First Draft (24 May 2010)
Report of Findings, Actions, and Recommendations
MAKING A DIFFERENCE: AEROSPACE LEADERSHIP
FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES
An International Forum
Hyatt Regency Crystal City
Arlington, Virginia, USA
May 11-12, 2010
Organized by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)
Co-Sponsored by The Alliance for Earth Observations, The American Meteorological
Society (AMS), and the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Energy issues and climate change are among the great challenges of our time. They are
global problems that must be solved. To do so requires leadership, collaboration among
both international and domestic entities, large capital investments, a technical workforce,
innovation, a big supply chain, and recognition of the need for difficult political choices.
These are all characteristic features of the aviation and space enterprise. Aerospace,
therefore, is well positioned to address these challenges, and has the capability to develop
and deploy the systems and technologies needed for their solution.
The mandate for aerospace is to establish a robust, deep understanding of the problems,
since no other sector is doing this; apply cutting-edge technology to new energy sources,
machinery for power generation, and all forms of transportation (not just aviation); and
provide space-based, air-based, and ground-based information and data-gathering
systems. In the broad context we know the challenges and we have enough information to
act.
The cost of inaction is far greater than the cost of action, with drastic consequences for
the generations that will follow us.
1
CONTENTS
Title Page
Executive Summary
I. Introduction
II. Energy and the Greening of Aviation
II.1. Findings
II.2. Actions
II.3. Recommendations
III. Understanding, Mitigating, and Adapting to Climate Change
III.1. Overview
III.2. Findings
III.3. Actions
III.4. Recommendations
IV. Summary of Findings, Actions, and Recommendations
IV.1 The Greening of Aviation
IV.1.1. Findings
IV.1.2 Actions
IV.1.3. Recommendations
IV.2. Climate Change
IV.2.1. Findings
IV.2.2. Actions
IV.2.3. Recommendations
Appendix A: Forum Program
Appendix B: Participants
2
I. INTRODUCTION
The 2010 Inside Aerospace Forum brought together leaders from the international
aerospace community to discuss how aviation could be made more energy-efficient and
how best to use aerospace technology and systems to understand, to mitigate, and to limit
or adapt to climate change.
The first overarching theme – energy and the “greening” of aviation – was addressed
under four topics: (1) Current energy challenges in aviation; (2) Current and needed
energy policy; (3) Conserving energy through operations; and (4) Achieving energy
efficiency through technology.
The second theme – understanding, mitigating, and adapting to climate change – focused
on four areas: (1) Science and technology for climate-change solutions: needs and
opportunities; (2) Climate-change mitigation through greenhouse-gas reductions: issues
in observations and compliance monitoring; (3) Enabling effective climate monitoring
and emission tracking: the next five years; and (4) Operational climate monitoring and
change mitigation solutions: beyond five years.
Follow-on sessions building on the information developed during this forum are planned
for July 26, 2010 at the Joint Propulsion Conference in Nashville, Tennessee, and for
September 1, 2010 at the AIAA SPACE 2010 Conference in Anaheim, California.
II. ENERGY AND THE GREENING OF AVIATION
II.1: Findings
II.1.1. Benefits of Aviation. Civil aviation is a major international business and is
widely and correctly recognized as a major enabler for global wealth creation and an
essential part of the world’s commercial infrastructure. This was most recently
highlighted by the massive disruptions in air traffic that occurred as a result of the April
2010 eruption of the volcano Eyjafjallajokull in Iceland, which paralyzed Europe’s
commerce for many days. But there is a broad public perception that aviation is a heavy
consumer of the global oil supply and a major producer of the “greenhouse” gases
(GHGs) that have been identified as the primary driver of climate change. The facts do
not support that perception, however: per unit of product (passenger distance traveled),
commercial transport aircraft use far less fuel than ground-based automotive vehicles,
and the world’s entire aircraft fleet accounts for only 3% of human-generated carbon
dioxide (CO2).
II.1.2. Environmental Impact. Nevertheless, it is both economically and
environmentally important to reduce both fuel consumption and GHG emissions to the
maximum extent feasible. Aviation is currently adding 0.23% of anthropogenic CO2 to
the atmosphere annually, and if nothing is done to curtail it, those emissions could grow
to between 1% and 3.5% per year by 2050. Perhaps of greater concern is the production
of water-vapor contrails by aircraft engines, which have recently been shown to stimulate
3
the rapid growth of cirrus clouds at the common cruise altitude of about 35,000 feet, the
troposphere-stratosphere boundary, trapping considerable heat in the troposphere.
One largely unrecognized impact directly affecting air traffic is on U.S. airport capacity
expansion projects. 72% of delayed work and 25% of cancellations are due to
environmental issues.
II.1.3. Costs. The skyrocketing cost of fuel is of direct concern to the airlines.
Fuel is currently the highest-cost sector of airline operations. Hence reductions in fuel
burn, which have obvious environmental benefits in reducing emissions of GHGs, are of
immediate interest to airline operators and therefore to aircraft manufacturers. In 2008
airlines spent $16 billion more on fuel than in 2007, and $42 billion more than in 2003.
This despite an improvement in fuel efficiency of 110% between 1978 and 2008. The
U.S. Air Force spent $6.7 billion on energy in 2009, and will spend over $10 billion in
2010; aviation consumes 79% of that.
II.1.4. Regulations. Most current regulations on GHG emissions do not target
aviation. Energy efficiency standards are addressed in the Waxman-Markey cap-andtrade bill (H.R. 2454, approved by the House in June 2009 and still under consideration
by the Senate), but emission standards for aviation were removed. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) mandates GHG reporting of CO2 and NOX emissions for new
commercial aircraft engines beginning in 2011, but federal fleets (including military) are
exempt. Executive Order 13514, issued in October 2009, requires contractors to track
GHG emissions, which could entail high costs to them.
EPA has an endangerment finding relative to six GHGs, aimed at enabling increased
mobility while reducing environmental impacts. It is a “five-pillar” approach: mature new
aircraft technology, accelerate operational changes, develop alternative fuels, examine
policies and market-based measures, and advance scientific understanding and
environmental analysis capability.
The Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) of the European Union (EU) has required
emissions monitoring and reporting since 2009, and will require emissions trading to
begin in 2012. Its terms will cap airline emissions at 97% of 2004 – 2006 emissions in
2012; 95% by 2013. It requires airlines to purchase 15% of emissions allowances below
the cap and all emissions allowances above the cap. Moreover, these rules apply to both
EU and non-EU airlines for their entire flights to and from European airports.
Such harmful, punitive targeted user-burdensome economic measures are proliferating:
regulation, taxes, surcharges, and new U.S. legislation. The Waxman-Markey bill had
originally called for all emissions from the eventual burning of jet fuel to be paid for
upstream by the fuel provider at a rate of $25/ton of CO2, adding $0.24 per gallon to the
cost of fuel. Although the aviation clauses in Waxman-Markey were subsequently
deleted, and the entire bill is not likely to survive, other comparable legislation is
undoubtedly forthcoming; e.g., the much anticipated Kerry-Lieberman bill, and three
other proposed Senate bills.
4
Cap-and-trade regulations are not new. They have been required in the U.S since 1995,
for emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) from power plants.
II.1.5. Trades. There are two opposing views on the magnitude of actions that
should be taken to reduce environmental impact. The “Equity” viewpoint, which is the
more prevalent view among the public, is that all GHG-emitting sources should be
required to achieve the same percentage reductions in GHGs. Because carbon dioxide in
the atmosphere is absorbed only very slowly, mostly by the oceans, the only way to
stabilize its level in the atmosphere is to reduce the rate of emission from all sources as
much as possible (ideally to zero, and possibly even to negative values by absorbing
CO2). The “Economic Efficiency” viewpoint is that any required reduction in GHG
should be calibrated to reflect the value of that source in goods and services to humanity
and the ease with which reductions in GHGs can be achieved by that source. There is
some tension between these two viewpoints. Before policies, we need principles (see
below; Section II.2.1). How should the aviation industry react to these two views? Should
it propose something in between; perhaps something sector-specific?
II.2 Actions
II.2.1. Goals. There are three main energy and environmental goals for aviation:
(1) Identify, qualify, produce, and certify alternative, carbon-neutral fuels; (2) increase
energy efficiency; and (3) decrease environmental impact (noise and emissions).
II.2.1.1. U.S. Government Goals. These are essentially the goals identified
in the U.S. National Research and Development Plan for Aeronautics, formulated
pursuant to Executive Order 13419. The plan calls for advancement of U.S. technology
leadership in aeronautics, and supports innovative research to do so. The key principles
on which policy is to be based, according to the order, are mobility, national security,
homeland defense, safety, environmental security, a world-class workforce, energy
availability, and protection of the environment. The goals and progress of NASA’s fiveyear, $320-million Environmentally Responsible Aircraft (ERA) project is detailed below
in Section II.2.4.
II.2.1.1.1. U.S. Air Force Goals. The U.S. Air Force plans to
reduce its fuel usage 10% by 2015, and its Air Mobility Command, which spends $4.1
billion annually (95,000 barrels per day) on fuel, plans to reduce its consumption 20% by
2020, for a savings of $820 million annually.
II.2.1.2. Airline Goals. The International Air Transport Association
(IATA) has committed to improve fuel efficiency 1.5% per year through 2020, to achieve
carbon-neutral growth after 2020, and to cut carbon emissions to 50% by 2050.
II.2.1.3. European Goals: ACARE. The European goals for 2020,
according to the Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe (ACARE) are to
reduce noise by 50%, to reduce NOX emissions by 80%, and to cut fuel consumption and
5
CO2 by 50%, all based on year 2000 levels. Energy initiatives to achieve these reductions
include smaller vehicles and alternative fuels. They plan to use carbon dioxide and water
in power plants to grow algae for distilling into biofuel, and are inviting partners for a
pilot demonstration of the necessary industrial infrastructure. They are working with
ForceIndia Formula-1 car manufacturers to develop energy-efficient technologies,
including Additive Layer Manufacturing (ALM), which is said to provide 26 times more
efficient extraction of raw materials than traditional methods. They claim ALM
components can save $150 million annually in fuel per aircraft; over 30 years that would
amount to $375 billion for the fleet. For the long term, they are planning a zero-emissions
hypersonic transport, single- or dual-stage, able to fly 60 passengers from Tokyo to Los
Angeles in 2-1/4 hours. The same type vehicle could be used for the burgeoning space
tourism industry.
II.2.1.4. European Goals: “Clean Sky.” The seven-year, $2-billion Clean
Sky joint-technology initiative is aiming for 30% reductions in CO2 and NOX by 2020.
The $500-million Smart Fixed Wing Aircraft (SFWA) will fly a “smart” wing with
passive and active laminar flow and load control and will demonstrate propi]ulsionempennage integration with open-rotor engines. The $150-million Green Regional
Aircraft (GRA) program, whose goal is 40% reduction in CO2 and NOX by 2020, will
demonstrate advanced lightweight structures with embedded damage sensors, all-electric
systems, and low-noise high-lift devices and landing gear.
II.2.2. Alternative Fuels. A clean-burning, sustainable renewable fuel is desired
that is low in aromatic components and sulfur, operates at high temperature, and produces
few particulate emissions. The most reasonable near-term choice is the use of
indigenously available feedstocks, such as natural gas, coal, oil shale, and petroleum
coke, to produce drop-in replacements/supplements for petroleum-derived jet fuels.
Renewable biofuels are currently not capable of supplying a large percentage of fuel
needs, but higher-yielding future feedstocks, such as algae or cellulosic biomass, may
improve feedstock supply.
Technical challenges are to meet the certification requirements of the American Society
for Testing and Materials (ASTM) specifications D7566 and D1655 via hydrogenated
renewable jet (HRJ) fuel and the use of the Fischer-Tropsch (FT) process to derive
certifiable liquid fuels from coal, natural gas (methane), and biomass. Note, too, that most
current biofuel projects produce substitutes for diesel fuel or gasoline, not for the
kerosene-based fuels used in aviation.
Since the carbon captured in biofuels is taken from the present-day atmosphere, the
carbon dioxide that is produced when the fuel is burned is not adding to the total, as is the
case when fossil fuel is burned. The CO2 is simply being recycled and the total
atmospheric content is no longer increasing; i.e., biofuels themselves are carbon-neutral,
although their production may not be carbon-neutral (e.g., if fossil fuels are burned in
farm equipment used to produce biofuel feedstocks).
6
The development of alternative fuels having carbon-neutral signatures has been
accelerating, with many promising prospects. Initially it was thought that derivatives of
food crops such as corn would be a solution, but the negative aspects of depleting food
supplies, the energy consumed in growing, harvesting, and distribution, and the heavy use
of water for these crops has turned attention to other sources of sustainable biofuels.
These include algae, jatropha, halophytes, camelina, salicornia, macauba, babassu, and
others, all of which require either no irrigation or salt water, and do not encroach on
agricultural land use.
At present rates of development, biofuel market viability (600+ tons/year, or about 1% of
total aviation fuel) should be achieved by 2015. The U.S. Air Force, which spent $5.3
billion for aviation fuel in 2009, has a goal of procuring 50% of all domestic aviation
fuels via cost-competitive purchases of alternative fuels by 2016.
The Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI) was created by the U.S.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Air Transport Association (ATA), the
International Air Transport Association (IATA), and the Airports Council InternationalNorth America (ACI-NA). A coalition of airlines, aircraft and engine manufacturers,
energy producers, researchers, international participants, and U.S. government agencies,
its goal is to lead the development and deployment of alternative jet fuels for commercial
aviation. It has an environmental team, a research and development team, a certification
and qualification team, and a business and economics team.
II.2.3. Increasing Energy Efficiency: “A joule in hand is worth ten in the
ground.” Simple estimates suggest that the amount of fuel currently consumed by air
transport is about twice the amount that would be needed if all existing aircraft were
operating at their maximum efficiency. The technical approaches to reduce vehicle fuel
consumption are to increase the vehicle cruise lift-to-drag ratio, decrease the empty
weight fraction, and increase over-all engine efficiency. Note that these measures are
currently being pursued: there has been a 110% improvement in aviation fuel burn
between 1978 and 2008, resulting in a reduction of 2.7 billion tonnes of CO2, or the
equivalent of taking 20 million automobiles off the road.
II.2.3.1. Drag Reduction. Drag reduction addresses drag sources, such as
turbulence and separation, and an increase in lift (with further reduced drag) by
enhancing laminar flow. Active-control methods that prolong laminar flow, delay
separation, or increase circulation are also being developed.
II.2.3.2. Materials and Structures. Advances in material and structures
technology that reduce the overall structural weight of the airframe include inherently
stronger, lighter-weight materials, as well as more efficient structural concepts.
Composites have emerged as major structural materials in the current new generation of
aircraft (e.g., the Boeing 787).
II.2.3.3. Engines. Jet engine efficiency has improved an average of 1% per
year over the last 50 years. This can continue, with the immediate prospect of 12 – 15%
7
improvement via the new engine designs now being pursued and implemented. Note that
subsystems – environmental control, electric power, flight control and actuation, fuel
pumping, engine cooling, and auxiliary power – consume 5 – 10% of fuel burn.
Improvements in each of these functions can be a source of significant savings.
Fuel burn can be reduced by increasing the engine’s overall pressure ratio and increasing
the temperature in the engine combustion chamber. This would also decrease the
production of CO2. However, both these changes increase the production of nitrogen
oxides (NOX), which both catalyze the production of the GHGs ozone and methane and
increase the likelihood of forming contrails, which can lead to the trapping of heat in the
troposphere (see II.1.2 above). The use of biofuel does not alter either the NOX or the
contrail problem. Conversely, if the objective is to reduce NOX and contrail formation,
CO2 generation would increase.
II.2.4. NASA’s ERA Project. NASA’s five-year, $320-million Environmentally
Responsible Aviation (ERA) project design studies have indicated that further
efficiencies are still possible with classical “tube and wing” aircraft designs (e.g., use of
composite materials, all-electric controls, laminar flow control, riblets, and advanced
engine technologies), but that more revolutionary configurations can provide much more
substantial savings. One promising design approach, the hybrid or blended wing body
(BWB), could have the potential of almost 30% reduction in fuel consumption, and
several “N+2” designs (meaning two generations beyond today's airplanes) could deliver
up to 53% fuel savings and CO2 reduction.
NASA’s subsequent “N+3” design studies, for subsonic airliners entering service in 2030
– 2035, were aimed at 70% fuel-burn reductions, 75% cuts in emissions, and 71 dB less
noise as compared to today’s aircraft. As part of a $2.1 million NASA grant, an MIT-led
team claims that its two “out-of-the-box” N+3 designs (a 180-seat and a 350-seat design)
could leverage new technologies like advanced airframe configurations and propulsion
systems to achieve by 2035 the 70% fuel savings goal and exceed the emissions goal,
reaching 87%.
II.2.5. Operations and Air Traffic Management. In the short term, substantial
fuel savings could be achieved through improvements in operations and air traffic
management. Advances in communication, navigation, and surveillance technology can
be leveraged to optimize aircraft arrival and departure procedures, along with sequencing
and timing on the surface, in the terminal area, and en route, thereby increasing airport
and airspace throughput and reducing fuel burn.
There are many opportunities here: e.g., enhance fuel-saving maintenance practices (for
example, frequent engine washing significantly improves fuel burn); cut auxiliary-power
unit (APU) time on the ground between flights, and thereby reduce fuel and emissions, by
using plug-in ground power as quickly as possible after arriving at the terminal gate; taxi
using only a single engine; use more efficient take-offs and departures; implement en
route efficiencies; and tailor descent and arrival. These measures do not require new
development; they all use existing aircraft technology.
8
II.2.5.1. “Time in Tanks.” One focus for identifying effective actions is
“time in tanks” – carrying excess fuel for contingencies or other requirements. The
military (Air Mobility Command) target is 95 minutes; the airline average is 65 minutes.
A possible approach is to baseline a Fuel Efficiency Index, based on analyses of mission
utilization, capacity, fuel efficiency and planning efficiency. Remember that added fuel
weight means higher burn and more emissions.
II.2.5.2. Fuel-Efficient Arrivals. “Tailored arrival” is a continuous
(optimized) descent, tailored for each aircraft at that specific time across the whole flight.
This is being done now to some extent, but tailored arrivals are sometimes being broken
off because the necessary ground tool isn’t available. Such tools are being planned for the
NextGen air traffic management system now being implemented by the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), which will also implement 4D trajectory operations (three spatial
dimensions + the temporal dimension). These measures can achieve huge fuel savings.
U.S. aircraft use 19 billion pounds of kerosene annually, and NextGen can save 5% that's a billion gallons of fuel. At $2/gallon, that's $2 billion savings annually – plus the
significant reduction in GHG generation.
Iberia Airlines, Spain's air traffic control authority Aena, and the Ineco company carried
out 620 test flights in May 2010 at the Madrid-Barajas airport involving continuous
descent approaches. According to the Single European Sky ATM Research Joint
Undertaking (SESAR SJU) the new landing approach technique yields an average 25%
reduction in CO2 emissions and fuel consumption, as well as significant reduction of
noise.
II.3 Recommendations
II.3.1. An International Solution. An international solution should be
formulated by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). It should include
fuel efficiency targets (e.g., annual average improvement of 1.5% through 2020), make
the growth of emissions carbon-neutral beginning in 2021, with a goal of 50% reduction
in CO2 production by 2050, and ensure that all stakeholders – scientists, manufacturers,
operators, and politicians (both U.S. and international) – do their part.
II.3.2. Domestic Action. U.S. organizations should seek to adopt a domestic plan
with the same objectives, using a complementary framework; should support the rapid
implementation of the FAA’s NextGen air-traffic control system and should meanwhile
accelerate adoption of the improved operations practices identified above in this report:
and should continue to urge growth of funding for aeronautical research and
development.
II.3.3. Congressional Hearing. The aviation sector, perhaps via the AIAA,
should encourage a congressional hearing on the equity versus economic efficiency
viewpoints identified above in Section II.1.5 on Trades. This should include the topic of
9
elaborating on the principles that necessary for to effective comprehensive policy
development (see Section II.2.1).
II.3.4 Sustainable Alternative Fuels. Advocate for alternative-fuel sustainability
to: (1) Promote the recognition, development, and implementation of globally
harmonized sustainability standards for alternative aviation fuels; (2) Establish a level
playing field for sustainable fuels; (3) Promote the recognition that biofuels are a priority
solution for aviation; (4) Offer rewards for implementing sustainable biofuel use; (5)
Provide a menu of incentives such as price and production supports, tax credits, and
market encouragement mechanisms; and (6) Develop a targeted program for sustainable
biofuel development across the whole life cycle; i.e, “Farm to Fly.” The Commercial
Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI) is a good first step (see II.2.2 above).
III. UNDERSTANDING, MITIGATING, AND ADAPTING TO
CLIMATE CHANGE
III.1. Overview.
Climate change is not a single, current problem, but a collection of problems. Some are
large, some small; some are regional, some global; some we understand, others are poorly
understood, and no doubt some are not yet even foreseen.
These problems will affect areas as divergent as agriculture, fisheries, forestry,
transportation, water management, infrastructure construction, emergency response
preparedness, air quality and health, homeland security, national security concerns
associated with population shifts, and many others. Each of these problems requires
practical solutions. Within the context of climate change, a practical solution is one that
is available, and useful, to local or regional policymakers to address their problems and
challenges. Furthermore, practical solutions must be accessible to people operating at all
levels of climate-change understanding.
Each of those many and varied practical solutions requires an immense amount of data to
identify the problem; to identify the best solutions; to execute those solutions that
policymakers settle on; and to monitor the progress and effectiveness of solutions in the
long term. Moreover, all these data need to be reliable, accurate, and sustained over time.
We already collect tremendous amounts of data, much of which is directly related or
applicable to the many effects of climate change. And there is a great deal that we can do
with those data to mitigate many of the coming problems associated with climate change.
But before optimizing and using current data, policymakers must have access to tools that
allow them to identify, execute, and monitor the best policy or measure for a given
problem. The data chain has three components: the observing systems, the computer
models, and the decision support.
10
Observing Systems. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the
Committee on Earth Observations (CEOS) collaborate to maintain a current inventory of
space-based systems and sensors. Polar-orbiting and geostationary satellites monitor
most of the 26 essential climate variables identified by the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC). Current space sensors collect data on everything from coastline
erosion to sea level rise, from ozone to air quality, from surface temperatures to
volcanoes, from sea ice to agricultural production.
Increasingly, space-based systems are augmented by growing sophistication and use of
high-altitude, long-endurance air-breathing platforms; e.g., NASA’s GLOPAC program,
which uses Global Hawk unpiloted aircraft to generate data on our planet’s water cycle
and air quality, which are used to correlate data collected with sensors on the space-based
Aqua and Aura satellite platforms. There are about 30,000 different data sets that the
IPCC has identified. Of these, only a very small number come from the tropics, in which
2 billion people live. Moreover, the forests of these zones are vital as carbon sinks.
Airborne sensors are filling in the blanks here.
Computer Models. Computer models consume and assimilate sensor data and establish
trends. These Earth science models provide both trends and forecasts to enable
understanding of our climate and to forecast future scenarios. A general trend for climate
models is toward enabling broader practical utility by providing both spatial and temporal
forecasts conducive to use at the regional and local scale. That is, model developers are
striving to expand their analyses from global-scale modeling on a generalized timeline to
make them versatile enough for practical use at the local level.
Decision Support. The decision-support function is to synthesize and integrate climate
data and modeling products into practical, decision-quality knowledge. Too many of the
data sets generated by the many deployed sensors are segregated from each other, as are
the computer models they feed. It is therefore necessary to integrate the products from
sensors and models and consolidate the output into something that can support the
decisions of local and regional policymakers.
The Global Earth Observing System of Systems (GEOSS) provides a framework to
enable integration of the Earth observing systems around the globe. As such, GEOSS is a
“macro” approach to inform participating governments and organizations on what is
working and what is needed, including enhancements to enable local or regional
policymakers to mitigate local or regional climate-change problems. To bridge the gap
between the mass of distributed scientific data and the ability to translate those data into
reliable, practical, decision-quality knowledge, a more “micro” tool is needed. This
could be a network of Climate Knowledge Integration Centers that are broadly accessible
to national, regional, local and private decision-makers. They would be staffed with
indigenous analysts and experts, equipped with high-powered computer infrastructure,
closely interfaced with other government agencies, state, local, international, and public
institutions. Placing such decision-quality information in the hands of regional and local
policymakers could effectively address issues in public health, agricultural stress, water
management, coastal area planning, flood damage, and other concerns.
11
The climate-change field faces a data-management issue similar to that encountered by
military commanders. The enormous quantity of data collected by their multitude of
sensors should provide unprecedented situational awareness of the battle space, but with
the penalty of severe information overload. Commanders who need to forward specific
information relevant to a unit as small as an infantry squad or a pair of attack jets are
required to “sip water from a fire hose;” i.e., to pull out that tiny thread of relevant
information from a mountain of data – and to do so quickly. The key is to deliver only
the right data, to the right people, at the right time.
The solution is a combination of computing power and expertise that allows different
categories of intelligence – imagery, communications intercepts, and others – to be
combined and correlated into a massive body of data. The breakthrough was the ability
of the commander to tailor his information search by time and map coordinates. The
technologies designed to do this continue to progress and improve, and they are clearly
adaptable to the decision support function of climate change.
III.2. Findings
III.2.1. The IPCC Report. The 2009 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) encapsulates what we know; the 2013 report will add to it.
Sharply reducing atmospheric CO2 and other GHGs is needed. The available responses
to climate change are mitigation, adaptation, and suffering; we are likely to do some of
each, but should seek to maximize the first two so as to minimize the last.
III.2.2. The U.S. National Strategy. Anthropogenic CO2 is the biggest driver of
warming: 75% - 85% from burning fossil fuels; the rest from deforestation. Global
average temperatures have increased by about 1 degree C since 1890; sea ice has shrunk
by 2.5 million square km since 1979. If nothing is done, sea levels could rise by 1 – 2 m
by 2100, by 3 – 12 m over the next century, and up to 70 m eventually. The capital
investment in fossil-fuel-based industry is $15 trillion, and it is projected to require 30 –
40 years to turn it over.
Science transcends politics: most of the confirming data were collected during the
previous administration of George W. Bush. Policies are now needed to implement
mitigation and adaptation to minimize suffering.
III.2.3. Earth Observations. The essential climate variables to be measured are
in three categories: atmospheric, oceanic, and terrestrial.
III.2.3.1. Atmospheric (over land, sea, and ice). Surface parameters
include air temperature, precipitation, air pressure, surface radiation budget, wind speed
and direction, and water vapor. Upper-air variables include Earth radiation budget
(including solar irradiances), upper-air temperature, wind speed and direction, water
vapor, and cloud properties. Composition parameters include carbon dioxide, methane,
ozone, other long-lived GHGs, and aerosol properties.
12
III.2.3.2. Oceanic. Surface measurements include sea-surface temperature,
sea-surface salinity, sea level, sea state, sea ice, current, ocean color (which indicates
biological activity), and CO2 partial pressure. Sub-surface variables include temperature,
salinity, current, nutrients, carbon, ocean tracers, and phytoplankton.
III.2.3.3. Terrestrial. Measurements include river discharge, water use,
ground water, lake levels, snow cover, glaciers and ice caps, permafrost, seasonally
frozen ground, albedo, land cover (including vegetation type), fraction of absorbed
photosynthetically active radiation, leaf area index, and fire disturbance.
III.2.4. Greenhouse Gas Monitoring. Although some space-based capabilities
exist for carbon monitoring, there are as yet no comprehensive measurement and analysis
systems. Natural exchange processes, and how they will change with changing climate,
are not well understood. For example, although we know that humans have added over
200 gigatons of CO2 to the atmosphere since 1958, less than half that amount remains. It
is not known which sinks are absorbing the remainder; land or ocean? Eurasia or North
America? Moreover, it is not known why the CO2 buildup varies from year to year when
the emission rates are nearly uniform.
Most fossil-fuel CO2 emissions emanate from large local sources. The high precision and
small sampling area of the Orbiting Carbon Observatory satellite (OCO), which fell into
the ocean during its unsuccessful launch, would have been able to detect these signals
and attribute them to the emitting country, as well as demonstrating the capability for
monitoring CO2 from space for a climate treaty
Measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) activities provide an annual accounting
of anthropogenic emissions and sequestration of six GHGs: CO2, methane [CH4], nitrous
oxide [N2O], hydrofluorocarbons [HFCs], perfluorocarbons [PFC]s, and sulfur
hexafluoride [SF6]. MRV covers all sectors of the economy (e.g., energy, industry,
agriculture). It employs an overall metric by which success is judged, and a system for
identifying the “key sources” within each country (based on magnitude and/or trend) to
guide the allocation of resources. The MRV methods were developed by the IPCC, and
are implemented in the U.S. by the EPA in cooperation with other agencies.
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) assembles
estimates of anthropogenic carbon emissions and removals (sinks) based on
measurements of human activities such as land use, using land-cover information, and on
atmospheric and oceanic measurements. These data are assembled from satellite imagery
and biogeochemical models.
III.3. Actions
III.3.1. Climate Monitoring. Climate monitoring by NASA satellite
observations includes 13 currently operating major missions, several of which tie together
in series (e.g., ocean surface topography, solar irradiance). Foundational missions in
13
development, which include several that contribute to Earth system data records, are the
NPOESS Preparatory Project (NPP), the Landsat Data Continuity Misson (LDCM), and
the Global Precipitation Mission (GPM). NASA also has Decadal Survey Missions,
especially ICESat II and to pick up measurements from ICESat, with ICE Bridge in
between; as well as Continuity Missions in response to the administration’s FY11
proposed budget (SAGE-III/ISS and GRACE-FO).
Climate-related long-term measurements include climate-forcing data (solar irradiance,
land cover, land use, radiatively active source gases, and aerosols) and climate-response
data (terrestrial and marine productivity; temperature, water vapor, and precipitation;
clouds; sea level; ice and snow cover; Earth radiation budget; ozone and other trace
gases). There is significant focus on calibration and validation over mission lifetimes,
including ground networks that provide complementary science as well (e.g., AERONET,
MPL Net, AGAGE, NDACC).
III.3.1.1. International Cooperation. The Group on Earth Observations
(GEO) is composed of 73 countries and 46 organizations. The Committee on Earth
Observations (CEO) includes 28 space agencies and 20 national and international
organizations. Members of these groups have over 100 current Earth observing missions.
III.3.1.2 CO2 Measurements. Current capabilities for accurate
documenting of the magnitude and distribution of CO2 in the atmosphere are limited by
the recent loss of the U.S. Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO), as noted above in
Section III.2.4. However, OCO-2 has been committed for launch in 2015. Meanwhile the
Canadian microsatellite CanX-2 and Japan’s Ibuki (GoSat) satellite are providing some
useful data.
III.3.2. Recent Actions by the U.S. Administration. Commitment of $80 billion
for clean, efficient energy in P.L. 111-5, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
(ARRA); creation of the Advanced Research Progects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) ($700
million from 2009 – 2011); Imposing the first-ever automotive fuel-economy and CO2
tailpipe emission standards; commitment of $2.56 billion to the U.S. Global Change
Research Program for 2011 (a 19.4% increase); and strengthening of bilateral
partnerships on energy and climate with a number of other nations. Also restructuring of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Department of
the Interior (DOI) to consolidate and develop climate-change focus, and creation of an
interagency task force to coordinate the nation’s climate-change adaptation activities.
The U.S. also established a U.S. Group on Earth Observations (USGEO) to formulate and
pursue a portfolio of high-priority national Earth observation recommendations that
extend across all U.S. agencies, all types of platforms, and all relevant scientific
disciplines, to provide an integrated picture, address continuity, and highlight investments
that maximize societal benefits.
III.3.3. Mitigation Actions.
14
III.3.3.1. Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs). NAMAs
can be broad policy changes and/or programs that aggregate results of specific actions
regionally or nationally. Current examples include Brazil’s programs to reduce
deforestation, practice energy efficiency, introduce biological nitrogen fixation, and
foster no-till agriculture; Indonesia’s sustainable peat land management and shift to lowemission transportation modes; Sierra Leone’s expanded clean-energy utilization, waste
incineration, composting, and recycling; and Mongolia’s portable wind generation for
nomadic herders and coal briquetting.
III.3.3.2. Corporate Actions. Several aerospace companies have contracts
from the U.S. Department of Energy to improve their energy efficiency and energy
management, as well as to conduct and improve climate monitoring techniques.
Lockheed Martin has set a corporate goal of 25% reduction in CO2 emissions, plus waterusage and waste-disposal objectives and seeking energy sources other than fossil fuels.
An important requirement for corporate investments in this type of project is clarification
and predictability of the regulatory environment (i.e., cap-and-trade legislation, pricing
regulations, taxing, etc.), so that compliance costs such as monitoring and verification can
be estimated.
III.3.3.3. Electric Power Generation Options. In addition to energy
conservation measures, which are the simplest and most economically efficient way to
reduce the production of GHGs, a number of countries are installing renewable energy
systems such as wind turbines, thermal and photovoltaic solar power plants, geothermal
energy extraction power plants, and other options such as tidal and ocean wave energy
and ocean thermal energy conversion systems. Increasing the availability of low-cost
electric power having no carbon signature not only reduces the GHGs generated by
electric power plants, but also facilitates the use of electric and hybrid automobiles,
thereby reducing the GHGs generated by transportation devices. There have even been
several designs of electric-powered aircraft, most notably in the NASA Environmentally
Responsible Aircraft (ERA) studies mentioned above in Section II.2.4.
II.3.3.3.1. Satellite Solar Power. Ground-based renewable energy
sources, even including existing hydroelectric power installations and nonrenewable but
carbon-neutral nuclear fission power plants, can meet only a fraction of the world’s
growing demand for electric power. Satellite solar power (SSP) systems represent a
future option that has the potential to provide a substantial contribution to base-load
power grids. Although the concept has been around since 1968, the projected cost of
developing and deploying large solar power plants in orbit around the Earth and their
ground segments has been prohibitive. It is only recently that the evolution of critical
technologies has made it possible to devise system designs that could become
economically practical early in this century.
Since the last SSP studies were conducted in the early 1980s, for example, photovoltaic
array efficiency has grown from ~10% to nearly 50%; wireless power transmission
efficiency has jumped from ~20% to 80 – 90%; required power management voltage has
dropped from 50,000 to less than 1,000; the degrees of freedom of the robotic devices
15
needed for orbital assembly and maintenance of modular system elements have grown
from ~3 to over 30 and they can use autonomous control (thereby eliminating the need
for a large space-bourn assembly and support cadre ); and perhaps most notable, launch
requirements for the new modular SSP configurations have shrunk from unique reusable
new designs having 250-tonne payloads to derivatives of current commercial rockets with
25-tonne payload capability.
In the past the high cost of SSP plants has deterred any interest from the $15-trillion
commercial electric power industry. However, there are recent signs that such interest is
indeed developing. In April 2009 the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), which
is the largest provider of power to California, asked its state regulatory agency for
permission to contract with the Solaren Company for a 200-MW satellite power
constellation, and in January 2010 the Astrium division of European Aeronautics,
Defense and Space (EADS) announced that they are canvassing the EU, European
governments, and big European energy companies for support of a prototype SSP system
that could be in operation by 2020, delivering power to Earth via 20 – 50 kW infrared
laser beams.
III.4. Recommendations
III.4.1. The Overall Philosophy. The strategy to resolve climate issues should
involve systems engineering and a requirements-driven approach rather than an
evolutionary developmental one. It should be pursued and created by an organization that
has the ability, and has been granted the license, to draw on all the relevant elements of
governmental (international and national), private-sector, and educational organizations.
Promote the concept that it isn’t “climate-change policy versus the economy,” but rather
“climate-change policy for the economy.” The cost of inaction will be far greater than the
cost of action.
III.4.2. The Strategy. The forthcoming national U.S. strategy, which should be
expanded and made the basis of a global initiative, should call for better measurements;
higher-fidelity computer models; Climate Knowledge Information Centers to transition
research to operations; access across all aspects of the climate issues; clarification of
regulation issues; creation of public-private partnerships; standardization of validation
and verification criteria; and intensification of education in science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM).
III.4.3. Earth Observations. Develop a U.S. national strategy for Earth
observations, commit to a long-term, continuous data acquisition plan, and establish a
“governance structure” for delivering Earth observations and their applications. These
actions should seek to involve international cooperation worldwide.
III.4.3.1. Carbon Monitoring. The U.S. and the international community
must make top-level strategic decisions on the design and implementation of a
comprehensive, accurate carbon monitoring system, as detailed above in Section III.4.1.
This system should include a standing interagency group, with broad participation from
16
the research community, to design a research program that improves and, where
appropriate, implements methods for estimating agriculture, forestry, and other land-use
emissions of CO2, N2O, and CH4. This group should also produce a global map of landuse and land cover change at least every two years.
III.4.3.2. Extend the international atmospheric sampling network to
research the atmospheric “domes” of greenhouse gases over a representative sample of
large local emitters, such as cities and power plants, and to fill in underrepresented
regions globally, thereby improving national sampling of regional greenhouse gas
emissions
III.4.3.3. Member organizations of the UNFCCC should strengthen selfreported national emissions inventories by extending regular, rigorous reporting and
review to developing nations, and by extending the most stringent IPCC methods to the
most important GHG sources in each country. This could reduce carbon inventory errors
to less than 10%, but will require both financial and technical assistance to the
developing nations.
III.4.4 Adaptation Actions. Develop heat-, drought-, and salt-resistant crops;
strengthen defenses against tropical diseases; develop water-management projects; build
dikes and storm-surge barriers; and avoid flood-plain and near-sea-level developments.
III.4.5. Mitigation Actions. Reduce deforestation and increase reforestation;
modify agricultural practices to reduce emissions of GHGs and build up soil carbon; and
most important, reduce emissions of carbon and GHGs by increasing the efficiency of
energy use in buildings, industry, and transport, and by major investments in energytechnology research, especially in renewable sources such as wind, solar, and biomass. A
policy requiring emission sources to pay for carbon emissions is also needed.
IV. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, ACTIONS, AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
IV.1. Greening of Aviation
IV.1.1 Findings
Benefits of Aviation. Civil aviation is a major international business and is widely and
correctly recognized as a major enabler for global wealth creation and an essential part of
the world’s commercial infrastructure.
Environmental Impact. Nevertheless, it is both economically and environmentally
important to reduce both fuel consumption and greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions to the
maximum extent.
Costs. The cost of fuel is of direct concern to the airlines. Fuel is currently the highestcost sector of airline operations. Hence reduction in fuel burn, which have obvious
17
environmental benefits in reducing emissions, is of immediate interest to airline
operators.
Regulations. Most current U.S. regulations on GHG emissions do not target aviation, but
harmful, punitive economic measures are proliferating: legislation, taxes, charges, the
European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme, and new U.S. legislation.
Trades. There are two opposing views: the “Equity” viewpoint states that all GHGemitting sources should be required to achieve the same percentage reductions in GHGs.
The “Economic Efficiency” viewpoint is that any required reduction in GHG should
reflect the value of that source in goods and services to humanity, and the ease with
which reductions in GHGs can be achieved by that source. There is some tension
between these two viewpoints.
IV.1.2. Actions
Goals. There are three main energy and environmental goals for aviation: (1) Identify,
qualify, produce, and certify alternative, carbon-neutral fuels; (2) increase energy
efficiency; and (3) decrease environmental impact (noise and emissions). Both the U.S.
and Europe have formulated plans to address these goals.
Alternative Fuels. A clean-burning, sustainable renewable fuel that contains few aromatic
components and sulfur, operates at high temperature, and produces little particulate
emissions is desired. Current feedstock choices are natural gas, coal, oil shale, and petroleum coke; future foreseeable feasible feedstocks are algae or cellulosic biomass.
Technical challenges are to certify and accelerate the development of alternative fuels
having carbon-neutral signatures. At present rates of development, biofuel market
viability should be achieved by 2015. The Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels
Initiative (CAAFI) is leading that development.
Increasing Energy Efficiency: “A joule in hand is worth ten in the ground.” Technical
approaches, all currently being pursued, are to increase cruise lift-to-drag ratio, decrease
the empty weight fraction, and increase over-all engine efficiency. More efficient
operations and air traffic management can substantially reduce fuel burn and therefore
emissions.
IV.1.3. Recommendations
An International Solution. An international solution should be formulated by the
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
Domestic Action. U.S. organizations should seek to adopt a domestic plan with the same
objectives, using a complementary framework.
18
Congressional Hearing. The aviation industry, perhaps via the AIAA, should encourage a
congressional hearing on the equity versus economic efficiency viewpoints.
Sustainable Alternative Fuels. Advocate for alternative-fuel sustainability.
IV.2. Climate Change
IV.2.1. Findings
The CO2 Issue. Sharply reducing atmospheric CO2 and other GHGs are needed. The
available responses to climate change are mitigation, adaptation, and suffering a; we all
likely to do some of each, but should seek to maximize the first two so as to minimize the
last.
The U.S. National Strategy. President Obama is committed to science and technology for
climate-change issues. “We know what the problem is; we know the main cause; we
know enough to act; and we know what we need from science and technology.”
Earth Observations. The essential climate variables to be measured are in three
categories: atmospheric, oceanic, and terrestrial.
Greenhouse Gas Monitoring. Although some space-based capabilities exist for carbon
monitoring, there are as yet no comprehensive measurement and analysis systems.
IV.2.2. Actions
Climate Monitoring. Climate monitoring by NASA satellite observations includes 13
currently operating major missions.
International Cooperation. The Group on Earth Observations (GEO) and the Committee
on Earth Observations (CEO) include 28 space agencies and 20 national and international
organizations. They have over 100 current Earth observing missions.
CO2 Measurements. The U.S. Orbiting Carbon Observatory OCO-2 has been committed
for launch in 2015. It will have capabilities for accurate documenting of the magnitude
and distribution of CO2 in the atmosphere. Meanwhile the Canadian microsatellite CanX2 and Japan’s Ibuki (GoSat) satellite are providing some useful data.
Recent Actions by the U.S. Administration. There have been a number of such actions,
aimed at understanding, mitigating, and adapting to climate change.
Mitigation Actions. Both Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) and
corporate actions have been implemented in a number of relevant areas, and the evolution
of relevant technologies has revived consideration of the satellite solar power option for
ultimately replacing fossil-fueled powerplants.
19
IV.2.3. Recommendations
The Overall Philosophy. The strategy to resolve climate issues should involve systems
engineering and a requirements-driven approach rather than an evolutionary
developmental one.
The Strategy. The forthcoming national U.S. strategy, which should be expanded and
made the basis of a global initiative, should call for better measurements; higher-fidelity
computer models; Climate Knowledge Information Centers; and several additional
actions.
Earth Observations. Develop a U.S. national strategy for Earth observations, commit to a
long-term, continuous data acquisition plan, and establish a “governance structure” for
delivering Earth observations and their applications. These actions should seek to involve
international cooperation worldwide.
Carbon Monitoring. The U.S. and the international community must make top-level
strategic decisions on the design and implementation of a comprehensive, accurate
carbon monitoring system.
Emissions Inventories. Member organizations of the UNFCCC should strengthen selfreported national emissions inventories by extending regular, rigorous reporting and
review to developing nations
Adaptation Actions. Develop heat-, drought-, and salt-resistant crops; strengthen defenses
against tropical diseases; develop water-management projects; build dikes and stormsurge barriers; and avoid flood-plain and near-sea-level developments.
Mitigation Actions. Reduce deforestation and increase reforestation; modify agricultural
practices to reduce emissions of GHGs and build up soil carbon; and most important,
reduce emissions of carbon and GHGs by increasing the efficiency of energy use.
******************
Appendix A: Forum Program
Appendix B: Forum Participants
20