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 Latvia, Estonia, UPR, Iceland

Flight LENGHT(3) CFMU

Monitoring Flights Y + Y-1 AO Fleets Hist.

Exemp tions Airspace CRCO Data extracts monthly Data Workspace for ETS AO Admin data Hist.

• • •

+ETS Data Exemptions Fuel Estimate C02 Estimate

Archives ALL ETS workspace regularly

Production of ETS Specific Data via Fuel estimator & ELSO* data Exemptions Identification (5,7, Commercial) & updates Geo. Scope & AO attribution (Fleet list and CA feedback) AO-SE CA AO-SE Report for AOs

Aggregated, XLS file

Support AO’s Verification CSV file all flights detailed Report for States

Aggregated XLS file

* 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 Distance (km) Climb/cruise/descent 125 250 232 463.048 Standard flight distances (nm) [1nm = 1.852 km] 500 926 750 1389 1000 1852 1500 2778 2000 3704 2500 4630 Fuel (kg) Flight total 1644.4 2497.3 3660.6 4705.0 6027.2 8332.0 10865.9 13441.3 LTO

Taxi out Take off Climb out Approach landing Taxi in

802.3

167.3 89.9 232.5 145.4 167.3

802.3

167.3 89.9 232.5 145.4 167.3

802.3

167.3 89.9 232.5 145.4 167.3

802.3

167.3 89.9 232.5 145.4 167.3

802.3

167.3 89.9 232.5 145.4 167.3

802.3

167.3 89.9 232.5 145.4 167.3

802.3

167.3 89.9 232.5 145.4 167.3

802.3

167.3 89.9 232.5 145.4 167.3

Climb/cruise/descent 842.1 1695.0 2858.3 3902.7 5224.9 7529.7 10063.6 12638.9 NOx (kg)

HC (g) EIHC (g/kg fuel) CO (g) EICO (g/kg fuel)

Flight total LTO

Taxi out Take off …

= 28.0 10.8

0.775 2.491

37.9 10.8

0.775 2.491

56.0 10.8

0.775 2.491

66.8 10.8

0.775 2.491

( Generic Aircraft Type , Flown Distance ) 83.9 10.8

0.775 2.491

CFMU Based Actual Route Length

109.4 10.8

0.775 2.491

141.1 10.8

0.775 2.491

169.9 10.8

0.775 2.491 (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

8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 600

Fuel Burn Dispersion

AO_FUEL_EGLL_LPPR AO_FUEL_EDDF_ESSA AO_FUEL_LKPR_UKBB 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 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000

MTOM

300000 350000 400000 450000

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 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 X 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 AC_TYPE 19.8% B744 8.3% B772 6.9% B763 6.2% A320 5.7% A343 4.9% B738 3.5% A332 3.5% B752 3.2% MD11 3.0% B742 2.7% A321 2.6% A319 2.4% B733 2.4% A333 1.9% A346 1.8% B734 1.5% MD82 1.4% B735 1.3% B737 1.3% A310 1.2% B762 ARR in TOP10 EU27 AP 3,409 4,557 1,809 20,506 2,626 1,656 883 1,425 647 159 12,654 27,822 7,230 565 600 6,684 19 12,670 2,268 267 402 ARR in OTHER AP MVTS 3,954 4,853 2,941 35,352 4,367 13,487 1,589 11,710 3,055 164 22,030 83,492 10,522 563 594 28,848 5,195 46,768 7,281 5,710 821 7,363 9,410 4,750 55,858 6,993 15,143 2,472 13,135 3,702 323 34,684 111,314 17,752 1,128 1,194 35,532 5,214 59,438 9,549 5,977 1,223 Sep-05 % Busy % Non Busy % Busy % Non Busy 46% 48% 38% 37% 38% 11% 36% 11% 17% 49% 36% 25% 41% 50% 50% 19% 0% 21% 24% 4% 33% 54% 52% 62% 63% 62% 89% 64% 89% 83% 51% 64% 75% 59% 50% 50% 81% 100% 79% 76% 96% 67% 43% 45% 35% 33% 46% 14% 29% 24% 33% 26% 37% 30% 23% 31% 50% 25% 31% 32% 17% 22% 22% 57% 55% 65% 67% 54% 86% 71% 76% 67% 74% 63% 70% 77% 69% 50% 75% 69% 68% 83% 78% 78% ARR in TOP10 EU27 AP ARR in OTHER AP Mvt 24,951 10,333 13,007 673 677 828 657 50,052 45,040 15,955 7,236 5,007 8,242 3,336 4,319 2,450 1,916 17,353 30,557 28,516 2,505 17,399 16,128 15,749 14,106 2,984 2,364 12,733 9,170 12,687 75,003 6,139 52,228 6,119 21,096 3,681 2,589 27,686 43,564 37,013 3,644 1,351 23,093 23,453 23,054 17,016 3,812 3,021

Airport Pairs from AO Sample

Confidence Intervals of Eurocontrol Fuel (and CO2) estimator (Based on a confidence level of 99.5%) Cluster SAMPLE EQV ANCAT REGRESSION CO 2 share 92.2% 2004 Confidence Interval 0.02% 4.6% 1.6% 1.5% 0.10% 0.29% 26.49% CO 2 share 92.6% 2005 Confidence Interval 0.02% 4.6% 1.5% 1.3% 0.10% 0.30% 25.36% CO 2 share 93.0% 2006 Confidence Interval 0.02% 4.8% 1.0% 1.2% 0.10% 0.33% 21.87% TOTAL 100.0%  2

err sample

  2

err eqv

0.41% 100.0%   2

err ancat

 0.34%  100.0%

err reg



type i

0.27%  2 •

A confidence level of 99.5% with a confidence interval of 1.5% means that by estimating the CO of 99.5% that the newly estimated CO 2 2 emissions using another data sample of the same size, there is a probability emissions are within

±

1.5% of the previously calculated CO 2 emissions

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 • [email protected]

• ETS-SF project manager • [email protected]

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