< PreviousICAO WORLD CIVIL AVIATION REPORTINTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION...................................................................................................................................................................80A New ICAO Aeroplane CO Emissions Standard2IntroductionFollowing six years of development, ICAO's Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) at its tenth meeting (CAEP/10) recommended an aeroplane Carbon Dioxide (CO) emissions certification Standard. This new 2standard is part of the ICAO “basket of measures” to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the air transport system, and it is the first global technology Standard for CO emissions for any sector with the aim of encouraging 2more fuel efficient technologies into aeroplane designs.This technology-based approach is similar to the current ICAO Annex 16 Standards on engine emissions for local air quality (Volume II) and aircraft noise (Volume I). The recommended CO Standard has been developed at the 2aeroplane level, and therefore has considered all technologies associated with the aeroplane design (e.g. propulsion, aerodynamics and structures). Once adopted by the ICAO Council, the aeroplane CO emissions 2certification Standard will be published as a new Annex 16, Volume III.The framework for the CO Standard consists of a 2certification requirement and regulatory limit, as shown in Figure 1, and the work to develop the CO Standard was 2divided into two phases. Phase 1, which was completed at the ninth meeting of the CAEP (CAEP/9) in February 2013, resulted in the approval of some of the details regarding the applicability of the Standard, the CO Metric System 2and the development of a CO Standard certification 2requirement. Phase 2 involved the development of the regulatory limit lines and the applicability requirements such as scope and date.In the ICAO Environmental Report 2013, a summary was provided of the work that had been completed during Phase 1. This new article provides an overview of both phases over the past six years, the lead up to the CAEP/10 meeting and the recommendation from the CAEP/10 meeting on the first ICAO aeroplane CO emissions 2certification Standard. Phase 1 work- The Development of a certification requirement1.1 An important Phase 1 milestone in the development of the CO Standard was the agreement on a CO metric 22system to measure the aeroplane fuel burn, and therefore CO emissions, performance. The intent of this 2CO metric system is to equitably reward advances in 2aeroplane technologies (e.g. propulsion, aerodynamics and structures) that contribute to reductions in aeroplane CO emissions, and differentiate between 2aeroplanes with different generations of these technologies. As well as accommodating the full range of technologies and designs which manufacturers can employ to reduce CO emissions, the CO metric system 22has been designed to be common across different aeroplane categories, regardless of aeroplane purpose or capability. An overview of the CO Metric System can be 2found in Figure 2.Figure 1. The framework and development phases of the CO Standard.2GENERAL CO STANDARD APPLICABILITY SCOPE 2FOR AEROPLANE CATEGORIES• Subsonic Jet Aeroplanes Over 5700 kg • Propeller-Driven Aeroplanes Over 8618 kg1.2 To establish the fuel efficiency of the aeroplane, the CO metric system uses multiple test points to represent 2the fuel burn performance of an aeroplane type during the cruise phase of flight. Specifically, there are three averaged (i.e. equally weighted) points representing Figure 2. An overview of the CO Metric System2.............................................................................................................................................................................ICAO WORLD CIVIL AVIATION REPORTINTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION.....................................................................................................................................................................81aeroplane high, middle and low gross masses, which are calculated as a function of Maximum Take-Off Mass (MTOM). Each of these represents an aeroplane cruise gross mass seen regularly in service. The objective of using three gross mass cruise points is to make the evaluation of fuel burn performance more relevant to day-to-day aeroplane operations.1.3 The metric system is based on the inverse of Specific Air Range (i.e. 1/SAR), where SAR represents the distance an aeroplane travels in the cruise flight phase per unit of fuel consumed. In some aeroplane designs, there are instances where changes in aeroplane size may not reflect changes in aeroplane weight, for example when an aeroplane is a stretched version of an existing aeroplane design. To better account for such instances, not to mention the wide variety of aeroplane types and the technologies they employ, an adjustment factor was used to represent aeroplane size. This is defined as the Reference Geometric Factor (RGF), and it is a measure of aeroplane cabin size based on a two-dimensional projection of the cabin. This improved the performance of the CO metric system, making it fairer and better able to 2account for different aeroplane type designs.1.4 The overall capabilities of the aeroplane design is represented in the CO metric system by the certified 2MTOM. This accounts for the majority of aeroplane design features which allow it to meet market demand.1.5 Based on the CO metric system, CAEP developed 2procedures for the certification requirement including, inter alia, the flight test and measurement conditions; the measurement of SAR; corrections to reference conditions; and the definition of the RGF used in the CO 2emissions metric. CAEP utilised manufacturers’ existing practices in measuring aeroplane fuel burn in order to understand how current practices could be used and built upon for the new Standard. Based on this information, the ICAO Annex 16 Volume III CO Standard 2certification requirement was developed; and, pending some future work, this was initially approved by the CAEP/9 meeting in February 2013. This was a crucial component in the CO Standard development and allowed 2CAEP to move onto Phase 2 of the work.Phase 2 work – Setting the regulatory limitICAO environmental Standards are designed to be environmentally effective, technically feasible, economically reasonable, while considering environmental interdependencies. These four tenets of CAEP guided Phase 2 work, which involved carrying out a comprehensive assessment of the costs and benefits of all the options which could be selected to form the CO 2Standard. This involved defining an analytical space within which CAEP would work to investigate the options available. This included the development of options for the regulatory limit line, applicability options and dates, and all the associated assumptions which allowed the CAEP working groups to perform the cost-effectiveness analysis required to make an informed decision on the Standard at the CAEP/10 meeting. The foundation of the CAEP/10 recommendation on the CO emissions 2Standard was supported by this significant data informed process, involving input from ICAO member states and stakeholders. The modelling exercise involved several analytical tools, including fleet evolution modelling, environmental benefits, recurring costs, non-recurring costs, costs per metric tonne of CO avoided, certification 2costs, applicability scenarios and various sensitivity studies to inform the decision-making process. This work allowed CAEP to conduct an analysis, with the aim of providing a reasonable assessment of the economic costs and environmental benefits for a potential CO 2standard in comparison with a “no action” baseline.CHOICES CONSIDERED DURING THE CO STANDARD 2WORK• Ten Regulatory Limit Lines;• Treatment of aeroplanes above and below 60 tonnes;• New Type and InProduction applicability;• Production cut-off; and • Applicability dates of 2020, 2023, 2025 and 2028.A full overview of the work and input into the CAEP/10 meeting can be found in the Report of CAEP/10, ICAO Doc 10069.The decision on the CO Standard 2Taking into account all the analysis and data, the CAEP/10 meeting was able to make a recommendation on the first ICAO aeroplane CO Standard.2The Standard will apply to subsonic jet and turboprop aeroplanes that are new type (NT) designs from 2020. It will also apply to in-production (InP) aeroplanes from 2023 that are modified and meet a specific change criteria. This is subsequently followed up by a production .............................................................................................................................................................................ICAO WORLD CIVIL AVIATION REPORTINTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION...................................................................................................................................................................82cut-off in 2028 which means that InP aeroplanes that do not meet the standard can no longer be produced beyond 2028 unless the designs are modified to comply with the Standard. Figure 3 shows an overview of the CO 2Standard regulatory limit lines for both NT and InP CO 2Standards.The CO Standard covers a broad range of aeroplane 2masses and types and is especially stringent where it will have the greatest impact: for larger aeroplane types with an MTOM of greater than 60 tonnes. CAEP considers technical feasibility very carefully during the development of environmental standards, and as such, the decision at CAEP10 recognised the fact that the larger aeroplane designs have access to the broadest range of CO emissions reduction technologies. This is less so for 2aeroplanes below 60 tonnes where the standard provides additional margin for a sector. This is particularly recognised for aeroplanes of MTOMs less than 60 tonnes and with fewer than 19 seats maximum passenger seating capacity, where for new aeroplane type designs the applicability date of the standard is 2023. The contribution of the CO Standard to reducing CO 22emissions from international aviationIt is complex to fully understand the impact of the CO 2Standard due to potential unknown market driven responses to the regulation, and the fact that the CO Standard 2cost-effectiveness analysis was a comparative investigation of regulatory limit lines. However, it is clear that the new standard will have direct effects by increasing the importance of fuel efficiency in the design process such that an aeroplane type not just meets the regulatory limit but also has good relative product positioning in terms of a margin to the limit.The Aeroplane CO emissions certification Standard is 2currently going through the adoption process within ICAO. This has involved a review for the Air Navigation Commission (ANC), a consultation process with all the 191 ICAO Member States, and on 3 March 2017, the Standard was adopted by the ICAO Council. Following this, the First Edition of Annex 16, Volume III should become applicable during the latter part of 2017.ReferencesICAO Circular 337 - CAEP/9 agreed certification requirement for the aeroplane CO2 emissions standardICAO Doc 10069 - Report of CAEP/10ICAO Environment Report, Destination Green, 2013ICAO Environment Report, On board a Sustainable Future, 2016A WIDE COVERAGE OF AEROPLANESThe standard is most stringent for larger aeroplanes with an MTOM of greater than 60 tonnes. This accounts for more than 90% of international aviation emissions..............................................................................................................................................................................ICAO WORLD CIVIL AVIATION REPORTINTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION.....................................................................................................................................................................83.............................................................................................................................................................................Land Use and Environmental ManagementINTRODUCTIONIn recent years, there has been increased public concern regarding the protection of the natural environment from the impact of transportation, and consequently, a growing emphasis on the need to employ effective measures to minimize such impacts. Since pollution may be generated within an airport as well as within the area surrounding it, environmental management practices should be applied at the airport and its environs.The need for land-use planning in the vicinity of an airport was recognized in the early history of civil aviation and focused on use and control of land. The objectives of these measures were to ensure the safety of people in the air and on the ground and to maintain efficient airport operations. In recent years, there has been increased public concern regarding the protection of the natural environment from the impacts of transportation.To lessen local and global impacts, it is important that the civil aviation industry endeavors to manage environmental impacts. This includes operational impacts such as emissions, noise, and the management of solid and hazardous wastes.BACKGROUNDICAO Doc 9184 Airport Planning Manual is focused on master planning at an airport. The Airport Planning Manual Part 1 (APM Part 1) is primarily focused on operational safety and efficiency. The ICAO Doc 9184 Airport Planning Manual Part 2 – Land Use and Environmental Management (APM, Part 2) is focused on land use and environmental management on and around an airport. The purpose of APM, Part 2 is to provide effective practices at an airport to reduce the potential environmental effects caused by the airport and its operations. The scope of APM, Part 2 does include information on impacts from ground sources, but does not focus on reducing the impacts of aircraft in-flight. The recommendations and considerations for airport planning from APM, Part 1 should always be considered in cooperation with the information provided in APM, Part 2 to manage environmental impacts.The APM Part 2 was released in the early 1980s as a guidance document for new airports. Over time, it was recognized as a valuable tool for existing and expanding airports. Since 1996, it has been continually updated by the ICAO Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) Working Group 2 “Airports and Operations” to reflect new and emerging knowledge in the area of environmental management and land-use planning. An update in 2016 expanded the information related to recommended infrastructure decisions to facilitate environmentally-friendly airport design and management.The following sections outline the essential areas of the APM, Part 2:!Environmental Impacts Associated with Aviation Activities!Environmental Management Measures and Considerations!Infrastructure for Environmental Management!Land Use!Land-Use Planning!Land-Use Administration!Heritage Considerations!Climate Change Resilience and AdaptationGENERALThe compatibility of an airport with its environs can be achieved by proper planning of the airport, management of pollution-generating sources, and land-use planning of the area surrounding the airport. The aim is to provide the best possible conditions for the needs of the airport, the community in the surrounding area, and the ecology of the environment. The location, size and configuration of the airport needs to be coordinated with patterns of residential, industrial, commercial, agricultural and other land uses of the area, taking into account the effects of the airport on people, flora, fauna, the atmosphere, water courses, air quality, soil pollution, rural areas and other facets of the environment.To the extent that safety and operational considerations permit a choice, decisions on runway alignment and other airport development should take into account their potential effects on the environment in order to prevent or minimize environmental conflicts. In effect, “land-use management” is a term which describes only a portion of the total planning process, and even highly innovative management practices can have little impact unless they are imposed within the context of sound policies and careful planning. “Land-use planning” or “planning for compatible land uses which takes into account the needs ICAO WORLD CIVIL AVIATION REPORTINTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION...................................................................................................................................................................84of airport development” more adequately describes the process of achieving an optimum relationship between an airport and its environs.Pollution occurring in and around the airport can have an effect on human health and the ecology of a broad area surrounding an airport. Efforts should be made towards pollution prevention in the first instance and impact management in the second instance. Environmental management thus provides a means of either decreasing pollution at the source or reducing the potential for negative environmental impacts. Environmental management includes items such as air and water quality guidelines, aircraft engine or ground-sourced noise limits, waste management plans, environmental emergency plans, and environmental management plans. By planning for intended growth and development, estimations can be made about the type and extent of potential future environmental impacts to allow for a more integrated approach to environmental management.ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH AVIATION ACTIVITESAPM Part 2 identifies most of the major environmental issues that may be directly associated with air transport and civil aviation in particular. The environmental issues described focus on land use, soil erosion, impacts on surface and subsurface water drainage, and the impact on flora and fauna. For each environmental issue presented, a brief description is provided, including a summary of past and present ICAO activities aimed at mitigating the issue, as well as comments on the relevant activities of other organizations, whenever pertinent.ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT MEASURES AND CONSIDERATIONSImplementation of environmental management measures at airports and surrounding areas is in the best interest of the airport operators, the community and the natural environment. These measures may include compliance with international standards and national and/or local regulations. They are implemented by airports, often in collaboration with airport stakeholders. When planning infrastructure development, an airport operator should consider how environmental management will be integrated to reduce the impacts on operations and the environment.Some measures limit pollution at its source, while others reduce its effect on communities and ecosystems. An Environmental Management System (EMS) is seen as the best method to incorporate environmental management into all levels of corporate operations and decision making processes. A well, planned EMS at an airport can help to manage environmental impacts.Airport operators can reduce the environmental impacts of their operations by incorporating environmental management plans and procedures with land-use planning. Several important components of environmental management at an airport are noise mitigation, emissions reduction and pollution prevention. Pollution prevention includes the use of materials, processes and practices that reduce or eliminate the creation of pollutants and wastes at the source. Adequate pollution prevention pre-empts the need for remedial actions later.INFRASTRUCTURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENTAPM Part 2 provides high-level guidance material on the infrastructure that can be included in an airport design that can enable and facilitate environmental management by the airport operator. LAND USELand use around airports can impact community exposure to the environmental effects of airport operations. As guidance on proper airport and land-use compatibility planning, APM Part 2 presents a variety of possible land uses with a broad appreciation of their relative sensitivity to the operational safety of aircraft and airport operations, local third party risk and aircraft noise exposure, and describes their compatibility with aircraft noise and airport operations.LAND-USE PLANNINGLand-use planning is an effective means to ensure that the activities nearby airports are compatible with aviation activities. Its main goal is to minimize the population affected by aircraft noise by introducing land-use planning measures, such as land-use zoning around airports. Compatible land-use planning and management based on appropriate “planning” noise contours, rather than “current” noise contours, can prevent encroachment of residential development at airports where future aircraft noise levels are projected to increase. .............................................................................................................................................................................ICAO WORLD CIVIL AVIATION REPORTINTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION.....................................................................................................................................................................85ICAO Doc 9829 Guidance on the Balanced Approach to Aircraft Noise Management provides guidance on alleviating the problem of noise in the vicinity of airports. This Balanced Approach recommends consideration of four noise management pillars, one of which is land-use planning. There are substantial benefits to be gained from the correct application of land-use planning techniques in the development of airports. While these benefits should not be overstated, more attention should be given to proper land-use planning as a tool with the main objective being to minimize the population affected by aircraft noise. Land-use planning benefits may take time to be fully realized and should be implemented as soon as noise problems are foreseen.LAND-USE ADMINISTRATIONNoise exposure is not the only factor to be taken into account for the purpose of land-use management in the vicinity of airports. It is recognized that economic factors are involved in land-use choices. Ideally, land-use decisions around airports would try to find a compatible balance between the interests in the land and the aeronautical use of the airport. For this reason, the authorities, local or central, have an important part to play in ensuring that aircraft noise exposure is taken into account when planning land-use in the vicinity of airports and that the ensuing plans are implemented.There are many techniques for regulating development or bringing about conversion or modification of existing land-uses to achieve greater compatibility between the airport and its environs. Some of these may be controls, such as zoning or building and housing codes; other methods influence development through acquisition or taxation. The desired goal is for effective land-use planning based on objective criteria to minimize the amount of noise-sensitive development close to airports, while allowing for other productive uses of the land.HERITAGE CONSIDERATIONSAirports may be located within or close to natural or cultural environments that have aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or national significance which States may wish to protect for future generations. Airports may also include buildings and artefacts on site which are deemed to have heritage values. It is important, therefore, to consider in the planning of airport infrastructure whether any development proposal may impact upon heritage elements at the airport and how such impacts may be mitigated.CLIMATE CHANGE RESILIENCE AND ADAPTATIONThe level of greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere is understood to be having an effect on climate and will continue to do so into the future. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “Climate change is projected to amplify existing climate-related risks and create new risks for natural and human systems”. Going forward, despite States’ agreement to limit global warming through the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the effects of a changing climate on human activities are expected to intensify; this presents risks and challenges for all sectors of society including the transportation sector. APM Part 2 identifies possible impacts, risks and vulnerabilities and provides examples of effective adaptation and resilience practices to reduce projected climate change impacts on airports. Airports are often classified as critical infrastructure by their States and regions as they facilitate mobility, economic growth, and provide essential services during disaster and emergency recovery situations. Moreover, any disruption that results in a loss of capacity at one airport can have a ripple effect throughout the wider network. In this context, it is important to develop resiliency against the projected effects of climate change, as they may negatively impact service continuity for aircraft and airport operations. The APM Part 2 provides guidance on how to address potential climate impacts in order to build more climate resilient infrastructure. This article has been extracted from the ICAO Environmental Report - 2016..............................................................................................................................................................................Aviation Safety ICAO WORLD CIVIL AVIATION REPORTINTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION.....................................................................................................................................................................89In 2015, the year-over-year accident statistics indicate a decrease in the overall number of accidents as well as the accident rate. Compared to 2014, the number of accidents (as defined in Annex 13 – Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation involving aircraft with a certificated maximum take-off weight (MTOW) of over 5700 kg and reviewed by the ICAO Safety Indicators Study Group (SISG) decreased by 5 per cent in 2015 to 92. Furthermore, the global accident rate involving scheduled commercial operations decreased by 7 per cent, from 3.0 accidents per million departures in 2014 to 2.8 accidents per million departures in 2015.The 474 fatalities in 2015 represent a substantial decrease from the 904 fatalities in 2014, despite the tragic events of the Germanwings and Metrojet accidents caused by acts of unlawful interference which resulted in significant loss of life. The number of fatal accidents decreased in 2015 to just 6, the lowest in the past five years.Aircraft Accidents Involving Scheduled Commercial Flights - 2015.............................................................................................................................................................................Global accident rates (accidents per million departures)Accident records: 2011-2015 scheduled commercial flightsNext >