Quote: GTL provides environmental benefits as it is clean burning - it produces fewer particulates, thereby reducing sulphur and nitrate emissions - and provides up to 5% higher energy density per weight
Well that's one way of improving an aircraft's performance.....
5% more ability at a stroke.....
Has to be worth t just for this.
Scipio From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 590 posts, RR: 6 Reply 2, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1182 times:
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 1): Quote:
GTL provides environmental benefits as it is clean burning - it produces fewer particulates, thereby reducing sulphur and nitrate emissions - and provides up to 5% higher energy density per weight
Well that's one way of improving an aircraft's performance.....
5% more ability at a stroke.....
Has to be worth t just for this.
I also was struck by this. I vaguely remember having read some time ago that it was the inverse: that GTL had a lower energy density per weight.
What does a five percent higher energy density do to the range of an aircraft? It must add at least a few hundred NM to the range of a 777, A340, 787, or A350?
The questions are, of course:
(i) what does it cost to produce the stuff?
(ii) what is the energy and polution balance of the production process compared to that of kerosene?
(iii) are there any obstacles that would prevent widespread adoption?
and
(iv) does it make economic sense for other airlines to adopt GTL as their standard fuel? As far as I know, Qatar is a special case, because they have so much natural gas and can produce GTL pretty much on the spot. It does not immediately follow that everyone else has an incentive to adopt GTL as well.
If the benefits are large, governments may need to provide some incentives...
In any case, synthetic fuels are probably one of the most promising way forward to quickly reduce the environmental impact of air travel.
Bottom line, widespread use is not likely any time soon, beyond the output of the Pearl GTL project (which I presume is likely limited to a fixed proportion of the plant's total output). Large-scale investments would be needed in other GTL facilities to provide a sufficient supply for the global airline industry.
If this turns our to be successful, it could give Qatar Airways a competitive advantage.
Tim Clark may want to enquire about the possibility to use GTL on the DXB-LAX route...
One other question is one my mind: does the use of a more energy-intensive fuel require any reprogramming or specific input to FBW systems?
Scipio From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 590 posts, RR: 6 Reply 4, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1181 times:
Discussing the flight, today's Financial Times quotes one Jeff Gazzard of Aviation Environment Federation group as saying that the carbon footprint of GTL is actually higher than that of ordinary fuel.
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 31 posts, 
From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 590 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
