Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Perceptions of emission reduction potential in air transport: a structural equation modeling approach

  • Published:
Environment Systems and Decisions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

This study employs a structural equation modeling (SEM) approach to identify the key perceptions that influence greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction potential (ERP) in air transport. It explores the correlation relationships between various perceptions and air transport GHG emission reduction potential. Personal approach and self-administered surveys were used to collect data from 249 aviation experts. The results of the SEM showed aircraft technology and design, aviation operations and infrastructure, socioeconomic and political measures, and alternative fuels and fuel properties are the key influencing perceptions for reducing GHG emissions. Aircraft technology and design had the strongest ERP, followed by aviation operations and infrastructure with a strong correlation between them. The structural model proved reliable and in agreement to identify the perceptions of the ERP. The outputs can be used to measure the level of knowledge and understanding about the ERP of air transport and can provide airlines with valuable information for designing appropriate air transport policies for emission reduction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agarwal RK (2010) Sustainable (Green) aviation: challenges and opportunities. SAE Int J Aerosp 2(1):1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alonso G, Benito A, Lonza L, Kousoulidou M (2014) Investigations on the distribution of air transport traffic and CO2 emissions within the European Union. J Air Transp Manag 36:85–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson JC, Gerbing DW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol Bull 103(3):411–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antoine NE, Kroo IM (2004) Aircraft optimization for minimal environmental impact. J Aircr 41(4):790–797

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antoine NE, Kroo IM (2005) Framework for aircraft conceptual design and environmental performance studies. AIAA J 43(10):2100–2109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babikian R, Lukachko SP, Waitz IA (2002) The historical fuel efficiency characteristics of regional aircraft from technological, operational, and cost perspectives. J Air Transp Manag 8(6):389–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baklacioglu T (2016) Modeling the fuel flow-rate of transport aircraft during flight phases using genetic algorithm-optimized neural networks. Aerosp Sci Technol 49:52–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belanger F, Hiller JS, Smith WJ (2002) Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: the role of privacy, security, and site attributes. J Strateg Inf Syst 11(3):245–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler PM (1990) Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull 107(2):238–246

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler PM, Bonett DG (1980) Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol Bull 88(3):588–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler PM, Dudgeon P (1996) Covariance structure analysis: statistical practice, theory, and directions. Annu Rev Psychol 47(1):563–592

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen KA (2014) Structural equations with latent variables. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Brueckner JK, Zhang A (2010) Airline emission charges: effects on airfares, service quality, and aircraft design. Transp Res B Methodol 44(8):960–971

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne BM (2013) Structural equation modeling with AMOS: basic concepts, applications, and programming. Structural equation modeling. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Capoccitti S, Khare A, Mildenberger U (2010) Aviation industry—mitigating climate change impacts through technology and policy. J Technol Manag Innov 5(2):66–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson F, Hammar H (2002) Incentive-based regulation of CO2 emissions from international aviation. J Air Transp Manag 8(6):365–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang YC (2012) Cabin safety behavioral intentions of passengers with reduced mobility. J Air Transp Manag 25:64–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang YW, Chang YH (2010) Does service recovery affect satisfaction and customer loyalty? An empirical study of airline services. J Air Transp Manag 16(6):340–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang YH, Liao MY (2009) The effect of aviation safety education on passenger cabin safety awareness. Saf Sci 47(10):1337–1345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chau PYK, Hu PJ-H (2001) Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: a model comparison approach. Decis Sci 32(4):699–719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen FY (2013) The intention and determining perceptions for airline passengers’ participation in carbon offset schemes. J Air Transp Manag 29:17–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen CF, Kao YL (2011) The antecedents and consequences of job stress of flight attendants—evidence from Taiwan. J Air Transp Manag 17(4):253–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen NY, Kirschen PG, Sridhar B, Ng HK (2014) Identification of flights for cost-efficient climate impact reduction. In: AIAA aircraft noise and emissions reduction symposium

  • Churchill GA Jr (1979) A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. J Mark Res 16(1):64–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corporan E, Edwards T, Shafer L, Dewitt MJ, Klingshirn C, Zabarnick S, West Z, Striebich R, Graham J, Klein J (2011) Chemical, thermal stability, seal swell, and emissions studies of alternative jet fuels. Energy Fuels 25(3):955–966

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cortina JM (1993) What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. J Appl Psychol 78(1):98–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daggett D, Hadaller O, Hendricks R, Walther R (2006) Alternative fuels and their potential impact on aviation. NASA/TM-2006214365

  • Dessens O, Anger A, Barker T, Pyle J (2014) Effects of decarbonising international shipping and aviation on climate mitigation and air pollution. Environ Sci Policy 44:1–10

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ (1999) Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychol Methods 4(3):272–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan X, Thompson B, Wang L (1999) Effects of sample size, estimation methods, and model specification on structural equation modeling fit indexes. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J 6(1):56–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forgas S, Palau R, Sánchez J, Huertas-García R (2012) Online drivers and offline influences related to loyalty to airline websites. J Air Transp Manag 18(1):43–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res (JMR) 18(1):39–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garver MS, Mentzer JT (1999) Logistics research methods: employing structural equation modeling to test for construct validity. J Bus Logist 20(1):33–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerbing DW, Anderson JC (1988) An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. J Mark Res 25(2):186–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green JE (2003) Civil aviation and the environmental challenge. Aeronaut J 107(1072):281–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Green JE (2009) The potential for reducing the impact of aviation on climate. Technol Anal Strateg Manag 21(1):39–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grote M, Williams I, Preston J (2014) Direct carbon dioxide emissions from civil aircraft. Atmos Environ 95:214–224

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE, Tatham RL (2010) Multivariate data analysis. Prentice Hall, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart PM (1994) Teacher quality of work life: integrating work experiences, psychological distress and morale. J Occup Organ Psychol 67(2):109–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson R, Martins J, Perez R (2012) Aircraft conceptual design for optimal environmental performance. Aeronaut J 116(3712):1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hihara K (2011) Analysis on bargaining about global climate change mitigation in international aviation sector. Transp Res E Logist Transp Rev 47(3):342–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hileman JI, De la Rosa Blanco E, Bonnefoy PA, Carter NA (2013) The carbon dioxide challenge facing aviation. Prog Aerosp Sci 63:84–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu YL, Liu TC (2012) Structuring risk perceptions related to airline cabin safety. J Air Transp Manag 20:54–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J 6(1):1–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IATA (2013) IATA technology roadmap. https://www.iata.org/whatwedo/environment/Documents/technology-roadmap-2013.pdf

  • International Energy Agency (2009) Transport, energy and CO2. (IEA, edn). International Energy Agency (IEA), Paris-Cedex. https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/transport2009.pdf

  • IPCC (1999) Aviation and the global atmosphere. Special report a special report of IPCC Working Groups I and III in collaboration with the Scientific Assessment Panel to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, Cambridge University Press

  • Janic M (2010) Is liquid hydrogen a solution for mitigating air pollution by airports? Int J Hydrogen Energy 35(5):2190–2202

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jenatabadi HS, Ismail NA (2014) Application of structural equation modeling for estimating airline performance. Journal of Air Transport Management 40:25–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog KG (1970) A general method for analysis of covariance structures. Biometrika 57(2):239–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog KG (1978) Structural analysis of covariance and correlation matrices. Psychometrika 43(4):443–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jovanovic AS, Klimek P, Quintero FA (2015) Forecast for the use of alternative fuels in aviation under environmental constraints and volatile market conditions. Environ Syst Decis 35(4):521–531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge TA, Hulin CL (1993) Job satisfaction as a reflection of disposition: a multiple source causal analysis. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 56(3):388–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kao LH, Stewart M, Lee KH (2009) Using structural equation modeling to predict cabin safety outcomes among Taiwanese airlines. Transp Res E Logist Transp Rev 45(2):357–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kar R, Bonnefoy PA, Hansman RJ (2010) Dynamics of implementation of mitigating measures to reduce CO2 emissions from commercial aviation. Cambridge, MA. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/56268

  • Katos AV (2010) The influence of information and communication technologies on enabling trade: a cross-country investigation. J Inf Technol Impact 10(1):15–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazda A, Caves RE (eds) (2015) Airport design and operation. Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, UK

  • Kline RB (2015) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford publications, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Koufteros XA (1999) Testing a model of pull production: a paradigm for manufacturing research using structural equation modeling. J Oper Manag 17(4):467–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koufteros X, Vonderembse M, Doll W (2001) Concurrent engineering and its consequences. J Oper Manag 19(1):97–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koufteros X, Babbar S, Kaighobadi M (2009) A paradigm for examining second-order factor models employing structural equation modeling. Int J Prod Econ 120(2):633–652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kousoulidou M, Lonza L (2016) Biofuels in aviation: fuel demand and CO2 emissions evolution in Europe toward 2030. Transp Res D Transp Environ 46:166–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo CW, Jou RC (2014) Asymmetric response model for evaluating airline service quality: an empirical study in cross-strait direct flights. Transp Res A Policy Pract 62:63–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence P (2009) Meeting the challenge of aviation emissions: an aircraft industry perspective. Technol Anal Strateg Manag 21(1):79–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee JJ (2010) Can we accelerate the improvement of energy efficiency in aircraft systems? Energy Convers Manag 51(1):189–196

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lee J, Mo J (2011) Analysis of technological innovation and environmental performance improvement in aviation sector. Int J Environ Res Public Health 8(9):3777–3795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee JJ, Lukachko SP, Waitz IA, Schafer A (2001) Historical and future trends in aircraft performance, cost, and emissions. Annu Rev Energy Env 26(1):167–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee DS, Fahey DW, Forster PM, Newton PJ, Wit RCN, Lim LL, Owen B, Sausen R (2009) Aviation and global climate change in the 21st century. Atmos Environ 43(22–23):3520–3537

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lee DS, Pitari G, Grewe V, Gierens K, Penner JE, Petzold A, Prather MJ, Schumann U, Bais A, Berntsen T, Iachetti T, Lim LL, Sausen R (2010) Transport impacts on atmosphere and climate: aviation. Atmos Environ 44(37):4678–4734

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lei PW, Wu Q (2007) Introduction to structural equation modeling: issues and practical considerations. Educ Meas Issues Pract (ITEMS Module) 26(3):33–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longhurst JWS, Raper DW, Conlan DE (1996a) Local and regional air quality impacts of airport operations. Environmentalist 16(2):83–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longhurst J, Gibbs DC, Raper DW, Conlan DE (1996b) Towards sustainable airport development. Environmentalist 16(3):197–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu C-S, Lai K, Cheng TCE (2007) Application of structural equation modeling to evaluate the intention of shippers to use Internet services in liner shipping. Eur J Oper Res 180(2):845–867

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayor K, Tol RSJ (2010) Scenarios of carbon dioxide emissions from aviation. Glob Environ Change 20(1):65–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikulić J, Prebežac D (2011) What drives passenger loyalty to traditional and low-cost airlines? A formative partial least squares approach. J Air Transp Manag 17(4):237–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller B, Minogue K, Clark JP (2001) Constraints in aviation infrastructure and surface aircraft emissions. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrell P (2009) The potential for European aviation CO2 emissions reduction through the use of larger jet aircraft. J Air Transp Manag 15(4):151–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng SI, Sambasivan M, Zubaidah S (2011) Antecedents and outcomes of flight attendants’ job satisfaction. J Air Transp Manag 17(5):309–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikoleris T, Gupta G, Kistler M (2011) Detailed estimation of fuel consumption and emissions during aircraft taxi operations at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. Transp Res D Transp Environ 16(4):302–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nojoumi H, Dincer I, Naterer GF (2009) Greenhouse gas emissions assessment of hydrogen and kerosene-fueled aircraft propulsion. Int J Hydrogen Energy 34(3):1363–1369

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH, Berge JMT (1967) Psychometric theory, vol 226. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary-Kelly S (1998) The empirical assessment of construct validity. J Oper Manag 16(4):387–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne JW (2008) Best practices in quantitative methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Owen B, Lee DS, Lim L (2010) Flying into the future: aviation emissions scenarios to 2050. Environ Sci Technol 44(7):2255–2260

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parker R (2009) From blue skies to green skies: engine technology to reduce the climate-change impacts of aviation. Technol Anal Strateg Manag 21(1):61–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravizza S, Chen J, Atkin JA, Burke EK, Stewart P (2013) The trade-off between taxi time and fuel consumption in airport ground movement. Public Transp 5(1–2):25–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schäfer A, Evans A, Reynolds T, Dray L (2015) Costs of mitigating CO2 emissions from passenger aircraft. Nat Clim Change 6(4):412–417. doi:10.1038/nclimate2865

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreiber JB, Nora A, Stage FK, Barlow EA, King J (2006) Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: a review. J Educ Res 99(6):323–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumann U (1994) On the effect of emissions from aircraft engines on the state of the atmosphere. Ann Geophys 12(5):365–384

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Segars AH, Grover V (1998) Strategic information systems planning success: an investigation of the construct and its measurement. MIS Q 22(2):139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senzig DA, Fleming GG, Iovinelli RJ (2009) Modeling of terminal-area airplane fuel consumption. J Aircr 46(4):1089–1093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sgouridis S, Bonnefoy PA, Hansman RJ (2011) Air transportation in a carbon constrained world: long-term dynamics of policies and strategies for mitigating the carbon footprint of commercial aviation. Transp Res A Policy Pract 45(10):1077–1091

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheu JB (2014) Airline ambidextrous competition under an emissions trading scheme—a reference-dependent behavioral perspective. Transp Res B Methodol 60:115–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simões AF, Schaeffer R (2005) The Brazilian air transportation sector in the context of global climate change: CO2 emissions and mitigation alternatives. Energy Convers Manag 46(4):501–513

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Singh V, Sharma SK (2014) Evolving base for the fuel consumption optimization in Indian air transport: application of structural equation modeling. Eur Transp Res Rev 6(3):315–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh V, Sharma SK (2015) Fuel consumption optimization in air transport: a review, classification, critique, simple meta-analysis, and future research implications. Eur Transp Res Rev 7(12):1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh V, Sharma SK (2016) Analyzing the moderating effects of respondent type and experience on the fuel efficiency improvement in air transport using structural equation modeling. Eur Transp Res Rev. doi:10.1007/s12544-016-0199-3

  • Singh V, Sharma SK, Vaibhav S (2012a) Modeling the civil aircraft operations for the optimization of fuel consumption in Indian air transport industry. J Ind Eng Lett 2(7):20–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh V, Sharma SK, Vaibhav S (2012b) Identification of dimensions of the optimization of fuel consumption in air transport industry: a literature review. J Energy Technol Policy 2(7):24–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh V, Sharma SK, Vaibhav S (2016) Transport aircraft conceptual design optimization using real coded genetic algorithm. Int J Aerosp Eng. doi:10.1155/2016/2813541

  • Stewart DW (1981) The application and misapplication of factor analysis in marketing research. J Mark Res 18(1):51–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suki NM (2014) Passenger satisfaction with airline service quality in Malaysia: a structural equation modeling approach. Res Transp Bus Manag 10:26–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (2006) Using multivariate statistics, 5th edn. Allyn and Bacon Inc, Needham Heights, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Timmis AJ, Hodzic A, Koh L, Bonner M, Soutis C, Schäfer AW, Dray L (2015) Environmental impact assessment of aviation emission reduction through the implementation of composite materials. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20(2):233–243

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tsuchida K, Hayshi K, Kumabe K, Hasegawa T (2007) Assessment on alternative aviation fuels from perspectives of petroleum depletion and environmental restrictions in the future. In: Proceedings of international symposium on eco topia science 2007 (ISET07), pp 1388–1392, Nagoya, Japan

  • Ullman JB, Bentler PM (2003) Structural equation modeling. Wiley, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Upham P, Thomas C, Gillingwater D, Raper D (2003) Environmental capacity and airport operations: current issues and future prospects. J Air Transp Manag 9(3):145–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vespermann J, Wald A (2011) Much ado about nothing? An analysis of economic impacts and ecologic effects of the EU-emission trading scheme in the aviation industry. Transp Res A Policy Pract 45(10):1066–1076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y, Yin H, Zhang S, Yu X (2014) Multi-objective optimization of aircraft design for emission and cost reductions. Chin J Aeronaut 27(1):52–58

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Williams V (2007) The engineering options for mitigating the climate impacts of aviation. Philos Trans Ser A Math Phys Eng Sci 365(1861):3047–3059

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Williams V, Noland RB, Toumi R (2002) Reducing the climate change impacts of aviation by restricting cruise altitudes. Transp Res D Transp Environ 7(6):451–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worthington RL, Whittaker TA (2006) Scale development research: a content analysis and recommendations for best practices. Couns Psychol 34(6):806–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wuebbles D, Gupta M, Ko M (2007) Evaluating the impacts of aviation on climate change. Eos Trans Am Geophys Union 88(14):157–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamaguchi K (2010) Voluntary CO2 emissions reduction scheme: analysis of airline voluntary plan in Japan. Transp Res D Transp Environ 15(1):46–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeh YP (2014) Exploring the impacts of employee advocacy on job satisfaction and organizational commitment: case of Taiwanese airlines. J Air Transp Manag 36:94–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou W, Wang T, Yu Y, Chen D, Zhu B (2016) Scenario analysis of CO2 emissions from China’s civil aviation industry through 2030. Appl Energy 175:100–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vedant Singh.

Appendices

Appendix 1: References

[1]:

Schäfer, Andreas W., Antony D. Evans, Tom G. Reynolds, and Lynnette Dray. “Costs of mitigating CO2 emissions from passenger aircraft.” Nature Climate Change (2015)

[2]:

International Air Transport Association (IATA). IATA Technology Roadmap. Technology Roadmap, 4Th Addition. 2013. https://www.iata.org/whatwedo/environment/Documents/technology-roadmap-2013.pdf. [Accessed: April 17th, 2016]

[3]:

Lee, Joosung J. “Can we accelerate the improvement of energy efficiency in aircraft systems?.” Energy Conversion and Management 51, no. 1 (2010): 189–196

[4]:

Kar, Rahul. “Dynamics of implementation of mitigating measures to reduce CO2 emissions from commercial aviation.” PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2010

[5]:

Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Boeing 787 Dreamliner Will Provide New Solutions for Airlines, Passengers. http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787/ [Accessed: April 21, 2016]

[6]:

EADS Airbus Division, “Airbus A350”, URL: www.eads.com/airbus/airbus_commercial_aircraft [Accessed: April 22, 2016]

[7]:

Bombardier Commercial Aircraft, “C-Series Family”, URL: www.bombardier.com/products [Accessed: April 20, 2016]

[8]:

Anselmo, J., “Mitsubishi Nears Regional Jet Launch Decision”, Aviation Week and Space Technology, April 19, 2016

[9]:

Posselt, J., “Estimation of the Global Emission Reduction Potential of Aviation Technologies and Their Contribution to Aviation’s High-Level Emission Goals”. Master Diss., Department of Automotive and Aeronautical Engineering, University of Applied Sciences Hamburg, 2015

[10]:

Agarwal, Ramesh K. Review of technologies to achieve sustainable (Green) aviation. INTECH Open Access Publisher, 2012

[11]:

Farries, Pamela, and Chris Eyers. “Aviation CO2 emissions abatement potential from technology innovation.” Committee on climate change (2008)

[12]:

Berton, J.J., Envia. E., An Analytical Assessment of NASA’s N + 1 Subsonic Fixed Wing Project Noise Goal”, 15th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference (30th AIAA Aeroacoustics Conference), Miami, FL, 2009

[13]:

Collier, F.S., “NASA’s Subsonic Fixed Wing Project”, Revolutionary Aircraft for Quiet Communities Workshop, Hampton, VA, July 24–26, 2007

[14]:

Graham, W. R., C. A. Hall, and M. Vera Morales. “The potential of future aircraft technology for noise and pollutant emissions reduction.” Transport Policy 34 (2014): 36–51

[15]:

Collier, F.S., “NASA’s Subsonic Fixed Wing Project”, Aviation and Alternative Fuels Workshop, ICAO, Montreal, Quebec, February 11, 2009

[16]:

McCollum, David L., Gregory Gould, and David L. Greene. “Greenhouse gas emissions from aviation and marine transportation: Mitigation potential and policies.” Institute of Transportation Studies (2010)

[17]:

Dray, Lynnette, Antony Evans, Tom Reynolds, and Andreas Schäfer. “Mitigation of aviation emissions of carbon dioxide: analysis for Europe.”Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2177 (2010): 17–26

[18]:

Kennedy, D., B. Combes, and O. Bellamy. “Meeting the UK Aviation Target—Options for Reducing Emissions to 2050.” International Civil Aviation Organization (2010)

[19]:

Sinnett, M., “787 No-Bleed Systems: Saving Fuel and Enhancing Operational Efficiencies”, Boeing AERO, 2007

[20]:

Waitz, I. A., Benzakein, M.J., “Lowering Aircraft Engine Emissions: The Global Requirement”, Air Transport World, January 29, 2009

[21]:

Grote, Matt, Ian Williams, and John Preston. “Direct carbon dioxide emissions from civil aircraft.” Atmospheric Environment 95 (2014): 214–224

[22]:

Rajashekara, K., Grieve, J., Daggett, D., “Solid Oxide Fuel Cell/Gas Turbine Hybrid APU System for Aerospace Applications”, Industry Applications Conference, 2006

[23]:

Sgouridis, Sgouris, Philippe A. Bonnefoy, and R. John Hansman. “Air transportation in a carbon constrained world: Long-term dynamics of policies and strategies for mitigating the carbon footprint of commercial aviation.”Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 45, no. 10 (2011): 1077–1091

[24]:

Kroo, I., “Nonplanar Wing Concepts for Increased Aircraft Efficiency”, VKI Lecture 113 of 119 Series on Innovative Configurations and Advanced Concepts for Future Civil Aircraft, Stanford University, 6–10 June 2005

[25]:

Vijgen, P., “An Industrial Perspective on Drag Reduction Technology and Implementation”, Katnet II 2nd Drag-Reduction Workshop, October 2008

[26]:

Poll, D.I.A., “The Optimum Aeroplane and Beyond”, The Aeronautical Journal, Vol. 113, No. 1140, March 2009

[27]:

Green, J. E. “The potential for reducing the impact of aviation on climate.”Technology analysis & strategic management 21, no. 1 (2009): 39–59

[28]:

Peeters et al., “Innovation towards Tourism Sustainability: Climate Change and Aviation”, International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, Vol.3, 2006

[29]:

Timmis, Andrew J., Alma Hodzic, Lenny Koh, Michael Bonner, Constantinos Soutis, Andreas W. Schäfer, and Lynnette Dray. “Environmental impact assessment of aviation emission reduction through the implementation of composite materials.” The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 20, no. 2 (2015): 233–243

[30]:

Gliebe, P., Dodds, W., “Practical Technology Solutions for Future Aircraft Engine 114 of 119 Noise and Emissions Reduction”, AIAA/AAAF Aircraft Noise and Emissions Reduction Symposium, Monterey, CA, 2005

[31]:

National Research Council, “Assessment of Wingtip Modifications to Increase the Fuel Efficiency of Air Force Aircraft”, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2007

[32]:

Kumar, V., Sherry, L., Thompson, T., “Analysis of Emissions Inventory for Single-engine Taxi-out operations”, International Conference on Research in Air Transportation (ICRAT-2008), Fairfax, VA, 01–04 June 2008

[33]:

Simaiakis, Ioannis, Harshad Khadilkar, Hamsa Balakrishnan, Tom G. Reynolds, and R. John Hansman. “Demonstration of reduced airport congestion through pushback rate control.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 66 (2014): 251–267

[34]:

Root, R., “Fuel Conservation: Operational Procedures for Environmental Performance”, Aviation Operational Measures for Fuel and Emissions Reduction Workshop, May 2002

[35]:

Clarke, J-P., J. Brooks, G. Nagle, A. Scacchioli, W. White, and S. R. Liu. “Optimized profile descent arrivals at Los Angeles international airport.”Journal of aircraft 50, no. 2 (2013): 360–369

[36]:

Lee, J.J., “Modeling Aviation’s Global Emissions, Uncertainty Analysis, and Applications to Policy”, Ph.D. Dissertation, Aeronautics and Astronautics Dept., Mass. Inst. of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 2005

[37]:

Palopo et al., “Economic and Safety Impacts of Flight Routing in the National Airspace System,” 7th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration and Operations (ATIO) Conference, Belfast, Northern Ireland, September 2007

[38]:

Jensen, Luke, J. R. Hansman, Joseph Venuti, and Tom Reynolds. “Commercial airline altitude optimization strategies for reduced cruise fuel consumption.” In 14th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, p. 3006. 2014

[39]:

Anger, Annela. “Including aviation in the European emissions trading scheme: impacts on the industry, CO 2 emissions and macroeconomic activity in the EU.” Journal of Air Transport Management 16, no. 2 (2010): 100–105

[40]:

Vespermann, Jan, and Andreas Wald. “Much Ado about Nothing?–An analysis of economic impacts and ecologic effects of the EU-emission trading scheme in the aviation industry.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 45, no. 10 (2011): 1066–1076

[41]:

Wit, R. C. N., B. H. Boon, A. Van Velzen, M. Cames, O. Deuber, and D. S. Lee. “Giving wings to emission trading.” Inclusion of aviation under the European emission trading system (ETS): design and impacts. Report for the European Commission, DG Environment. Delft (2005)

[42]:

Schaefer, Martin, Janina Scheelhaase, Wolfgang Grimme, and Sven Maertens. “The economic impact of the upcoming EU emissions trading system on airlines and EU Member States—an empirical estimation.”European Transport Research Review 2, no. 4 (2010): 189–200

[43]:

Lee, Joosung, and Jeonghoon Mo. “Analysis of technological innovation and environmental performance improvement in aviation sector.” International journal of environmental research and public health 8, no. 9 (2011): 3777–3795

[44]:

Becken, Susanne. “Tourists’ perception of international air travel’s impact on the global climate and potential climate change policies.” Journal of Sustainable Tourism 15, no. 4 (2007): 351–368

[45]:

Yamaguchi, Katsuhiro. “Voluntary CO 2 emissions reduction scheme: Analysis of airline voluntary plan in Japan.” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 15, no. 1 (2010): 46–50

[46]:

Gössling, Stefan, John Broderick, Paul Upham, Jean-Paul Ceron, Ghislain Dubois, Paul Peeters, and Wolfgang Strasdas. “Voluntary carbon offsetting schemes for aviation: Efficiency, credibility and sustainable tourism.” Journal of Sustainable tourism 15, no. 3 (2007): 223–248

[47]:

Noh, Hazariah M., Arturo Benito, and Gustavo Alonso. “Study of the current incentive rules and mechanisms to promote biofuel use in the EU and their possible application to the civil aviation sector.” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 46 (2016): 298–316

Appendix 2: Explanation of the ERP decision variables

S. no.

Decision variable

Explanation

1

Aircraft maximum takeoff weight (PATDA)

Maximum takeoff weight of an aircraft is a value defined by the aircraft manufacturer. It is the maximum mass at which the aircraft is certified for takeoff due to structural or other limits. Aircraft maximum takeoff is the most important factor in fuel economy, because more lift-generating drag results as weight increases. If the weight is reduced, engines that are smaller and lighter can be used, and for a given range the fuel capacity can be reduced. Thus, some weight savings can be compounded for reduction of aviation CO2 emission, which is proportional to fuel burn

2

Aircraft structural weight (PATDB)

Includes the weight of the structure, power plant, furnishings, installations, systems, and other equipment that are considered an integral part of an aircraft before additional operator items are added for operation. The performance of an aircraft is connected with fuel burn since a more fuel-efficient aircraft needs less volume to store the fuel, reducing the structural weight of the airframe

3

Wing reference area (PATDC)

It is the trapezoidal portion of the wing projected into the centerline. It is evaluated when the wing loading is selected. As the wing area is increased, both lift produced and wing weight are proportionally increased

4

Composite material use (PATDD)

Means how much  % of composite material is being used for aircraft wing, fuselage, and tails. For example, a technology which utilizes light-weight composites for the construction of the aircraft may lower airframe weight by 20 %. Thus, the technology is represented by a k-factor of 0.8 which is applied to the aircraft’s airframe weight, resulting in a lower aircraft gross weight. Since the aircraft weight has dropped, less fuel is required, further reducing the weight of the aircraft beyond the initial 20 % reduction.

5

Lift/drag ratio (PATDE)

In aerodynamics, the lift-to-drag ratio, or L/D ratio, is the amount of lift generated by a wing, divided by the aerodynamic drag it creates by moving through the air. A higher or more favorable L/D ratio is typically one of the major goals in aircraft design; since a particular aircraft’s required lift is set by its weight, delivering that lift with lower drag leads directly to better fuel economy, climb performance.

6

Thrust-specific fuel consumption (PATDF)

This is the mass of fuel needed to provide the net thrust for a given period, e.g., lb/(h. lbf) (pounds of fuel per hour pound of thrust) or g/(s. kN) (grams of fuel per second-kilonewton)

7

Engine bypass ratio (PATDG)

The bypass ratio (BPR) of a turbofan engine is the ratio between the mass flow rates of air drawn through the fan disk that bypasses the engine core (un-combusted air) to the mass flow rate passing through the engine core.

8

Aircraft range (PAOIA)

This is the total distance that an aircraft can fly with full fuel tank and without refueling. This consists of takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, and landing

9

Aircraft fuel weight (PAOIB)

The required amount of the total fuel weight necessary for a complete flight operation depends upon the mission to be followed, the aerodynamic characteristics of the aircraft, and the engine-specific fuel consumption. Additional weight is introduced if an aircraft takes more fuel onboard than that required by the fuel flight plan.

10

Payload (PAOIC)

The load available as passengers, baggage, freight, etc., after the weight of pilot, crew, usable fuel have been deducted from the useful load.

11

Numbers of seats (PAOID)

Number of Seats is the total number of seats to be arranged as described in the airplane

12

Cruise speed (PAOIE)

The speed of an aircraft during cruise mission segment. The cruise speed for an aircraft, usually somewhat below maximum, that is comfortable and economical. A reduced cruise speed has previously been considered as a means for reducing mission fuel burn. One drawback of the reduced speed is a negative impact on airline productivity and passenger acceptance, especially for long-range missions. For short- to medium-range aircraft, however, the flight time increase is less problematic, thus making slower cruise an attractive possibility

13

Crew weight (PAOIF)

It is the weight of the people who are responsible to conduct the flight operations and serving passengers and payload

14

Terminal efficiency (PAOIG)

To isolate the impact of airport-specific differences in terminal efficiency, we include the variables for airport origins and destinations. Airport arrival and departure procedures consume considerable fuel, and we hypothesize that some airports are more fuel efficient than others in this respect. As the airports may require aircraft to meet certain arrival fixes that may be at nonoptimal altitudes or require nonoptimal speed profiles. The volume of operations and congestion at hub airports has been found to cause a great deal of inefficiency during departure and arrival operations

15

Social demand (PSEPA)

Aircraft fuel economy, which is a surrogate measure of jet engine emissions (mostly CO2). Currently, the social for demand fuel-efficient and low-emission aircraft is not strong enough because the general public is not well aware of the effects of aviation emissions on the global climate

16

Fuel cost (PSEPB)

The fuel cost is the main driver for improvements to aircraft fuel efficiency. When oil prices soar, airlines actively adopt advanced aircraft with greatly improved fuel economy

17

Voluntary measures (PSEPC)

Serving or acting in a specified function of one’s own accord and without compulsion or promise of remuneration

18

Demand shift (PSEPD)

Account for changes in travelers’ mode choice behavior or reduction of demand due to nontravel alternatives (e.g., video-conferencing and virtual meetings)

19

Charging carbon emission (PSEPE)

An alternative economic measure to reduce emissions of CO2 by commercial air transportation could be to apply a system of social cost of carbon as developed by the US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Generally speaking, the system is based on estimating the monetary value of social/economic damages or the value of avoiding these damages associated with the marginal increase or decrease, respectively, in CO2 emissions. For kerosene-fueled aircraft, CO2 emission is directly proportional to fuel burn

20

Alternative fuel type (PAFPA)

Selection of suitable alternative fuel, which will reduce the fuel consumption from air transport

21

Net calorific value (PAFPB)

Net calorific value of a fuel portion is defined as the amount of heat evolved when a unit weight of the fuel is completely burnt and water vapor leaves with the combustion products without being condensed. One of the most important requirements of aviation fuel is high heat content for maximum range or payload

22

Energy density (PAFPC)

This is the amount of energy stored in a given system or region of space per unit volume or mass. Aircraft is rated at maximum takeoff weight (MTOW), which includes the weight of fuel, passengers, and cargo. If an aircraft reaches MTOW before its fuel tanks are full, fuel with a higher energy density will allow more passengers and cargo on a given route or will carry the same passenger and cargo load a longer distance. Volumetric energy content is also important as this affects the flight range available with a full load of fuel, especially in smaller aircraft and military aircraft

23

Aromatic content (PAFPD)

Aviation fuel containing one or more molecular ring structures having properties of stability and reactivity characteristic of benzene. One of the biggest concerns of alternative fuels has come from their low aromatic content. Fuels with high aromatics content, and especially fuels with high naphthalenes content, form more of these carbonaceous particles. Since these carbonaceous particles are potentially harmful, both the total aromatic content and the total naphthalenes content of jet fuel are controlled

24

Carbon content (PAFPE)

Carbon particles that are not completely consumed are responsible for the visible smoke that some engines emit. Smoke formation is determined mainly by engine design and operating conditions, although for a given design, fuel composition can influence emissions. Better mixing of fuel and air results in more complete combustion and, thus, the less carbon formation

25

Thermal stability (PAFPF)

Thermal stability is one of the most important jet fuel properties because the fuel serves as a heat exchange medium in the engine and airframe. Jet fuel is used to remove heat from engine oil, hydraulic fluid, and air-conditioning equipment. Fuels with poor thermal stability will leave deposits in the engine fuel system which will degrade performance and require more frequent maintenance. This is a very demanding requirement for jet fuel and may become even more so in the future

26

Flash point (PAFPG)

The flash point is the lowest temperature at which the vapors above a flammable liquid will ignite on the application of an ignition source. At the flash point temperature, just enough liquid has vaporized to bring the vapor air space over the liquid above the lower flammability limit. The flash point is a function of the specific test conditions under which it is measured. The flash point of wide-cut jet fuel is below 0 °C (32 °F) and is not typically measured or controlled

27

ERPA

Emission reduction potential measuring instrument

Appendix 3: Questionnaire

3.1 A Covering Letter

Dear Respondent,

This survey is being carried out as part of my research work at NIT Hamirpur to understand the emission reduction potential in the air transport and to identify the perceptions affecting aviation emission. Please answer the questions freely. You cannot be identified from the information you provide. I ensure the confidentiality of your response. Also, you should have at least about 5 years of experience related to the aviation field to participate in the survey.

The questionnaire should take about 20–25 min to complete. Please answer the questions in the space provided. Also, do not spend too long on any question. Your first thoughts are usually your best!

Even if you feel the items covered may not apply to you, please do not ignore them. Your answers are essential in building an accurate picture of the issues that are important to identify perceptions of emission reduction potential in the air transport.

I hope you find completing the questionnaire enjoyable, and thank you for taking the time to help. If you have any queries or would like further information about this research, please contact me: er.vedu@gmail.com.

Thank you for your cooperation

Vedant Singh,

PhD., Research Scholar,

Mech. Engg., NIT Hamirpur (H.P.)

INDIA-177005

figure a
figure b

Thank you.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Singh, V. Perceptions of emission reduction potential in air transport: a structural equation modeling approach. Environ Syst Decis 36, 377–403 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-016-9608-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-016-9608-3

Keywords

Navigation