Air Transport and the Energy Challenge Symposium Feedback 30 November – 1 December 2006 Toulouse
Presented by: Marie Froment
Presented by Marie Froment Presented by Marie Froment
Symposium organisation: 5 sessions followed by questions and debate: ¾ Problems facing air transport in the 21th century ADP, IFP & académie des technlogies ¾ Which fuels and aircraft for the mid 21th century ? Total, Snecma, Rolls Royce, Airbus, Boeing ¾ Which alternative energies for air transport in the future ? ONERA, Airbus ¾ What aviation for the future ? ANAE, NASA, Greener by Design ¾ What air transport system for the 21st century ? Air France, Easy Jet, Eurocontrol, ADP Presented by Marie Froment Presented by Marie Froment
Presentation organisation: 1) SITUATION Estimation of the global energy consumption Peak oil and consequences
2) TECHNOLOGICAL ASPECTS By 2020: Optimisation of the current technologies By 2050: New concepts
3) OPERATIONAL ASPECTS Airlines vision Air traffic control vision Airports vision Presented by Marie Froment Presented by Marie Froment
SITUATION: In 200 years world population: 1 ⇒ 6 milliards people Word energy consumption: x 50 Distribution: 85 % of the world energy consumption comes from fossil fuels (oil ~35%, natural gas ~25%, coal ~25%) The situation will not change during le next 20 - 30 years : - nuclear cover less than 10 % and its share will not increase during that period - commercial renewable energies will stay under 10 % during the period
Source Gilbert Ruelle (ANAE)
Transport:
In 2000 overall transport sector is 20% of total energy used: road (80%), air (10%), maritime (5%) and other transport (5%) The transport fraction will remain constant
But the air transport part could : 10% (2000) ⇒ 15% (2050-2100) Presented by Marie Froment
Source Pierre-René Bauquis (IFP)
Presented by Marie Froment
Peak oil and consequences: The peak of the oil production , according to the current estimations, is situated between 2010 and 2030 ⇒ a lot of divergences ! Fuel is the top cost item for long haul operations and the 2nd one for short haul ones.
If fuel price doubles: If no impact on the ticket price ⇒ P 40% costs for long haul & P 20% for short haul If impact on the ticket price ⇒ N 12% fare increase generates a P18% demand growth for short haul & N 25% fare increase generates a P 62.5% demand growth for long haul
V a ria ble cost
Year 2005
Tota l cost
Long ra nge ope ra tions Fue l* A ircraft cost and leasing, insurance Distribution fees M aintenance Technical crew Com mercial crew Ground handling A irport charges & ATC overheads Catering
27.0% 9.8% 9.0% 8.9% 8.8% 8.8% 8.4% 8.1% 5.6% 5.6% Tota l
S hort a nd m e dium ra nge ope ra tions Ground handling Fue l* Distribution fees A ircraft cost and leasing, insurance M aintenance Technical crew A irport charges + ATC overheads Com mercial crew Catering Tota l * No jet-fuel hedging taken into account
Fix e d cost
9.8% 3.6% 4.5% 8.8% 8.8% 7.5% 5.6%
Tota l
pe r trip M id/long te rm risk
27.0% 0.0% 5.4% 4.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 8.1% 0.0% 5.6%
27.0%
0.8% 1.2%
6.9%
17.9%
5.6%
48.6%
51.4%
33.5%
19.4% 12.6% 12.3% 11.6% 9.7% 9.7% 8.8% 6.8% 4.8% 4.2%
15.5%
3.9% 12.6% 7.4% 0.0% 4.8% 0.0% 8.8% 0.0% 0.0% 4.2%
3.9% 12.6%
41.7%
22.7%
100.0%
6.8% 4.8% 58.3%
Source Daniel Sallié (ADP)
With their weak flexibility the impact isMarie even more important for low Presented by Froment cost companies Source Ray Webster (Easy Jet) Presented by Marie Froment
5.4% 4.5%
100.0%
4.9% 11.6% 4.8% 9.7%
pe r pa x (ve ry) Short te rm risk
7.4% 4.8% 1.3%
7.5%
4.2% 19.1%
Peak oil and consequences The peak of the oil production , according to the current estimations, is situated between 2010 and 2030 ⇒ a lot of divergences !
Will the fuel use decrease because of the lack of oil or because of the increase of its price with CO2 emissions taxes ?
Hypothesis : 1 t fuel produces 3.5 t. CO2
Costs
Formerly
Currently
Fuel ($/ton)
175
350
700
1400
Lower figure + CO2 (50$/ton)
0
0
175
175
175
350
875
1575
0
0
1750
1750
175
350
2475
3150
Higher figure + CO2 (500$/ton)
Future (2010-20) / (2020-30)
The price of the CO2 ton is not fixed yet and still has no impact, (currently it is between 6 and 30 euro the ton according to periods). But in 2010-2020 this price could be much more important Presented by Marie Froment
Source Pierre-René Bauquis (IFP)
Presented by Marie Froment
Technological aspects: - Horizon 2020: Aircraft conceived to fly with oil or with alternative fuels - Horizon 2050: new energy sources must be considered such as hydrogen, nuclear... Oil-derived kerosene
Synthetic kerosene Bio-fuel and BTL LH2
2000
2010
Next2020 generation 2030 aircraft 2040
2050
designed for kerosene like fuels
Source Philippe Jarry & Yvon Vigneron (Airbus)
The evolution perspectives and the energy adaptation are today more developed for the automobile than for the air transport Source Pierre-René Bauquis (IFP) Presented by Marie Froment Presented by Marie Froment
By 2020: Optimisation of the current technologies Engine manufacturers European ACARE 2020 objectives (reference 2000 aircraft): Aircraft
Objectives
Engines
Noise reduction
reduce perceived noise by half
reduce noise by 6dB per operation
NOx emissions reduction
reduce NOx by 80% and other emissions
reduce NOx by 60 to 80%
CO2 emissions reduction
reduce CO2 by 50%
reduce specific fuel consumption by 20%
Source Jacques Renvier (SNECMA) For EIS 2015, no architectural revolution expected in Propulsion. Still allow about 10 % fuel burn saving. For EIS 2020 , another 10 to 12% saving but noise issue may require Aircraft innovative formula
⇒ Trade-offs are necessary Open rotor: 10-15% SFC improvement Revolutionary changes to propulsion system dependent on energy source and aircraft configuration Presented by Marie Froment Source Ian Ritchey (Rolls Royce)
Presented by Marie Froment
By 2020: Optimisation of the current technologies Aircraft manufacturers Boeing/Nasa vision Improvements realised and strategy: Reduction 70% fuel consumption between 707 and 767-200 Fuel burn reduction achieved thanks to: new technologies like lighter weight materials, better wing aerodynamics, more electric technos, fuel cells for APU replacement (SOFC) …
Systems Engines Materials
Aerodynamics
Finding an alternate fuel will be difficult ⇒ CO2 requirements will impact choices Presented by Marie Froment
Source Jeff Verwey (Boeing) & Fayette Collier (Nasa) Presented by Marie Froment
Relative contributions toward 787 breakthrough fuel efficiency
By 2020: Optimisation of the current technologies Aircraft manufacturers Aircraft design will be dependent of priorities and trade-offs Low fuel use
Low atmospheric impact
Low noise
Faster
“N+1” (~2012)
Nasa objectives presented as: Noise, Emission, Fuel Burn Targets Attainable from Major Changes in Engine Cycle/Airframe Configurations and Advanced Technologies
Presented by Marie Froment Presented by Marie Froment
Low operating cost
Alternate fuels
“N+2” (~2018)
By 2020: Optimisation of the current technologies Aircraft manufacturers Blended wing body X48B
Extreme short take-off landing (ESTOL) jet transport aircraft
⇒ Noise and emissions reduction Should fly between March and June 2007 EIS should be between 2022 & 2025 – conceived for 50-150 pax – Mach 0,8 (cruise) – range between 1400 to 2000 miles ⇒ Airport noise foot print reduction Presented by Marie Froment
Source Jeff Verwey (Boeing) & Fayette Collier (Nasa) Presented by Marie Froment
By 2020: Optimisation of the current technologies Aircraft manufacturers Airbus vision Proposition of different ways of improvement to reduce fuel consumption: Optimization of the a/c configuration propfan use to reduce consumption intensive use of composite materials New propulsion systems like open rotor Reduction of the wing deflection ⇒ P of the a/c cruise speed
HOWEVER, need to better understand impact on: Cruise speed / Community noise / Production costs… Source Philippe Jarry & Yvon Vigneron (Airbus) NACRE project initiated by Airbus: large blended wing-body, proactive green aircraft Source John Green (Greener by design)
Presented by Marie Froment Presented by Marie Froment
By 2020: Optimisation of the current technologies Aircraft manufacturer Emissions trade-offs to take into account: Air transport < 4% of total anthropogenic radiative forcing ⇒ CO2 is confirmed to be a predominant contributor ⇒ NOx has to be considered as well … ⇒ Contrails/cirrus may be confirmed as a major contributor !
Complex & opposite effects
For NOx emissions: Flying lower may reduce NOX impact but might increase fuel burn, thus CO2 emissions ⇒ Could be recovered if reduced aircraft speed For contrails & cirrus:
needs better 9 Flying lower : However negative impact on fuel burn, thus CO2 emissions understanding 9 Adapting Flight Path to weather: Significant impact on ATC
For fuels: Giving similar fuel characteristics, therefore with no impact on aircraft configuration or fuel efficiency Presented by Marie Froment
Source Philippe Jarry & Yvon Vigneron (Airbus) Presented by Marie Froment
By 2020: Optimisation of the current technologies Alternative fuels - comparisons Alternative fuels GTL D FT – Fisher Tropsch (natural gas) CTL D FT Hydrogenation (coal based) BTL D FT or direct Hydrogenation (biomass based) HTL D Direct carbonation of nuclear hydrogen.
CTL - GTL Advantages
CO emissions, sulphur compounds, soot reduction BUT: lubricant need , production cost more important & smaller particles emitted Drawbacks
Kerosen (first utilisation: transport)
-High energy density -Easy to use
GTL
- 2x less CO2 -Difficult to find emissions than coal for -Demand increase & cost increase the same energy production
CTL
-No geopolitical risks -Most important polluter for the supply ⇒ Only one solution for this problem would be to capture the CO2 during the production -Resources available for at least 200 years Presented by Marie Froment
Source: Pierre-René Bauquis (IFP)
-Few resources still available -Geopolitical risks even higher -Important CO2 emissions (no capture way for transport)
Presented by Marie Froment
By 2020: Optimisation of the current technologies BTL Alcohols: methanol and ethanol ⇒ not adapted to air transport : low energy content, low flash point, emission of aldehyde after combustion Vegetal oil esters: good energy content but several drawbacks : high freezing temperature, sensitivity to oxidation, reactivity to water ⇒ concerning the pollutants emissions, lack of data for use on aero-engines Synthetic fuel from biomass: the Fischer-Tropsch process allows the production of a synthetic kerosene Advantages
Drawbacks
-Renewable energy Same advantages as CTL/GTL: -Netto CO2 production reduced by 8090% -Few or no sulphur -Few HPA content ⇒ few smoke emission
-high solidification temperature -Intensive agriculture: impact on the environment -Limitation of the production (max 10-20% of the total consumption) - Quality/type/standardization of BTL over the world
Presented by Marie Froment
Source Paul Kuntzmann (ONERA)
Presented by Marie Froment
By 2050: New concepts - Hydrogen propulsion LH2 as Alternative Fuel for Aeronautics Hydrogen advantages:
Source Jeff Verwey (Boeing) & Fayette Collier (Nasa)
-Weight 1: 2.8 in comparison with kerosene -Hydrogen offers a high energy content per mass, hence promises payload or range increase for aircraft. No CO, CO2 and SOX emissions
Hydrogen drawbacks: Continuous Moldline Flaps - For aviation, hydrogen must be cooled down to the liquid state (LH2, -253°C) Distributed LH Propulsion for reasons of volume and weight of tanks Forward and Aft Noise Shielding - 4 times greater volume than kerosene - Very good insulation of tanks, pipes - Tanks under some differential pressure - Spherical or cylindrical tanks Fuselage LH2 Tanks - New aircraft configuration 2
Blended Wing Body
Source Andreas Westenberger (Airbus)
Based on a 2001 scenario hydrogen a/c could become Presented by Marie Froment economically interesting around 2040 Presented by Marie Froment
By 2050: New concepts – Nuclear Propulsion Advantages - Fossil resource extensive (available for at least 100 years with current technologies- today 440 plans in the world) - the estimation of reserves is dependent on the selected nuclear technology - very high power energy density - no CO2 emissions
Drawbacks - Important heat emanation during the fission global efficiency of nuclear powerplants is limited (around 22 % for the nuclear submarine powerplants) ⇒ need to manage this energy - nuclear reaction produces dangerous radiations for the humans, the building materials and the electronic components - nuclear reaction should be perfectly controlled - nuclear reaction produces some wastes, in particular long half life nuclear materials (plutonium, actinides), to be kept in secured deposits or treated - public image is very bad (tchernobyl, waste treatments…)
⇒ The nuclear powered aircraft seems technically feasible but requires heavy investment and poses serious problems of safety/security/environment ; in particular flight over land should be forbidden since a crash would lead to a disaster Presented by Marie Froment
Source Paul Kuentzmann (ONERA) Presented by Marie Froment
Airlines vision – Easy Jet / Air France Low fare airlines
Full service airlines
Market share (% of passengers)
⇒ Focus on minimising costs and maximising efficiency ⇒ Hub principle ⇒ Lower costs passed on to consumers as lower fares ⇒ Important capacity aircraft ⇒ Mainly point to point services vs hub and spoke model Fuel reduction: CDA implementation, ⇒ Mainly use secondary and regional airports fly with lighter weight, reduce engine ⇒ Direct services between the regions use on ground, less APU use, ATM & SESAR project 100% Fuel reduction: Operate 5% 19% 90% younger, cleaner, aircraft 20% 33% 80% fleets (1% per year), ATM, 19% 70% CDA, highest seat configuration 12%
60% 50% 40%
75% 62%
30%
55%
20% 10% 0% 2000
2003
Mainline carriers (including subsidiaries and regionals) Source: Mercer Presented (2005) by Marie Froment
Source Gilles Bordes-Pages (Air France) Source Ray Webster (Easy Jet)
Note: Intra-European traffic 2003: 590m (441m international + 149m domestic)
Presented by Marie Froment
2010
Charter airlines Low fare airlines
Air traffic control vision ATM even more exposed than in the past ⇒ traffic congestion & emissions reduction
Different measures have been set up: ⇒ RVSM for a/c flying up to 29000 ft (~9000m): N 15% capacity - 4,4% of NOX - 5,0% of H2O - 3,5 & 5,0% of fuel burn
At cruising altitudes
⇒ CDA: 10-30% reduction in fuel burn and CO2 emissions (“up to 200kg per flight”) ⇒ More direct routes: currently 6,2% extra distance covered ⇒ SESAR project: optimisation of European ATM Stream management and not frontier management Deployment (2014 -> 2020) with close relationship with US CNS/ATM could bring an additional 5-12% fuel burn reduction Presented by Marie Froment
Source Andrew Watt (Eurocontrol)
Presented by Marie Froment
Airport vision: ADP ADP presentation ⇒ 2nd airport in Europe by turnover (1,914.6 million euros in 2005) ⇒ 1st in term of cargo ⇒ 78 million passengers in 2005 (82 Mpax in 2006) Airports are faced with the energetic problem of: 9 Aircraft, APU 9 GSE, GPU 9 Landside traffic around the airport 9 stationary sources
ADP priorities: - Optimisation of the airport accessibility (public transport) - Energy efficiency at terminals (electricity consumption) - Optimisation of ground equipments (APU restrictions, use of GPU or FEGP, reduction of taxi phase duration ~30mn at CDG)
Air travel is going to continue to grow. Airport capacity in 2025 will have to be at least twice what is today. Presentedit by Marie Froment Source Marc Noyelle (ADP)
Presented by Marie Froment
Conclusions of the symposium: Today, jet subsonic transport aircraft are reaching their maturity in terms of efficiency ; improvement to efficiency is thus limited in the medium and long
term (George Ville – ANAE):
- 20 à 30% in terms of technology impact, - 30% for optimized operation (but to the detriment of passenger wishes).
Carbon emission costs will have an heavy impact on the energy choices. For aviation industry, the choice between liquid H2 and/or synthetic kerosene should occur between 2020 and 2030 in order to define the new generation of airplanes to be constructed as from 2040-2050. (Pierre-René Bauquis – IFP) Biomass-fuels could be a medium term solution to contain CO2 emissions Long way ahead to see LH2 emerge as the universal solution (Philippe Jarry & Yvon Vigneron – Airbus) For EIS 2040, propulsion can manage deep fuel change like H2. But major change will be driven by the overall air transport system changes
The challenge of future air transport is not only related to energy but also to environment and economics Source Presented by Marie FromentPaul Presented by Marie Froment
Kuenztmann (ONERA)
Recommendations Collaborative stakeholder action is key Air Trafic Management
Noise
airports authorities airlines A/c manufacturers Public, Passagers Industrial partners ONGs Research institutes
Emissions
Communication Aviation industry should not underestimate the change of consumer attitude versus air transport: we need to make sure that they understand the situation (Ray Webster – Easy Jet) Presented by Marie Froment Public image of the aviation (Daniel Sallié – ADP) Presented by Marie Froment
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION !
Presented by Marie Froment Presented by Marie Froment
Some revolutionary concepts
Presented by Marie Froment Presented by Marie Froment
Le challenge de l‘aviation: exemples de trade-offs Moteur: Augmenter le rapport de pression et la température de combustion
Ö Réduction de la consommation/CO2 Ö Réduction du bruit Ö Réduction des NOX
Ö Réduction de la consommation/CO2 Ö Réduction du HC et du CO Ö Augmentation des NOX
om CO m 2 a t io
Co ns
Ö Réduction de la consommation/CO2
Bruit
Procédure opérationnelle: CDA Ö Réduction du bruit
n
/
Avion: Améliorer l’aérodynamique & réduire la masse
Autres émissions
Avion: Modifier la nacelle Ö Réduction du bruit Ö Augmentation de la consommation/ CO2
Presented by Marie Froment Presented by Marie Froment
Moteur: Augmenter le rapport de mélange Ö Réduction de la consommation/ CO2 Ö Réduction du bruit Ö Augmentation des NOX
Impacts des émissions avions
Presented by Marie Froment Presented by Marie Froment
Peak oil and consequences The peak of the oil production , according to the current estimations, is situated between 2010 and 2030 ⇒ a lot of divergences !
Will the fuel use decrease because of the lack of oil or because of the increase of its price with CO2 emissions taxes ? Hier
Baril en $ tonne en $
Hypothesis : 1 t fuel produces 3.5 t. CO2
25 175
Aujourd’hui
50 350
Demain (2010-20) ou (2020-30)
100 700
200 1400
Coût tonneCO2 50$
175 875
175 1575
500$/Tonne.CO2
1750 2475
1750 3150
Final price for the fuel tonne: barrel + CO2
The price of the CO2 ton is not fixed yet and still have no impact, (currently it is between 6 and 30 euro the ton according to periods). But in 2010-2020 this price could be much more important Presented by Marie Froment
Source Pierre-René Bauquis (IFP)
Presented by Marie Froment
