Abstract
AbstractAn operational mitigation strategy for commercial aircraft impact on atmospheric composition, referred to as the turboprop replacement strategy (TRS), is described in this paper. The global air traffic between 2005 and 2011 was modeled with the TRS in which turbofan powered aircraft were replaced with nine chosen turboprop powered aircraft on all routes up to 1700 nautical miles (NM) in range. The results of this TRS double the global number of departures, as well as global mission distance, while global mission time grows by nearly a factor of 3. However, the global mission fuel and the emissions of aviation CO2, H2O, and SOx remain approximately unchanged, and the total global aviation CO, hydrocarbons (HC), and NOx emissions are reduced by 79%, 21%, and 11% on average between 2005 and 2011. The TRS lowers the global mean cruise altitude of flights up to 1700 NM by ~2.7 km which leads to a significant decrease in global mission fuel burn, mission time, distance flown, and the aircraft emissions of CO2, CO, H2O, NOx, SOx, and HC above 9.2 km. The replacement of turbofans with turboprops in regional fleets on a global scale leads to an overall reduction in levels of tropospheric O3 at the current estimated mean cruise altitude near the tropopause where the radiative forcing of O3 is strongest. Further, the replacement strategy results in a reduction of ground‐level aviation CO and NOx emissions by 33 and 29%, respectively, between 2005 and 2011.
Highlights
IntroductionShort-haul flight (intracontinental and domestic missions) accounted for 92% of all global departures recorded, and over a half of the estimated total global emissions of CO2 and NOx between 2005 and 2011 [Wasiuk, 2014]
Short-haul flight accounted for 92% of all global departures recorded, and over a half of the estimated total global emissions of CO2 and NOx between 2005 and 2011 [Wasiuk, 2014]
An increasing fuel burn would be expected because of the annual increment in departures from 2005 to 2011, but the turbine used on a turboprop burns 25–40% less fuel compared with an equivalent turbofan engine on short-haul missions per unit thrust [Air Transport Action Group, 2010; Mrazova, 2013]
Summary
Short-haul flight (intracontinental and domestic missions) accounted for 92% of all global departures recorded, and over a half of the estimated total global emissions of CO2 and NOx between 2005 and 2011 [Wasiuk, 2014]. Turboprop aircraft are better suited than turbofan for short-haul missions as they spend more time in cruise and are noted for their low fuel consumption [Babikian et al, 2002]. There is a dramatic drop in fuel cost over recent years; the environmental cost could tip the advantage in favor of the turboprop. This can be coupled with the findings on the availability of fuel by Nygren [2008] which suggest that aviation fuel production is predicted to decrease by several percent a year after the crude oil production peak is reached. The growth in demand for air traffic, coupled with falling availability of aviation fuel, “envisages a substantial lack of jet fuel by the year 2026.”
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
