challenge for Aircraft (ECLAIR): In 2014, JAXA started an electric aircraft program, called Flight Demonstration

66 Preparing Your Airport for Electric Aircraft and Hydrogen Technologies of Electric Aircraft Technology for Harmonized Ecological Revolution, to accelerate electric aircraft development in Japan. This project focused on technologies for electric engines, combined with fuel cells, and hybrid propulsion systems. In 2020, the Japanese Prime Min- ister declared that its country will reduce GHG emissions to zero by 2050. To achieve this objective in aviation, JAXA launched the ECLAIR consortium between industry partners and the Japanese government for the development of innovative electric aircraft technolo- gies. The platform Next Generation Aeronautical Innovation Hub Center was created to facilitate the collaboration between the stakeholders regarding research and development of new technologies.