Comparison of Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) and Ground Power Unit (GPU) with Life Cycle Analysis in Ground Operations: A Case Study for Domestic Flight in Turkey
作者： Onder Altuntas , Ekici Selcuk , Gorkem Yalin , T. Hikmet Karakoc
DOI: 10.4028/WWW.SCIENTIFIC.NET/AMM.629.219
关键词:
摘要: In this study, the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) and Ground (GPU) that are required meet energy demand in ground operations of aircraft were compared terms their damages –human health (disability adjusted life years- DALYs), ecosystem quality (PDF.m2.yr) resources (MJ Surplus). These calculated with gate-to-gate method Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). This assessment was held on three main stages; capital investment, operation maintenance. SimaPro 7.2.4 used for calculation. Human Health Damages (HHDs) APU found to be (0.0557 -disability DALYs) 20.34 days/year while HHDs GPU as (0.0411 years-DALYs) 15 days/year. While Ecosystem Quality (EQDs) 103366.37 PDF.m2.yr, EQDs 82651.23 PDF.m2.yr. other words, although use gives rise loss 0.1 species –1 year, 1 square kilometer area, 0.083 species. With regards Resources (RDs), 62125 MJ surplus needed future extractions minerals fossil fuel considering APU, one hand 36002 GPU. As a result, effects human health, determined greater than 30 minute. The has less impact operations.
sci-hub.se 参考文章(12)
G. Rebitzer, T. Ekvall, R. Frischknecht, D. Hunkeler, G. Norris, T. Rydberg, W.-P. Schmidt, S. Suh, B.P. Weidema, D.W. Pennington, Life cycle assessment: Part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications Environment International. ,vol. 30, pp. 701- 720 ,(2004) , 10.1016/J.ENVINT.2003.11.005
Allan Seabridge, Ian Moir, Aircraft Systems: Mechanical, Electrical, and Avionics Subsystems Integration ,(1992)
Gyu-ho Kim, Bok-won Lee, Hongbing Lu, Jong-hyun Park, Failure analysis of an aircraft APU exhaust duct flange due to low cycle fatigue at high temperatures Engineering Failure Analysis. ,vol. 20, pp. 97- 104 ,(2012) , 10.1016/J.ENGFAILANAL.2011.11.003
Arnold Tukker, Life cycle assessment as a tool in environmental impact assessment Environmental Impact Assessment Review. ,vol. 20, pp. 435- 456 ,(2000) , 10.1016/S0195-9255(99)00045-1
Klaus Schäfer, Carsten Jahn, Peter Sturm, Bernhard Lechner, Michael Bacher, AIRCRAFT EMISSION MEASUREMENTS BY REMOTE SENSING METHODOLOGIES AT AIRPORTS Atmospheric Environment. ,vol. 37, pp. 5261- 5271 ,(2003) , 10.1016/J.ATMOSENV.2003.09.002
S. Göll, R.C. Samsun, R. Peters, Analysis and optimization of solid oxide fuel cell-based auxiliary power units using a generic zero-dimensional fuel cell model Journal of Power Sources. ,vol. 196, pp. 9500- 9509 ,(2011) , 10.1016/J.JPOWSOUR.2011.07.030
Adisa Azapagic, Life cycle Assessment and its Application to Process Selection, Design and Optimisation Chemical Engineering Journal. ,vol. 73, pp. 1- 21 ,(1999) , 10.1016/S1385-8947(99)00042-X
U KESGIN, Aircraft emissions at Turkish airports Energy. ,vol. 31, pp. 372- 384 ,(2006) , 10.1016/J.ENERGY.2005.01.012
Morten Winther, Uffe Kousgaard, Arne Oxbøl, Calculation of odour emissions from aircraft engines at Copenhagen Airport Science of The Total Environment. ,vol. 366, pp. 218- 232 ,(2006) , 10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2005.08.015
M. Mazaheri, G.R. Johnson, L. Morawska, An inventory of particle and gaseous emissions from large aircraft thrust engine operations at an airport Atmospheric Environment. ,vol. 45, pp. 3500- 3507 ,(2011) , 10.1016/J.ATMOSENV.2010.12.012