Non-Subscriber Extract
Green drive gets the green light
By Ben Vogel and Mark Rowe
26 June 2009
At Stansted, woodchip is blown into a storage area (pictured) before being fed into the furnace for the biomass boiler. (Mel Nice/BAA)
The debate over alternative sources of energy for aviation has not been confined to aircraft. The issue has airport managers pondering how such fuels would be used on the ground, as they seek to reduce the carbon footprints of their own 'mini-cities'.
Whatever commercial alternatives to kerosene emerge, they are likely to work as 'drop-in' fuels, meaning that it meets the precise technical and operational specifications with which jet engines have been designed to work; and could simply replace kerosene in the supply, storage and transportation chain and engine systems of existing jet aircraft.
This has implications for airports, as fuel that had to be handled in a significantly different fashion to kerosene would require a huge overhaul in airport infrastructure.
On these grounds, liquid hydrogen and solar power have been ruled out in the medium term, mainly because the aviation industry feels that it alone cannot finance the required research, retrofitting of aircraft and infrastructure adjustments these fuels would demand.
First generation biofuels have also proved problematic, since they tend to absorb water, which can affect pipeline structures.
Such fuels would be stored and processed locally in airports or adjacent to them. "It would cost too much to transport a fuel from one part of the world to another," says Richard Altman, executive director of the US-based Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI) alliance, which includes representatives from the aviation industry, the US government, non-governmental organisations and academia.