air travel – greener by design€¦ · income and air travel. the effects could be more far...

DESIGNbyGreenerGreener

ANNUAL REPORT 2019-2020

A I R T R AV E L – G R E E N E R B Y D E S I G N

2 Royal Aeronautical Society

Executive Committee

Prof Peter Bearman Jonathon Counsell Roger Gardner Dr John Green Ian Jopson Dr Ray Kingcombe Geoff Maynard Kevin Morris Prof Ian Poll Dr Marc Stettler Robert Whitfield Dr Richard Wilson Roger Wiltshire

Front cover: Harbour Air DHC-2 Beaver fitted with Magnix all-electric motor. Harbour Air.

Greener by Design

NA

SA

3 Greener by Design Annual Report 2019-2020

GREENER BY DESIGNANNUAL REPORT 2019-2020

Introduction 4Conference Report 6Carbon Pricing through effective Market-Based Measures 16Atmospheric Science 22Technology 28Operations Report 35

Contents

Top: Magnix all-electric nine (plus two crew) Cessna 208B Grand Caravan on test.Magnix.


Introduction

Introduction

Unprecedented and dramatic climatic events have hit the headlines in the last year. Whether It has been frequent severe storms, forest fires, sandstorms, severe drought or extensive flooding, it has brought home to almost everyone, sadly in many cases quite literally, the reality of climate change. We ignore it at our and our children’s peril. It should come as no surprise to anyone who lives in a democracy that interest in, and scrutiny of, environmental issues has continued to grow rapidly – almost matching China’s growth in CO2 emissions, now at 28% of the world total!

This pressure led the UK Government last summer to tighten the requirements in the Climate Change Act 2008. Instead of the previous target of an 80% reduction in domestic CO2 emissions between 1990 and 2050, the new target is net zero by 2050. Although this legislation excludes international aviation and shipping, the Government stated in Parliament that they plan to include these later and asked the Climate Change Committee (CCC) to provide advice on how this could be done.

In September 2019 the CCC responded by doubting the greater use of Sustainable Aviation Fuel or the introduction of all electric aircraft before 2050. Instead they advocated strong demand management to halve anticipated growth by 2050. These are, in GBD’s view, pessimistic assumptions which disregard the industry’s past record on innovation and ignore research currently being undertaken.

However, in March 2020 all this was overtaken by the Covid-19 pandemic. Suddenly life for all of us changed dramatically with the lockdown. Air traffic plunged by over 90% and hopes for the annual holiday abroad this year evaporated. Social distancing, working from home and virtual meetings have become the new norm. How much of this will change our attitudes and habits permanently remains to be seen, but it is bound to have a significant short-term effect on the economy, our

income and air travel. The effects could be more far reaching if a vaccine to protect us against the virus is elusive. Several years are likely to elapse before air travel returns to 2019 levels.

Ironically the lockdown has also cut air pollution by 50%, and CO2 emissions perhaps by as much as 20%. So while the virus with its personal tragic consequences for many is still occupying the headlines, the lockdown shows what could be done about cutting CO2 emissions if the motivation was strong enough. Many environmental groups around the world are putting pressure on Governments to be brave and take more radical action. While the Covid pandemic has been a terrible tragedy for many, the world needs to resolve to tackle Climate Change with the same urgency and determination to avoid a climate catastrophe of wide-ranging consequences in the latter part of this century.

BA was the first airline that committed to do what it takes to achieve net zero CO2 emissions on all their flights by 2050, a lead now followed by many others. However, Covid-19 will have a major impact on these plans. The 20th anniversary GBD conference will therefore be a virtual conference on the subject – Recovery strategy with climate gain – scheduled for 3 and 4 November in London. We hope you will be able to join us and also for a special ‘real’ conference on the non-CO2 effects of Aviation on Global Warming in May 2021.

Geoff Maynard Chair

Greener by Design

5Greener by Design Report 2018-2019

The CTi fan system on the Advanced Low Pressure System engine demonstrator. Rolls-Royce.

Conference Report

Royal Aeronautical Society 6

Greener by Design Conference ReportINTRODUCTION

The 2019 Greener by Design Conference ‘Aviation and the Net Zero Emissions Challenge’ was held at No.4 Hamilton Place on 7 November 2019. The conference was opened by Geoff Maynard, Chair of Greener by Design, who welcomed all the delegates to discuss this challenging topic.

The opening address was given by Sir Brian Burridge, Chief Executive Officer of the Royal Aeronautical Society, who spoke on Creating Sustainable Sectors. He identified three key sectors: (1) the Future of Flight, including Urban Air Mobility, Defence, Space Capability and Aircraft Design; (2) Climate Change & Sustainability, including Environmental issues, Sustainable Aviation Fuels, Carbon Offsetting and Regulation; and (3) Tomorrow’s Aerospace Professional, including Diversity and Inclusion, Social mobility, and Recruitment and Retention of personnel.

He stressed that the three sectors overlap, and that they all require innovative leaders. The Society’s role was to foster, encourage and support the industry to attract and retain high quality individuals who could contribute to the sustainability of the aviation sector.

WHERE ARE WE?

The first session was opened by Professor Piers Forster, member, UK Committee on Climate Change (CCC) and Director, Priestley International Centre for Climate, University of Leeds, who reviewed the climate science in the light of recent IPCC reports and the UK net zero target, aviation’s share of carbon dioxide emissions, non-CO2 climate effects of aviation and pathways compatible with net-zero. He noted that the world had significantly transformed over the past ten years and was now focused on meeting a target limiting global

Singapore Airlines’ A350-900 Flight SQ31 being fuelled for the first Green Package flight from San Francisco to Singapore on 1 May 2017, powered by a combination of sustainable biofuel produced from used cooking oils and conventional jet fuel. Airbus.

7Greener by Design Annual Report 2019-2020

together to ensure its successful implementation, which would put $40bn into climate mitigation removing 2.5bn tonnes of CO2 over its lifetime.

The industry foresaw the future being driven by SAF, and he noted that the first flight using this was in 2005 – to date 200,000 commercial flights had been completed using SAF, with five airports already supplying it from 11 production facilities worldwide, currently representing 0.01% of total aviation fuel production. The industry target is for 2% of all jet fuel being supplied as SAF by 2025, but this needs further investment – he noted that the UK Government was leading in producing the framework for SAF production.

The industry ‘Waypoint 2050’ project for getting to a target of 50% net CO2 on a 2005 baseline had been announced at the Paris air show, and it was hoped that the ICAO Assembly would also mandate it. The question was is 50% enough when some States were targeting net zero by 2050? It was clear that some airlines and geographical areas can and should move quicker, but he didn’t believe it was feasible everywhere.

The option of ‘Green taxes’ had been raised again in the EU, which seemed an easy solution, but their effectiveness was suspect and the solution explored in EU would not be acceptable in other parts of the world, especially in the Southeast and Southern countries. On balance, there is a need for vision to overcome some of these huge challenges.

Tim Johnson, Director, Aviation Environment Federation, was the last session speaker and started by noting that the CCC’s planning

temperatures to no more than 1½°C, over pre-industrial levels.

As far as aviation was concerned, over this period there had been an increase in passenger kilometres, but the CO2 emissions had kept remarkably constant up to the present, however this trend was now starting to increase again. As a result, meeting the UK’s net-zero target requires new technologies to be developed and implemented, including carbon capture and storage (CCS).

The economic viability of future options required closer analysis ie at £200/tonne CO2 CCS, was it more sensible to focus on this rather than concentrating on sustainable aviation fuel (SAF)? SAF did, however, offer some potential for mitigation, but there was still a need to reduce ice formation from its use. He also noted that it wasn’t possible to offset everything.

With respect to the IPCC, and aviation’s effect on the atmosphere including non-CO2 emissions, Piers noted that they were just about to submit an update to the Radiative Forcing values, but in reality they don’t expect things to change much: CO2 emissions were up by about 20%, while the effects of both NOX and SOX were reduced. Soot impacts were higher, and contrails and cirrus clouds were expected to have a much larger effect.

Radiative Forcing (RF) was still seen as a good way of comparing the warming impacts from the different emission species, but more intensive analyses of climate simulations have led to the development of Effective Radiative Forcing (ERF) which is seen as a much better measure.

In conclusion, the view of aviation’s CO2 and non-CO2 impacts on the global atmosphere, have not really changed that much at all.

Michael Gill, Executive Director, Air Transport Action Group, gave an industry update noting that currently, and in up to 30 years’ time (2050), the industry had a fuel efficiency target of increasing at 1.5% per year. To date, the performance currently stands at 2.3%, significantly higher (almost double) than the rest of the economy.

The industry was also on-track to deliver the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA), for which the industry was supportive. While agreeing that it’s not perfect but, on balance, it is a good starting point with CORSIA being viewed as a gap-filler and not a be-all and end-all. He noted that all stakeholders needed to work

Lord Adair Turner proposes the Mission Possible during the conference. Ben Robins, FutureProofCreative.

Conference Report


noting that some were already asking corporate buyers to pay extra to enable them to use SAF. Governments should mandate its use with a 20% uptake as a start.

ICSA also want to address the demand management challenge set by the IPCC for all greenhouse gasses (not just CO2), and this needs to be reflected in policy. ICAO needs to supply the necessary leadership to ensure that this is managed properly, with discussions around net vs absolute emissions, and global vs regional, if states don’t act. CCS will be an essential part of the management of emissions as technology is not enough to meet the carbon neutral requirement. Currently the cost is around $140–$670 per tonne but will reduce with efficiencies of scale. Tim saw demand management not necessarily as an objective, but carbon pricing was – active demand management would be a fallback option.

Finally, although public scrutiny of aviation was at an all-time high, the opposite is true of information to make informed choices – carbon labelling of products may be a useful way of addressing this issue.

Following the presentations, a question was asked about the impact of sustainable fuels on radiative forcing from contrails. It was noted that the particles that contrails coalesce on were formed by aromatics in the fuel, but although aromatic fuels were currently going through certification, there was so much dirt already in the atmosphere, contrails would always be formed.

In a response to a question of what the industry thought about Greta Thunberg’s recent suggestion to stop flying, it was noted that IATA airlines had been carrying out work on reducing emissions from 2009 and it was not in response to Greta. However, her position has helped the industry to push harder and make people stop and think about their share of carbon emissions. It was suggested that CO2 performance labelling of aircraft was not far away and that this would help people understand their impacts better.

Finally, the ability of ICAO standards to meet the net-zero target was questioned and would the industry be prepared to go further. Everyone noted some frustration with ICAO. However, they recognised that ICAO did have a difficult job to manage all 193 member states and that they had a good track record of setting technical standards and do recognise the imperfections. Industry was already driving ahead with their own strategy – it was noted that the recent

assumption for aviation and shipping was that they should be net-zero, and their aviation strategy would be published in 2020. There is an obvious discrepancy between the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) goal of carbon neutral growth from 2020, and the CCCs of reducing aviation’s emissions to 2005 levels. He thought that industry is unlikely to be able to achieve net-zero by 2050, which means thinking about all CO2 emissions now and how to reduce and mitigate them.

For aviation, he believed that reducing CO2 beyond current strategy by limiting passenger demand and looking at airport strategy was necessary. An ICAO long-term goal, with associated pathway to be agreed at the next ICAO Assembly was important to inform the discussion.

The International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation (ICSA) wants ICAO member states to try to come together with a common vision. Absolute levels of CO2 from aviation must be no higher than those of 2020, rather than the net criterion of CORSIA. In the future, ICSA want a 50% reduction from aviation as an absolute target, as a minimum. They believe that there is plenty of scope to increase fuel efficiency even further – not just by incorporating new technology but also by retiring older aircraft earlier.

They feel that there is a future in SAF, but this needs to develop more rapidly – in 2018 6m tonnes of SAF powered aviation for just 10min. There are many ways that airlines could promote a greater uptake

A model of the Airbus Bird of Prey concept was on prominent display during the conference. Ben Robins, FutureProofCreative.

Greener by Design Annual Report 2019-2020 9

Under these conditions the value of ETRW is about 0.6. Hence the conclusion by Professor Poll that, today, if all aircraft were able to operate at their most efficient, and comparing this with how they actually operate, his analysis indicates only half of the fuel would be needed. The speaker described this as 100% wastage. In order of importance he listed the sources of wastage as due to: operating below maximum load factor, lack of matching of an aircraft to routes with its design range, air traffic management en-route, departure routes and climb profile, descent profile and arrival routes and ground manoeuvring. His challenge to the industry is to remove all wastage.

The contribution from Oliver Family of Airbus, Head of Overall Aircraft Design – E-Fan X, provided an interesting report on the progress to date on the development of the electric-powered aircraft project E-Fan X being undertaken by Airbus and Rolls-Royce. He began by setting out the case for electrification and demonstrated that using coal to generate electricity is in decline and that there is an exponential growth in renewables accompanied by a reduction in cost per MW-hr. In the nine years up to 2018 in North America the cost per MW-hr from solar energy fell from $359 to $43 and in the seven years up to 2017 the cost of storage per KW-hr using lithium-ion batteries fell from $1,000 to $209. The motivation for the partnership between Airbus and Rolls-Royce is to develop the first low-emissions airliner with learning gained from building and flying E-Fan X, a hybrid-electric demonstrator. The aircraft is based on a BAE 146 with engine number three replaced by an electric propulsion unit. A gas turbine engine is located near the tail section and is coupled to a generator linked to a battery storage system.

CCC letter to the Secretary of State for Transport wanted the UK to map out a path to net-zero complementary to ICAO, and then use ICAO as a vehicle to encourage other states to do the same.

TECHNOLOGY AND OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY

Professor Ian Poll, Cranfield University, commenced the second session with a presentation entitled ‘What is the potential for improving operational efficiency?’ by showing a prediction that by 2050 aviation alone will increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by between 1% and 2%. He went on to consider how fuel usage could be reduced by aircraft operating at their maximum efficiency. He questioned whether advances in aircraft technology could provide a complete solution for the reduction required in the relatively short time span between now and 2050. Also, taking into account an annual growth rate in aviation of 4.7%, he stated that large off-set programmes alone would not provide the solution and hence alternative approaches required consideration. The effect of various sources of inefficiency were assessed by presenting ‘energy to revenue work’ ratios (ETRW), defined as the ratio of energy released by the fuel to the product of weight payload and distance flown. It was stated that a typical value for ETRW, averaged across a carrier’s fleet, is currently about 1.2. Considering an individual aircraft, its value of ETRW is dependent on many factors including range and load factors. However, an aircraft achieves its lowest values, meaning increased operational efficiency, when working close to the point where the weight of the aircraft before any fuel is added (the zero fuel weight) and the take off weight are both at their certified maximum permitted values.

Following the Covid-19 pandemic many airlines have brought forward the retirement of older aircraft such as the Boeing 747-400. Ken Fielding.


change are beginning to become apparent. However, he has the expectation that COP 26 will help to focus minds. Since aircraft being flown today and aircraft at the design stage today are still expected to be with us in 2050 the speaker sees sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) and offsetting as the ways out of an ‘existential’ crisis. Aircraft can fly now with a 50% blend and it is hoped this can be increased further and that aviation will be a priority when it comes to allotting feedstock. In order to encourage the use of SAFs the speaker turned to Air Passenger Duty (APD) and landing charges. Since APD is highly unlikely to go away it could be increased for passengers on non-SAF flights and reduced for SAF flights. A similar thinking was applied to landing charges. Returning to offsetting the speaker briefly described contributing to nature-based and technology-based schemes for CO2 removal. When it comes to voluntary schemes they have not been successful as only 1% of passengers are willing to participate. To increase participation more trust needs to be built up so people have a clearer view of what happens to their money. The speaker was confident that Heathrow will arrive at net zero CO2 by 2050 with offsetting and given that there is greater emphasis placed on SAF production.

The final presentation in this session, ‘Improving Airspace Efficiency’ was given by Dr Jarlath Molloy, Environmental Affairs Manager, NATS. Air traffic control is identified as one of a number of aspects of aviation where there is scope for reducing emissions and in his presentation, Dr Molloy set out advances being made at NATS. In 2019 a survey was undertaken by NATS of the UK public’s views on air travel and it indicated that 60% think reducing CO2 emissions should be the industry priority. Other interesting statistics include: 38% willing

In addition, there is important experience to be gained in high voltage power distribution, in hybrid-electric system control and thermal management. While individual components have high efficiencies the amount of heat generated is estimated to be about 140 kW, estimated by the speaker to be the equivalent of cooling 1,400 BAE 146 passengers. In addition to these challenges the speaker indicated that the greatest test was integrating all the new systems into the aircraft. The E-Fan X design phase is well underway including wind-tunnel testing, battery testing and 3kV power distribution testing. Detailed design is expected to be completed by mid-2020 and the aircraft will be converted to its hybrid configuration in 2021 and flight testing will take place in 2022.

The next speaker, Adam Morton, Head of Environmental Technology at Rolls-Royce, explained that he joined the company about a year ago from the energy sector where he was involved in decarbonisation and observed that aviation still had a long way to go to achieve net zero emissions. In his presentation, Addressing Carbon – Breaking Down the Silos, he first described the reduction in CO2 emissions that can be expected with new improved gas turbine engines such as the Ultrafan where, compared with present Trent engines, a 25% improvement in efficiency can be expected by 2025. However, in accord with other speakers, he agreed that to meet the 2050 net zero emissions target advances were needed on a number of fronts. One of Rolls-Royce’s aims is to encourage the development of sustainable aviation fuels that do not have an adverse effect on engine maintenance intervals. The presenter called for greater focus on this area by established and new fuels companies in order to maximise future availability while at the same time removing unacceptable land-use impacts. Other important developments being carried out by Rolls-Royce are in electrification and hybridisation such as displayed in the collaboration they have with Airbus in the E-Fan X demonstrator project. Here there are opportunities for advances in power system configuration and the development of low-emission gas turbine engines for electrical power generation.

Matt Gorman, Director of Sustainability, Heathrow Airport, explained that the title of his presentation, An Update from Heathrow Airport, was devised to allow him to have scope to talk more broadly about the net zero emissions challenge from a Heathrow perspective. The message was that presently not enough is being done to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and the problem needs to be addressed with greater urgency as the adverse effects of climate

Conference Report

The Rolls-Royce composite carbon/titanium (CTi) fan blade for the Advance and UltraFan engines was flown on Rols-Royce’s Boeing 747 flying testbed in 2014. Rolls-Royce.


world total, are forecast to rise by 83% in the same period. Some transfer to rail, higher prices to depress demand, and operational efficiencies are needed. Electric aircraft for shorter routes with biofuels or synfuels for longer routes are also required. HGVs and shipping are likely to use battery electric for shorter distances, and for longer distances HGVs could use fuel cell electric vehicles and for shipping biofuels, synfuels, ammonia or hydrogen. Aviation should have priority for biofuel use, but there is insufficient to meet all demand so other options must be explored. Significant improvements in battery technology – a six to eight times improvement in energy density – would allow commercial transatlantic flights. Although costs will rise, in some cases significantly eg shipping, the effect on most consumer end prices will be small (around 1%), except for houses (3%) and air fares (c15%). The actual cost will depend on how much improvement can be achieved in energy efficiency.

Lord Turner concluded by pointing out the opportunities for aviation: the cost of biofuels/synfuels will fall with scale and learning effects, but the industry cannot piggyback on road transport biofuel developments and needs to overcome the ‘chicken and egg’ issues surrounding supply and demand. The industry needs to (1) commit to the Net Zero target; (2) introduce a seriously priced offset system that becomes compulsory; and (3) introduce fuel standards that by 2050 require 100% zero carbon fuel.

LOW CARBON FUELS – NEW FUELS, NEW MARKETS

An overview of the Low Carbon Fuel scene within aviation was provided by Lizzie Gorman of E4Tech, together with three presentations from different stakeholder positions, namely the building of the UK Sustainable Aviation Fuel Supply Chain, the role of

to pay an environmental charge, 31% consider the environmental impact when flying and only 22% think the public should be discouraged from flying. Ten years ago NATS set a target to reduce CO2 emissions by 10% and since then they have achieved a 7% reduction in average emissions per flight. Since 2006 the number of flights, flight distances and CO2 emissions have increased but the average value of CO2 per km within UK regions has decreased. As a measure of airspace efficiency NATS uses 3Di, a metric devised in 2012. Each flight has a preferred profile but the actual radar track shows flights deviate from their ideal profiles due to a number of reasons. This inefficiency is converted into a score between 0 and 100+ by an appropriate summing of the deviations. The present score is 29, to the outsider it has limited meaning but over time it provides NATS with a metric to assess how well they are doing. The speaker pointed out that some reasons for deviations are beyond NATS’ control. In their estimates of airspace efficiency, it is shown that the most important components are climb and descent which together account for about 70% of the inefficiency embedded in their scoring system. Since 2015 the 3Di score has improved by 3.7% and NATS has set up a challenging target of 10% improvement by 2024.

KEYNOTE PRESENTATION BY LORD TURNER

The afternoon session began with a keynote address from Lord Adair Turner, Chair of the Energy Transitions Committee, entitled ‘Achieving net zero emissions in aviation’. He started by reminding the audience that the International Air Transport Association (IATA) has committed to only a 50% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050 by a mixture of efficiencies in technology, operations and infrastructure, together with growth in biofuels and economic measures. However, the commitment to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees requires Net Zero CO2 emissions by around 2050. Globally this will be very difficult to achieve, but it is technically and economically achievable from the energy and industrial systems without relying on offsets from land use. The good news is that costs are well down on original estimates: by 80% in the case of wind energy.

There are three routes to net zero: reduced demand (eg recycling of plastics); greater efficiencies; or switching to electric, biomass or hydrogen, and carbon capture. Aviation demand (pax/km) is forecast to rise by 240% between 2014 and 2050, while CO2 emissions, currently 2.9% of

The French Government is investing in zero-carbon aviation, including a potentially hydrogen-powered successor to the A320 for the mid-2030s. Enable H2.


Conference Report

the fuel supplier and the impact of sustainability on fuel development.

Lizzie Gorman presented the current status of SAF production and then went on to review both the future prospects of SAF production and the challenges to scaling up that production. She listed the variety of technologies that had been certified over the past decade, with Hydro-processed Esters and Fatty Acids (HEFA) currently the most commercial. Today there is dedicated hydro-processing and co-processing capacity of 5Mtonnes/year globally, and further substantial capacity is likely to be added in the next few years. However, most of this is used to produce renewable fuel for the road transport sector. Current and planned global SAF production capacity (excluding HEFA) is headed by Alcohol to Jet, Gasification +FT, Pyrolysis + Upgrading and Direct Sugars to Hydrocarbons. But such (non HEFA) capacity totals little over one Mtonnes/year, and contrasts with the 300 Mtonnes/year of global kerosene use.

Currently there is a price gap between SAF and kerosene and Lizzie considered that policy is beginning to be implemented that will bridge that gap, citing CORSIA globally. Several regions allow renewable fuel supplied to the aviation sector to contribute towards renewable fuel blending mandates – and an obligation to supply renewable fuel into the aviation sector will be introduced by Norway and is being considered by other European Member States.

In the short term most SAF will be supplied from HEFA. A relatively small modification is required in order to increase the amount of jet fuel a hydro-processing facility produces to supply the aviation sector, but as this would be at the expense of road transport fuel production, price incentives will need to be in place for this to happen. In addition, some dedicated (aviation targeted) HEFA production facilities are now operating/under construction. Bottom up modelling of biofuel plant build rates suggests that SAF production could reach between 15 and 31 Mtonnes/year by 2035. Longer term, E4Tech sees HEFA production capacity as likely to be limited by the availability of feedstock and that therefore other routes from different forms of biomass or renewable electricity will be required. Projections indicate global SAF production capacity could get to between 63 and 131 Mtonnes/year in 2050 – between 22% and 45% of global kerosene use in 2050 according to the IEA 2DS scenario.

She concluded that to achieve SAF production at this scale will require a scale-up and development

On 23 June 2020 ZeroAvia conducted the first test flight of a Piper M-class six-seater converted to electric power from Cranfield Airport. ZeroAvia.

of production technologies which are not currently commercialised together with the establishment of supply chains for large volumes of sustainable feedstocks. In addition, a long-term and stable policy will be required to bridge the price gap between SAF and kerosene – and access to finance will be required to build large-scale plants.

Keith Bushell, UK Stakeholder Manager – Environmental Affairs, Airbus and Dr Michelle Carter, Head of Transport, Knowledge Transfer Network outlined what was involved in helping develop the UK sustainable aviation fuel supply chain. Keith explained that Sustainable Aviation’s (SA) 2016 Carbon Roadmap forecast that by 2050 there would be a 24% reduction in aviation’s CO2 emissions as a result of using SAF. At that time, SA asked the Government for a Public Private Partnership to help deliver this new fuel industry in the UK, leading to the establishment of a SAF Special Interest Group. This two-year project was led by Michelle, who explained how the SIG was formed and operated. She explained how the project helped break down silos, bringing clarity to where the disparate research was being carried out, and by whom, and identifying the different implementation teams. This led to introductions and a big step forward towards the creation of a Sustainable Aviation Fuels industry in the UK.

Keith explained that this work was feeding into a new SA Carbon Roadmap due to be published shortly. This was expected to project a 30% carbon reduction from SAF use, involving 14 new plants. He also spelt out SA’s key ask, namely that the British Government should establish a dedicated Office for Sustainable Aviation Fuels (OSAF) to complement the successful Office for Low emissions Vehicles (OLEV)


Bryan Stonehouse MRAeS, Global Aviation Biofuels & Carbon Manager, Shell Aviation described the role of the fuel supplier in helping the industry to fly more but emit less. He agreed that SAF has a major role to play in enabling aviation to meet the net zero carbon challenge. He sees fuel suppliers having a key role in this, and saw Shell as having a role to play in all seven elements of the value chain, namely in the Supply Chain and Logistics, and Product Quality and Assurance and as a Technology Developer, Fuel Producer, Investor, Off-taker and Fuel user.

He considered that industry must look at options to go faster and stressed that a net zero scenario is quite different from simply curtailing emissions from growth. Co-ordinated industry action and partnership is needed for success – and greater efforts will be needed in the policy space and with consumers to help drive sectoral change.

Finally, Elena Schmidt, Standards Director, Roundtable on Sustainable Biomaterials (RSB) presented the opportunities and constraints for alternative aviation fuels from a sustainability perspective – putting the Sustainable in SAF. While the Greenhouse Gas Emissions associated with a fuel are of paramount importance, key also are Water Use, Labour Rights, Food Security, Rural Development, Waste and Traceability – and Indirect Impacts. The RSB has developed 12 principles that set out the standard and is closely involved with the certification process for new fuels.

The RSB is also active beyond certification, helping to set up supply chains, develop regional indicators, providing technical advice to policy makers and developing new tools. The RSB is also engaged in work to assess the biomass potential of different regions of the world, a key issue given the fact that the availability of sustainable feedstock is likely to be a key limiting factor for decades to come. The RSB is also closely involved with CORSIA and Elena showed how RSB Certification and CORSIA Criteria interrelate.

A wide range of questions started with “what’s in it for Airbus”: ensuring safety was the reply, together with helping to address climate change. An enquiry as to whether the CO2 emissions to fuel ratio could be reduced was rejected: a higher proportion of hydrogen in the fuel can appear to help, but that hydrogen has to be made from something, resulting in further CO2 emissions.

There was considered to be significant potential for using pipeline infrastructure to move SAF around the country, potentially suggesting SAF plants being collocated with existing refineries.

On the subject of what needs to be done in the policy space, Bryan spoke of the variety and scale of measures being introduced around the world. For instance, Norway is bringing in a mandate this year and Sweden next year (rising to 20% by 2030) and the Netherlands are looking at a mandate rising to

Team Scramasaxe – a participant in Air Race E, which will become the world’s first all-electric aircraft race when it launches an inaugural series of international races. Airbus/Hervé de Brus.


Conference Report

national action. The CCC had recommended this for the UK and the new Government’s response is awaited.

The sector is facing a difficult task with a number of areas to be prioritised including synthetic fuels. However, further, much sharper, market-based measures should be expected including taxation and demand management. In summary, he believed that the industry’s position would have to move from seeking a licence to grow to justifying sustainability.

The next speaker was Eva Weightman, Director Aviation at the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA). IETA is a non-profit group with a vision of a fair and international global carbon price produced by markets of high environmental integrity. Her presentation focused on the role of carbon markets in the context of the Paris agreement of 2015 and the developing contribution of CORSIA.

Although many lessons had been learnt in recent years about the creation and use of carbon markets, they do work. Article 6 of the Paris agreement had stressed the need for international co-operation and many countries would be working collectively to achieve their NDCs. But NDCs varied from country to country and different countries had very different carbon abatement costs. International co-operation through, for example, carbon markets helps countries find the most cost-efficient way to meet their targets. Opportunities for carbon removal are also not equal across the world and international collaboration provides the opportunity for large-scale projects with their resultant economies of scale.

14% by 2030. Some regions are setting their own low carbon fuel standards and the different views of competing users has led to a lively dialogue this year which is impacting policy decisions. He identified the UK, California and Canada as Governments which have been considering interesting policy ideas but expressed concern about some of the policies emerging which could lead to thoroughly sub-optimal solutions such as tankering.

Elena confirmed that food production is a key issue and that the RSB criteria require that feedstock production does not have a harmful impact on food production and markets locally. She also confirmed that the project run by Masdar to develop SAF from halophytes, a pathway some see to have great potential, is on-going. Direct Air Capture (DAC) is another potential source but is currently a long way off being competitive.

THE ROAD TO 2050 – WHICH ROUTE TO TAKE?

The final session opened with a presentation from Chris Lyle, Chief Executive of Air Transport Economics. His career has included a long period at ICAO and he was able to give an independent but highly informed view of the progress of ICAO’s global approach to aviation and climate change.

ICAO responded to the Kyoto Protocol by developing a basket of measures aimed at achieving carbon-neutral growth (CNG) of international aviation from 2020 including the landmark market-based measure CORSIA. Although progress has been made, the pace is slow and the existing basket of measures will not achieve CNG from 2020. ICAO’s lack of legal authority was an inherent weakness and CORSIA is both fragile and vulnerable. Three major countries (China, India and the Russian Federation) opposed the latest proposals on the last day of the recent ICAO Assembly.

The good news, however, is that the private sector industry is very frustrated with many airlines and industry bodies pushing for much greater ambition. Chris believes that Governments (individually or collectively) should now develop more climatically effective strategies, balancing the three pillars of sustainability and building on the experience of CORSIA. Work should start now and be implemented in parallel with CORSIA.

International aviation emissions should be brought into Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement umbrella, annulling the CORSIA exclusivity and encouraging stronger

Single-aisle Turboelectric Aircraft with Aft Boundary-Layer Propulsion concept. NASA.


Eva presented the results of work completed with the University of Maryland using the same integrated model used by the IPCC. It demonstrated that collaboration would cut the cost of implementation by half, saving some $250bn by 2030, and further significant benefits would result if the approach is extended to changes in land use. Aviation, through CORSIA, will be part of the international carbon markets. As buyers they will be competing with other sectors and governments and the use of these markets will help all sectors achieve their targets most efficiently.

The final speaker in the session was Jonathon Counsell, Group Head of Sustainability at International Airlines Group (IAG). He gave an industry perspective and explained how IAG had decided to set a target of Net Zero CO2 emissions by 2050. He explained how the IPCC’s special report had demonstrated the importance of avoiding another half a degree of warming. Without stronger action aviation emissions could become a quarter of all emissions by 2050. Over the past 12 months sustainability had moved to the top of the industry’s agenda.

The new IAG targets were to achieve a 10% reduction in CO2 per passenger kilometre by 2025, a 20% reduction by 2030 and net zero CO2 by 2050. Jonathon hoped others in the industry would follow the IAG lead. IAG believe the net zero target is achievable through progress in a number of areas and the use of a global market-based measure. CORSIA is a compromise needed to get agreement from 193 ICAO states but a more ambitious scheme was needed.

IAG is investing $400m in the development of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and, in partnership with Velocys and Shell, is developing a UK waste-to-fuel plant due to open in 2024. SAF plants could produce 8% of UK aviation fuel needs by 2035 and 30% by 2050. IAG is also incentivising its managers to reduce carbon emissions.The nature of the carbon offset market would be very different as we approach 2050 and IAG is also exploring the technology of atmospheric carbon capture.

Tim Johnson joined the three speakers in a final panel session. Questions covered obstacles to taxation of aviation fuel, the future of UK domestic aviation and there was also a plea not to ignore aircraft noise when addressing climate change. Finally Piers Forster encouraged the industry to think internationally and help push other countries to greater ambition on emissions reduction.

CLOSING REMARKS

In his closing remarks, Geoff Maynard, Chair GbD, pointed out that conference has identified a clear route forward for the industry to meet the Net Zero Emissions Challenge by 2050. There are still opportunities for further operational and technology improvements to reduce fuel burn. There are also very promising prospects for developing small- and medium-sized electric aircraft within the next ten years. For longer routes, there are good opportunities to develop sustainable aviation fuels. The CORSIA scheme will ensure that most aviation growth from 2020 will be offset (and all from 2027, including that from the expansion of Heathrow). Offsetting is now readily available, and the estimated carbon footprint from this conference, including delegates travel has been offset through Ecosphere.

In the longer-term carbon capture and storage provides an opportunity to offset remaining aviation emissions, and using the CCC estimates, removing and storing a tonne of CO2 from the atmosphere will cost around £200 per tonne of CO2 equivalent. Passing this cost on to the customer, and assuming some improvement in efficiency, would result in costs rising by £1 for every 42 miles travelled per passenger. While not cheap, it is not prohibitively expensive either and provides a route to aviation meeting the Net Zero Challenge by 2050.

British Airw

ays


Carbon Pricing through effective Market-Based Measures

Carbon Pricing through effective Market-Based MeasuresINTRODUCTION

Carbon pricing is generally accepted as the most effective instrument for addressing climate change, by giving organisations the economic incentive to reduce their CO2 emissions. The key mechanisms for delivering carbon pricing are known as Market-Based Measures (MBMs), as opposed to say taxes. MBMs are primarily focused on an environmental outcome rather than a fiscal outcome produced from a tax.

The principle of carbon pricing is that carbon is given a value, and airlines pay for emissions via carbon savings from projects on the ground such as efficiency improvements, renewable and nature-based solutions including reforestation and avoided deforestation.

Using MBMs, carbon reductions are made in other sectors when they cannot be made within aviation. However, carbon pricing also provides an incentive to accelerate in-sector carbon saving measures

as well as moderating aviation demand because it increases airline costs.

International aviation, where airlines from different countries fly and compete on the same routes, require measures that treat airlines equally and prevent carbon emissions simply moving between airlines flying the same routes. Policy measures like unilateral taxes simply heightens the risk of carbon leakage and potential net increases in carbon emissions, with funds tending to go into national government accounts, rather than directly into carbon reduction projects.

The MBM known as CORSIA (Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation), agreed globally in 2016, is a mechanism designed to reduce emissions across international aviation without introducing any competitive distortion or carbon leakage. At the same time, there is a recognition of the European political desire to continue with a more stringent policy for intra-

NA

SA/S

SAI Edw

ard Winstead


European flights, and a strong belief that the current European Emissions Trading Scheme model should transition into a policy that is aligned with the CORSIA framework.

CONTEXT FOR EFFECTIVE MBMs

The aviation industry is investing in ever more fuel-efficient aircraft, fuel saving operational measures and sustainable aviation fuels as well as breakthrough technologies for the future such as hybrid electric aircraft. The evidence to deliver continued improvements from these ‘in-sector’ areas is demonstrated in the 2020 Sustainable Aviation Carbon Road-Map. However, to achieve ambitious carbon targets effective market-based policy measures and associated carbon pricing are essential. When designed appropriately these policy measures not only achieve carbon targets, but they also strengthen the incentive to deliver in-sector improvements as well.

Effective market-based policy measures are fundamental to government, business and society to enable cost and environmentally effective emission reductions across the global economy. These policy measures are especially important to aviation because additional in-sector reductions at the margin are more costly than in many other sectors. To the extent in-sector aviation savings are insufficient to meet carbon targets, such measures require airlines to pay for emissions reductions in other parts of the economy to make up the difference.

With the start of the global CORSIA agreement in 2021, the aviation sector is taking significant steps to harness the power of market forces to tackle climate change. A low or zero carbon economy

will need carbon pricing across all sectors, with appropriate policy frameworks. This will require governments to continue developing the structures and policies for effective carbon markets worldwide. A key area for governments to address in the near term is conclusion of the Article 6 element of the UNFCCC Paris Agreement which sets the important rules for the international carbon market. In this context, the approach to aviation emissions will need to evolve, strengthen and support global carbon market developments.

DETERMINING THE UK NET ZERO EMISSIONS TO 2050

The UK aviation industry is prioritising the removal of carbon emission through ‘in sector’ actions, and forecast maintaining a decoupling in growth in aviation activity from emissions growth, but by 2050 the industry is still forecast to generate around 25 million tonnes of CO2. Given the need to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, market-based policy measures agreed internationally will be necessary to define the trajectory of net emissions reductions, strengthen carbon pricing and provide the framework to obligate the aviation industry to invest in carbon offset and removal solutions for these residual emissions.

The assumed trajectory to achieve net zero by 2050 is shown in graph 1. The period to 2035 is based on how the EU ETS and CORSIA will apply to UK aviation. The reason for the slight drop in the offset emissions from 2033 is due to the slight change in the basis for the calculation of offsets within the CORSIA mechanism. Beyond 2035 it is assumed there is a gradual transition to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.

CARBON PRICING THROUGH EFFECTIVE MARKET‐BASED MEASURES

UK aviation forecast requirement for carbon offset and removal (including effect on demand of MBM costs)

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

CO2 emissions after ‘in sector’ mitigation CO2 emissions after carbon offset and removal investment

CO2 Em

ission

s (M

tCO

2)

By investing in out of sector carbon reductions net UK aviation emissions can be reduced to

zero by 2050

Graph 1. UK aviation forecast requirement for carbon offset and removal (including effect on demand of MBM costs).



Based on these assumptions the quantity of carbon emissions the UK aviation industry requires to address will change from year to year as shown in graph 2.

REQUIREMENTS FOR EFFECTIVE MBMs

The aviation industry, Sustainable Aviation, governments and climate science have all consistently advocated that carbon pricing and effective carbon MBMs are an essential element in reducing emissions in the aviation sector. This means mandatory regulation that harnesses the power of markets to seek emission reductions where they can be made most cost-effectively and applied equitably in air transport markets to avoid competitive distortion and carbon leakage.

To achieve the first requirement – environmentally- and cost-effective emissions reduction – the policy measure must allow access to a range of abatement options in multiple sectors and countries. This market-based approach means that the cost of emissions reductions is established by projects that are most able to generate them. It also means that airlines and their customers pay no more than necessary for meaningfully achieving carbon targets. However, over time, as global structures to support carbon pricing mature, the cost of carbon can be expected to increase.

The second requirement – equity – is achieved by carefully designing the scope and rules of the policy measure with the objective that all airlines

face equal treatment. Market distortion will occur where the cost per tonne of CO2 of a policy measure is different between different airlines, leading to carbon leakage and potential increase in net emissions. In air transport markets this can affect simple point-to-point markets as well as indirect transfer markets.

The global CORSIA and EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) policy measures both achieve these requirements to a large degree. On the other hand, unilateral ‘eco’ taxes targeted only at air transport and introduced in individual countries don’t achieve either requirement and are therefore a failure environmentally, economically and competitively.

CORSIA is a breakthrough global climate agreement to accelerate carbon reductions from aviation and achieve the goal of carbon neutral growth from 2020. From 2021, airlines will be required to pay to reduce CO2 emissions through qualifying emission reduction projects around the world to meet the requirements of CORSIA. By introducing carbon pricing at a global level, CORSIA achieves the first aviation industry target of carbon neutral growth from 2020 and provides a strong foundation to move towards subsequent targets and measures out to 2050.

To achieve capped growth in emissions at the global level and maintain equity, operators and countries with mature markets will achieve declining net emissions through CORSIA. This is true for the UK and can be seen in graph 1 by a declining trajectory in net emissions over time as a result of CORSIA.

Graph 2. Number of tonnes of carbon assumed to be purchased by UK aviation to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

2035

2036

2037

2038

2039

2040

2041

2042

2043

2044

2045

2046

2047

2048

2049

2050

Carb

on e

miss

ions

(MtC

O2)

Number of tonnes of carbon assumed to be purchased by UK aviation to achieve net zero emissions by 2050


CORSIA EMISSION REDUCTION UNITS

Under CORSIA, international aircraft operators will collectively be required to purchase independently verified emission units for over 2.5bn tonnes of CO2 between 2021 and 2035 representing global funding of over £25bn in low carbon projects (at an indicative price of £10 per tonne). This means airlines will fund thousands of new carbon reduction projects and programmes worldwide that deliver lower carbon emissions.

There are many ways to achieve CO2 reductions that produce emission reduction units, many of which bring other social, environmental or economic benefits relevant to sustainable development. Such offsets can be sourced from various types of project activities, including, for example, wind and solar energy, clean cook stoves, methane capture, forestry and other emissions-reducing projects.

Particularly exciting is the potential for airlines to help move ground energy supplies to better carbon free renewable sources such as wind and solar power as well as protecting valuable eco-systems by purchasing high quality nature-based offsets generated by deforestation prevention or reforestation.

To ensure the environmental integrity of CORSIA, the ICAO Council will adopt a list of emissions units that can be used for compliance. The Council’s decision will be informed by a recommendation from a Technical Advisory Body and guided by environmental criteria to guarantee that emissions units deliver real and meaningful CO2 reductions.

The criteria are based on principles commonly applied under existing carbon trading mechanisms and well-accepted carbon offset certification standards, for example:n A key requirement is that the greenhouse gas

reduction or removal projects must be ‘additional’ to business-as-usual activity. The units must also represent a permanent reduction of emissions that cannot be reversed. Similarly, the activity should not result in unintended increases in emissions elsewhere

n To quantify the greenhouse gas reduction benefits from a project, a baseline is determined to represent what would have happened if the project had not been implemented. Emissions reductions are quantified using accurate measurements, valid protocols, and are audited

n Emissions Units Programs must demonstrate that they have procedures in place to track units and prevent avoidance of ‘double counting’, ie ensuring that emissions reductions are only counted once, across different climate policies and carbon mitigation schemes

n Emissions units programs also need to have safeguards in place to address wider environmental and social risks

n Strict accounting ensures the carbon reduction is achieved, purchased by one airline and ‘cancelled’ meaning that those reductions are not claimed anywhere else under any other carbon MBM

n UK airlines are clear of the need for high quality carbon offsets to ensure every tonne of emissions reduction paid for genuinely delivers meaningful carbon reductions without unintended consequences or adverse effects.

Boeing



It is recognised that the design of CORSIA was a compromise to gain agreement of all the UN member states, the main elements of compromise being:1. It covers only the growth in emissions as opposed

to all emissions2. It applies from 2021 to 2035, and a revised

scheme will be needed post 20353. It is a carbon offset scheme4. It begins with a voluntary phase from 2021 to

2026 prior to the mandatory phase in 2027

However, it is a significant achievement that a global agreement to address CO2 emissions has been implemented and there is additionally a three yearly in-built mechanism to review the effectiveness of the scheme, with the first review taking place in 2024. Critical to the effectiveness of CORSIA will be the quality and integrity of the carbon offsets. Post 2035, availability of offsets will reduce as more countries move towards net zero, and alternative CO2 removal solutions such as Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage (DACCS) powered by green electricity will be needed to offset aviation emissions.

INTRA-EUROPEAN POLICY FOR AVIATION

On average since 2012 when aviation was included in the EU ETS, net emissions on intra-European flights have been reduced by 40%. This is because a finite amount of emissions are allowed for different emitting sectors in the EU ETS and operators must either reduce their emissions or pay to have emissions reduced elsewhere in the system. Since 2012 airlines have funded over 130 million tonnes of CO2 reduction through the EU Emissions Trading System at a cost of over 1.3bn Euros. By comparison, it is estimated CORSIA will mitigate 2.5bn tonnes of CO2, through ~$25bn (@ $10/tonne) of new funds contributed by airlines during the 2021-35 CORSIA period.

During 2020, UK and EU policymakers will consider the next steps for European policy, taking account of the latest developments with CORSIA. The aviation industry recognises the European political desire to continue with more stringent policy for intra-European flights and believe the classical ETS model should transition into a policy that is aligned with the CORSIA framework. It is possible to simultaneously align intra-European climate policy with the CORSIA framework while ensuring that intra-European aviation contributes to European climate targets.

ADDITIONAL POSITIVE IMPACTS OF MBMs

The benefit of good MBMs goes beyond the cost-effective emissions reductions that are achieved. By putting a price on carbon emissions, airlines are likely to reflect these costs in air fares, and there is an associated moderation in demand for air travel.

Carbon pricing also provides increased incentive in all other emissions mitigation areas. It increases the focus of airlines on fuel optimising fleet and operations, it enhances the financial case for deployment of sustainable fuels and it positively influences manufacturers to innovate to improve fuel efficiency in future generations of aircraft.

ASSUMPTIONS FOR EFFECTIVE MBMs

The EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) is assumed to apply until 2020. From 2021 CORSIA takes effect. From 2021 there is assumed to be UK and EU climate policy for intra-European flights that complements and aligns with the global CORSIA instrument but reflects the need for higher emissions reduction stringency in that region. The European policy is assumed to have a declining cap of 2.2% per annum and be in place until 2035. It is assumed that there is no double regulation of emissions, and therefore that emissions reduced through CORSIA are not addressed by the complementary European policy that would apply to intra-European flights.

CORSIA is modelled using best available data and assumptions until 2035 to reflect the design as defined in the ICAO Assembly Resolution of 2016, including a shift from the sector growth method of determining operator obligations to the own-growth method. This causes the net emissions reduction associated with CORSIA to be non-linear up to 2035.

United A

irlines


At present the priority is to ensure the successful implementation of CORSIA, but it is expected that global climate policy will evolve for the period after 2035 (when CORSIA ends) to 2050 to ensure carbon reduction targets are achieved, incorporating scientific guidance and political considerations of the time. Acceleration of work on long-term targets was agreed at the 2019 ICAO Assembly with the potential for adoption of updated goals as early as 2022. The industry and the UK government fully support this approach.

DEVELOPMENT OF EMISSION REDUCTION OPTIONS

As carbon markets and government policy measures mature, the nature of carbon reduction initiatives is also likely to evolve. Lessons from previous frameworks where some types of emissions reduction units were found to be inappropriate must be learnt. Market forces and policy direction will influence the type and range of options that will become available in the future for generating emission reduction units. Options that could develop as significant areas in future include:n Natural carbon sinks such as improving soil and

peatland CO2 absorption and reforestationn Carbon removal technologies such as direct

removal of carbon from air and sequestration

There is a lot of potential for negative emissions or Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies, but the required investment will be significant, and the potential to accelerate current technologies to meet commercial market demand has yet to be fully assessed. If they are successfully developed, some as yet unproven Greenhouse Gas Removal techniques, such as Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) and direct air capture and carbon storage (DACCS), could be introduced earlier to help meet carbon targets cost-effectively. While these concepts develop, there has been a focus upon Natural Climate Solutions including forestry, peat land, wetland restoration as well as agricultural solutions. This is based on their readiness for implementation and scalability, and the overriding fact that protection and regeneration of the world’s nature-based assets is key to addressing the climate emergency.

There are three key areas in which the Government should work with industry to progress the following issues:1. The UK Government should support concerted,

global action to reduce aviation emissions. The Government should do all it can to drive work

through ICAO on setting a clear, long term CO2 target for aviation compatible with the IPCC 1.5 degree report and 2015 Paris Climate Summit ambition, by no later than 2022. COP26, now delayed until 2021 in Glasgow, presents an ideal opportunity for the UK to show climate change leadership on the global stage by progressing the international framework for aviation emissions to support delivery of the 2050 long-term CO2 target of Net Zero Emissions. To support development of the wider carbon markets, UK government should continue to focus on a successful outcome of UNFCCC negotiations on Article 6 of the Paris Agreement (ie setting the international rules for an effective carbon market).

2. The UK government should support a transition from the current ETS model into a policy that is aligned with the CORSIA framework.

3. The UK government should explore the opportunity for UK and other airlines to be allowed to spend some of their CORSIA funds on UK projects as a matter of priority. This will allow UK businesses to support new carbon reduction projects and technologies across the UK, bringing benefits to communities and the economy and ensuring local governance and quality standards are maintained. This should include both nature and technology-based carbon reduction and removal solutions.

This is partly based on an extract taken from Sustainable Aviation’s Roadmap published in February 2020.

Adr

ian

Ping

ston

e

Atmospheric Science


NON-CO2 EFFECTS

We begin, as in last year’s report, with the observation that, of the main contributors to climate change from aviation, it is the non-CO2 effects that we believe should now be the primary target for research. It remains the case that, because of its long lifetime, CO2 is the main long-term threat to the Earth’s climate and, for aviation, reducing CO2 emissions must be the most important long-term objective. This requires advances in aircraft and engine design, in operations, in sustainable alternative fuels but not in understanding the role of CO2 in climate change. The scientific understanding of the latter is high and the rate at which aviation contributes to the increase in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is accurately known, at least for civil aviation which is the predominant contributor. True, there may be some uncertainty in accurately quantifying the processes by which CO2 is removed from the atmosphere, and hence in projecting future CO2 concentrations. That is not a question specific to aviation, however. It is relevant to future policy to reduce the net emission of CO2 by aviation but it is not currently a significant question for aviation.

In contrast, the non-CO2 impacts of aviation are substantial and are peculiar to aviation. Because they are believed currently to account for more than half of the radiative forcing from aviation, they deserve our serious attention. The European Commission has been required by the European Parliament to report to it on the impact of aviation non-CO2 effects on climate change and to report on possible measures to address the issue. Consequently, the Commission has mandated the European Safety Agency (EASA) to conduct a study, which we understand is led by Lee of Manchester Metropolitan University and was due to report to the Commission by 1 January 2020. The Commission expects to present the analysis in the second quarter of 2020.

As regards recommendations for mitigation, we must await the report of the Commission and any subsequent decision by the European Parliament in the autumn. In last year’s Annual Report we quoted from Lee, who observed in his 2018 report to DfT on the non-CO2 effects of aviation: “However, the clear message is that mitigation of non-CO2 impacts tends to raise complex questions regarding both scientific uncertainty and trade-off (with CO2)

Atmospheric Science

Sim

on Eugster


Table 1. Evolution of estimated contribution of NOX emission to aviation radiative forcing.

consequences, whereas reducing CO2 emissions has clear and long-term benefits and does not suffer from the same levels of scientific uncertainty.” On the other hand, the most recent publication on the issue by the Commission states “Going forward, the Commission has identified the reduction of non-CO2 aviation emissions and their interdependencies with CO2 (and noise) as one of the priority areas in the next EU Research & Innovation framework programme (Horizon Europe).

While the complex questions regarding scientific uncertainty cited by Lee remain only slightly reduced, we believe recent work discussed below has shown that some substantial measures to reduce climate impacts can be adopted without any significant increase in CO2 emissions.

REVISED VIEW OF NOX CONTRIBUTION

While nitrous oxide (N2O) is one of the five main greenhouse gases, it is not produced by aircraft. The other two oxides of nitrogen, NO and NO2, collectively termed NOX, which are produced by the combination of atmosphere oxygen and nitrogen in the high temperatures in a gas turbine combustor, are not greenhouse gases but in the upper atmosphere their emission leads to an increase in the concentration of ozone and a reduction in the concentration of methane, both greenhouse gases.

In a classic 2009 review by Lee et al of Radiative Forcing in 2005, RF by CO2 was put at 28.0mW/m2 and that by NOX at 13.8mW/m2, which was the net of 26.3 positive from ozone formation and –12.5 from methane removal. Over the following decade the estimate of the negative contribution of methane removal increased in magnitude, having the effect of reducing the estimated net RF from aviation NOX emissions in 2005 to 4.0mW/m2. Consequently, last year’s Annual Report included a chart by Kärcher of DLR showing net RF in 2011 from NOX at 5mW/m2, leaving CO2 and contrail-cirrus clearly as the two dominant contributors from aviation to climate change.

In December 2019, however, Grewe et al of DLR published a paper(1) which challenged this assessment. The authors argued that, along with the recent studies which had led to the progressive reduction in the estimated impact of NOX, there are two methodological flaws underlying the current analyses. These are simplifications which have resulted in the contribution of aviation NOX emissions to climate change being underestimated by a factor of six to seven. The first is the

assumption in methane response calculations of steady state rather than transient development, which leads to the negative effect of methane on RF being overestimated. The second is that most studies determine ozone changes by switching off or reducing aviation NOX emissions, instead of calculating aviation contributions to the ozone. Table 1, taken from Grewe et al, shows the evolution with time of the estimated climate impact of NOX as studies have progressed.

Relative to the original estimate of Lee et al in 2009, the changes in successive columns reflect: (ia) recognition that a reduction in background methane reduces the ozone formed from methane as a precursor to ozone, termed ‘primary mode ozone’ (PMO) and also (ib) that a reduction of methane entering the stratosphere, where it decomposes into carbon dioxide and water vapour, reduces the stratospheric water vapour (SWV) concentration and, since water vapour is a greenhouse gas, reduces radiative forcing; (ii) an updating of the formula for calculating RF for methane concentration changes to include short-wave radiation effects, which increases the negative RF for methane; (iii) correction for the methodological error in calculating methane lifetimes and (iv) correcting the error in calculating the contribution of NOX emissions to the ozone concentration.

Thus, compared with an estimated contribution to RF of 28.0mW/m2 from CO2 in 2005, the contribution from NOX in that year fell from 13.8mW/m2 estimated in 2009 to a low of 4.0mW/m2 by 2018 but is now put by Grewe et al at 26.7mW/m2, almost equal to the contribution of CO2.

This paper, if its conclusions are accepted, is of major importance to the assessment of the non-CO2 effects of aviation and of measures to mitigate the effects. It might be considered a ‘game changer’.

Radiative Lee (i) Add- (ii) Rev- (iii) #1 (iv) #2forcing of et al itional ised Meth- Ozoneaviation NOX 2009 Proc- methane contri-emissions in esses ane life- bution2005 (PMO, RF time method SWV) formulain mW/m2

Ozone 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 41.2Methane –12.5 –12.5 –15.4 –10.0 –10.0PMO –5.0 –5.0 –3.3 –3.3SWV –1.9 –1.9 –1.2 –1.2Total NOX RF 13.8 6.9 4.0 11.8 26.7


Atmospheric Science

REDUCING THE CLIMATE IMPACT OF CONTRAILS AND CONTRAIL-CIRRUS (AIC)

It is the contribution to climate change of contrails and contrail-cirrus, collectively termed aircraft-induced cloudiness (AIC), that in 2016 the ad hoc Contrail Avoidance Group was convened by Greener by Design to address. The aim of the Group is to achieve a convincing demonstration of the potential for reducing AIC by ‘smart flying’ under ATM control.

The two main drivers for this effort are, first, the fact that, even with an increased contribution from NOX, AIC is believed to account for approximately half the Radiative Forcing from aviation. Secondly, that using air traffic management (ATM) to avoid the ice supersaturated regions (ISSRs) in which persistent contrails form, and in which the cirrus cloud into which they develop is sustained, could be introduced relatively quickly, and affect the entire world fleet, in a way that new technology to reduce fuel burn could not. In February 2019 the US Company Aireon launched its satcom datalink relay network to the Iridium 66-satellite constellation, to enable ATM surveillance of ADS-B equipped aircraft ‘anywhere on Earth’. This has increased the incentive to take this project forward as quickly as practicable.

Last year’s Annual Report presented results of studies of contrail statistics by Gierens of DLR, stimulated by the Group’s activity. These added weight to his earlier assertion that most of the contrail RF came from a very small percentage of flights. In his work he developed the concept of ‘Big Hits’, which occur on the infrequent days when meteorological conditions at cruise altitudes are particularly propitious for persistent contrail formation. This work was complemented by a new analysis by Poll of the effect on fuel burn of flight diversions to avoid forming contrails. From these two studies it was argued in last year’s report that taking ATM action to make a small change in the cruise altitude of a minority of flights on Big Hit days could substantially reduce RF from persistent contrails with a very small increase in fuel burn. An increase of 0.025% was suggested for the airlines’ annual fuel burn.

These broad conclusions have been reinforced by a study by Teoh and Stettler at Imperial College, London, in collaboration with Schumann of DLR, the results of which were published(2) in February 2020. The paper estimates the impact of aviation contrails on climate forcing for flight track data in Japanese airspace, using the DLR CoCiP (Contrail-Cirrus Prediction) code. The paper marks a step beyond earlier studies using CoCiP by using a fractal

aggregates (FA) model developed by the authors to predict the black carbon particle number emission index as a function of engine setting. In previous CoCiP calculations the index had been taken as constant at 1015 particles per kg of fuel burned.

The study uses the CARATS high resolution aircraft activity data set for Japanese airspace for six one-week periods of activity recorded bi-monthly between May 2012 and March 2013, a total of 61 million waypoints. For each flight CoCiP was used to predict the total energy forcing (EF) of the contrail/contrail-cirrus it generated – that is the integration over the life of the contrail, over its length and its evolving width, of its radiative forcing. The units of RF are W/m2, the units of EF are Joules. It is important to note that energy forcing of contrails/contrail-cirrus can be both positive (warming) and negative (cooling). The overall warming from contrail-cirrus is the difference between the warming from trapping outgoing longwave radiation from the Earth and the cooling from reflecting incoming short-wave radiation from the Sun – both large quantities. The substantial reductions reported by Teoh et al are the result of deflecting traffic only after the late afternoon, so that the major effect is to eliminate the contrail-cirrus that during the night would have trapped the outgoing infra-red radiation.

Figure 1 shows the aggregated results, plotting the cumulative energy forcing of all the flights in the study as a percentage of the total forcing against the number of flights as a percentage of the total.

This figure strongly reinforces the conclusions from the earlier DLR studies. Some 80% of the total energy forcing by AIC was caused by 2% of the flights. For this 2% of flights, which were from the late afternoon onwards. the study evaluated the effects on contrail forcing of increasing or decreasing the cruise altitude by 2,000ft in the ice

sustained, could be introduced relatively quickly, and affect the entire world fleet, in a way that new technology to reduce fuel burn could not. In February 2019 the US Company Aireon launched its satcom datalink relay network to the Iridium 66-satellite constellation, to enable ATM surveillance of ADS-B equipped aircraft ‘anywhere on earth’. This has increased the incentive to take this project forward as quickly as practicable. Last year’s Annual Report presented results of studies of contrail statistics by Gierens of DLR, stimulated by the Group’s activity. These added weight to his earlier assertion that most of the contrail RF came from a very small percentage of flights. In his work he developed the concept of ‘Big Hits’, which occur on the infrequent days when meteorological conditions at cruise altitudes are particularly propitious for persistent contrail formation. This work was complemented by a new analysis by Poll of the effect on fuel burn of flight diversions to avoid forming contrails. From these two studies it was argued in last year’s report that taking ATM action to make a small change in the cruise altitude of a minority of flights on Big Hit days could substantially reduce RF from persistent contrails with a very small increase in fuel burn. An increase of 0.025% was suggested for the airlines’ annual fuel burn. These broad conclusions have been reinforced by a study by Teoh and Stettler at Imperial College, London, in collaboration with Schumann of DLR, the results of which were published(2) in February 2020. The paper estimates the impact of aviation contrails on climate forcing for flight track data in Japanese airspace, using the DLR CoCiP (Contrail-Cirrus Prediction) code. The paper marks a step beyond earlier studies using CoCiP by using a fractal aggregates (FA) model developed by the authors to predict the black carbon particle number emission index as a function of engine setting. In previous CoCiP calculations the index had been taken as constant at 1015 particles per kg of fuel burned. The study uses the CARATS high resolution aircraft activity data set for Japanese airspace for six one-week periods of activity recorded bi-monthly between May 2012 and March 2013, a total of 61 million waypoints. For each flight CoCiP was used to predict the total energy forcing (EF) of the contrail/contrail-cirrus it generated – that is the integration over the life of the contrail, over its length and its evolving width, of its radiative forcing. The units of RF are W/m2, the units of EF are Joules. It is important to note that energy forcing of contrails/contrail-cirrus can be both positive (warming) and negative (cooling). The overall warming from contrail-cirrus is the difference between the warming from trapping outgoing longwave radiation from the Earth and the cooling from reflecting incoming short-wave radiation from the Sun – both large quantities. The substantial reductions reported by Teoh et al are the result of deflecting traffic only after the late afternoon, so that the major effect is to eliminate the contrail-cirrus that during the night would have trapped the outgoing infra-red radiation. Figure 1 shows the aggregated results, plotting the cumulative energy forcing of all the flights in the study as a percentage of the total forcing against the number of flights as a percentage of the total.

Figure 1 Cumulative energy forcing as a proportion of flights Figure 1. Cumulative energy forcing as a proportion of flights(5).


supersaturated (contrail forming) region. as shown schematically in Fig 1.

The results of this part of the study are shown in Fig 2. The study calculated the reduction in energy forcing for every diverted flight. For each flight It also calculated the change in fuel burn (CO2 emission) caused by the change in altitude, using the BADA3 database. The energy forcing by the change in CO2 emission was determined from the absolute global warming potential (AGWP) with a 100-year time horizon (TH) to align with the Kyoto Protocol. The study includes a table showing the predicted EF for the baseline and diverted flights for contrails alone and for the CO2 EF with a 100-year time TH and also for 20-year and 1,000-year THs. Figure 2(a) shows the reduction in EF from contrails alone and Fig 2(b) the reductions from contrails plus CO2 with a 100-year TH. The coloured lines show the averages for each of the six weeks in the study and the black lines shows the overall average. A Monte Carlo simulation was done, taking account of uncertainties in the met conditions and the estimated black carbon emissions, and the shaded areas represents the 95% confidence limits of the estimate. In summary, for the total number of flights in this study, the black line lines show that diversion of 1.7% of the flights was predicted to reduce the Energy forcing from CO2 and AIC together of 35.6% and reduce AIC alone by 59.3%. The estimated fuel burn penalty for the diverted flights was 0.27%, which translates into a fuel burn penalty (and increased CO2 emission) of 0.014% for the fleet.

The study went on to consider, in the longer term, the widespread adoption of cleaner burning double annular combustor (DAC) engines, which produce fewer and shorter-lived contrails than the equivalent single annular combustor (SAC) engines. Eventual replacement of the 70% of the current fleet which are SAC engines with DAC engines is predicted to reduce total contrail EF by 68.8%. Combined with the diversion strategy, net EF from contrails and CO2 with a 100-year TH is predicted to be reduced by 65% and that from contrails alone by 91.8%.

There are two caveats with respect to this study. One is that, particularly in the light of the reassessment cited above of NOX RF, which is sensitive to cruise altitude, future studies of flight diversion should take NOX into account. Secondly, as the authors accept, the BADA3 data set is not suited to this study. The analysis by Poll and Schumann(3) recently submitted for publication would be a better alternative for future work. Nevertheless, as Poll agrees, the use of BADA3 does not change the broad conclusion. A small change in cruise altitude for a small number of flights on Big Hit days could reduce contrail EF and total EF substantially with negligible increase in fuel burn for the airlines.

GEOENGINEERING – SOLAR RADIATION MANAGEMENT

The term geoengineering has not previously appeared in a Greener by Design Annual Report but it cannot be avoided indefinitely. It is coming down

This figure strongly reinforces the conclusions from the earlier DLR studies. Some 80% of the total energy forcing by AIC was caused by 2% of the flights. For this 2% of flights, which were from the late afternoon onwards. the study evaluated the effects on contrail forcing of increasing or decreasing the cruise altitude by 2,000ft in the ice supersaturated (contrail forming) region. as shown schematically in Fig 1. The results of this part of the study are shown in Fig 2. The study calculated the reduction in energy forcing for every diverted flight. For each flight It also calculated the change in fuel burn (CO2 emission) caused by the change in altitude, using the BADA3 database. The energy forcing by the change in CO2 emission was determined from the absolute global warming potential (AGWP) with a 100-year time horizon (TH) to align with the Kyoto Protocol. The study includes a table showing the predicted EF for the baseline and diverted flights for contrails alone and for the CO2 EF with a 100-year time TH and also for 20-year and 1,000-year THs. Figure 2a shows the reduction in EF from contrails alone and Fig 2b the reductions from contrails plus CO2 with a 100-year TH. The coloured lines show the averages for each of the six weeks in the study and the black lines shows the overall average. A Monte Carlo simulation was done, taking account of uncertainties in the met conditions and the estimated black carbon emissions, and the shaded areas represents the 95% confidence limits of the estimate.,

Figure 2 Reductions in contrail and total EF by selective changes in cruise altitude

In summary, for the total number of flights in this study, the black line lines show that diversion of 1.7% of the flights was predicted to reduce the Energy forcing from CO2 and AIC together of 35.6% and reduce AIC alone by 59.3%. The estimated fuel burn penalty for the diverted flights was 0.27%, which translates into a fuel burn penalty (and increased CO2 emission) of 0.014% for the fleet. The study went on to consider, in the longer term, the widespread adoption of cleaner burning double annular combustor (DAC) engines, which produce fewer and shorter-lived contrails than the equivalent single annular combustor (SAC) engines. Eventual replacement of the 70% of the current fleet which are SAC engines with DAC engines is predicted to reduce total contrail EF by 68.8%. Combined with the diversion strategy, net EF from contrails and CO2 with a 100-year TH is predicted to be reduced by 65% and that from contrails alone by 91.8%. There are two caveats with respect to this study. One is that, particularly in the light of the reassessment cited above of NOX RF, which is sensitive to cruise altitude, future studies of flight diversion should take NOX into account. Secondly, as the authors accept, the BADA3 data set is not suited to this study. The analysis by Poll and Schumann(3) recently submitted for publication would be a better alternative for future work. Nevertheless, as Poll agrees, the use of BADA3 does

Figure 2. Reductions in contrail and total EF by selective changes in cruise altitude(5).


the track and it will confront the environmental science community with challenging questions.

The term has been applied to two main types of activity, the development of methods to reduce the concentration of anthropogenic greenhouse gases and the development of methods to reduce the warming of the Earth by solar radiation. The subject has been controversial and in the past discussion of it has in some places been a scientific taboo. Now, however, the two activities tend to be viewed differently. Reduction in greenhouse gas concentrations, termed carbon removal, carbon capture and storage or carbon sequestration, is something that scholars largely agree we need to do in an effort to avoid dangerous levels of warming. There is now a tendency not to describe it as geoengineering.

To quote MacMartin et al(4) however, writing about efforts to mitigate the emission of greenhouse gases, “there is increasing awareness of the substantial gap between the amount of mitigation needed to avoid dangerous anthropogenic climate change and current mitigation commitments.” This leads to the conclusion that it will be necessary in due course to resort to solar geoengineering, sometimes termed solar radiation management, to avoid catastrophic climate change through global warming.

Figure 3 illustrates schematically how global temperature (climate impacts) may be envisaged evolving with time, By the time the black curve has become horizontal, aggressive cuts in emissions have reduced the net CO2 emission rate to zero but by this time the global CO2 concentration will be associated with an unacceptably high global

temperature. It will take a considerable time for large scale CO2 removal technology to emerge but Fig 3 envisages this being developed successfully and deployed progressively from about mid-way through the period shown.

Solar geoengineering is envisaged as the means by which a rise in global temperature above a safe maximum, the ‘overshoot’ shaded blue in Fig 3. is avoided. A range of alternative methods of reducing the rate global of solar energy capture have been investigated theoretically, the most frequently discussed option being the addition of aerosols to the stratosphere to reflect some sunlight back to space. Not enough is currently known to support informed decisions regarding deployment of such approaches but preliminary climate modelling suggests that solar geoengineering in addition to mitigation is likely to reduce many climate risks.

MacMartin et al(4), from whom Fig 3 has been borrowed, discuss the governance issues that have to be addressed in considering the deployment of solar geoengineering. It is a complex, many faceted and challenging problem for both scientists and policy makers. Nevertheless, if Fig 3 represents the future, the challenge will undoubtedly have to be faced.

It is a topic of some interest to the aviation community, partly because it might be applied in the upper atmosphere where the non-CO2 effects of aviation are manifest (though other possibilities have also been suggested). Also, because aircraft – perhaps even civil transport aircraft – might be used to distribute the light-reflecting aerosols. Finally, because it has been suggested that the technique of avoiding ISSRs so as not to form warming night-time contrail-cirrus could be extended to deliberately fly through ISSRs at the right time of day to form cooling contrail cirrus. This last suggestion runs the risk of strong opposition on the grounds that it would be geoengineering. The GBD contrail group has therefore created a governance sub group to ensure that future plans are in line with current best practice.

REFERENCES

1. Volker Grewe, Sigrun Matthes and Katrin Dahlmann, The contribution of aviation NOX emissions to climate change: are we ignoring methodological flaws? Environmental Research Letters, Institute of Physics (IOP) Publishing, https://elib.dlrl.de/131988/

Atmospheric Science

not change the broad conclusion. A small change in cruise altitude for a small number of flights on Big Hit days could reduce contrail EF and total EF substantially with negligible increase in fuel burn for the airlines. Geoengineering – solar radiation management The term geoengineering has not previously appeared in a Greener by Design Annual Report but it cannot be avoided indefinitely. It is coming down the track and it will confront the environmental science community with challenging questions. The term has been applied to two main types of activity, the development of methods to reduce the concentration of anthropogenic greenhouse gases and the development of methods to reduce the warming of the earth by solar radiation. The subject has been controversial and in the past discussion of it has in some places been a scientific taboo. Now, however, the two activities tend to be viewed differently. Reduction in greenhouse gas concentrations, termed carbon removal, carbon capture and storage or carbon sequestration, is something that scholars largely agree we need to do in an effort to avoid dangerous levels of warming. There is now a tendency not to describe it as geoengineering. To quote MacMartin et al(3) however, writing about efforts to mitigate the emission of greenhouse gases, “there is increasing awareness of the substantial gap between the amount of mitigation needed to avoid dangerous anthropogenic climate change and current mitigation commitments.” This leads to the conclusion that it will be necessary in due course to resort to solar geoengineering, sometimes termed solar radiation management, to avoid catastrophic climate change through global warming.

Figure 3 Schematic illustration of the deployment of solar geoengineering

Figure 3 illustrates schematically how global temperature (climate impacts) may be envisaged evolving with time, By the time the black curve has become horizontal, aggressive cuts in emissions have reduced the net CO2 emission rate to zero but by this time the global CO2 concentration will be associated with an unacceptably high global temperature. It will take a

Figure 3. Schematic illustration of the deployment of solar geoengineering.


2. Roger Teoh, Ulrich Schumann, Arnab Majumdar and Marc E J Stettler, Mitigating the Climate Forcing of Aircraft Contrails by Small-Scale Diversions and Technology Adoption. Environmental Science and Technology, https://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b05608.

3. D I A Poll and U Schumann, An estimation method for the fuel burn and other performance characteristics of civil transport aircraft in cruise. Part 1 Fundamental quantities and governing relations for a general atmosphere. Published by The Aeronautical Journal online, and will be available in print later this year.

4. Douglas G MacMartin, Peter J Irvine, Ben Kravitz and Joshua B Horton, Technical characteristics of a solar geoengineering deployment and implications for governance. Climate Policy, September 2019, Vol 19, No 10, pp 1325-1339.

5. Reproduced with permission from Environ Sci Technol. 2020, 54 ,5, 2942 -2950 .Copyright 2020 American Chemical Society.

Airbus


The 2019-2020 period has seen continued and increasing calls for reduced, and ultimately net-zero emissions from aviation with various governments and airlines setting specific timescales for these aggressive targets to be achieved. In February 2020, the UK Court of Appeal ruled that the Airport National Policy Statement was unlawful, because the Government had failed to consider the Paris Climate Change Agreement, and consequently the designation of Heathrow’s third runway as a scheme of national importance was voided. This is a sharp reminder of the need for continued advances in aviation technology if the industry is to continue growing.

Aircraft technology improvements have a key role to play in delivering this improvement alongside operational efficiency and Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs).

SAFs are a critical technology for reducing the CO2 emissions in the near to mid-term provided they are a ‘drop-in’ replacement, ie they can be easily blended with mineral derived aviation fuel and used

on the existing aircraft fleet, much of which will still be in service during the next 20-30 years. A new aircraft introduced in 2035 will represent a small proportion of the world fleet in 2040, and while more significant in 2050 is unlikely to dominate the market.

At the time of writing (June 2020), the impact of the Covid-19 crisis on the airline industry looks massive although the ultimate effects will be defined by the recovery profile of air passenger traffic. The short-medium term impact on technology is also unclear but will clearly be linked to the levels of funding available to finance it.

A lack of cash across the industry (airlines and aircraft supply chain) linked to the availability of large numbers of reasonably low-cost, relatively new parked aircraft will challenge new aircraft sales for some time. It may also limit the funds available for near term, new technology programmes. Many governments have also been forced to borrow extensively during the crisis and may be less inclined to fund technology research in the short-term

Technology

Technology

NASA


although getting economies restarted will pull in the opposite direction.

On the positive side, if older, less efficient aircraft are parked for a considerable time (or permanently) then the average efficiency of the remaining aircraft fleet rises.

EVOLUTIONARY AIRCRAFT DEVELOPMENTS

The most notable first flight of 2019-2020 was the 777-9 aircraft, offering an estimated ~15-20% fuel burn (CO2) savings per seat relative to the smaller 777-300ER. Entry into service (EIS) is expected to be in 2021. Along with general technology improvements, the most obvious innovation is the aircraft’s folding wingtips to allow the aircraft to operate efficiently in cruise with no additional constraints relative to the 787, A350 and older 747-400 aircraft.

With the ending of A380-800 production and probably very limited future 747-8 passenger aircraft sales, the 777-9 is likely to be the largest passenger aircraft for some time, competing with the A350-1000. The latter is also undergoing a development programme to permit higher density, economy seating to further improve its operating costs per seat – another example of the general densification of aircraft passenger cabins that is also reducing the CO2 emissions per passenger.

The Embraer 175 E2 made its first flight in December 2019 although, at the time of writing, it is yet to secure any orders, largely due to US pilot scope clauses limiting numbers of aircraft of this Maximum Take-Off Weight.

The development programmes for the 88-seat Mitsubishi SpaceJet plus the 160-170 seat Comac 919 and Irkut MC-21 aircraft all continue flight testing with Entry Into Service (EIS) planned for 2021-2022. The latter two are aimed at challenging the dominant position of the established A320 and the 737 aircraft while the Spacejet is targeting the Embraer 190 market. All three new aircraft programmes will initially be using variants of the engines being used for the competing aircraft and therefore will be targeting similar performance standards rather than substantial improvements.

Opportunities for future development programmes of new >100-seat Airbus and Boeing passenger aircraft looks more limited following a recent wave of new aircraft programmes and this is likely to reinforced by the expected short-mid-term scarcity of cash following the Covid-19 crisis.

The much-reported 220-270 seat Boeing NMA programme, targeting a mid-2020’s EIS with an all-new aircraft, is likely to be challenged by the combined effects of the current industry crisis and the ongoing 737 MAX MCAS (Manoeuvring Characteristics Augmentation System) problems.

Boeing had been targeting a mid-2020 return to service for the 737 MAX although the challenge of getting the necessary crew training complete and aircraft prepared to fly again is likely to delay widespread usage until later in the year. This is happening at a time of great uncertainty so how this will develop is unclear and is highly dependent on how the industry recovers, ie when passengers will feel safe to fly again.

There have already been several 737 MAX cancellations and deferments linked to the Covid-19 crisis and there are likely to be further 737 and A320 family cancellations as airlines look to adjust capacity if the traffic levels are much reduced. For the first time in many years, there will be excess production capacity on both production lines allowing customers greater choice.

It should be noted that the hiatus to 737 MAX deliveries and operation is an environmental negative as older less efficient aircraft have been retained longer to maintain operating schedules.

Left: NASA and Boeing are collaborating on a lightweight, ultra-thin Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) concept, designed to be more aerodynamic and fuel-efficient than current designs, as part of the Subsonic Ultra Green Aircraft Research (SUGAR) programme.

The Boeing 777X made its first flight on 25 January 2020.

Boe

ing

30

Technology

Royal Aeronautical Society

The Sino-Russian CRAIC CR929 aircraft is targeting the 787, A330neo market although this does not appear to be offering a step change improvement in terms of CO2 emissions.

Embraer are studying the feasibility of a 70-80-seat regional turboprop aircraft to compete with the ATR72 and DHC-8 Q400. The new Xian MA700 70-seat turboprop development continues with a first flight expected soon.

FUTURE AIRCRAFT TYPES

The multitude of recent large aircraft programmes makes it more difficult to see what will trigger the next round of major aircraft programmes that will deliver further improvements in CO2 emissions.

Wide-body re-engining programmes with the Rolls-Royce Ultrafan and equivalent competing architectures are possible in the early 2030’s. Single-aisle aircraft may present the most likely opportunity for new large aircraft programmes given the older, underlying airframe systems of the A320 and even older 737. The Boeing NMA initiative is clearly linked to any future 737 replacement studies.

Much of the more easily achievable technologies have already been incorporated into transport aircraft. Increasing environmental pressure is likely to intensify the drive to adopt some of the more challenging technologies that have not yet been widely included. A number of these technologies and associated research programmes are described below for each of the various major disciplines, although a new technology will often require a multi-disciplinary development programme to deliver an aircraft level benefit.

AERODYNAMICS

Extensive laminar flow remains one of the last remaining routes to substantial aerodynamic step changes on conventional aircraft. It has been the focus of numerous research programmes since the 1940s. In late 2019, the completion of the Clean Sky funded ‘Laminar Nacelle Virtual Demonstrator – airframe Integrated Technology Demonstrator (ITD)’ was reported – this targeted a 0.5-1% fuel burn improvement for business jets. The Clean Sky programme also funded the 2017 Airbus/EU Clean Sky BLADE laminar flow wing flight tests.

To date, laminar flow applications on large transport aircraft have been limited to engine nacelles and the

787-9 fin and stabiliser (it was removed from the 787-10). Some smaller turboprop aircraft can also achieve limited laminar flow on the wing surfaces.

More extensive application of laminar flow technology to the wings as well as empennage and engine nacelles could deliver 5-10% fuel burn benefits – a major challenge is how to maintain the surface quality in an everyday operational environment.

STRUCTURES

The EU Clean Sky programme current structural focus is on regional aircraft, business jets and advanced rotorcraft with several major programme milestones planned before the end of 2020.i) June 2020: Integrated Technologies

Demonstrator FTB2 – Regional Aircraft IADP. This includes an advanced composite wing box and trailing edge surfaces linked to load alleviation and wing morphing systems. Ultimate aircraft level benefits are expected to be lower wing weight at acceptable cost.

ii) December 2020: Business Jet Composite Wing Root Box – Airframe ITD. A 10% weight reduction is targeted relative to a conventional metallic structure in addition to substantially reducing CO2 emissions during its assembly.

Polymer based composite materials account for ~50% of the airframe structure by weight (~80%

Hybrid Electric Regional Aircraft (HERA). Concept passenger airliner designed by Realise and the Electric Aviation Group (EAG). Realise.


by component volume) on modern wide-body aircraft, eg Airbus A350 and Boeing 787. Where composite materials are not suitable or cost-effective, aluminium-lithium and titanium alloys are used for much of the remaining structure as both offer significant weight savings relative to the conventional aluminium alloys and stainless steel that they replace.

Aluminium-lithium alloys usage has also increased for recently developed single aisle and business jet fuselage structures, eg Airbus A220, Bombardier Global 7500/8000 and MS-21 aircraft. The Comac 919 and recent Gulfstream models also make use of aluminium-lithium although it is not clear for which components.

Airbus ‘AlbatrossOne’ and NASA ‘Ptera’ research programmes have both explored the potential for movable outer wing panels that are free to rotate up and down around a streamwise hinge during flight. This is intended to reduce the loads associated with turbulence and ultimately reduce wing weight through lower wing root bending loads.

SYSTEMS

As well as direct aircraft level weight benefits, advanced systems are an important enabler for aerodynamic, structural and propulsive efficiency.

The EU Clean Sky programme includes demonstrator programmes for its regional aircraft work package. The ‘Iron Bird Demonstrator – Regional IADP’ programmes, targeting June 2021 completion, is studying advanced Regional Aircraft Systems with a focus on electric actuation to reduce overall systems mass and their energy demand from the propulsion system.

There is also a systems element in the previously discussed regional aircraft advanced structures programme – wing morphing and load alleviation to reduce airframe structural mass.

PROPULSION

The potential for improved fuel burn from the Rolls-Royce Ultrafan programme, and similar programmes from the competing engine manufacturers, is discussed previously.

Electric Propulsion – The aviation technology headlines through 2019 and into early 2020 continue to be largely dominated by electric

propulsion technology with some notable first flight milestones achieved.

The Harbour Air/Magnix project to re-engine a DHC-2 Beaver float plane achieved a widely publicised first flight in December 2019 – claimed as the first flight of an electrically powered commercial passenger aircraft. Impressively, this flight was achieved in less than nine months after the project was announced to the public – a rugged 1950’s designed utility airframe mated with a state-of-the-art electric aerospace motor. The aircraft is illustrated on the front cover of this report.

Little information relating to the battery attributes has been made public although the foiur-minute flight duration with a single occupant suggests that battery capacity remains a limiting feature, at least for now. Clearly, more work is required to certificate the aircraft and develop the charging infrastructure to operate this aircraft on Harbour Air’s passenger network, but the potential is clear.

In August 2019, the Norwegian airline, Wideroe, and Rolls-Royce announced a joint research programme to explore options for zero-emissions regional aircraft – the airline has a 2030 EIS target relative to the Norwegian government’s 2040 date for electric only regional flight.

The Eviation Alice nine-seat commuter aircraft development programme continues. The aircraft was on static display at the 2019 Paris air show. Unfortunately, a ground fire was reported on the test aircraft in January 2020 with no subsequent comment on its impact on the aircraft’s development timescales.

Airbus at Filton, UK, with the support of Airbus ProtoSpace, have developed AlbatrossOne, a small-scale, remote-controlled aircraft demonstrator that has 'semi-aeroelastic' hinged wing-tips. Airbus.


This event may also hint at some of the challenges of integrating high-power electrical systems.

Project ‘Fresson’ was launched in October 2019 with partial UK government funding (through the Aerospace Technology Institute) to design and develop an electric propulsion system for a Britten-Norman Islander for inter-island operation in the Orkney Islands – this requires a 60-minute flight endurance with a 30-minute reserve.

Various other industry led flight demonstrator programmes were continuing although the impact of the Covid-19 crisis is starting to be seen. The Airbus/Rolls-Royce ‘E-FanX’ electrical propulsion demonstrator programme using a BAE 146 aircraft was cancelled in late April 2020 at the height of the crisis with both partners looking to conserve cash. Rolls-Royce is reported to intend to continue some ground testing using the test vehicle.

Since last year, little new information has been released on the United Technology/Collins Project 804. This plans to introduce a parallel hybrid-electric DHC-8-100 or -200 aircraft. Electrical and gas turbine power delivered separately to the propeller drive with the electrical power intended to augment the gas turbine in take-off and climb to permit such that the gas turbine can be optimised for cruise.

The NASA X-57 Maxwell development continues with a first flight planned for late 2020 with a new wing equipped with electric distributed propulsion.

The fundamental challenge with all current electric propulsion concepts is energy storage mass and the implications on the aircraft design weights, ie increased landing weights, and the system volume requirements. This is valid whether the electrical energy is sourced from batteries or hydrogen-driven fuel cell generators, although the level of challenge may differ.

Current technology battery and ‘hydrogen plus tank’ (to drive a fuel cell) energy densities are much lower than kerosene, even including the reduced losses associated with converting electrical energy to propulsive power and electric motor power/weight advantages.

Battery and hydrogen system volumes will also be greater than that required for kerosene, driving further changes to the aircraft, ie typically drag and weight, as larger aircraft will be required if the payload is to be maintained.

Hence, electrical or even hybrid-electric powered aircraft are currently limited to short range operation in which the battery or fuel cell must still be capable

Technology

Artist’s concept image of NASA’s first all-electric X-plane, the X-57 Maxwell, in its final configuration. NASA.


of generating the peak power requirement for take-off or a missed approach.

Distributed Propulsion: This is often associated with electric propulsion as electrical power distribution is less complex than that for liquid fuel or with a mechanical transmission. The NASA X-57 Maxwell is an example of this, although the delays in this programme hint at some of the challenges of electrical power distribution.

Boundary Layer Ingestion (BLI): Both NASA and EU Clean Sky funded HYPER-F programmes have studied or are studying BLI propulsion concepts. Again, electrical power is viewed a key enabler. NASA reported ‘as much as 8.6%’ fuel burn improvement’ due to BLI. The benefit is clearly dependent on the mass associated with the BLI components, the CG effects of more mass in the aft fuselage and the BLI system propulsive efficiency.

CONFIGURATION

The conventional ‘tube and wing’ airframe configuration powered by turbofan engines is often cited as being close to various theoretical limits that constrain further substantial efficiency improvements beyond the current state-of-the-art. This suggests that radical airframe and propulsion configurational changes may be necessary to continue progress towards substantially lower aviation CO2 emissions.

The potential CO2 benefits of less conventional aircraft configurations such as Blended/Hybrid Wing Body (B/HWB) or trussed braced high aspect ratio wings are well documented, although so are the risks and challenges. These risks are an important consideration as the development of a major new aircraft type is sometimes described as ‘betting the company’, ie the programme and company success or failure are tightly bound together.

However, the growing imperative to deliver the commitments of reduced aviation CO2 emissions may be enough to drive this step change. Airbus released information in February 2020 on its MAVERIC subscale flying wing demonstrator: it appears similar to the previous NASA/Boeing X-48 subscale flight demonstrator. Both programmes are

likely to be intended to calibrate design methods of the parent companies and better understand aircraft performance and handling qualities close to the edge of the flight envelope.

ADVANCED ROTORCRAFT

The Leonardo AW609, a first civil tilt-rotor aircraft, is expected to achieve certification later in 2020. The EU Clean Sky funded Airbus RACER compound helicopter is currently being assembled with a flight test programme starting before the end of 2020. Cruise speeds >200kt are targeted, significantly faster than conventional rotorcraft.

In the US, advanced rotorcraft development is led by the Bell V280 ‘Valor’ tiltrotor and the Sikorsky SB-1 ‘Defiant’ Compound Helicopter. Both aircraft are now in flight-test, the latter making its first flight in 2019.

SUPERSONICS

Supersonic passenger aircraft development continues in the US with aircraft build approaching completion for X-59 ‘Quiet SuperSonic Transport’ QueSST demonstrator with a first flight planned for

Right: The Airbus MAVERIC (Model Aircraft for Validation and Experimentation of Robust Innovative Controls) 'blended wing body' scale model technological demonstrator has been flying since June 2019. Airbus.


Technology

2021/22. Boom technology are also getting their XB-1 ‘Baby Boom’ 1/3 scale demonstrator ready for its first flight planned for 2020.

Environmental standards for modern SSTs have still not been agreed with apparent differences between European and US authorities (existing standards for Concorde are considered outdated by EASA). The EASA website reports an expectation of higher CO2 and non-CO2 effects relative to subsonic aircraft and is subject of the EU Horizon 2020 RUMBLE (RegUlation and norM for low sonic Boom Levels) research programme.

OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRING TECHNOLOGY CHANGES

Both Airbus and Boeing have been studying the fuel burn benefits of flying aircraft in relatively close proximity (1.5-2.0nm), much like geese flying in a ‘V’ formation. The trailing aircraft (or bird) are positioned on the outboard side of the wing tip vortex that has an upward vertical velocity component. To maintain altitude, and the relative position to the lead aircraft, the wing lift must be reduced thus reducing the following aircraft’s induced drag.

Drag reductions of approximately 10% have been claimed for the following aircraft across various tests although this will be eroded at a network level as the leading aircraft is getting no benefit (or penalty) and some aircraft may exchange operation at a more favourable flight level to gain the formation flying benefits.

This proximity between the aircraft is well within the current minimum specified lateral separations and clearly requires formation keeping technology to ensure the aircraft safely maintain their position at the optimum location for fuel reduction. This must be automated and function safely in all cruise flight conditions.

ACARE 2020 CO2 SCORECARD

To finish, it is worth a look at what has been achieved over the past 20 years. ACARE’s Vision 2020 document set a target for a 50% reduction in CO2 per passenger kilometre for 2020 ‘new aircraft’ – the document was released in January 2001. Although the baseline for this improvement is not explicitly defined, if the 2020 fleet and operation is compared to that of 2000, then the industry has probably either met or got very close to the target.

Aircraft and engine technology have probably contributed 30-40% fuel burn improvements – an A350 and 777-9 fuel burn per seat is ~30% lower than a 747-400, even better if compared with the substantial 747 classic and DC-10 fleets still operating in 2000. The story is similar for single-aisle aircraft comparing the A320 (CEO and NEO) and 737 (NG and MAX) families against the large fleets of 737 classics and DC-9 and MD-80 aircraft operating in 2000.

Further significant benefits have been achieved though cabin densification (more seats installed in existing cabins), increased aircraft average size and operational improvements such as Reduced Vertical Separation Minima and Continuous Descents and Approach (to minimise hold time before landing and fuel burn on approach).

The Boom XB-1 supersonic aircraft demonstrator is due to roll out on 7 October 2020. Boom.


Operations Report COVID-19 AND THE DEMAND FOR AIR TRAVEL

Covid-19 is presenting the aerospace industry with a unique set of challenges. Passenger traffic has plunged by 95% and freight by 40%. Business customers are being forced into alternative methods of working, and holidaymakers are getting used to staying at home. We are all conscious of the need to keep 2m apart. Some of the new norms may stick, with inevitably significant longer-term impacts. How long is difficult to judge, but many airlines are assuming for at least two to three years, and maybe longer. Airports and aircraft manufacturers are also facing the effects of reduced demand, and everyone has the challenge of reorganising the workplace to provide for social distancing. And the biggest American manufacturer was already struggling to get its grounded 737 MAX back in traffic after two fatal accidents in the last two years.

All this assumes that a post Covid-19 world will look the same as before. But will this be true? There are several indications that things will be different, especially in the travel and holiday markets, which will lead to depressed passenger demand for the foreseeable future.

A wide swath of society will have less money than they used to – including youngsters who

have lost their jobs and older people who rely on company dividends. Many will have had their first experience of ‘zoom’ and other internet meeting apps – and become very (or reasonably!) proficient. This could well translate into less travel. Equally many businesses will also need to conserve cash and will have had many months to hone their skills on working remotely and changing their working practices to reduce – or eliminate – the need to travel. Many employees have been working from home – and do not want to return to the regular commute to the office. Companies have been adapting how they do business, and this includes the aerospace industry. It is now possible to buy your chosen aircraft from Airbus, with all the pre delivery checks, payment, registration and inspections done remotely. All that is needed is one trip by the aircrew to pick the plane up. Result: fewer trips by everybody.

Even if potential business and leisure travellers have the money, it is clear many travel restrictions are going to remain in force for some time to come, with the added uncertainty of them being lifted, changed or re-imposed at virtually no notice. Some countries (including the UK) are imposing a 14-day quarantine period for arriving air passengers, from 15 June. This is a serious disincentive to a holiday or business trip abroad, although consistent with

Delta Air Lines aircraft parked on a taxiway at Kansas City International Airport due to Covid-19. elisfkc2.


Operations Report

Government advice to avoid all non-essential travel. Others are insisting on checking the temperature of would be departing passengers, travel being refused if your temperature is elevated. This introduces further uncertainty into travel plans, as you might be stopped from travelling even if you are suffering from something else. An additional complication is that insurance for Covid-19 related events is now unavailable, so all travel and accommodation costs are very much at the traveller’s risk. And this presupposes that the place you are going to has reopened its hotels, bars and restaurants, theme parks and swimming pools, art galleries and other tourist attractions. If not, or if they may be closed again with no notice, how many tourists will risk coming?

Since mid-March we have all been educated in the need for self-distancing, keeping 2m away from anyone other than members of our household. This has been a critical action to keep infection rates low. We have all become used to it – a new social norm. However, in any busy space, like an airport it is quite difficult to achieve and totally impractical and uneconomic on a flight, as several of the low-cost carriers have been quick to point out. Hours spent on an aircraft sitting really close to someone we don’t know will seem much more uncomfortable, and potentially high risk, than it used to seem. While younger passengers may not be deterred, older passengers may well be, not least because of the much higher mortality rate from the virus in older age groups. This fear of flying may be enhanced if the passenger worries about the state of healthcare in the foreign country they are travelling to, or the prevalence of the disease, or the potential costs of being hospitalised there. Older people are a very important sector for the airline and tourist industries, many making frequent trips abroad, often to holiday homes or to see family, together with a significant number of longer trips – of the ‘trips of a lifetime’ variety. The higher risks for this group will remain, and this group could be very slow to return, and some never will. Another reason for many years elapsing before we shall see traffic back to pre-Covid-19 levels.

Despite the shortage of cash, the changing travel and shopping restrictions, and the fear of being close to an infected person at the airport or on a plane, the main fact determining the shape of the post Covid world will be the availability of a vaccine, and/or a drug to treat the disease. Both will have major impacts in tackling the disease, assuming that the vaccine gave immunity for a reasonable length of time. This is far from certain: it is likely to be less than a year judging by immunity given by other coronavirus antibodies. This will raise major logistical

issues about how you can keep everyone inoculated. And younger people will need to be included too, as some are likely to be asymptomatic carriers. Potential travellers would need certificates to prove their inoculated status, and these could become as essential as a passport. Under this scenario apart from the cost of inoculations and certificates, and the lack of insurance cover, the world could return to its pre-Covid-19 state, albeit slowly.

COVID-19 AND THE ENVIRONMENT

Covid-19 has had a major impact on the environment. On the positive side, the ensuing shutdown of industry, reduced road and air traffic has resulted in a sharp decline in the emissions of CO2, NOX and particulates. There has been a very noticeable improvement in air quality in towns and an almost total absence of contrails in the sky. The effect has been world-wide and will almost certainly lead to a reduction in the total amount of CO2 in 2020 emitted into the atmosphere compared with 2019. The European Union is likely to meet its target for 20% of energy to come from renewable sources, partly because Covid-19 has reduced dramatically energy use, and partly because the UK has left the EU (and the UK only achieved 11.8% in 2018) so its departure will raise the EU average. The UK target was 15%, and again because of the shutdown, it may be achieved. Worldwide, the impact will not be so pronounced, partly because China accounts for over 27% of world CO2 emissions (and they restarted more or less full

Civil Protection volunteers carrying out health checks in February 2020 at Guglielmo Marconi Airport, Bologna, Italy. Dipartimento Protezione Civile.


production in early May), and partly because their CO2 emissions are rising year on year.

However, the drastic reduction in flights has given the environmental lobby fresh vigour to ensure emissions from aircraft do not return to previous levels. Pressure is being placed on governments to make financial help to the industry dependant on reducing emissions in the future. Air France has accepted 4bn Euro in state funds, and 3bn in Euro loans, on condition that it will withdraw flights on domestic routes where the rail journey time is less than 2.5 hours. It is not clear how the journey times are to be calculated, which will allow some wriggle room later on when deciding which routes not to restart. There is also some rather vague wording on becoming a world leading airline with the best environmental performance. At the time of writing it remains unclear if similar strings may be attached to state aid (if any) for UK carriers.

The first major casualty of the crisis was the cancellation of the COP26 meeting to be held in Glasgow in October. A key part of this was agreeing on the rules for determining what are to be eligible offsets for the CORSIA scheme, Although critical to the scheme, given the reduction in traffic now anticipated this year it is unlikely any offsets will be needed in 2020/21, as CO2 emissions are likely to be well below last year’s baseline total. COP26 has now been rescheduled for November 2021, so the detail of the new offset rules will not be known until the conference concludes.

The second major casualty has been the call around the world to relax emission standards to reduce the economic effects of the crisis. China has already relaxed the rules on building new coal fired power stations. In the USA, Republicans are putting pressure on the administration to relax some of the Obama rules protecting the environment, a move strongly opposed by the Democrats.

The third major casualty has been aerospace companies’ research programmes. Faced with a major loss of income companies are drastically cutting research budgets. As mentioned in the Technology report, Airbus and Rolls are cancelling their joint project E-fanX, which was planned to lead to a hybrid electric aeroplane. Some concern has been expressed about electric aircraft, citing difficulties in making them as safe as kerosene-powered aircraft, partly because of the battery fire risk. Further work on batteries has exposed how difficult it is to significantly improve on the power/weight ratio achieved by a Lithium-ion battery, partly because Lithium is the lightest metal there is (it is

third lightest element after hydrogen and helium). So there is a real challenge in making the order of magnitude improvement in energy density, which is critical to having a 100-seater aircraft with a 1,000 mile range, which would enable a significant percentage of flights to be electric.

Ironically the Covid-19 crisis could take some pressure off aviation. If air traffic remains 60% below previous levels, aviation will contribute less than 1% of global CO2 (it was 2.7%). No problem can be solved by focusing on less than 1% of the problem, so the focus will rightly switch to cars, lorries, electricity production and gas central heating. Real progress must be made worldwide in all these sectors if global warming is to be halted. Furthermore, assuming the development of Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAF) continues, it is quite reasonable to assume this could provide 30% to 50%+ of aviation’s (much reduced) fuel demand, and with some electric aircraft the balance could well met by direct removal and storage of CO2 from the atmosphere. The additional demand to power the plants from a green electric supply would be quite manageable, given the much smaller requirement. So net zero CO2 emissions could be readily achievable if the sector was significantly smaller.

However, overall while in the short-term emissions may be down, longer-term prospects for mitigating and avoiding climate change seem to have taken a step backwards as controls and targets are relaxed, exacerbated by the reduction in funding for research from both industry and governments. Climate change is, however, still with us, will accelerate and has a greater potential for changing all our lives more adversely than Covid-19. A sobering thought for today’s youth.

HEATHROW DEVELOPMENTS

In June 2019 the House of Commons voted 415-119 in favour of designating the third runway at Heathrow as a scheme of National Significance, so expediting its progress through the planning process. However, wending their way through the courts were a number of appeals brought by environmental groups to overturn this decision. In February all the grounds for appeal were rejected – except one. This related to the procedure the Government had used to produce the Airports National Policy Statement (ANPS). The procedure for doing this is laid out in the Planning Act 2008, and the Court of Appeal ruled that the procedure had not been followed correctly, because Section 5(8) requires the government to “include an explanation


Operations Report

of how the policy set out in the statement takes account of Government policy relating to the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change.” The court concluded that the designation of the ANPS was unlawful by reason of its failure to take into account the Government’s commitment to the Paris Agreement on climate change, concluded in December 2015 and ratified by the United Kingdom in November of the following year. The Government’s view was that the Paris Agreement 2015 was an International agreement with no standing in English law, as it is unincorporated into UK legislation. The Court of Appeal, however, took a different view, ruling that as the UK government had signed the Agreement, it was part of UK aviation policy, and therefore fell within Section 5(8) and should have been considered. The Court therefore found the Government had not fully complied with the Planning Act and therefore the decision to designate APNS was unlawful. This rendered the ANPS in its current form unable to have legal effect although the Secretary of State may review it in line with relevant statutory regulations.

Despite the Government deciding against appealing, Heathrow Airport Ltd decided to do so, and their application to appeal was granted by the Supreme Court on 6 May. No date has been set for the hearing but, despite Covid-19, HAL’s Chief Executive remains optimistic that extra capacity will be needed at Heathrow in due course. One reason for this could be more frequent domestic flights, perhaps provided by smaller electric aircraft. However, with the steep decline in air traffic due to Covid-19, Heathrow Airport’s Chief Executive, John Holland Kaye, at a Transport Select committee hearing the same day, said he thought the third runway would not be needed for around 10 -15 years.

DECARBONISING TRANSPORT CONSULTATION

In June 2019 the UK Government passed the Climate Change Act 2008 (2050 Target Amendment) Order 2019, a law that requires the UK to achieve ‘net zero’ domestic greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The UK was the first major global economy to do so, and 22 others have now followed suit including France, Spain, Germany, Portugal, New Zealand, Norway (by 2030), Sweden (by 2035) and Austria (by 2040). The key question is ‘how can this be achieved?’

In March this year the Government published a document outlining the challenges in decarbonising transport. They are formidable. All other (non-transport) sectors have reduced their emissions substantially since 1990, whereas transport emissions have remained about the same. This has resulted in transport becoming by default the largest CO2 producing sector (126MtCO2e – 28% of net total UK CO2 emissions) in 2018. Most of these (domestic) transport emissions are from cars and taxis (55%), but with HGVs and vans contributing a further 33%. Domestic shipping, buses, trains and aviation contribute the balance. However, these figures do not include international aviation or shipping, responsible for a further 37 and 8MtCO2e respectively (UK share based on fuel sales in the UK). While the shipping figure is unchanged from 1990, the aviation figure has more than doubled (from 16MtCO2e in 1990).

The paper goes on to outline what is happening in each sector, the strategy to achieve ‘net zero’, and the incentives the government is offering to reach the net zero objective. These include grants for plug in electric cars, funding for ultra-low emissions buses and grants for powering trains directly from solar energy.

The section on Aviation is disappointingly brief. It reiterates the Department for Transport central projection (pre Covid-19) that aviation demand (including domestic) will rise by 73% between 2018 and 2050. However, improvements in efficiency driven in part by larger planes and in part by limited use of SAF result in emissions remaining broadly flat. Clearly this is not satisfactory against a net zero objective and Government stresses the steps it is taking to persuade the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to adopt a more stringent approach, consistent with the Paris Agreement, at its next assembly meeting in 2022. The Government also indicates that if progress is too slow or ineffective, it would consider including the UK share of International aviation in the UK domestic target. This would be a very significant step, not least

An artist's impression of Heathrow Airport with the third runway. Heathrow.


The next annual Greener by Design Conference, ‘RAeS Climate Change Conference 2020 – Recovery strategy with climate gain’, will be held virtually on 3 and 4 November 2020. There will also be a real conference in May 2021 on the non-CO2 effects of Aviation on Climate Change.

The Greener by Design GroupGreener by Design was formed in 1999 by the Royal Aeronautical Society and bodies representing airports, UK airlines and the aerospace industry, bringing together experts from every part of the aviation industry with Government bodies and research institutions. The initiative is supported by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and other bodies in the aviation sector but it is non-aligned, researching and advising independently of any interest.

Greener by DesignResearches, assesses and advises Government and industry on operational, technological, economic and regulatory options for limiting aviation’s environmental impact.Promotes best practice across the aviation and aerospace sectors.Promotes a balanced understanding of aviation’s true environmental impact and its environmental programmes, in liaison with other groups with similar objectives.Issues an annual report and holds an annual conference and workshops on sustainable aviation.

because it could disadvantage UK aviation, and merely displace demand to other countries.

It also is premature, as later this year the Government is scheduled to produce a consultation paper on aviation and the net zero target, including advice from the Committee for Climate Change. As detailed in the earlier sections of this Annual Report, the Government has not fully considered the other ways of reaching net zero. SAF production could be expanded, electric aircraft could be used on shorter flights, or the ability of market-based measures (including CORSIA) to impact demand seem all to have been ignored. There is also no mention of the possibility of offsetting the CO2 produced by direct removal from the atmosphere, a technology that although still experimental, is expanding rapidly. There are also many other possibilities being investigated: for example the Lufthansa Group has recently teamed up with the Swiss Federal Institute

of Technology in Zurich to develop a renewable jet fuel from water, sunlight and CO2 extracted from the atmosphere, to make a synthetic gas, which can be used to produce jet fuel.

It is also important to note that many airlines, including BA, have already set themselves a target of meeting a net zero target by 2050. There is no disagreement about the net zero target. There is no disagreement on the methods that are available to achieve net zero. The only area of disagreement is among experts about how successful the various approaches will be, many of which are still in their infancy and need considerable further development. There should therefore be widespread support for investigating these various solutions, while recognising that a combination of measures is likely to be the optimum solution. In the 20 years since GBD was founded its message is as valid as ever – the way forward for aviation is Greener by Design.


Global Market-Based Measures

DESIGNbyGreenerGreener

Air Travel – Greener by Design draws on the expertise of industry and academia.Any views expressed in this report are those of Greener by Design and do not necessarily represent the view of the Royal Aeronautical Society as a whole.

For further information or comments on this paperAir Travel – Greener by DesignROYAL AERONAUTICAL SOCIETYNo.4 Hamilton PlaceLondon W1J 7BQ, UK+44 (0)20 7670 4300aerosociety.com/GreenerbyDesign

air travel – greener by design€¦ · income and air travel. the effects could be more far...

Documents