Abstract
In this paper, environmental impact analysis is applied to the various auxiliary power units (APUs) used for commercial aircraft in air transportation sector. The exhaust emissions of different auxiliary power units used in commercial aircraft are investigated. The emission index (EI), global warming potential (GWP) rate, global warming potential index (GWPI), environmental impact (EnI) rate, environmental impact index (EnII), environmental damage cost (EDC) rate, and environmental damage cost index (EDCI) of the exhaust emissions of APUs are computed. The GTCP36-300 model APU has the lowest total emission rate (TER) with 1.333 kg/h, the GTC85-129 model APU has the maximum total environmental index (TEI) by 24.719 g/kg-fuel, the GTCP36-300 model APU has the best total global warming potential value with 2709.176 kg/h CO2_eqv, the TSCP700 model APU has the worst global warming potential index rate as 52.481 kg/kWh CO2_eqv, the best total environmental damage cost rate is calculated to be 3.717 €/h for GTC85-72 model APU, the TSCP700 model APU has the highest environmental damage cost index with 0.130 €/kWh, the maximum total environmental impact is computed to be 5656.378 mPts/h for GTCP660 model APU, and the best total environmental impact index is determined for the GTC85-72 model APU.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Availability of data and materials
Data sharing not applicable to this article.
Abbreviations
- APU:
-
Auxiliary power unit
- \(b\) :
-
Specific environmental impact factor (mPts/kg)
- \(c\) :
-
Specific environmental cost, eco-cost (€/kg)
- CO:
-
Carbon monoxide
- CO2 :
-
Carbon dioxide
- EDC :
-
Environmental damage cost (€/h)
- EDCI :
-
Environmental damage cost index (€/kWh)
- EI :
-
Emission index (g/kg-fuel)
- EnI :
-
Environmental impact (mPts/kg)
- EnII :
-
Environmental impact index (mPts/kWh)
- GWP :
-
Global warming potential (\(\frac{\mathrm{kg}}{\mathrm{h}}{\mathrm{CO}}_{2}\mathrm{eqv}\))
- GWPI :
-
Global warming potential index (\(\frac{\mathrm{kg}}{\mathrm{kWh}}{\mathrm{CO}}_{2}\mathrm{eqv}\))
- gwv :
-
Global warming potential value
- \(\dot{m}\) :
-
Mass flow (kg/h)
- MMT:
-
Million metric tons
- NOx :
-
Nitrogen oxides
- P :
-
Engine power (kW)
- PDF:
-
Potentially disappeared fraction
- SOx :
-
Sulfur oxides
- UHC:
-
Unburned hydrocarbon
- TER:
-
Total emission rate (kg/h)
References
Aeroexpo. https://trends.aeroexpo.online/project-72364.html Access date: 29 April 2021.
Altuntas O, Ekici S, Yalin G, Karakoc TH (2014) Comparison of auxiliary power unit (APU) and ground power unit (GPU) with life cycle analysis in ground operations: a case study for domestic flight in Turkey. Appl Mech Mater 629:219–224. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.629.219
APU-Auxiliary Power Unit, 2021, “Auxiliary power unit (APU)”, SKYbrary, https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Auxiliary_Power_Unit_(APU)#:~:text=An%20Auxiliary%20Power%20Unit%20or,high%20pressure%20air%20start%20cart. Access date: 29 April 2021.
Aygun H, Turan O (2021) Environmental impact of an aircraft engine with exergo-life cycle assessment on dynamic flight. J Clean Prod 279(123729):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123729
Aygun H, Caliskan H (2021) Environmental and enviroeconomic analyses of two different turbofan engine families considering landing and take-off (LTO) cycle and global warming potential (GWP) approach. Energy Convers Manage 248(114797):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114797
Balli O (2020) Exergetic, exergoeconomic, sustainability and environmental damage cost analyses of J85 turbojet engine with afterburner. Int J Turbo Jet Eng 37(2):167–194. https://doi.org/10.1515/tjj-2017-0019
Balli O, Hepbasli A (2014) Exergoeconomic, sustainability and environmental damage cost analyses of T56 turboprop engine. Energy 64:582–600
Caglayan H, Caliskan H (2019) Thermo-ecological analysis of industrial kilns. J Environ Manage 241:149–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.04.032
Caliskan H (2017) Environmental and enviroeconomic researches on diesel engines with diesel and biodiesel fuels. J Clean Prod 154:125–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.168
Dallar AS. 2011. Aircraft design for reduced climate impact. A Doctoral Dissertation submitted to Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Stanford University. http://purl.stanford.edu/yf499mg3300
Ekici S, Sohret Y (2020) A study on the environmental and economic aspects of aircraft emissions at the Antalya International Airport. Environ Sci Pollut Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11306-w
Eggleston HS (2006) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme and Chikyū Kankyō Senryaku Kenkyū Kikan), 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/index.htm
FAA- Federal Aviation Administration (2015) “Aviation, emissions, impacts mitigation: a premiere”, FAA Office of Environment and Energy, January 2015, https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/policy_guidance/envir_policy/media/primer_jan2015.pdf
Fuglestvedt JS, Shine KP, Bernsten T, Cook J, Lee DS, Stanke A, Skeie RB, Velders HJM, Waitz IA (2010) Transport impacts on atmosphere and climate: metrics. Atmos Environ 44:4648–4677
Gomez-Campos A, Vialle C, Rouilly A, Hamelin L, Rogeon A, Hardy D, Sablayrolles C (2021) Natural fibre polymer composites - a game changer for the aviation sector? J Clean Prod 286(124986):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124986
Graver B, Kevin Z, Rutherford D (2019) CO2 emissions from commercial aviation, 2018. International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT), Working paper 2019–16:1–13. https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICCT_CO2-commercl-aviation-2018_20190918.pdf
HBFM. Hava Bakım Fabrika Md.lüğü. Firt Air Maintanence Factory Directorate. APU emission report. 2020. Eskisehir, Turkey.
Herndon SC, Jayne JT, Lobo P, Onasch TB, Fleming G, Hagen D, Whitefield PD, Miake-Lye RC (2008) Commercial aircraft engine emissions characterization of in-use aircraft at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport. Environ Sci Technol 42(6):1877–1883
IPCC (2018) Global warming of 1.5°C-IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways. In: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H.-O.,Roberts, D., Skea, J., Shukla, P.R., Pirani, A., Moufouma-Okia, W., Pean, C., Pidcock, R., Connors, S., Matthews, J.B.R., Chen, Y., Zhou, X., Gomis, M.I., Lonnoy, E., Maycock, T., Tignor, M., Waterfield, T. (Eds.), The context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty (Eds.). https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/
Kesgin U (2006) Aircraft emissions at Turkish airports. Energy 31(2–3):372–384
Khandelwal B, Cronly J, Ahmed IS, Wijesinghe CJ, Lewis C (2019) The effect of alternative fuels on gaseous and particulate matter (PM) emission performance in an auxiliary power unit (APU). Aeronaut J 123(1263):617–634. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2019.16
Kinsey JS, Timko MT, Herndon SC, Wood EC, Yu Z, MiakeLye RC, Lobo P, Whitefield P, Hagen D, Wey C, Anderson BE, Beyersdorf AJ, Hudgins CH, Thornhill KL, Winstead E, Howard R, Bulzan DI, Tacina KB, Knighton WB (2012) Determination of the emissions from an aircraft auxiliary power unit (APU) during the Alternative Aviation Fuel Experiment (AAFEX). J Air Waste Manag Assoc 62(4):420–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/10473289.2012.655884
Lobo P, Christie S, Khandelwal B, Blakey SG, Raper DW (2015) Evaluation of non-volatile particulate matter emission characteristics of an aircraft auxiliary power unit with varying alternative jet fuel blend ratios. Energy Fuels 29(11):7705–7711. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5b01758
Mazaheri M, Johnson GR, Morawska L (2011) An inventory of particle and gaseous emissions from large aircraft thrust engine operations at an airport. Atmos Environ 45:3500–3507
Meyer L, Tsatsaronis G, Buchgeister J, Schebek L (2009) Exergoenvironmental analysis for evaluation of the environmental impact of energy conversion systems. Energy 34(1):75–89
NPI (National Pollutant Inventory). 2008. Emissions estimation technique manual for airports. Version 2.0. ISBN: 978 642 55446.Commonwealth of Australia 2008. GPO Box 787, Canberra, ACT 2601, e-mail: npi@environment.gov.au, web: www.npi.gov.au
Padhra A (2018) Emissions from auxiliary power units and ground power units during intraday aircraft turnarounds at European airports. Transp Res Part D 63:433–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2018.06.015
Petrakopoulou F, Tsatsaronis G, Morosuk T, Paitazoglou C (2012) Environmental evaluation of a power plant using conventional and advanced exergy-based method. Energy 45(1):23–30
Ramírez-Díaz G, Nadal-Mora V, Piechock J (2015) Descriptive analysis of viability of fuel saving in commercial aircraft through the application of photovoltaic cells. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 51:138–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.06.008
Reddit (2021) United Airlines 2014 Boeing 737–900ER N67815 c/n 43532 APU (auxiliary power unit) San Francisco Airport 2020. [OC] 5304 X 7952. https://www.reddit.com/r/aviationmaintenance/comments/hcw83b/united_airlines_2014_boeing_737900er_n67815_cn. Access date: 29 April 2021.
Schafer K, Jahn C, Sturm P, Lechner B, Bacher M (2003) Aircraft emission measurements by remote sensing methodologies at airports. Atmos Environ 37:5261–5271
Seymour K, Held M, Georges G, Boulouchos K (2020) Fuel estimation in air transportation: modeling global fuel consumption for commercial aviation. Transp Res Part D 88(10252):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102528
Siebel T, Zanger J, Huber A, Aigner M, Knobloch K, Bake F (2018) Experimental investigation of cycle properties, noise and air pollutant emissions of an APS3200 auxiliary power unit. J Eng Gas Turbines Power. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.403815http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/article.aspx?articleid=26575
Sohret Y, Karakoc TH, Turan O (2016) Using emission index to determine energy efficiency and environmental parameters of a turbofan engine at various flight phases. Int J Global Warming 10(1/2/3):3–15
Stettler MEJ, Eastham S, Barrett SRH (2011) Air quality and public health impacts of UK airports. Part 1: emissions. Atmos Environ 45(31):5415–5424
Toffolo A, Lazzaretto A (2002) Evolutionary algorithms for multi-objective energeticand economic optimization in thermal system design. Energy 27:549–567
Turgut ET, Cavcar M, Usanmaz O, Canarslanlar AO, Dogeroglu T, Armutlu K, Yay OD (2014) Fuel flow analysis for the cruise phase of commercial aircraft on domestic routes. Aero Sci Technol 37:1–9
Tuzcu H, Sohret H, Caliskan H (2020) Energy, environment and enviroeconomic analyses and assessments of the turbofan engine used in aviation industry. Environ Prog Sustainable Energy. Paper no: e13547, pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.13547
Vogtlander JG (2019) Data on eco-costs. Delft University of Technology”.
Vogtlander JG (2010) LCA-based assessment of sustainability: the eco-costs/value ratio (EVR). Published VSSD. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258220975
Vogtlander JG, Bijma A (2000) The ‘virtual pollution prevention costs ‘99’: a single LCA-based indicator for emissions. Int J Life Cycle Assess 5(2):113–120
Wade MD (2002) Aircraft/auxiliary power units/aerospace ground support equipment emission factors. United States Air Force IERA. October 2002, p. 68.
Winther M, Kousgaard U, Ellermann T, Massling A, Nojgaard JK, Ketzel M (2015) Emissions of NOx particle mass and particle numbers from aircraft main engines, APU’s and handling equipment at Copenhagen Airport. Atmos Environ 100:218–229
Xun Q, Xun B, Li Z, Wang P, Cai Z (2017) Application of SiC power electronic devices in secondary power source for aircraft. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 70:1336–1342
Yildiz I, Acikkalp E, Caliskan H, Mori K (2019) Environmental pollution cost analyses of biodiesel and diesel fuels for a diesel engine. J Environ Manage 243:218–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.05.002
Acknowledgements
The authors are very grateful to the reviewers for their valuable and constructive comments, which have been utilized in improving the quality of the paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Ozgur Balli: conceptualization; data curation; formal analysis; investigation; methodology; supervision; validation; visualization; writing—review and editing. Hakan Caliskan: conceptualization; data curation; formal analysis; investigation; methodology; supervision; validation; visualization; writing—review and editing.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval
Not applicable.
Consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Philippe Garrigues
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Balli, O., Caliskan, H. Environmental impact assessments of different auxiliary power units used for commercial aircraft by using global warming potential approach. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29, 87334–87346 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-21876-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-21876-6