To further inform decisions regarding adoption of suitable best practices, the following work is recommended:
(1) Update information
Many technologies are currently in the developmental stage and there is not sufficient information available yet for quantitative assessments. There is a critical need for future work to better characterize the costs data. Information given here may be updated as new information becomes available.
(2) Revise or Develop Cost Estimates as New Data Become Available
In this work, costs could be assessed for only 13 best practices. However, potential adopters of best practices need cost data for all of the possible best practices that could be applied to their situation. Thus, there is a critical need for more cost information. Ongoing work is recommended to obtain or develop cost estimates for best practices for which costs are not reported here, as well as to update cost estimates reported here as new data become available.
(3) Evaluate key assumptions and other factors that influence the selection of best practices
The impact of variations of key assumptions, such as market penetration rates,
sensitivity analysis. It is also important to understand the impacts of other factors, such as: the applicability and practical barriers of new technologies; policies and regulations; governmental incentives, such as financial, data, and analytical support, and costs and benefits seen by operators versus overall national reductions.
(4) Develop tools to support decision making regarding best practices i. Develop a web-based decision tree:
A decision tree is helpful when faced with a complex multistage decision problem. Thus, a decision tree is a useful tool to help inform decision making regarding the choice of best practices. A decision tree involves a hierarchical cascade of questions to guide responsible and target parties toward promising best practices appropriate to their situations. Decision trees include choice nodes, uncertainty nodes, and valuation. Choice nodes represent discrete actions that can be taken by a decision maker. Uncertainty nodes represent the range of possible outcomes associated with a particular decision option.
Decisions can be made in a sequence, leading to a complete design for vehicle or modal technology and operations. The value of each alternative strategy can be quantified in a multiple attribute framework, including monetized attributes (e.g., cost savings) and non-monetized attributes (e.g., percentage reduction in energy use, emissions). The decision tree may be implemented in an interactive web-based format and could be publicly accessible.
ii. Develop a decision tool
Conditions of a specific responsible or target party, such as local fuel costs are critical considerations in choosing a best practice to adopt.
Therefore, there is a critical need to develop a decision support that will allow such parties to compare multiple best practices on the basis of representative and relevant important assumptions. For such a tool, a user should be able to enter his or her own data and assumptions.
REFERENCES
1. USEPA (2005), “Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2003, Final Version,” EPA 430-R-05-003, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, April.
2. FHWA (2005), “Assessing the Effects of Freight Movement on Air Quality at the National and Regional Level, Final Report,” Prepared by ICF Consulting for Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, April, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/freightaq/
(Accessed 09/10/05).
3. BTS (2005), “National Transportation Statistics 2005,” Bureau of Transportation Statistics of U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, June,
http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/pdf/entire.pdf (Accessed 09/10/05).
4. EIA (2006), “Annual Energy Outlook 2006,” DOE/EIA-0383(2006), Energy Information Administration, Washington, DC, February,
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383(2006).pdf (Accessed 06/10/06).
5. USEPA (2005), “SmartWay Transport Partnership,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, MI, http://www.epa.gov/smartway/ (Accessed 08/31/05).
6. Grant, M., K. See, and D. Downing (1998), “Transportation and Global Climate Change:
a Review and Analysis of the Literature, Final Report,” DOT-T-97-03, Prepared by Hagler Bailly, Inc. for Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, June.
7. FHWA (1999), “Greenhouse Gas Control Strategies: A Review of "Before-and-After"
Studies,” Prepared by Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc and Cambridge Systematics for Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, November 12.
8. USEPA (2005), “Clean Automotive Technology,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
9. EIA (2000), “Analysis of the Climate Change Technology Initiative: Fiscal Year 2001,”
SR/OIAF/2000-01, Energy Information Administration, Washington, DC, April, pp 68-79.
10. BSR (2005), “Clean Cargo: Sustainability in Freight Transport,” Business for Social Responsibility, San Francisco, CA, http://www.bsr.org/CSRResources/WGO/CC-GF/
(Accessed 09/10/05).
11. Ang-Olson, J. and W. Schroeer (2002), “Energy Efficiency Strategies for Freight Trucking:
Potential Impact on Fuel Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions,” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2002(1815):11-18.
12. Bedsworth, L.W. (2004), “Climate Control: Global Warming Solutions for California Cars,” Union of Concerned Scientists, April,
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/climate-control-clean-vehicles-greenhous e-gas-in-california.html (Accessed 09/10/05).
13. USEPA (2002), “Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2000,”
EPA 430-R-02-003, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., April 15.
14. Nishioka S. (2000), “Report for Plenary Discussion on Domestic Best Practices Addressing Climate Change in G8 Countries.” G8 Environmental Futures Forum 2000 on Domestic Best Practices Addressing Climate Change, Prepared for Environment Agency of Japan, Tokyo, Japan, http://www.env.go.jp/earth/g8_2000/forum/g8bp/index.html (Accessed 08/20/05).
15. BTS (2005), “Freight Transportation,” Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Washington, DC, http://www.bts.gov/programs/freight_transportation/ (Accessed 08/20/05).
16. AASHTO (2005) Freight Transportation Network, The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Washington, DC,
http://freight.transportation.org/ (Accessed 08/20/05).
17. FHWA (2003), “FHWA Vehicle Types,” Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC,
October 14, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/ohpi/vehclass.htm (Accessed 10/05/06).
18. US Census Bureau (2004), “2002 Economic Census: Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey-- Geographic Area Series-- United States: 2002,” EC02TV-US, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, December 2, http://www.census.gov/prod/ec02/ec02tv-us.pdf (Accessed 10/05/06).
19. National Academy of Sciences (2000), “Review of the U.S. Department of Energy's Heavy Vehicle Technologies Program,” National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.,
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/9989.html (Accessed 10/05/06).
20. Gaines, L., A. Vyas, and J.L. Anderson (2006), " Estimation of Fuel Use by Idling Commercial Trucks," Paper No. 06-2567, Prepared by Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL for the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, January 22-26.
21. Berkeley (2004), “Municipal Code: Title 14 Vehicles and Traffic: Chapter 14.56 Movement of Heavy Vehicles and Equipment: Section 14.56.080 Definitions and truck classification,” City of Berkeley, California,
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/bmc/berkeley_municipal_code/title_14/56/080.html (Accessed 10/5/06).
22. AAR (2005), “Railroads: The Vital Link to North America’s Economic Future:
Overviews of U.S. Freight Railroads,” Association of American Railroads, Washington, DC, February, http://www.aar.org/PubCommon/Documents/AboutTheIndustry/Overview.pdf (Accessed 09/14/05).
23. BTS (2002), “The Commodity Flow Survey,” Bureau of Transportation Statistics of U.S.
Department of Transportation, Washington, DC,
http://www.bts.gov/programs/commodity_flow_survey/methods_and_limitations/html/scop e_and_survey_methods.html (Accessed 8/20/05).
24. US Census Bureau (2004), “North American Industry Classification System --Revisions for 2002,” December 29, http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02 (Accessed 10/30/05).
25. Lutsey, N., C.-J. Brodrick, D. Sperling, and C. Oglesby (2004), “Heavy-Duty Truck Idling Characteristics: Results from a Nationwide Truck Survey,” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2004(1880):29-38.
26. Thomas L. (2004), "Truck Stop Electrification as a Long-Haul Idling Alternative," Prepared by Perrot ANTARES Group Inc., Landover, MD for the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, and presented at the 2004 Annual Meeting of the
Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, January 13,
http://www.epa.gov/smartway/documents/dewitt-study.pdf (Accessed 09/14/05).
27. Stodolsky, F., L. Gaines, and A. Vyas (2000), “Analysis of Technology Options to Reduce the Fuel Consumption of Idling Trucks,” ANL/ESD-43, Prepared by Energy Systems Division of Argonne National Laboratory for U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, June, http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/15.pdf (Accessed 03/05/06).
28. Chris Lindsey and Jeff Kim (2005), “Summary of Operations: Fleet Demonstrations of Shorepower Truck Electrified Parking on the I-87 Northway: Final Report,” NYSERDA Agreement Number 7209, Prepared by Antares Group Inc. and Shurepower l.L.C. for The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, Albany, NY, December, http://www.nyserda.org/publications/I87TSEDemonstrationReportDec05.pdf (Accessed 03/05/06).
29. ANTARES (2005), “Summary of Operations: Truck Stop Electrification Facilities on the New York State Thruway: Final Report,” NYSERDA Agreement Number 6282, Prepared by Antares Group Inc. for The New York State Energy Research and Development
Authority, Albany, NY, January,
http://www.nyserda.org/publications/I-90TSEDemonstrationReportJan05.pdf (Accessed 03/05/06).
30. The Computerworld Honors Program (2005), “Advanced Travel Center (Truck Stop) Electrification (ATE) System: 2005 Computerworld Honors Case Study,”
http://www.cwheroes.org/laureates/transportation/idleaire.pdf (Accessed 10/15/05).
31. California ARB (2004), “Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed
Rulemaking: Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor
Vehicle Idling,” California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA, July 22, http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/idling/isor.pdf (Accessed 04/05/06).
32. Vyas, A., C. Saricks and F. Stodosky (2002), “The Potential Effect of Future
Energy-Efficiency and Emissions-Improving Technologies on Fuel Consumption of Heavy Trucks,” ANL/ESD/02-4/, Argonne National laboratory, Argonne, IL, August,
http://www.ipd.anl.gov/anlpubs/2003/03/45815.pdf (Accessed 10/05/05).
33. California ARB (2004), “Draft Technology and Cost Assessment for Proposed Regulations to Reduce Vehicle Climate Change Emissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 1493,” California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA, April 1,
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/042004workshop/final-draft-4-17-04.pdf (Accessed 01/05/06).
34. Anderson, S.O., W. Atkinson, and J.A. Baker (2002), “Existing and Alternate Vehicle Air Conditioning (A/C) Systems,” Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases: Scientific Understanding, Control Options and Policy Aspects, Millpress: Rotterdam, Netherlands.
35. EU (2003), “Consultation Paper: How to Considerably Reduce Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Due to Mobile Air Conditioners,” Directorate-General Environment of European Commission, Brussels, 4 February.
36. California ARB (2004), “Mobile Air Conditioning Systems-Direct Emissions Technology Assessment,” California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA, August 6,
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/factsheets/august_tsd/hfc_direct_august.pdf (Accessed 06/05/06).
37. California ARB (2004), “Mobile Air Conditioning Systems-Indirect Emissions,” California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA, August 6,
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/factsheets/august_tsd/hfc_indirect_august.pdf (Accessed 06/05/06).
38. NESCCAF (2004), “Interim Report Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Light-Duty Vehicles,” Northeast States Center for a Clean Air Future, March,
http://www.clf.org/uploadedFiles/CLF/Programs/Clean_Energy_&_Climate_Change/Clima te_Protection/Clean_Cars/NESCCAF%20white%20paper.pdf (Accessed 04/05/06).
39. Wood, R. M., Bauer, S. X. S (2003),” Simple and Low-Cost Aerodynamic Drag Reduction Devices for Tractor-Trailer Trucks,” 2003-01-3377, Society of Automotive Engineers Technical Paper Series, November, http://www.solusinc.com/pdf/2003-01-3377.pdf (Accessed 08/01/06).
40. Saltzman, E.J. and Meyer, R.R. Jr. (1999), “A Reassessment of Heavy-Duty Truck Aerodynamic Design Features and Priorities,” NASA/TP-1999-206574, National Aeronautics and Space Administration and Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California, June, http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88628main_H-2283.pdf (Accessed 08/02/06).
41. Englar, R,J. (2004), “Pneumatic Heavy Vehicle Aerodynamic Drag Reduction, Safety Enhancement, and Performance Improvement,” The Aerodynamics of Heavy Vehicles:
Trucks, Buses, and Trains, Lecture Notes in Applied and Computational Mechanics,, Springer, Heidelberg, Germany, pp. 277-302.
42. John Toon (2001), “Flying Low-Drag Trucks: Aerodynamic Concepts and Controls for Aircraft Will Cut Fuel Use and Improve Control in Trucks,” Georgia Tech Research Institute, February 16, http://gtresearchnews.gatech.edu/reshor/rh-win01/trucks.html (Accessed 03/05/06).
43. LLNL (2003), “May 2003 Working Group Meeting on Heavy Vehicle Aerodynamic Drag:
Presentations and Summary of Comments and Conclusions,” Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, California, May 29-30,
http://www.llnl.gov/tid/lof/documents/pdf/245808.pdf (Accessed 06/15/06).
44. Coon, J.D. and K.D. Visser (2004), “Drag Reduction of a Tractor-Trailer Using Planar Boat Tail Plates,” The Aerodynamics of Heavy Vehicles: Trucks, Buses, and Trains, Lecture Notes in Applied and Computational Mechanics, Springer, Heidelberg, Germany, pp.
249-265.
45. USEPA (2004), “EPA Technical Bulletins: A Glance at Clean Freight Strategies:
Automatic Tire Inflation Systems,” EPA 420-F-04-010, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, MI, February,
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/documents/tireinflate.pdf (Accessed 10/05/06).
46. USEPA (2004), “EPA Technical Bulletins: A Glance at Clean Freight Strategies: Single Wide-Based Tires,” EPA 420-F-04-004, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, MI, February, http://www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/documents/supersingles.pdf (Accessed 10/05/06).
47. Michelin Corporate, “Michelin and the Environment,”
http://www.michelin.com/corporate/front/templates/affich.jsp?codeRubrique=88&lang=EN
&codePage=PAG_COMP_PNEU (Accessed 12/16/06).
48. Englar, R.J. (2000), “Development of Pneumatic Aerodynamic Devices to Improve the Performance, Economics, and Safety of Heavy Vehicles,” SAE/TPS-2000-01-2208, Prepared by Georgia Tech Research Institute for Government/Industry Meeting, Washington, DC, June 19,
http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/servlets/purl/770965-K88tPq/native/770965.pdf (Accessed 10/01/06).
49. Langer, T. (2004), “Energy Saving Through Increased Fuel Economy for Heavy-duty Trucks,” Prepared by American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy for the National Commission on Energy Policy, February 11,
http://report.energycommission.org/newfiles/Final_Report/III_Efficiency/III.4.a%20-%20H eavy-Duty%20Trucks.pdf (Accessed 10/20/05).
50. USEPA (2004), “EPA Technical Bulletins: A Glance at Clean Freight Strategies: Weight Reduction,” EPA 420-F-04-005, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, MI, February, http://www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/documents/weightreduction.pdf (Accessed 10/05/06).
51. Saricks, C., A.D. Vyas, F. Stodolsky, and J.D. Maples (2003), “Fuel Consumption of Heavy-Duty Trucks: Potential Effects of Future Technologies for Improving Energy Efficiency and Emissions,” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
Transportation Research Board, 2003, 1842:9-19.
52. USEPA (2004), “EPA Technical Bulletins: A Glance at Clean Freight Strategies:
Low-Viscosity Lubricants,” EPA 420-F-04-006, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
53. Bradley, R. (2000), “Technology Roadmap for the 21st Century Truck Program: A Government-Industry Research Partnership,” 21CT-001, Office of Heavy Vehicles Technologies of U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tennessee , December, http://www.osti.gov/fcvt/21stcenturytruck.pdf (Accessed 01/15/06).
54. DieselNet (2006), “Volvo unveils 2007 truck engines,” February 14, http://www.dieselnet.com/news/2006/02volvo.php (Accessed 11/27/06).
55. CAF, “Advances in Diesel Engine Technology,” Clean Air Fleet, http://www.cleanairfleets.org/advances.html (Accessed 11/26/06).
56. USDOE (2006), “FY 2005 Progress Report for Advanced Combustion Engine
Technologies,” Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office of FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C., January,
http://www.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/adv_engine_2005/2005_advanced_engin e.pdf (Accessed 09/09/06).
57. USDOT (2004), “FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies Program: Success Story – DOE’s “More Electric Truck” Could Revolutionize the Heavy-duty Trucking Industry,”
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office of FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C., October,
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/success/more_electric_truck_04.pdf (Accessed 10/5/06).
58. USEPA (2004), “EPA Technical Bulletins: A Glance at Clean Freight Strategies:
Drivers Training,” EPA 420-F-04-008, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, MI, February, http://www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/documents/drivertraining.pdf (Accessed 10/05/06).
59. Natural Resource Canada, “FleetSmart Profiles: Highway Trucking-Woodstock
Transport,” http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/transportation/business/documents/ (Accessed 9/12/05).
60. Gaines, L., F. Stodolsky, and R. Cuenca (1998), “Life-Cycle Analysis for Heavy Vehicles,”
Argonne National Laboratory, Prepared for Air & Waste Management Association Annual
Meeting, San Diego, California, June, http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/102.pdf (Accessed 12/15/06).
61. Pang, S.H. and H.C. Frey (2006), “Life Cycle Inventory Energy Use and Emissions for Biodiesel versus Petroleum Diesel Fuels,” North Carolina State University, presented at the 16th CRC On-Road Vehicle Emissions Workshop, San Diego, California, March 28-30.
62. Strong, C., C. Erickson and D. Shukla (2004), “Evaluation of Biodiesel Fuel: Literature Review,” FHWA/MT-04-001/8117-20, Prepared by Western Transportation Institute of Montana State University at Bozeman for Montana Department of Transportation, Helena, MT, January, http://www.coe.montana.edu/wti/wti/pdf/425244_Lit_Review.pdf (Accessed 02/10/06).
63. NBB (2004), “Report of the Biodiesel Workgroup,” Prepared by National Biodiesel Board for California’s Energy Commission, Sacramento, CA, October 12,
http://www.energy.ca.gov/afvs/documents/2004-10-12_BIODIESEL_GROUP.PDF (Accessed 02/13/06).
64. Tyson, K.S., J. Bozell, R. Wallace, E. Petersen, and L. Moens (2004); “Biomass Oil Analysis: Research Needs and Recommendations,” NREL/TP-510-34796, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado, June 20,
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/34796.pdf (Accessed 02/16/06).
65. EIA (2006), “Assumptions to the Annual Energy Outlook 2006: Transportation Demand Module,” DOE/EIA-0554(2006), Energy Information Administration, Washington, DC, March, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/assumption/pdf/transportation.pdf (Accessed 03/11/06).
66. Sheehan, J., V. Camobreco, J. Duffield, M. Graboski, and H. Shapouri (1998), “Life Cycle Inventory of Biodiesel and Petroleum Diesel for Use in an Urban Bus: Final Report,”
NREL/SR-580-24089, Prepared by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory for U.S.
Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, May.
67. Gaines, L. (2004), “Heavy Vehicle Idling: How to Reduce its Impacts,” Presented at
National Automotive Center, Rancho Mirage, CA, February 25–27, http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/296.pdf (Accessed 11/01/05).
68. USEPA (2004), “Case study: Chicago Locomotive Idle Reduction,” EPA420-R-04-003, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, March.
69. Montañez, J. and M. Mahler (2005), “Reducing Idling Locomotives Emissions,” North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
http://daq.state.nc.us/planning/reducing_idling_locomotive_emissions.ppt (Accessed 12/17/06).
70. USEPA (2006), “SmartWay Transport Partnership ― Idling Reduction: Alternatives,”
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., August 11th,
http://www.epa.gov/smartway/idlingalternatives.htm#Technology (Accessed 12/27/06).
71. Queen, R.B., “Green $ave$ Green: The Green Goat Hybrid Locomotive,” Mew Technologies Committee, Locomotive Maintenance Officers Association,
http://www.railpower.com/dl/greensavesgreen.pdf (Accessed 12/22/06).
72. Gaines, L. (2004), “Locomotive Idling,” Presented at National Idling Reduction Planning Conference, Sponsored by U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Department of Transportation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, Albany, NY, May 17-19,
http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/RR/312.pdf (Accessed 11/01/05).
73. Punwani, S.K. (2002), “Progress in Railroad Freight Car Engineering,” Rail Transportation 2002, RTD-Vol. 22, American Society of Mechanical Engineering, New York, NY, pp.
63-72.
74. Canadian Pacific Railway (2006), “CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY Ingenuity: 2006 corporate profile + fact book,”
http://www8.cpr.ca/cms/NR/rdonlyres/ecsepstmuey5gw2wzladjfb424vrtub5u3hdqzhotq26 wq6znvb2bf36got6u22udtst7qghxnj6gucq6ckleu57xbh/2006_Corporate_Profile_and_Fact _Book_d6_07_09_06.pdf (Accessed 12/10/06).
75. Judge, D. (2000), “Lubrication optimizes wheel-rail interface - railroad maintenance,”
February, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BFW/is_2_96/ai_60008643 (Accessed 12/18/06).
76. Judge, T. (2004), “A Smo-o-o-th Ride,” Railway Age, 205(12):35-37, December.
77. Environment Canada (2005), “Locomotive Emissions Monitoring Program 2004
(Environmental protections series: EPS 2/TS/19),” Transportation Division, Clean Air Directorate, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, December,
http://www.railcan.ca/documents/publications/1118/2006_04_12_LemReport2004_en.pdf (Accessed 02/05/06).
78. Fritz, S.G. (2004), “Evaluation of Biodiesel Fuel in an EMD GP38-2 Locomotive,”
NREL/SR-510-33416, Prepared by Southwest Research Institute for National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, April.
79. Dunn, R. (2003), “Biodiesel as a Locomotive Fuel in Canada,” TP 14106E, Prepared for Transportation Development Centre (TDC), Montreal, Quebec, Canada, and Energy Research and Development (PERD) of Natural Resources Canada, May,
http://www.tc.gc.ca/tdc/publication/pdf/14100/14106e.pdf (Accessed 02/05/06).
80. King, D. and I.A. Waitz (2005), “Assessment of the Effects of Operational Procedures and Derated Thrust on American Airlines B777 Emissions from London’s Heathrow and Gatwick Airports,” Report No. PARTNER-COE-2005-001, Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction, Sponsored by the Federal Aviation
Administration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Transport Canada, July 21. http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/partner/reports/drate-rpt.pdf (Accessed 8/12/07).
81. IPCC (1999), Aviation and the Global Atmosphere: A Special Report of IPCC Working Groups I and III, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
82. Reneaux, J. (2004), “Overview on Drag Reduction Technologies for Civil Transport Aircraft,” European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and
http://www.onera.fr/daap-en/drag-reduction/drag-reduction-technologies-for-civil-transport -aircraft-reneaux.pdf (Accessed 02/25/06).
83. Joslin, R.D. (1998), “Aircraft Laminar Flow Control,” Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, 30:1-29, January, http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev.fluid.30.1.1.
(Accessed 12/25/06).
84. Thomas, R.H., M.M. Choudhari, and R.D. Joslin (2002), “Flow and Noise Control:
Review Assessment of Future Directions,” NASA/TM-2002-211631, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, April 2002, http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20020045525_2002078986.pdf (Accessed 12/25/06).
85. Bajnath, R., B. Beasley, and M. Cavanaugh (2004), “Laminar Flow,” AOE 4124, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, March 29,
http://www.aoe.vt.edu/~mason/Mason_f/LaminarFlowS04.ppt (Accessed 12/25/06).
86. EUROCONTROL (2007), “Overall Concept and Architecture Activity (OCA): Glossary,”
the EUROCONTROL Organisation, Brussels, Belgium.
http://www.eurocontrol.int/oca/public/site_preferences/display_glossary_list.html (Accessed 8/14/07).
87. JPDO (2007a), “Concept of Operations for the Next Generation Air Transport System:
Version 2.0,” Joint Planning and Development Office, Washington, DC, June 13.
http://www.jpdo.gov/library/NextGen_v2.0.pdf (Accessed 8/14/07).
88. JPDO (2007b), “Making the NextGen Vision a Reality: 2006 Progress Report to the Next Generation Air Transportation System Integrated Plan,” Next Generation Air
Transportation System (NextGen), Joint Planning and Development Office, Washington, DC. http://www.jpdo.aero/pdf/2006_Progress_Report.pdf (Accessed 8/11/07).
89. Iglesias, A. (2001), “Reducing Fuel Burn through Improved Operational Measures,”
89. Iglesias, A. (2001), “Reducing Fuel Burn through Improved Operational Measures,”