Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T10:01:42.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The impact of single engine taxiing on aircraft fuel consumption and pollutant emissions

Part of: Sustainable Aerospace

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2018

M. E. J. Stettler Open the ORCID record for M. E. J. Stettler [Opens in a new window] ,
G. S. Koudis ,
S. J. Hu ,
A. Majumdar  and
W. Y. Ochieng
M. E. J. Stettler*
Affiliation:
Centre for Transport Studies Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Imperial College LondonLondon, UK
G. S. Koudis
Affiliation:
Centre for Transport Studies Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Imperial College LondonLondon, UK
S. J. Hu
Affiliation:
Centre for Transport Studies Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Imperial College LondonLondon, UK
A. Majumdar
Affiliation:
Centre for Transport Studies Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Imperial College LondonLondon, UK
W. Y. Ochieng
Affiliation:
Centre for Transport Studies Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Imperial College LondonLondon, UK
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Optimisation of aircraft ground operations to reduce airport emissions can reduce resultant local air quality impacts. Single engine taxiing (SET), where only half of the installed number of engines are used for the majority of the taxi duration, offers the opportunity to reduce fuel consumption, and emissions of NOX, CO and HC. Using 3510 flight data records, this paper develops a model for SET operations and presents a case study of London Heathrow, where we show that SET is regularly implemented during taxi-in. The model predicts fuel consumption and pollutant emissions with greater accuracy than previous studies that used simplistic assumptions. Without SET during taxi-in, fuel consumption and pollutant emissions would increase by up to 50%. Reducing the time before SET is initiated to the 25th percentile of recorded values would reduce fuel consumption and pollutant emissions by 7–14%, respectively, relative to current operations. Future research should investigate the practicalities of reducing the time before SET initialisation so that additional benefits of reduced fuel loadings, which would decrease fuel consumption across the whole flight, can be achieved.

Keywords

AirportAircraftSingle engine taxiingPollutant emissionsFuel consumptionAviation and the environmentAirport air quality
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 122 , Issue 1258 , December 2018 , pp. 1967 - 1984
Copyright
© Royal Aeronautical Society 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Masiol, M. and Harrison, R.M. Aircraft engine exhaust emissions and other airport-related contributions to ambient air pollution: a review, Atmospheric Environment, 2014, 95, (0), pp 409-455.Google Scholar
2. Berster, P., Gelhausen, M.C. and Wilken, D. Is increasing aircraft size common practice of airlines at congested airports? J Air Transport Management, 2015, 46, pp 40-48.Google Scholar
3. Gelhausen, M.C., Berster, P. and Wilken, D. Do airport capacity constraints have a serious impact on the future development of air traffic? J Air Transport Management, 2013, 20, pp 3-13.Google Scholar
4. Wolfe, P.J., Yim, S.H.L., Lee, G., Ashok, A., Barrett, S.R.H. and Waitz, I.A. Near-airport distribution of the environmental costs of aviation, Transport Policy, 2014, 34, (0), pp 102-108.Google Scholar
5. Masiol, M. and Harrison, R.M. Quantification of air quality impacts of London Heathrow Airport (UK) from 2005 to 2012, Atmospheric Environment, 2015, 116, pp 308-319.Google Scholar
6. SESAR. The Roadmap for Sustainable Air Traffic Management: European ATM Masterplan, 2012.Google Scholar
7. SESAR. Enabling Greener Flights, 2015.Google Scholar
8. Penn, S.L., Arunachalam, S., Tripodis, Y., Heiger-Bernays, W. and Levy, J.I. A comparison between monitoring and dispersion modeling approaches to assess the impact of aviation on concentrations of black carbon and nitrogen oxides at Los Angeles International Airport, Science of the Total Environment, 2015, 527–528, (0), pp 47-55.Google Scholar
9. Yim, S.H.L., Stettler, M.E.J. and Barrett, S.R.H. Air quality and public health impacts of UK airports. Part II: impacts and policy assessment, Atmospheric Environment, 2013, 67, pp 184-192.Google Scholar
10. Koudis, G.S., Hu, S.J., Majumdar, A., Jones, R. and Stettler, M.E.J. Airport emissions reductions from reduced thrust takeoff operations, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2017, 52, (Part A), pp 15-28.Google Scholar
11. Guo, R., Zhang, Y. and Wang, Q. Comparison of emerging ground propulsion systems for electrified aircraft taxi operations, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 2014, 44, (0), pp 98-109.Google Scholar
12. Deonandan, I. and Balakrishnan, H. Evaluation of Strategies for Reducing Taxi-out Emissions at Airports. 10th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations (ATIO) Conference, 2010.Google Scholar
13. Stettler, M.E.J., Eastham, S. and Barrett, S.R.H. Air quality and public health impacts of UK airports. Part I: emissions, Atmospheric Environment, 2011, 45, (31), pp 5415-5424.Google Scholar
14. Goldberg, B. and Chesser, D. Sitting on the Runway: Current Aircraft Taxi Times Now Exceed pre-9/11 Experience. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Special Report SR-008, 2008.Google Scholar
15. ICAO. ICAO Aircraft Engine Emissions Databank, 2015.Google Scholar
16. Kumar, V., Sherry, L. and Thompson, T. Analysis of Emissions Inventory for ‘Single-engine Taxi-out’ Operations. ICRAT 2008, 2008.Google Scholar
17. Heathrow Airport Ltd. An Industry Code of Practice: Reducing the Environmental Impacts of Ground Operations and Departing Aircraft, Departures Code of Practice, 2012.Google Scholar
18. Nikoleris, T., Gupta, G. and Kistler, M. Detailed estimation of fuel consumption and emissions during aircraft taxi operations at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2011, 16, (4), pp 302-308.Google Scholar
19. Kurniawan, J.S. and Khardi, S. Comparison of methodologies estimating emissions of aircraft pollutants, environmental impact assessment around airports, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 2011, 31, (3), pp 240-252.Google Scholar
20. Hao, L., Kang, L., Hansen, M. and Ryerson, M.S. Fuel burn impacts of taxi-out delay and their implications for gate-hold benefits. Eleventh USA/Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Seminar (ATM2015), 2015.Google Scholar
21. Ravizza, S., Chen, J., Atkin, J.A.D., Burke, E.K. and Stewart, P. The trade-off between taxi time and fuel consumption in airport ground movement, Public Transport, 2013, 5, (1–2), pp 25-40.Google Scholar
22. Khadilkar, H. and Balakrishnan, H. Estimation of aircraft taxi fuel burn using flight data recorder archives, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2012, 17, (7), pp 532-537.Google Scholar
23. ICAO. Airport Air Quality Manual (Doc 9889), 2011. ISBN 978-92-9231-862-8.Google Scholar
24. Kim, B. and Rachami, J. Aircraft emissions modeling under low power conditions. Proceedings of the A &WMA’s 101st Annual Conference and Exhibition, Portland, Oregon, USA, 2008.Google Scholar
25. Simone, N.W., Stettler, M.E.J. and Barrett, S.R.H. Rapid estimation of global civil aviation emissions with uncertainty quantification, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2013, 25, pp 33-41.Google Scholar
26. Wasiuk, D.K., Lowenberg, M.H. and Shallcross, D.E. An aircraft performance model implementation for the estimation of global and regional commercial aviation fuel burn and emissions, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2015, 35, pp 142-159.Google Scholar
27. IFALPA. Engine-out taxi. The Global Voice of Pilots(14POS22), 2013.Google Scholar
28. Stephens, M.A. Tests Based on EDF Statistics, D’Agostino, R. (Ed), Goodness-of-fit techniques. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1984, pp 97-194.Google Scholar
29. Corlu, C.G., Meterelliyoz, M. and Tiniç, M. Empirical distributions of daily equity index returns: a comparison, Expert Systems with Applications, 2016, 54, pp 170-192.Google Scholar
30. Laitila, T. A pseudo-R2 measure for limited and qualitative dependent variable models, J Econometrics, 1993, 56, (3), pp 341-355.Google Scholar
31. Capehart, B.L. Encyclopedia of Energy Engineering and Technology. CRC Press, 2007, Boca Raton, US.Google Scholar