Over 2500 airports worldwide provide critical infrastructure that supports 4 billion annual passengers. To meet changes in capacity and post-COVID-19 passenger processing, airport infrastructure such as terminal buildings, airfields, and ground service equipment require substantial upgrades. Aviation accounts for 2.5% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but that estimate excludes airport construction and operation. Metrics that assess an airport’s sustainability, in addition to environmental impacts that are sometimes unaccounted for (e.g. water consumption), are necessary for a more complete environmental accounting of the entire aviation sector. This review synthesizes the current state of environmental sustainability metrics and methods (e.g. life-cycle assessment, Scope GHG emissions) for airports as identified in 108 peer-reviewed journal articles and technical reports. Articles are grouped according to six categories (Energy and Atmosphere, Comfort and Health, Water and Wastewater, Site and Habitat, Material and Resources, Multidimensional) of an existing airport sustainability assessment framework. A case study application of the framework is evaluated for its efficacy in yielding performance objectives. Research interest in airport environmental sustainability is steadily increasing, but there is ample need for more systematic assessment that accounts for a variety of emissions and regional variation. Prominent research themes include analyzing the GHG emissions from airfield pavements and energy management strategies for airport buildings. Research on water conservation, climate change resilience, and waste management is more limited, indicating that airport environmental accounting requires more analysis. A disconnect exists between research efforts and practices implemented by airports. Effective practices such as sourcing low-emission electricity and electrifying ground transportation and gate equipment can in the short term aid airports in moving towards sustainability goals. Future research must emphasize stakeholder involvement, life-cycle assessment, linking environmental impacts with operational outcomes, and global challenges (e.g. resilience, climate change adaptation, mitigation of infectious diseases).
There are hundreds of millions of kilometers of paved roads and many people live in proximity. Pollution from road transportation is a well-documented problem potentially leading to chronic health impacts. However, research on the raw material production, construction, operation, maintenance, and end-of-life phases of paved roads, and corresponding supply chains, is generally limited to energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. No previous research efforts on the life-cycle stages of pavements and road operation connect pollutant emission inventories to intake of inhaled pollutants and resulting damages to exposed populations. We have developed a first-of-its kind model quantifying human exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) emissions due to routine pavement resurfacing and vehicle operation. We utilize the Intervention Model Pollution (InMAP) Source-Receptor Matrix (ISRM) to calculate marginal changes in ground-level PM2.5 concentrations and resulting exposure intake from a spatially resolved primary and secondary PM2.5 emission precursors inventory. Under a scenario of annual road resurfacing practices within the San Francisco Bay Area in California (population: 7.5 million), resurfacing activities, material production and delivery (i.e., cement, concrete, aggregate, asphalt, bitumen), and fuel (i.e., gasoline, diesel) supply chains contribute to almost 65% of annual PM2.5 intake from the sources in the study domain. Exposure damages range from $170 to $190 million (2019 USD). Complete electrification of on-road mobile sources would reduce annual intake by 64%, but a sizable portion would remain from material supply chains, construction activities, and brake and tire wear. Future mitigation policies should be enacted equitably. Results show that people of color experience higher-than-average PM2.5 exposure disparities from the emission sources included in the study, particularly from material production.
The potential environmental and human health impacts associated with constructing and operating terminal buildings is explored for commercial airports in the United States. Research objectives are to quantify: (1) baseline and mitigated greenhouse gas (GHG) and criteria air pollutant (CAP) emissions; (2) operational costs; and (3) climate change damages from terminal building construction and materials, operational energy consumption, water consumption and wastewater generation, and solid waste generation. An Excel-based decision-support tool, Airport Terminal Environmental Support Tool (ATEST), has been created to allow stakeholders to conduct preliminary assessments of current baseline and potential mitigated impacts. Emissions are quantified using a life-cycle approach that accounts for cradle-to-grave effects. Climate change and human health indicators are characterized using EPA’s Tool for Reduction and Assessment of Chemical Impact (TRACI) factors. ATEST is applied to multiple case study airports— Reno/Tahoe International (RNO), Pittsburgh International (PIT), Newark Liberty International (EWR), Seattle-Tacoma International (SEA), San Francisco International (SFO), and Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International (ATL)—to demonstrate its scalability and capability to assess varying spatial factors. Across all airports, electricity mix and construction are significant in determining GHG and CAP emissions, respectively. A sensitivity analysis of GHG emissions for the SFO case study reveals that the electricity mix, amount of electricity consumed within the terminal, terminal gross area, and amount of compostables in the solid waste stream have the most impact on increasing annual GHG emissions. ATEST represents a crucial first step in helping stakeholders to make decisions that will lead to healthier, more sustainable airport terminals.
Aircraft at airport gates require power and air conditioning, provided by fossil fuel-combusting equipment, to maintain functionality and thermal comfort. We estimate the life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and economic implications from electrifying gate operations for 2354 commercial-traffic airports in the world. Here we show that complete electrification could yield GHG reductions of 63%–97% per gate operation relative to current practice, with greater reductions correlated with low-carbon electricity. Economic payback periods average just 1–2 years. Shifting to complete gate electrification could save a high-traffic airport an average of $5–6 million in annual climate economic damages relative to estimates of current practice. 10–12 million metric tons of annual GHG emissions are potentially saved if most airports in the world electrified gate operations, costing the 24 busiest global airports on average $25–30, U.S. airports $60–70, and non-U.S. airports $80–90 per metric ton of CO2 mitigated, in some cases comparable to carbon-market prices. Environmental benefits depend primarily upon electricity sources and operational parameters such as aircraft fleet composition.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.