EUROCONTROL ETS Support Facilities
and Fuel Estimator tool
Antonio Astorino
Objectives
• Present
• Eurocontrol
• Eurocontrol Fuel Estimator (Small emitters tool)
• Eurocontrol Support Facility for ETS aviation’s
Stakeholders (Reporting Monitoring and
Verification)
• States/Competent Authorities
• Aircraft operators
• ETS-SF architecture and data provider services
• Monitoring, Reporting and Verification process support
What is Eurocontrol ?
• Public International Organisation
• Not an institution of the EU
• 49 years of existence
• 2000+ persons staff specialised in Aviation
• Multi-projects Organisation
EUROCONTROL and the EU
•
What Eurocontrol is doing ? :
Coordination Body
• Pan-European Technical and operational
« Coordination » body between :
• a) Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSP) and Civil
Aviation Authorities (CAA) through Europe
• b) Telecommunications and transport National
agencies and ministers through Europe
• c) Aircraft Operators (AO) as well as their
associations (IATA, ERA, EBAA, IAOPA…..)
• d) Military and NATO
• e) European Commission & Agencies – EASA, ESA
• f) ICAO EUR NAT and Montreal, FAA (USA)
• g) Standardisation bodies
•
ARINC/EUROCAE/ETSI
• g) Industry partners
• Airframe manufacturers ,Engine manufacturers
• Aircraft on board systems, ATC systems
What Eurocontrol is doing ? Manages and
Operates
•
Manages pan-European Air Traffic Management (ATM)
Implementation programs and defines ATM standards
•
Operates pan-European ATM functions at every seconds
•
- Central Flow Management Unit (CFMU)
-
- MAASTRICH upper airspace control centre
-
- Central Route Charge Office (CRCO)
What are ENV activities in Eurocontrol ?
• ETS-SF, for CAs and AOs and Verifiers
• Fuel estimator for ETS
• ELSO, list publication for European
Commission
• Historical Emissions for CO2 CAP aviation
• Others related modelling activities for NOISE,
Advance Emissions model
• Main partners
• EC & MS & CAs & Compliance Forum
• ICAO/CAEP WGs
• AOs and Verifiers
• Support to Regulation and research (1x staff)
ETS Aviation process is complex
• More than 35xx AOs to report to EU ETS
• 5xx Regular AOs
• 3xxx Small Emitters
• AC/Airframes NB in Europe approx 14xxx
• 1 Aircraft = 1 installation
• No other alternative energy than Fossil Fuel
• 27/30 States, +3 CAs Norway, Lichen, Iceland
• MS are responsible for emissions of Administered AO for flights
outside their own Airspace (8.000.000 flights/year)
• Impossible for States to “control” ETS unless help from
Eurocontrol
ETS Aviation process is dynamic
• At any time Aircrafts change owner/AO
• At any time ETS concerned parties/stakeholders change
also
• 300 changes in AO status per year in CRCO
• More States in Future as EU30 or more
• AO new entrants in ETS every year
• AO at edge of de-minimis (2xxx AOs) thresholds
• potential new entrants next years
EUROCONTROL offers support to ALL ETS
Stakeholders
ETS-SF Sys. Architecture
CRCO NATIVE DATA
Flight
LENGHT(3)
CFMU
Latvia, Estonia,
UPR, Iceland
Monitoring
Flights
Y + Y-1
Exemptions
AO
Fleets
Hist.
CRCO Data
extracts
monthly
Data
Workspace
for ETS
Airspace
+ETS Data
• Exemptions
• Fuel Estimate
• C02 Estimate
AO
Admin
data Hist.
Archives
ALL ETS workspace
regularly
Production of
ETS Specific Data
via
Fuel estimator ELSO*
&
data
Exemptions
updates
Identification
(5,7, Commercial)
&
Geo. Scope
&
AO attribution
(Fleet list and
CA feedback)
AO-SE
CA
Report for AOs
AO-SE
Aggregated, XLS file
Report for States
Aggregated XLS file
Support AO’s Verification
CSV file all flights detailed
* Eurocontrol List Support Office
Background FUEL ESTIMATOR– Fuel Burn
Data Acquisition in 2009
• Request for cooperation from EUROCONTROL’s
Director General on 11 February 2009 to Air
Transport Associations
• First data set received in March 2009
• Last data set received week of 2 June 2009
• Most data received late May 2009
Emissions Estimation Methodology
•ANCAT (Abatement of Nuisances Caused by Air
Transport) also known as EMEP/CORINAIR
•Recommended by ECAC: “ECAC Member
States should calculate the emissions of aviation
as accurately as possible using ANCAT method
number three as described in the Guidance
Material” (ECAC 27/3, 8-9 July 2003)
•http://reports.eea.europa.eu/EMEPCORINAIR5/en/page002.html
ANCAT 3 – EMEP/CORINAIR
Input & Output Data
A320
125
Standard flight distances (nm) [1nm = 1.852 km]
500
750
1000
1500
2000
250
2500
Distance (km)
Climb/cruise/descent
232
463.048
926
1389
1852
2778
3704
4630
1644.4
802.3
2497.3
802.3
3660.6
802.3
4705.0
802.3
6027.2
802.3
8332.0
802.3
10865.9
802.3
13441.3
802.3
167.3
89.9
232.5
145.4
167.3
167.3
89.9
232.5
145.4
167.3
167.3
89.9
232.5
145.4
167.3
167.3
89.9
232.5
145.4
167.3
167.3
89.9
232.5
145.4
167.3
167.3
89.9
232.5
145.4
167.3
167.3
89.9
232.5
145.4
167.3
167.3
89.9
232.5
145.4
167.3
842.1
1695.0
2858.3
3902.7
5224.9
7529.7
10063.6
12638.9
28.0
10.8
37.9
10.8
56.0
10.8
66.8
10.8
83.9
10.8
109.4
10.8
141.1
10.8
169.9
10.8
0.775
2.491
0.775
2.491
0.775
2.491
0.775
2.491
0.775
2.491
0.775
2.491
0.775
2.491
0.775
2.491
Fuel (kg)
Flight total
LTO
Taxi out
Take off
Climb out
Approach landing
Taxi in
Climb/cruise/descent
NOx (kg)
Flight total
LTO
Taxi out
Take off
…
Emissions
EINOx
(g/kg fuel) =
HC (g)
EIHC (g/kg fuel)
CO (g)
EICO (g/kg fuel)
( Generic Aircraft Type , Flown Distance )
CFMU Based Actual
Route Length
(source: EMEP/CORINAIR)
Fuel Burn Influencing Factors, ANCAT, Best
Available Data
Main factors influencing fuel burn of ONE flight
•
•
•
Mass of Aircraft during flight
• PAX (0-10%, EBAA example)
• Fuel (40%)
• Tank management Strategy
• Jet or turbo prop
• Airframe (50%)
Distance (no height effects)
• GCD (+95km)
• Actual (radar tracks)
Time
• Meteo
• ATM (LTO, stacks,,rerouting)
• Cost Index (business type)
• Cumulated effect : two “identical” flight, same ADES ADEP,
same distance, same aircraft type could vary +/- 40%
Fuel Burn Data Samples (1)
• 23 aircraft operators:
• European business aviation
• European legacy carriers
• European leisure carriers
• European low fares carriers
• European regional carriers
• Non-European legacy carriers from the following
continents: Africa, Asia, and North America
• Each aircraft operator provided data for one or more
months for 2004, 2005 and/or 2006.
Few provided data for periods relating to
2007 or 2008
Fuel Burn Data Samples (2)
• Data for 59 aircraft types, covering both jet and turbo-prop
aircraft.
• For 54 of them, the sample data has been deemed valid.
2004
2005
2006
92.2%
92.6%
93.0%
• The remaining 5 aircraft types were discarded because of
insufficient sample data
Fuel Burn Dispersion
AO_FUEL_EGLL_LPPR
AO_FUEL_EDDF_ESSA
AO_FUEL_LKPR_UKBB
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
A320 Fuel Burn Distribution
A320 Fuel Burn Distribution with Fit
B744 Fuel Burn Distribution
B744 Fuel Burn Distribution with Fit
Methodology after Reconciliation (1)
• AO SAMPLE
• If sample data then use new fit
• AO EQV
• If aircraft of same type of a sample (e.g. RJ70 vs. RJ1H)
then use sample new fit with correction factor based on
MTOW ratio
Methodology after Reconciliation (2)
• ANCAT with new delta factor
• If aircraft in ANCAT but not in sample, use ANCAT data
with a delta factor based on difference between ANCAT
aircraft family regression and sample aircraft family
regression
Heavy Jet
30
FUEL/NM
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
50000
100000 150000 200000
250000 300000 350000 400000 450000
MTOM
Methodology after Reconciliation (3)
• REGRESSION
• If neither of the previous, then use average fuel per nautical
mile based on model from sample aircraft family regression
Heavy Jet
30
FUEL/NM
25
20
15
X
10
5
0
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
MTOM
300000
350000
400000
450000
Fuel Burn Statistics
Distance: Actual VS Great Circle
ANCAT Fuel: Actual VS Great Circle
AO Based Model Fuel: Actual VS ANCAT GC
AO Based Model Fuel: Actual VS ANCAT Actual
AO Based Model Fuel: Actual VS Great Circle
Intra EU27
10.6%
7.6%
9.0%
1.3%
7.7%
Non Intra EU27
5.0%
4.9%
7.6%
2.6%
4.4%
Total
7.4%
5.7%
8.0%
2.2%
5.4%
Airport Coverage Representativeness
in Sample
Weigth
19.8%
8.3%
6.9%
6.2%
5.7%
4.9%
3.5%
3.5%
3.2%
3.0%
2.7%
2.6%
2.4%
2.4%
1.9%
1.8%
1.5%
1.4%
1.3%
1.3%
1.2%
ARR in
ARR in
AC_TYPE TOP10 EU27 AP OTHER AP MVTS
B744
3,409
3,954
7,363
B772
4,557
4,853
9,410
B763
1,809
2,941
4,750
A320
20,506
35,352
55,858
A343
2,626
4,367
6,993
B738
1,656
13,487
15,143
A332
883
1,589
2,472
B752
1,425
11,710
13,135
MD11
647
3,055
3,702
B742
159
164
323
A321
12,654
22,030
34,684
A319
27,822
83,492
111,314
B733
7,230
10,522
17,752
A333
565
563
1,128
A346
600
594
1,194
B734
6,684
28,848
35,532
MD82
19
5,195
5,214
B735
12,670
46,768
59,438
B737
2,268
7,281
9,549
A310
267
5,710
5,977
B762
402
821
1,223
Sep-05
ARR in
ARR in
% Busy % Non Busy % Busy % Non Busy TOP10 EU27 AP OTHER AP Mvt
46%
54%
43%
57%
5,497
7,236
12,733
48%
52%
45%
55%
4,163
5,007
9,170
38%
62%
35%
65%
4,445
8,242
12,687
37%
63%
33%
67%
24,951
50,052
75,003
38%
62%
46%
54%
2,803
3,336
6,139
11%
89%
14%
86%
7,188
45,040
52,228
36%
64%
29%
71%
1,800
4,319
6,119
11%
89%
24%
76%
5,141
15,955
21,096
17%
83%
33%
67%
1,231
2,450
3,681
49%
51%
26%
74%
673
1,916
2,589
36%
64%
37%
63%
10,333
17,353
27,686
25%
75%
30%
70%
13,007
30,557
43,564
41%
59%
23%
77%
8,497
28,516
37,013
50%
50%
31%
69%
1,139
2,505
3,644
50%
50%
50%
50%
677
674
1,351
19%
81%
25%
75%
5,694
17,399
23,093
0%
100%
31%
69%
7,325
16,128
23,453
21%
79%
32%
68%
7,305
15,749
23,054
24%
76%
17%
83%
2,910
14,106
17,016
4%
96%
22%
78%
828
2,984
3,812
33%
67%
22%
78%
657
2,364
3,021
Airport Pairs from AO Sample
Confidence Intervals of Eurocontrol Fuel (and
CO2) estimator
(Based on a confidence level of 99.5%)
2004
2005
Cluster
CO2
share
SAMPLE
92.2%
0.02%
92.6%
0.02%
93.0%
0.02%
EQV
4.6%
0.10%
4.6%
0.10%
4.8%
0.10%
ANCAT
1.6%
0.29%
1.5%
0.30%
1.0%
0.33%
REGRESSION
1.5%
26.49%
1.3%
25.36%
1.2%
21.87%
0.34% 100.0%
0.27%
TOTAL
 err
2
sample
100.0%
Confidence
Interval
CO2
share
2006
0.41% 100.0%
  err   err
2
eqv
Confidence
Interval
2
ancat
i
CO2
share
 err
Confidence
Interval
reg type i
•A confidence level of 99.5% with a confidence interval of
1.5% means that by estimating the CO2 emissions using
another data sample of the same size, there is a probability
of 99.5% that the newly estimated CO2 emissions are within
±1.5% of the previously calculated CO2 emissions

2
Eurocontrol Fuel Estimator = Small emitters tool
• Same algorithm as standalone tool is used in ETS-SF and in
the Generated AER and CSV reports & files
• also used in calculation of Historical Emissions at EC request
(coherency)
• Is a STATISTICAL tool, very good estimator performances IF
:
• Applied to Multiple flights records
• More flight more accurate aggregated (sum) CO2
• CAP example (8.000.000 flights)
• Aircraft types in use in AO fleet
• If all fleet in Regression model aircraft types, increased
uncertainties on Fuel and CO2 estimates
• Mixed fleet (sample and regression), better accuracy
Fuel Estimator feedback from Airlines
• comments (major airline) CO2 estimates is very accurate
• comments on Fuel over-estimates considerable for some
Aircraft types (147 Jets concerned)
• Minor ‘advantage’ in the CAP work
• As a statistical tool, the tool also under-estimate fuel
and CO2 in some cases (turbo prop) but no comments
received so far, silent majority ?
Small emitters tools Next STEPS
• => by the end of 2011 at the latest more accurate
models of some aircrafts types, Fuel and CO2 estimated
values in AER and CSV files more reliable !
• Regression model Class improvement
• 3 (or 4) sub class and not one
• Reduction of Fuel and CO2 estimates by 23%
in average for 147 Jets Aircraft Types
concerned (min 20 to max 40%)
• Gathering additional actual fuel burn from AOs
• many contribution, actual fuel data, received since
few months
Contributing to EMEP/CORINAIR-ANCAT
•
Fuel modelling are available (and will be improved)
• Linear parameters by Aircraft types will be published on a
regular basis by Eurocontrol
•
Eurocontrol will propose a complementary methodology to be an
input to the review of ANCAT/Emep-Corinair in coordination with
JRC ISPRA
•
Specificities :
• CO2 only
• “Specific” LTO concept (intercept at distance 0) hardly
differentiable from cruise
Questions ?
• Thank you
• Contacts :
• Fuel model update
• antonio.astorino@eurocontrol.int
• ETS-SF project manager
• Stefano.mancini@eurocontrol.int
Acronyms
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
AER Annual Emission Reports
AO Aircraft Operator
AC Aircraft
ATM Air Traffic Management
CA Competent Authority
CFMU Central Flow Management Unit
CRCO Central Route Charge Office
ETS : Emission Trading Scheme (as per Directive xx and related legislation MRV, interpretation
etc…)
EC European Commission
EEA European Economic Area
ENV Environment
ELSO Eurocontrol List Support Office (in relation with AO-MS List published in June by EC)
ETS-SF ETS Support facility
EURO Eurocontrol
LEN3 Route Length Model 3 as from Flight Plan corrected when significant deviations
MRV Monitoring Reporting and Verifications
MS Member State
SE Small Emitters
SES Single European Sky
SESAR Single European Sky ATM Research
TKR Tonnes Kilometres Reports
XML Extensible Markup Language