Clean Air Conundrum

Feature Clean Air Conundrum The European ground support industry has long been at the forefront of developments in clean air GSE, but the US is catching up fast. Europe's difficulty is deciding on which technology to embrace and who should pay...


  1. Horizontal transport (e.g. cars, buses, tractors)
  2. Vertical transport (e.g. loaders, catering trucks and conveyor belts)
  3. Energy delivery (e.g. GPUs and air starts)

*Regarding the sulfur content of the diesel fuel, KES expects the airport users to voluntarily decide in 2005 to use the 50 ppm quality (which will be the legal maximum for on-road transportation).

The figures for 2010 show the benefits of continuing engine and fuel developments. In 2010, the total amount of CO, HC and SO2 emissions are expected to be lower than in 2000 - despite the progressive rise in fuel consumption. KES was not asked to calculate emissions from previous years, but, based on the recorded fuel consumption in 1990 and emission profiles of engines from that time, concluded that GSE emissions are stable, or lower today. Emissions of CO, HC, NOx and PM in g/kWh have already come down tremendously thanks to engine developments. Meanwhile, the emission of SO2 is only influenced by the sulfur content of the fuel (something that will fall to 50 ppm in the future).

For more details, contact:
Rien Bakker
Senior Engineer /Consultant
GSE
KLM Equipment Services
Email: RBakker@kes-gse.nl

Fuel consumption * Airport users chose to use diesel fuel with a sulfur content of 350 ppm instead of the legal maximum of 2,000 ppm for off-road use. KES assumed that this lowered the PM emission by approximately 10 percent.

Emissions of CO, HC and PM were considerably lower in the Energy category than in the other two categories.
This, says KES, is the result of KLM's long-term policy of specifying fuel efficient engines with an on-road emission profile for GPUs. The emission legislation for on-road engines is way ahead of that for off-road engines.
KES then used the amount of fuel burnt per flight as a parameter to help calculate future emissions in 2010. It also
checked back against figures for 1990 and 2000.

Liters per flight

THE HANDLER VIEW



We Recommend

  • Blog

    GSE Emissions Study — You Can Help

    The Transportation Research Board’s (TRB) Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) has issued a request for proposals to “develop a tutorial that describes GSE operations and identifies...

  • News

    Keeping the Bay Beautiful

    Features Keeping the Bay Beautiful By Richard Rowe March 2001 San Francisco International Airport has made a top down corporate commitment to develop a truly green airport. Richard...

  • Article
    Show Us the Green... And We Will Show You the Money

    Show Us the Green... And We Will Show You the Money

  • Article

    Cleaner, Leaner, & Greener

    FAA's Inherently Low-Emission Airport Vehicle Pilot Program is underway, writes Michelle Garetson February 2003 The Federal Aviation Administration Office of Airports Community and...