Special Report Part III: Industry Initiatives Make a Difference

While most airlines are just now developing their environmental programs, Delta (DAL) became the first U.S. airline to offer passengers carbon offsetting. This is in addition to its other environmental initiatives designed to lower its environmental footprint. British Airways is the only other airline to...

For immediate service; more information; and multi-user access (site license), non-profit organization, educational institute pricing, contact Karen Garner kgarner@accessintel.com at (301) 354-1612.

This story is only available to paid subscribers. Please login below with your username and password if you are a subscriber.

Username:
Password:
	What is my password?

Subscribe     Trial

While most airlines are just now developing their environmental programs, Delta (DAL) became the first U.S. airline to offer passengers carbon offsetting. This is in addition to its other environmental initiatives designed to lower its environmental footprint. British Airways is the only other airline to develop such a program. To date, however, they are still too new to determine their impact, although passengers are using them and are inquiring at other airlines about such programs.

Calculating Emissions
Carbon offset programs, which allow passengers to offset the emissions of their trip by paying extra, raise a host of questions such as where the money goes and what is it used for. How are the programs monitored for accuracy and for actual emissions reductions? How are emissions calculated and what percentage goes to the project versus airline/environmental partner administrative costs?
The exchanges being developed around the world have answered many of these questions, especially about monitoring and measurement. Indeed, calculating emissions is not objective with several different methods used. Now, just in the nick of time, companies are developing carbon calculation programs in response to critic’s concerns that there are no standards for accounting and auditing. One such program is BACK Aviation Solutions’ new product measuring carbon emissions for aircraft, airports, engines and airlines.
BACK created a Carbon Emissions Calculator using its sister company – OAG Airline Schedules database. Based on the formula developed by the U.K. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), plus historical, current and projected data from OAG Airline Schedules, the BACK Aviation Carbon Emissions Calculator provides a macro-level view of the impact of commercial aviation on the environment. Clients will be able to use BACK’s program to compare carbon footprints by equipment type, airline, airport, route, country or world region. Related Story
Calculating emissions is about the costs companies must pay for going over their assigned allowances, estimated at $16 billion for U.S. carriers alone, according to the Air Transport Association. Related Story Allowances for the airline industry have yet to be assigned, constituting one of the largest controversies about the imposition of emissions trading schemes. The question centers on whether or not the industry will be given credit for all the environmental work. The industry wants credit for the 40 years it has spent on reducing noise and emissions pollution.
An explanation of emissions trading as well as the various exchanges that already exist around the world was covered in Part II of this series. Regional Aviation News’ environmental series was prompted by AviationToday.com’s webinar – The Green Challenge in Aviation: How "Clean" Technology Will Affect You.
For an idea on how much carbon emissions are trading for, one need only look at ICAO’s Voluntary Emissions Trading Scheme Report which cited two exchanges through which airlines would be likely to buy and sell emissions.
• The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) market price in October 2006 for CO2 was about $4 per ton. The price has risen from around US$0.98 in December 2003 and reached a high of US$5 in April 2006.
• The EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ECX) daily prices per ton of CO2 have ranged from €20 (April 2005) to €30 (April 2006). The ECX market price in September 2006 for CO2 was about €16 or US$20 per ton. In October 2006, the ECX traded its first emission option, giving buyers and sellers the ability to hedge price risks. The British pound is now at about $2.00 per pound.

Airline Initiatives
“If you look at other industries there are few where the economic benefits are in line with the CO2 benefits,” said Washington Post National Editor Del Wilber during the recent AviationToday.com’s webinar. “Any sector that makes up three or four or five percent is a fair target. [Airlines are two percent of global emissions.] Airlines are doing whatever they can to reduce fuel consumption; winglets on planes, American (AMR) has taken 100 pounds of potable water off its MD80s. They are rushing to get ahead of the debate because they are such an easy punching bag. They are blamed for everything these days from flight delays, noise, smog. They get flogged like crazy. So they are trying to get ahead of becoming the next victim of the global warming sniper bullet which is really aimed at the auto, smokestack and power plant industries.”
Wilber noted that according to a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). “If the airline industry does not continue its quest for reducing emissions and costs, other industries may surpass its progress resulting in aviation becoming a larger and larger percentage of emissions,” he said. He noted that having achieved all the efficiencies they can out of aircraft, airlines are relying on engine manufacturers to produce the next wave of efficiency.”
But Anupam Bhargava, general manager, Line Maintenance Services for Pratt & Whitney Global Service Partners, who also spoke at the webinar, pointed out that airlines have always been self regulating when it comes to the environment because it is a very efficiency-driven industry.


Airlines are already doing their part in upgrading fleets and introducing cutting-edge technologies such as winglets which save three percent of fuel burn. In addition, they’ve employed sophisticated software programs to analyze flight paths and weather to develop more efficient routes. Operations now include single-engine taxiing, plugging into electric gate power where available to avoid running auxiliary power units, using tugs to position aircraft, and redesigning hubs and schedules to alleviate congestion.
They also have converted to electric ground support equipment when feasible and some have even resorted to peddle power with rickshaws. Started at American West as a cost-cutting measure, US Airways (LCC) maintenance, ground crew and fleet inspectors use three-wheeled bikes to get around and to transport equipment. The industry has also redistributed weight in the belly and introduced life-jackets for over-water flights to allow more direct routing. In a boon to the MRO industry, they have removed seat-back phones; excess or heavy galley equipment and magazines; introduced lighter seats and beverage carts; and stripped primer and paint, all in an effort to improve fuel efficiency since fuel has surpassed labor as the highest cost center.
Delta’s fuel efficiency program yielded more than $25 million in savings last year just with weight reduction efforts, engine washes, engine refurbishment, continuous descent approaches and industry leadership in single-engine taxis, said the airline. It also implemented a system designed to reduce water consumption by 50 percent at the airline’s Technical Operations Center (TOC). The airline also incorporated 600 zero-emission, electric vehicles and ground support equipment into its fleet in addition to converting internal combustion engines to electricity.
As for new aircraft, during its last investor’s conference Bombardier (BBD) said launching new planes would not be worth it without at least a 15 percent increase in efficiency. Embraer (ERJ) concurred.

Manufacturer Initiatives
Industry initiatives transcend the operation of an aircraft, said Bhargava during the webinar. “We have to look at the total picture from what it takes to produce an engine, the materials we use and introduce new processing and services that allow for better operations," he said. "We have to make sure there aren’t other environmental liabilities such as contamination of the ground water. Pratt and Whitney looks at the total operating cost and total environmental impact of an engine from manufacturing, operation and overhaul and repair. We are looking at all the ways we can reduce our footprint and that embodies our green factories program, the resources we use to produce an engine, our green engine program questioning what materials we use. We also look at the future generation of engines such as the geared turbofan which we expect to have a dramatic environmental impact. Then we look at the maintenance side and the introduction of new processes and services that allow airlines to operate more efficiently, with a lower environmental impact.”
One of its biggest problems is the reduction in the use of hazardous materials such as cyanide, chromium, lead and cadmium and developing new maintenance programs to actually remove the materials completely. “Even the small details like that will add up in the long run and reduce maintenance costs and environment impacts,” said Aviation Maintenance Editor Joy Finnegan, during the webinar.
Ironically – and this is something the regional airline industry already knows – Rolls Royce told Wilber that the most efficient engine is a propeller-driven engine and work is proceeding on such engines that can operate at 30,000 feet with the noise footprint of a 777.
Pratt’s geared turbofan represents a leap in technology on all three fronts – fuel, emissions and noise, said Barghava. It allows the engines to operate more efficiently by using reduction gear system to allow the fan to spin at its optimal speed both for efficiency and for noise reduction.
Pratt & Whitney introduced its eco-power, on-wing engine wash, now being rolled out at airports around the world, two years ago. “Engine washes saves up to 1.2 percent of fuel,” said Barghava, who cited one customer with a 15-aircraft 767 fleet that saved $1 million a year with engine washes, reduced fuel requirements by 3.1 million pounds and emissions by 9.7 million pounds. “Add these things up they there is a significant number in the aggregate on an annual basis across fleets.”
Bombardier set a goal of three percent reduction in energy use, GHGs, water consumption and hazardous waste annually between 2004 and 2008. In Toronto, it is recycling 32 tons of plastic annually and diverting 80 percent of its waste stream. At Dorval and Mirabel, paint shops are using advanced technology to incinerate 90 percent of emitted Volatile Organic Compounds. Belfast is eliminating more than 90 percent at 120 tons. Between 2002 and 2004, Toronto increased its production rate by 40 percent while decreasing its energy consumption of 20 percent and by 22 percent for natural gas.
As for its aircraft, is NextGen regional jets are the lightest in their classes between 70 and 104 seats meaning less energy for production, manufacturing and operation, according to Bombardier Vice President of Marketing and Communications Trung Ngo. A 70- to 80-seat jet offers up to 27 percent fewer emissions while 80 to 90 seaters are at 35 percent and larger equipment is at 30 percent.
Embraer increased its recycling program in 2006 by five percent over 2005, reaching 79.6 percent of wood, plastic, styrofoam, paper, cardboard, cooking oil and others. Embraer’s recycling program started in 1998. Since 2000, recycling has advanced from 52.9 percent to the present 79.6 percent, as the program’s efficiency has increased. The remaining 20.4 percent represents materials which, at this time, are non-recyclable. The company’s energy usage programs were recognized by the Federation of Industries of the State of São Paulo (FIESP), which honored the company with two awards in 2006. At its main plant in São José dos Campos, it reduced electrical energy consumption by 456 MWh, for an efficiency gain of 7.2 percent. Similar projects are underway at other company units. It also does much more in programs designed to benefit the community. Related Story
As with Bombardier and Embraer, Airbus and Boeing (BA) are using more composites instead of aluminum. With General Electric’s (GE) new GEnx engines, designed to operate at lower temperatures to produce 15 percent fewer CO2 emissions and 30 percent less nitrogen oxide than current technology engines, the Boeing Dreamliner promises to produce less noise, use 20 percent less fuel and emit 20 percent fewer emissions. Finnegan cited Airbus’s Advanced Management of End-of-Life Aircraft, recycling everything that be reused in the most ecological way possible and disposing of metals in the same way.
Manufacturers from general aviation aircraft to heavy jets are increasingly using composites. “There is a direct correlation between composites over traditional sheet metal material in terms of the overall contribution of green house gases,” said Finnegan, who added there is a shortage of materials needed to produce composites now. “For every pound of fuel saved, 3.2 pounds of CO2 emissions are saved.”

Carbon Offset Programs
Airlines are looking at carbon offset programs similar to the one British Airways has in which passengers pay a premium to offset carbon emissions. Northwest is currently talking with several potential partners and reviewing options based on their credibility, transparency and the meaningfulness of the projects. American said that while customers have asked about such a program, it is still looking into it. American Spokesperson Tim Wagner said that it would be publishing an environment policy shortly. Northwest is also looking into a similar program in which passengers would pay $30 per ticket.
Delta’s program, launched in June, partners with The Conservation Fund, a leading environmental nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting land and water resources. Customers purchasing through delta.com can choose to contribute $5.50 for adomestic roundtrip flights and $11 for international roundtrip flights to be used by The Conservation Fund to plant trees throughout the U.S. and abroad. A small portion of the donation also supports the organization’s education and outreach efforts. Delta also committed to plant a tree for each of its 47,000 employees. These first trees will be planted within the U.S. in protected areas across the Gulf Coast region – an area that has lost more than 20 million acres of forestland in the last century.
The newly planted forests will help to absorb carbon dioxide, filter water, restore wildlife habitat and enhance public recreation areas. As the program grows, Delta plans to invite employees and customers to participate in ceremonial tree plantings in cities worldwide.
It also expanded its in-flight recycling of all aluminum, plastics and paper with all proceeds going to benefit Habitat for Humanity. In the first two weeks of the program, Delta flight attendants recycled approximately five tons of material.
Even airports are getting into the picture with Fresno Yosemite International Airport, traditionally a regional market, recently breaking ground on a consolidated car-rental facility with a solar-paneled roof that will provide 40 percent of the airport’s power. The project will be funded from rental-car user fees and will consolidate the six car rental agencies on one 15-acre site, build a covered walkway to protect customers walking to and from cars and provide covered parking for hundreds of rental vehicles.
The 2MW solar project includes 2,352 solar panels on the roof of the covered parking and a further 20 acres – 9,408 panels – of ground mounted photovoltaic arrays approved by the FAA for installation in a portion of the airport’s approach zone where occupied structures are not allowed. The entire project will cost $43 million and is scheduled for completion by early 2008.

Research
While the industry has thus far tackled CO2 emissions with fuel efficiency, there is much research work that remains to be done on NOx and whether contrails damage the environment. While critics have pointed to contrails as problematic, no analysis has ever been done, according to Ngo. Water vapor, however, a byproduct of hydrogen-powered engine for which the industry has research programs, has a potent impact on the environment, according to Finnegan.
Rolls Royce is leading a nearly $200 million Environmentally Friendly Engine (EFE) program, which is now entering its manufacturing phase. EFE, part of the UK’s National Aerospace Technology Strategy, is focusing on developing and validating key technologies to reduce emissions, fuel burn and noise from aircraft, and supports the environmental performance targets set by the Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe (ACARE).
These new technologies will be integrated and tested in a full engine demonstrator that will run next year. Launched in 2006, the program is designed to help meet the industry targets, using a 2000 baseline, of 50 percent lower CO2 emissions, 80 percent lower NOx emissions and 50 percent less noise by 2020.
Bombardier is one of 11 industry and academic organizations participating in the five-year research program. It is spearheading the $12 million Power Plant package to explore new nacelle design concepts that will help reduce weight, drag and noise. Its Belfast team is looking both at advanced nacelle design concepts and ways of taking advantage of new manufacturing processes and materials.
Key technologies being examined include a new thrust reverser configuration, electric ice protection for the nacelle inlet, high performance acoustic treatments, and nacelle shapes that will reduce aerodynamic drag.
As industry supports development of alternative fuels by participating in the Civil Aeronautics Alternative Fuel Initiatives (CAAFI), it is also urging Congress to fully fund the private/NASA/FAA/Defense Department research projects such as that designed to develop a range of coal-to-liquid (CTL) technologies and bio-fuels. Current reauthorization proposals include funding for CLEEN – Consortium for Lower Energy, Emissions and Noise Technology Partnership.
Embraer, which already has an aircraft powered by bio fuels in its Ipanema crop duster, expects to join international efforts shortly, according to Executive Vice-President, Technology Development and Advanced Design, Satoshi Yokota. The bio-fueled aircraft was certified two years ago and not only includes new deliveries but a retrofit program. While Embraer indicated this particular bio fuel will not have applications in the commercial environment, it did say it has expanded its research programs to look at other bio fuels.
He noted Brazil is the world’s greatest bio-fuels producer behind the U.S. Indeed, the U.S. can take a lesson from Brazil where road traffic is powered by bio fuels. He also said that U.S. corn-based bio-fuels are 30 percent more expensive than Brazil’s sugar-cane-based fuel. Embraer is already working with ICAO, NASA and Boeing. “The drive is to get bio fuels as close as possible to kerosene,” he said, adding that such fuels will probably be mixed with kerosene and thus would not require new engines or additional fuel delivery infrastructure.
“The fact is kerosene is the most efficient fuel and the last drop of kerosene on the planet will be burned in a jet,” said Washington Post’s Wilbur. AviationToday.com Publisher John Persinos added aviation fuel is dirty compared to the sulfur-reducing initiatives of gas and home heating oil.
Boeing and Air New Zealand are working with bio-fuel company Aquaflow Bionomic Corporation to develop an alternative fuel based on wild algae. It is literally pond scum formed from a combination of photosynthesis and carbon dioxide on nutrient-rich water such as sewage ponds.
As much as they promise, there are many engineering challenges to overcome with bio-fuels, not the least of which is freezing at high altitudes where aircraft operate, said Finnegan.

Side Bar
Eco-Labeling Doing More Harm Than Good
Eco-labeling – comparing carbon costs between flights and cars – as covered in Part II  may be the only way the industry can get its good environmental story out but it is not without its critics. In order to be truly effective, it is necessary for consumers to understand the issues surrounding eco-labeling, according to European Regions Airlines Association President Mike Ambrose in a conversation with Regional Aviation News.
To Ambrose, eco-labeling has a significant down side when it comes to goods and services. While developed to help the consumer decide just how much pollution they are willing to pay for, either in increased prices for consumer products or by efforts to offset individual carbon footprints, there are a host of questions raised by such schemes of which the consumer should be aware. Now, it is doubtful that consumers even know what questions to ask. For the aviation industry, however, it is one of the few ways to get its message out as to just how environmentally friendly it is, especially compared to roads and even households.
The fact is typical household emissions per person per year in the U.K. is 11 tons while a return Heathrow-Barcelona flight emits approximately 0.26 tons per person. Given that, people can reduce their own environmental footprint by using energy-saving products qualified by the U.S. government’s EnergyStar initiative or by switching to new fluorescent light bulbs or even planting a tree. They can also pay to offset their footprint with such programs as those developed by British Airways and Delta (DAL).

The Law of Unintended Consequences
While efforts to reduce individual carbon footprints may have started abroad, we have already seen similar news coverage in the U.S. The problem with this is there is so little information designed to help the consumer make really informed choices.
Nor is there any information on other unintended consequences, according to ERA’s Ambrose. Eco-labeling may go as far as the choices consumers make at the market. For instance, fresh fruit may have a carbon label that will cause consumers to steer away. But that has a huge impact on others. Ambrose pointed out governments around the world have established economic aid and development programs Africa, still struggling to make it into the 20th century, much less the 21st. If consumers stop buying products from these struggling nations such efforts will be derailed.

• Bombardier (BBD) Vice President-Marketing & Communications Trung Ngo noted that the subsidies to European farmers are more than the gross domestic product for the entire African continent. What will happen to those subsidies and struggling farmers if consumers begin to make distance-based choices?
• Exactly how much will we have to pay for otherwise cheap products now produced in China and what impact will that have on foreign relations?
• What will such impacts do to the competitiveness of in-country products?

There are also economic consequences for the industrialized world and it is these arguments that have stymied efforts to get the Bush Administration to move on environmental issues. Despite protestations that such program will ruin the economy, it will also spawn a new economy, one based on reducing the impact of humans on the environment, just as Bombardier and Embraer are doing today. Embrear turned its commitment to the environment into a revenue stream totaling $6.6 million last year, representing a growth of 57.1 percent over 2005 when it brought in $4.2 million. Even so, critical questions must be asked as consumers attempt to cut their carbon footprints.

For instance:
• Do consumers know that airlines are a net contributor to government coffers while other modes are highly subsidized?
• Do they know just how much aviation contributes to the economy?
• And if, in trying to offset their carbon emissions, they reduce demand, how that will that impact their economy?
• And how will reduced demand impact the aviation industry just as it is being forced to divert money from investing in new, more efficient and cleaner aircraft to emissions trading?
• Since road traffic constitutes the greatest carbon contributions won’t switching from aircraft to cars make an already bad situation worse?

Commentary
Compared to aviation, the government, consumers and the auto industry alone could be found environmentally negligent. We’ve had an energy crisis for more than 30 years and we have been decrying our reliance on both foreign oil and fossil fuels. Even after the lessons learned in the 1970s, U.S. automakers focused on energy guzzling offerings and the environmentally dreaded SUV. In perhaps the best illustration of the differences between US and other manufacturers that not only illustrate the problem but could have predicted the current economic debacle in Detroit, Toyota offered the Prius and GM offered the Hummer. The trouble is, this is about more than an aluminum fashion statement. This must now become a permanent part of the human mentality; one that does not disappear once the fuel crisis is over as happened in the 1980s when it was more a matter of supply than the environment.
While going green might be the latest fad, there is a lot consumers need to know before informed decisions can be made and it is up to both governments and environmentalists to weigh the issues and deliver information that really helps. Consumers face a real balancing act. Unless public education campaigns go further than just eco-labeling, it is unlikely targeting the consumer to establish what is and is not acceptable will work. In fact, it could do more harm than good. Unless governments focus on the entire picture, they will be working against their own efforts and, worse, deceiving those who can do the most to help.