Tow the Line?

 

“Aircraft are noisy, you can smell the gas and they burn a ton of fuel… The most noticeable emissions are those planes emit on the ground.”                                                                                

Vince Howie, CEO of Aircraft Towing Systems World Wide, LLC (ATS)

As climate change wreaks havoc around the planet – even the recent big freeze as warmer
Artic air pushed cold air south into the United States – we need to use every bit of fossil fuel containment that we can. Some of the sources of greenhouse emissions are rather surprising. For example, we know that methane is buried under the permafrost and is 23 times heavier than carbon dioxide, but what many might not know is that cattle, because of their digestive systems are major contributors. Bill Gates, writing for his GatesNotes.com, tells us: “Cattle are a huge source of methane; in fact, if they were a country, they would be the third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases!” Who knew?

But smaller containment efforts can be implemented to help create an aggregate necessary reduction in greenhouse gasses – almost all a combination of the two carbon-based gasses noted above. And that includes air travel which ingests humongous amounts of fossil fuel to lift massively heavy aircraft into the air and keep them there. But until we can replace aviation fuel with a clean alternative, that is one segment that threatens to get worse. The ATS website tells us: “Aviation contributes about 2% of global greenhouse gas emissions—a percentage that the Air Transport Action Group predicts will increase without a switch to sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). But sustainable fuels aren’t the only way to attack aviation’s fuel use and emissions… A new system from Aircraft Towing Systems World Wide (ATS) tackles the problem from the ground up.” 

Elissaveta M. Brandon, writing for the January 28th Fast Company.com, took a deep dive into that colossal waste of jet fuel absorbed by big jets while taxiing to and from their ultimate runways. In particular, she addresses replacing big planes’ having to burn massive volumes of fossil fuel just to taxi, with an efficient underground electrical towing system, such as the ATS technology pictured above: “The average taxi time in the U.S. is between 16 and 27 minutes, which accounts for about 5% of a flight’s fuel consumption. A Boeing 747, for example, uses 1 ton of fuel during a 15-minute taxi. But a new towing system could bring that number closer to zero… It would cost a whopping $150 million to overhaul Chicago O’Hare, but it could save airlines almost $500 million in fuel costs…

“It works something like this: After the plane lands, the pilot drives the aircraft’s nosewheel (the landing wheel at the front of the plane) onto a tow dolly, where it’s secured in place. At this point, the engines can be turned off and the plane is ‘pulled’ along an underground rail system that’s set in 4-foot-deep channels. Think of it as a two-part system: Aboveground, the tow dolly connects to the nosewheel; belowground, it connects to an electric-powered pull car that travels along track channels, pulling the plane from the runway to the gate (or vice versa). It’s a big undertaking, but according to a 2019 report almost 10% of airplane emissions could be reduced by simply fixing taxiing inefficiencies.” The installation process, however, would be disruptive and require about a year for each large airport implementing the technology.

“In the meantime, ATS has two main competitors. TaxiBot—a human-operated vehicle that can tow a plane from the gate to the runway while its engines are idle—is currently used at Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport and at India’s Delhi International Airport. But Howie says once the vehicle has towed the plane to the runway, it has to return to the gate, potentially causing traffic on taxiways. Meanwhile, WheelTug requires an altogether new nosewheel, which would necessitate modifications on planes that would make them heavier and less fuel-efficient in the air.

“By comparison, ATS was designed to fit all kinds of planes, from commercial to military, and bring in considerable fuel savings, particularly for the Boeing 737 and Airbus 320, which make up 80% of commercial fleets. Most savings, however, would go to the airlines, so convincing both parties could prove tricky: The system benefits airlines more directly than airports, but airlines can’t use it without airports investing in the infrastructure.” FastCompany.com.

These technologies are investments that ultimately pay for themselves. They should be an easy sell to major carriers, who face rising and unpredictable fuel costs. And these upgrades are part of the massive job creation that our dealing pragmatically with the challenges of climate change. 

I’m Peter Dekom, and climate change requires huge policy and technology changes… and an aggregate of lots of small changes that generate what we so desperately need.