Electric GSE

Going Electric - Who’s Going to Pay?

The jury’s no longer out on whether GSE needs to go electric.  Studies done by a wide-range of groups — from the Department of Energy to private companies — all show that electric is cheaper in the long-run, especially when the cost of fuel goes up, and electric vehicles are cheaper to maintain.  (And for cold weather operations, electric has a clear advantage.)  The environmental benefits are also beyond dispute at this point — the carbon footprint of electric GSE is significantly smaller than for gas- or diesel-powered vehicles. The big issues are infrastructure and paying for new equipment or converting old equipment.

So two things need to happen — the airports need to update their infrastructure to support electric GSE and GSE operators need to find the money to invest in new equipment or conversion of old equipment. GSE operators are not alone in wanting to go electric on the ramp. Airlines and airport operators will be under increasing pressure to reduce their carbon footprints.  One way to do that will be to reduce their emissions on the ground. So they are going to be pushing ground handlers to convert their vehicles so that they can get the credit for the resulting reduction in emissions.

Ground handling companies may end up getting squeezed to make investments in new or converted vehicles, even when it is not economically an opportune time. But before that happens, companies need to look into what opportunities there are for government grants. And while I haven’t seen any public utilities giving grants for GSE, that doesn’t mean that they can’t be pursuaded to do so. For example, the recently passed stimulus bill has $6.9 billion for state block grants for energy efficiency improvements and reduction of carbon emissions. Each state can spend this money broadly on projects covered by the legislation. GSE operators need to meet with their airport operators to see whether some of that money could be used for infrastructure improvements at their airports and purchases of electric GSE or GSE conversions. The Department of Energy and EPA have or have had grants for energy efficiency improvements which should be explored. The FAA’s  Airport Improvement Program grants may now or in the future be available for carbon reduction projects. While the focus may have been on delivery fleets and shuttle buses in the past, this doesn’t mean that airport operators can’t make the case for electric GSE at their airports.

I know that a number of airports hire dedicated personnel to pursue grant opportunities. GSE  operators need to make sure that their needs are covered in the pursuit of such grants.

This entry was posted on Monday, June 15th, 2009 at 9:57 am and is filed under John Goglia. You can follow any responses to this entry through theRSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

1.    Raghunandan Jagdish Says: 
June 15th, 2009 at 11:45 pm

Dear Goglia
You are right. there are two aspects to the “good deed” that goes towards going electric. One is the benifits and the other the cost. The benifit may be even reduced operational costs over time that may pay off for the equipment and also the reduction in the carbon footprint and the social awareness that this issue merits.

However the more concerning issue is the big one of Vitamin M - money! The costs are simply mind boggling for an operator to replace. the new ones being procured could go electric but simply exorting the ground handler to replace equipment is simply nonsensical. The handler would have invested into the existing equipment to run for a certain age before turning over into electric. The diesel engines are simply too expensive to do away with

Another alternative that could be looked at in cities where the infrastructure is existing is the conversion to CNG. the CNG is a clean gas. However the airport has to invest into dispensing stations for the CNG for this to be viable. India already has enforced CNG Catering Hi Lifts as well as tarmac coaches for the new equipment. They are also not looking to spread into other equipment. The advanctage stems from the fact that for a cost an exiting diesle engine can be converted into a gas vehicle and the cylinders ewill be placed accordingly. The other advantage is the cleanliness. it leaves out water! clean as it comes.

We hope the aviation authorities give great plicy thought rather than passing policy decisions that cannot be taken back

The author is a well known manufacturer of aviation GSE in India. http://www.nandan.co.in

 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4157 (20090615) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com