4.7 Article

Reduce aviation's greenhouse gas emissions through immediately feasible and affordable gate electrification

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS
Volume 16, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/abf7f1

Keywords

aviation; greenhouse gases; climate damages; gate electrification; life-cycle assessment; climate change; airport

Funding

  1. Groupe ADP

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Complete electrification of gate operations at airports can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and save economic costs, with an average reduction of 63%-97% per gate operation and an economic payback period of 1-2 years. This shift could save high-traffic airports an average of $5-6 million annually, demonstrating potential environmental and economic benefits.
Aircraft at airport gates require power and air conditioning, provided by fossil fuel-combusting equipment, to maintain functionality and thermal comfort. We estimate the life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and economic implications from electrifying gate operations for 2354 commercial-traffic airports in the world. Here we show that complete electrification could yield GHG reductions of 63%-97% per gate operation relative to current practice, with greater reductions correlated with low-carbon electricity. Economic payback periods average just 1-2 years. Shifting to complete gate electrification could save a high-traffic airport an average of $5-6 million in annual climate economic damages relative to estimates of current practice. 10-12 million metric tons of annual GHG emissions are potentially saved if most airports in the world electrified gate operations, costing the 24 busiest global airports on average $25-30, U.S. airports $60-70, and non-U.S. airports $80-90 per metric ton of CO2 mitigated, in some cases comparable to carbon-market prices. Environmental benefits depend primarily upon electricity sources and operational parameters such as aircraft fleet composition.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available