(Photo: Continental Airlines)

From Green Right Now Reports

Houston-based Continental Airlines today announced a major increase in the amount of waste being recovered in its recycling programs following the company’s decision to put special emphasis on recycling projects.

As the United States prepares to observe “America Recycles Day” on Sunday, Continental said that so far in 2009, it has collected more than 4 million pounds of mixed recyclables from terminal operations at its Houston Bush Intercontinental, New York/Newark Liberty and Cleveland Hopkins hubs – an 800 percent year-over-year increase. Mixed recyclables include newspapers, cans, and plastic bottles contributed by co-workers and customers via designated “EcoSkies” recycling bins in hub airport terminals.

“While Continental has had a robust recycling program for more than a decade, we have made substantial enhancements to the program throughout 2008 and 2009, increasing recycling onboard our aircraft, at our airport terminals and at other supporting facilities, like our food service kitchens,” Leah Raney, Continental’s managing director of global environmental affairs, said in a statement. “We have had strong encouragement and support from our co-workers and customers, and we are excited to see such great results from our expanded recycling program.”

In 2008, Continental’s expanded inflight and flight kitchen recycling efforts resulted in the recovery of more than 462 tons pounds of plastic and aluminum, and more than 1,300 tons of cardboard. So far in 2009, Continental has more than doubled that amount, recovering more than 1,500 tons of plastic and aluminum, and more than 30,000 tons of cardboard.

Continental also works with contract caterers at the non-hub airports it serves to encourage recycling; today, more than 91 percent of Continental’s domestic caterers and more than 87 percent of its international caterers recycle.

Due to Continental’s focus on increasing its recycling efforts in 2009 alone, Continental has:

• Recycled enough aluminum to build 20 Boeing 777 airplanes
• Saved more than 584,300 trees
• Saved enough water to meet the monthly freshwater needs of 106,900 homes
• Saved enough energy to heat and cool more than 49,600 homes
• Reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 35,208 metric tons
• Reduced carbon footprint to landfills by saving 116,900 cubic yards of waste

Continental said proceeds from its recycling program are re-invested in the program or donated to We Care, a nonprofit charity organization that provides financial assistance to Continental employees in need.

Let’s be honest. Airplanes are big offenders when it comes to emissions and use of fossil fuels. Yet even though solutions to that problem are a ways off, some airlines are trying to green other aspects of their operations.

(Photo: Southwest Airlines)

The newest effort: Last week, Southwest Airlines flew its first “green plane,” a Boeing 737-700 loaded with environmentally conscious elements.

What makes it green?

• A recyclable carpet that also reduced labor and materials (because it was installed in sections).
• Two types of seat covers, both environmentally friendly. On one side of the aisle is “e-Leather” – made from recycled materials discarded by the leather industry and upgraded to composition, man-made leather. Across the aisle, seats are covered in IZIT Leather, a new alternative material. All the seats weigh about 2 pounds less than their predecessors.
• A lighter-weight canvas container for the life vest (replacing metal ones) that will also create more room under the seats.
• A lighter-weight fill for the back of the seats.

Reducing an airplane’s weight is a significant factor in emissions and fuel use. Marilee McInnis, a Southwest representative, said that their green plane is 519 pounds lighter than a comparable model outfitted the old way.

(Photo: Southwest Airlines)

In addition to the interior changes on the plane, Southwest is kicking off an effort to improve recycling onboard all its flights with a “co-mingled” system that will allow all recyclable items to go into a single container.

Examining how waste was handled took 18 months of study and work by five groups, including facilities maintenance workers and ground operations. “We had to implement co-mingled recycling on the ground first,” McInnis said.

Southwest may be the first airline to test “eco-friendly products” onboard an airplane, McInnis said.

There are other changes that Southwest is mulling. “We are looking at different windscreen (bulkheads) materials that are more durable and slightly lighter,” she said.

Southwest’s 35-member “Green Team” was an active participant in planning the revamped plane. That team tries to “put a green filter on the business decisions being made and to try these eco-friendly materials on one aircraft,” McInnis said. “We believe that environmental decisions also make good business sense and this plane is proof of that – it’s good for the bottom line, saving fuel and labor costs, but it is also good for the planet.”

The Green Team has representatives from all of Southwest’s major operating groups, and it meets every few weeks to look for ways to “green up” the company. “We also have a Green Ambassador Team composed of nearly 300 employees across our system who help implement . . .initiatives and promote environmental stewardship at work and home,” McInnis said.

What happens next? If the new products are comfortable and effective, Southwest will retrofit each plane as it comes up for refurbishing. “This would mean that after a decision is made, within four years our fleet of more than 500 aircraft would be completely installed with the new products,” she added.

McInnis has a personal stake in the project. She founded and leads Southwest’s Green Team. “I am personally super excited. A ‘green’ plane has been a hope for a long time, but there are many people at Southwest who . . . are excited about what this means for our company, relating to our commitment to the environment . . . .

“We are all thrilled to see this plane flying.”

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

From Green Right Now Reports

Houston Mayor Bill White and the Houston Airport System today announced that the City of Houston Department of Aviation has received $8.8 million in Federal Aviation Administration grants to install state-of-the-art equipment at George Bush Intercontinental Airport that is projected to reduce emissions by up to 60 percent.

The two grants awarded through the FAA’s Airport Improvement Program be used to purchase and install solar panels, heaters and chillers in the airport’s central operating plant, which controls the air conditioning and heating in the airport’s five terminals. The upgrades will replace an outdated gas-powered steam generation system currently in use.

“This meets two of our major goals as we continue to improve our airport system – operating more efficiently, and with significantly reduced emissions,” Mayor White said in a statement. “These benefits don’t stop at the end of the runways.”

One of the Bush Intercontinental grants is for $5 million from the FAA’s Voluntary Airport Low Emission program, a nationally competitive initiative designed to reduce airport ground emissions at commercial service airports located in regions of the country with higher than normal pollution levels. The project allows airports to use grants to finance low-emission vehicles, refueling and recharging stations, gate electrification and other airport air quality improvements.

To date, only nine airport operators in the U.S. have received VALE grants and the most recent grant to IAH is among the largest ever issued, Bush officials said. In order to expedite the project the system will be designed and built to order, beginning in 2010 and is scheduled for completion in 2011.

From Green Right Now Reports

King County Metro in Seattle has ordered up to 500 diesel-electric hybrid buses from Daimler Buses North America. The first year order includes 93 hybrids, and the transit service took options for up to 200 more buses.

Daimler says the first Orion VII diesel-electric hybrids will be delivered to Seattle beginning in mid-2010.

With the latest orders, Daimler Buses says it will have a total of more than 2,900 diesel-electric hybrid transit buses in revenue service or on order for various transit authorities throughout the U.S. and Canada – making it the largest hybrid provider worldwide.

“Daimler remains committed to promoting clean drive technologies which will shape future transportation,” Andreas Strecker, president and CEO of Daimler Buses North America, said in a statement. “These additional orders for the Orion VII diesel-electric hybrid bus further maintain Daimler’s position as the world’s hybrid bus leader – a position that we intend to retain through product excellence and continued innovative firsts.”

Eight Midwestern states have agreed to work toward the common goal of developing high speed rail in the Midwest, and hope to access $8 billion in earmarked federal dollars to fund the new services.

Governors from those states — Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio and Wisconsin — signed an agreement on Monday, saying they support each other in seeking federal dollars to build a high speed rail network. The hub of the network would be in the Windy City, and Chicago Mayor Richard Daley along with five of the governors attended the Midwest High Speed Rail Summit to solidify the agreement.

Chicago already serves as a hub for Amtrak and many freight lines. The new plan would bring high speed rail into the mix, which advocates say could transform and green transportation in the the Upper Midwest and Great Lakes regions.

(Photo: Midwest High Speed Rail Association)

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has allocated $8 billion for high speed rail. The Midwest group is likely to find competition for that money from California which has passed the initial bonds for a planned high speed rail that would run from Sacramento to San Diego.

Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin (D) told the group gathered on Monday that the Midwest wanted to be “in front of the rest of the nation” with it’s high speed proposal, according to news reports.

High speed passenger trains can go 110 mph to over 200 mph, cutting trip times in half or more on Midwestern routes between cities in neighboring states, such as Chicago to Minneapolis; Chicago to St. Louis; Chicago to Detroit. Routes between neighboring cities, like Milwaukee and Madison, could become an easy daily commute.

For more on routes envisioned for a high-speed Midwest network, see the Midwestern High Speed Rail Association website.

The Association of American Railroads, which represents freight trains and Amtrak, announced its support of the Midwest plan on Monday.  In an address to the summit, AAR President and CEO Edward R. Hamberger said the national rail network is “critical to meeting the mobility needs of the 21 century.”

“America’s freight railroads support the goal of increased passenger rail investment,” he said . “It’s good for our economy and the environment when more people and goods move faster by rail.”

Hamberger pointed out that the country’s privately owned freight rail network will provide the initial foundational infrastructure for high speed rail in America and noted that railroads are already greener than other types of transportation or freight shipping.

Railroads account for 43 percent of the freight moved between cities, more than trucks or any other type of transportation, and can move a ton of freight more than 400 miles on a single gallon of fuel, according to the AAR.

The skies are getting cleaner thanks to efforts made by Continental Airlines in partnership with Boeing, GE Aviation/CFM International, and Honeywell’s UOP. In early January of this year, Continental Airlines conducted the first biofuel demonstration flight by a commercial carrier in North American. Wednesday, Continental Airlines said it was “very pleased” in announcing its analysis of the flight.

The 90-minute test flight, taking off from, and then returning to, Houston, successfully completed many necessary flight operations. Engine 1 operated on 100 percent jet fuel, while Engine 2 of the Boeing 737-800 operated on a blend of 50 percent jet fuel and 50 percent biofuel. The biofuel was made from a combination of algae and jatropha plants, which do not impact food harvests, water resources or contribute to deforestation.

While reducing the amount of traditional jet fuel used was an accomplishment because it potentially reduces dependency on crude oil — the use of biofuel provided an even greater benefit in lessening air pollution.

“Overall life cycle greenhouse gas emissions related to using a biofuel like the one used on our demonstration flight are estimated to be reduced by 60 percent to 80 percent as compared to traditional jet fuel,” said Susannah Thurston, Corporate Communications Manager at Continental

“We are very pleased with the findings of the demonstration flight,” Thurston said Thursday.

As far as when travelers can expect biofuels to be used on commercial flights, Susan Gross with UOP Communications expects it to be another three years. UOP expects to receive the licensing rights at the end of this summer. It will then take an approximate two-and-a-half years until the fuel is produced in commercial quantities and widely used.

In regards to the cost of biofuel in comparison to traditional jet fuel, Susan Gross says “at this time, we are unable to predict the actual cost.” There are two large factors when computing the cost of the biofuel, 85% is directly related to the cost of the products used and 15% is the cost of refining the fuel. The refining cost will stay the same. For example, the two alternatives used in the Continental demonstration flight, algae oil and jatropha plants, are more expensive than crude oil at this time. UOP hopes that with increasing demand for alternative fuels, more plants will be harvested and the prices will be comparable.

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

From Green Right Now Reports

American Airlines Flight 63 will depart from Paris this Thursday morning, headed for Miami but — the airline hopes — it may land in history.

This flight aims to prove that trans-Atlantic flights, a source of significant global CO2 emissions, can be operated a bit greener and leaner.

Through the Atlantic Interoperability Initiative to Reduce Emissions (AIRE), American will be the first U.S. airline to test next-generation technology and procedures that will reduce carbon emissions and save fuel on trans-Atlantic routes. The testing will be conducted during a normally scheduled flight so American can obtain real-time benefits.

AIRE, a joint initiative of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the European Commission, and several airlines, is designed to speed up application of new technologies and operational procedures, which have a direct impact on reducing carbon emissions and noise pollution as well as conserving fuel. Part of the AIRE project includes gate-to-gate flight demonstrations to test the benefits of technologies that will be used with the FAA’s NextGen air traffic management system.

“It is critical that the aviation industry work with our Air Traffic Control partners to demonstrate the benefits of NextGen technology today,” Bob Reding, American’s Executive Vice President of Operations, said in a statement. “By implementing this technology as quickly as possible, we can make real and meaningful strides to reduce our impact on the environment, increase system capacity, and reduce air traffic delays.

“Utilizing NextGen technology is a crucial part of American’s overall environmental and fuel savings efforts. These efforts have already yielded fuel savings of more than 110 million gallons annually and reduced our carbon emissions by 2.3 billion pounds in 2008.”

Using a Boeing 767-300 aircraft, American Flight 63 will fly from Paris Charles De Gaulle and arrive at Miami International Airport at 1:55 p.m. EDT. The flight will conduct several fuel conservation measures, including single-engine taxi on departure and arrival, continuous climb out and descent, optimized routing over water, and a “tailored arrival.” Several of these endeavors are already key elements of Fuel Smart, American’s ongoing employee fuel conservation program. In 2009, American has a goal to save 120 million gallons of jet fuel and reduce its carbon emissions by 2.5 billion pounds.

Post-flight data analysis by the FAA, European Commission, and American will determine the carbon and fuel savings gained on the demonstration flight. The FAA and AA will then conduct a two-month trial in Miami to continue testing the next-generation technology and procedures.

While the vast majority of Americans are car bound, rising numbers are getting on board with public transit, commuter and light rail, trolleys and buses.

Those riding the rails and buses took 10.7 billion trips on public transportation in 2008, a 4 percent increase over the number of trips taken in 2007, according to a ridership report by the American Public Transportation Association.

During the same period, the number of vehicle miles traveled on roadways declined by 3.6 percent, the group reported, citing the U.S. Department of Transportation.

While the road miles driven could simply reflect fewer people commuting to work combined with lower driving levels resulting from last summer’s soaring gas prices, the APTA sees the increase in ridership as a continuation of a longer term trend.

“Public transportation use is up 38% percent since 1995, a figure that is almost triple the growth rate of the population (14 percent) and up substantially over the growth rate for the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) on our nation’s highways (21%) for that same period,” the association explained in a news statement released Monday.

In sheer numbers, the 2008 ridership was the greatest since 1956; though today’s higher population means the percentage of riders is still much less than it was at that time.

APTA president William W. Millar noted that those switching to public transit can save themselves more than $8,000 a year in gasoline and car maintenance costs, as well as helping lessen their carbon footprint.

“Now, more than ever, the value of public transportation is evident and the public has clearly demonstrated that they want and need more public transit services,” Millar said. “Public transportation is good for the economy, good for the environment and good for energy independence and now is the time for the federal government to increase its investment in public transportation.”

Light rail — which includes trolleys and modern street cars — saw the biggest percentage increases in ridership.

The city of Charlotte, with a light rail system that opened in late 2007, saw an 862 percent increase.

Charlotte was followed by New Orleans’ light rail system, still recovering from Hurricane Katrina, with an annual increase of 218 percent.

When the giant stimulus bill, expected to be approved by Congress, finally lumbers forth it will pour billions into projects that have been neglected, like highway renovations, and items that have recently bleeped onto the public radar screen, like clean energy incentives.

In some cases, money has been included (so far) for programs that have been debated and tabled for years. High speed rail, which is slated to get $8 billion, falls into that category.

You might ask yourself, what is high speed rail? And you’d be right to ask that question, because right now, in America, there is no high-speed rail. There’s a grand plan for a high-speed train that would run the length of California, where voters last fall approved the first bond money for the Sacramento to San Diego line. Once, years ago, people proposed high-speed rail as a way to better connect Dallas, Austin and Houston, a plan that met an early death in a state well-served by airlines and enamored of highways.

Today, in Chicago, the Midwest High Speed Rail Association (MHSRA) survives, clinging tenaciously to the concept that super-fast trains can be an environmental and social game-changer in the United States and that Chicago, a giant intersection of freight and passenger rail lines, would be an excellent nexus for a high speed rail system.

America is “beyond ready for this,” says Rick Harnish, executive director of the MHSRA. “Everywhere that decent train service has been built in the last 15 years has been tremendously successful.”

Even where rail has been badly designed – Harnish named a certain line in a large metropolitan area that placed stations at noisy freeway interchanges and chose a route that didn’t make complete sense – the trains are packed, he says.

Same for Amtrak, he added, which since gasoline prices began their jittery ways, has seen its ridership climb.

Considered to be underfunded by advocates, Amtrak has won passengers despite operating on a patchwork of rail that includes sharing lines with freight routes, which contributes to delays and constrains scheduling. It achieved record ridership in 2008, carrying 28.7 million passengers.

A good high-speed rail system, says Harnish, would lift rail out of its second-class existence as an alternative to planes and automobiles and make it competitive. Suddenly it would be affordable and convenient to take the train.

At speeds of 150 to 200 miles per hour, high-speed rail could deliver passengers from Chicago to Minneapolis, or from Chicago to St. Louis, or from Pittsburgh to New York City in under three hours, or even less than two hours.

Business and social trips that were onerous by car or required expensive airfare would be suddenly doable.

You’ve heard the saying, “it’s easy being green.” Maybe sometimes. But not always, and not if you’re the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) agency, which finds itself tangling with a green dilemma.

DART, which serves Dallas and 11 other cities in the region, has been planning to replace its aging bus fleet with 537 shiny new buses. It’s a great opportunity to go green with the entire fleet.

But after taking bids this fall and updating the research, the agency members are locked in debate over what type of buses are “cleaner” and which ones make the most sense environmentally and economically. The answer is not readily apparent. Like potential car buyers on the threshold of a dealership showroom, the bus-buying members of DART find themselves puzzling over the new technologies and old perceptions.

They are comparing diesel buses against those that run on compressed natural gas (CNG) and also considering the newest buses on the block, diesel-electric hybrids.

The hybrids are clean machines, with the fewest greenhouse gas emissions. They’re also the smoothest riding — and by far the most expensive. The CNG buses, meanwhile, have a reputation for cleaner emissions than traditional diesel buses. But compared to newer diesels, those emissions differences may have gone up in smoke.

The concept drawings here, provided by the CHSR Authority and graphic animators Newlands & Company, Inc., illustrate how the system would work and be meshed with existing infrastructure.

Building the rail lines would cost less than adding highways, according to the CHSR Authority — as suggested by this picture where the train could carry as many passengers as are riding in four lanes of highway traffic.

Despite the derailing economy, California voters got on board for reviving train service in their state November 4th by passing state proposition 1A — a $10 million bond to begin construction of a fully electric rail system running 220-mph trains between San Francisco’s Transbay Terminal and Union Station in Los Angeles.

The bond is a vote of confidence from the public and a down payment on the $40 billion-plus project that plans to run high-speed trains from Sacramento to San Diego. The plan’s boosters say it will create jobs, relieve air and highway congestion, and help the state meet its legislative mandate to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 30 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

Slideshow: California’s High-Speed Railway Plan

While detractors like the San Diego Union-Tribune’s editorial board said California’s budget woes make spending billions of dollars on a massive transportation project not only ill-advised, but “potentially the biggest boondoggle in California history”, proponents called the victory a landmark for high-speed rail nationwide.

Amtrak spokesperson Vernae Graham said Amtrak, which supports the plan, is likely to benefit from the high-speed rail project’s test track, which she said could increase Amtrak’s track speed through California’s Central Valley. In the past year, Amtrak has seen ridership grow more than 30 percent over the Capitol Corridor – one of its Northern California routes – and achieve double-digit growth on two other California routes that stand to connect up with the high-speed trains. Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner from Los Angeles to San Diego, the second most popular train in the entire Amtrak system, carries more than 2.5 million people a year.

According to the California High Speed Rail Authority’s business plan, the $33 billion cost of that San Francisco to Los Angeles backbone link will be shared among the State of California, the federal government, local and regional governments and private sector investors. The $10 billion down payment passed by voters to develop the system cannot be spent until matching federal, local and private funding is also secured.

It’s no surprise this plan could give fiscal conservatives, and even fiscal realists, pause in a state that just completed the longest state budget impasse in history. But on this one, former Massachusetts governor, presidential candidate and Amtrak board member Michael Dukakis told Wired Magazine, “people are way ahead of the government. They want a rail system that works.”

There’s no doubt electric rail is greener than just about any transportation alternative for the routes in question. “I don’t know of any transportation system which matches high-speed rail for reducing tainted emissions, improving air quality, and reducing dependence on foreign oil,” said Judge Quentin Kopp, chair of the California High Speed Rail Authority and chief spokesman of the campaign to pass the transportation bill.

But how quantifiably green is the project? Kopp said by the time the entire 800-mile system is completed, it will reduce the state’s reliance on fossil fuel by 12.7 million barrels of oil per year and reduce the state’s CO2 emissions by about 12 million pounds annually. And energy consultant Navigant Consulting Inc. said the train system could run with zero emissions if renewable-energy sources are used to power it. The system is expected to use 3,380 Gigawatt hours a year of energy to transport 94 million passengers by 2030. According to Navigant’s findings, generating this amount of energy from renewable sources is “well within the capabilities of the state.” This amount represents one percent of the state’s electrical load, or about three and a half days worth of electricity consumed throughout the state.

The California High-Speed Rail Authority’s business plan calculates high-speed trains will “alleviate the need to spend nearly $100 billion to build about 3,000 miles of new freeway plus five airport runways and 90 departure gates over the next two decades,” Quentin Kopp said.

High-speed rail could not only take a few polluting airliners’ out of California’s skies. It could also help airlines focus on what they do best: long-distance flights. That’s according to Robert Crandall, the Former Chairman, President and CEO of AMR Corp., the parent company of American Airlines. Crandall said in a speech to the Wings Club in June 2008 that short-haul flights of less than 300 miles, which are not generally profitable for airlines, could be readily replaced by high-speed rail. Crandall said high-speed rail and aviation could work together. “We could increase long-haul aviation capacity to and from our major cities by linking nearby airports to those cities with high-speed rail links,” Crandall said.