Environmentalists and everyday air travelers alike are growing increasingly aware of the airline industry's greenhouse-gas problem. As demands for greener air travel grow, will technology come to the rescue of the jumbo jet?

Growing Pains

And that is the core of the greenhouse-gas problem: growth. The global market forecast from Airbus, Boeing's only major competitor, predicts that the number of passenger aircraft in service will more than double by 2025, from 12,676 at the end of 2005 to 27,307. Based on increased air traffic, the FAA estimates that aircraft greenhouse-gas emissions in the U.S. will increase by 60 percent in that time. (That might not be the worst part. Recent studies have concluded that water vapor from airplane contrails may have three to four times the warming impact of the carbon dioxide in the exhaust.) The extra demand means that just 4,500 of the airplanes currently in operation, about a third, will be retired; the other 8,200 will remain in service or be converted into freighter aircraft. Even biofuel blends, which appear to be at least a decade off, might not be enough to slow the increase in emissions.

Yet since air travel fuels the global economy as surely as it fuels global warming, few are calling for a hard limit on this growth. Thus technology will be asked to make quite a leap over the coming years, lest the skies grow unfriendly.

Middle Ground : Even though the blended-wing body is much more efficient than the typical cigar-and-stick design, no one wants to sit 50 feet from the nearest window.  the Boeing Company

Whatever Happened to the Blended Wing?

At the Future of flight, a museum just down the road from Boeing's hangar in Everett, Washington, I spoke with Jeanne Yu, a director of environmental performance at Boeing, about radical airplane designs that might reduce greenhouse emissions. The classic example is Boeing's X-48B Blended Wing Project, which turns the entire aircraft into a giant wing [see the gallery here]. The design reduces drag and accentuates lift, and a 2006 study from the Partner team at MIT and the University of Cambridge showed how the design would improve fuel efficiency by 23 percent. Yet Boeing has no commercial plans for the blended wing body; it's developing the craft exclusively for military use.

I ask why, and before Yu can answer, another museum visitor, an Englishman who works for Rolls-Royce, one of the manufacturers of the Dreamliner's engine, turns and says, "The biggest problem with blended-wing designs is that no one can see out a window." Yu agrees. The designs place passengers in what seems to be a small amphitheater. Air travelers want to be able to see out windows and have easy access to an exit. "It's part of human instinct," Yu says. "We need to know where we are and see where we are."

She thinks greenhouse-emission reductions will come from design improvements she calls "low-hanging fruit"—retrofitting existing airplanes with lighter landing gear or wing tips, for instance. As for other radical concepts, Boeing engineers "still haven't found anything better than this platform," she says, gesturing toward a Dreamliner nearby. But that doesn't mean they're going to stop looking. "We believe there are answers out there we don't know about."

Dennis Gaffney is a freelance writer based in Albany, New York. This is his first story for Popular Science.

3 Comments

astronaut41

from Liberal, Kansas

Dainel

Why not try and overcome the lack of windows by using cameras on the outside of the plane and video screens along the sides to look like windows

It does seem like the disappointment due to the lack of windows, could be offset with a killer personal entertainment system.

How do you get three pounds of carbon from 1 pound of jet fuel? I don’t have a background in chemistry, but that doesn’t seem right? Should it say 3lbs of CO2?

The was a great article. Unfortunately RVSM was not an implentation of the NEX-GEN. Most of the technology for NEX-GEN has not been developed or tested. The money for this program is going to be taken from air traffic controllers paychecks after they were slashed 30% in 2006 with the FAA imposed "contract:". Another source will be from increased user fees from general aviation and fuel taxes. Owners of general aviation aircraft will have to spend between $7000 and $8000 per aircraft for tihs equipment.

As far as I can see, the biggest problem with delays, is the ground infastructure. You can have as many aircraft in the air as you want, but you can only put so many aircraft on the runways, taxiways, and gates at a time. Delays are cause on the ground, not in the air.

Either way, as far as the FAA's track record goes, I will not be surprised to see the $22 billion rebaselined and not delivered on time or on budget.



Download Our iPhone App

Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone with full articles, images and offline viewing



Follow Us On Twitter

Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed



Become a Fan On Facebook

Share links with friends, comment on stories and more


December 2009: Best of What's New

In our December issue, Popular Science names the 100 best innovations of the year: bombproof wallpaper, self-parking cars, the fastest helicopter, and 97 more. Plus inventor profiles and videos.

Check out the best of what's new here.

Popular Science Photo Pool


Share your photos in the Pop Sci pool at www.flickr.com!
tags_sprite.png
POP_embeddedForm_cover_May09.jpg