Following the completion of the 1st phase of the RAAK PRO project Aviation Safety Metrics, during which the researchers mapped the current practice in safety metrics and explored the validity of monotonic relationships of SMS, activity and demographic metrics with safety outcomes, this report presents the concept for the design of new metrics. Those metrics will be based on the hypothesis that the greater the gap between Work-As-Imagined and Work-As-Done the lower the safety performance, and they correspond to a set of references from academic literature, challenges in professional practice,depiction of system structure, and consideration of “soft” organizational aspects. Along with the design of the alternative metrics, this report explains the respective concepts referred in the literature but excluded from the current research, as well as the process and possible difficulties in ensuring various validity types of the new metrics.
Although reengineering is strategically advantageous fororganisations in order to keep functional and sustainable, safety must remain apriority and respective efforts need to be maintained. This paper suggeststhe combination of soft system methodology (SSM) and Pareto analysison the scope of safety management performance evaluation, and presents theresults of a survey, which was conducted in order to assess the effectiveness,efficacy and ethicality of the individual components of an organisation’s safetyprogram. The research employed quantitative and qualitative data and ensureda broad representation of functional managers and safety professionals, whocollectively hold the responsibility for planning, implementing and monitoringsafety practices. The results showed that SSM can support the assessment ofsafety management performance by revealing weaknesses of safety initiatives,and Pareto analysis can underwrite the prioritisation of the remedies required.The specific methodology might be adapted by any organisation that requires adeep evaluation of its safety management performance, seeks to uncover themechanisms that affect such performance, and, under limited resources, needsto focus on the most influential deficiencies.
Emissions from aviation will continue to increase in the future, in contradiction of global climate policy objectives. Yet, airlines and airline organisations suggest that aviation will become climatically sustainable. This paper investigates this paradox by reviewing fuel-efficiency gains since the 1960s in comparison to aviation growth, and by linking these results to technology discourses, based on a two-tiered approach tracing technology-focused discourses over 20 years (1994-2013). Findings indicate that a wide range of solutions to growing emissions from aviation have been presented by industry, hyped in global media, and subsequently vanished to be replaced by new technology discourses. Redundant discourses often linger in the public domain, where they continue to be associated with industry aspirations of 'sustainable aviation' and 'zero-emission flight'. The paper highlights and discusses a number of technology discourses that constitute 'technology myths', and the role these 'myths' may be playing in the enduring but flawed promise of sustainable aviation. We conclude that technology myths require policy-makers to interpret and take into account technical uncertainty, which may result in inaction that continues to delay much needed progress in climate policy for aviation.
LINK
Ons voorstel ‘Biobased Sustainable Aviation Fuel’, richt zich op het ontwikkelen van een nieuwe productieroute voor sustainable aviation fuels (SAFs). Hiermee wordt invulling gegeven aan de behoefte van de luchtvaartindustrie om alternatieve productieroutes voor SAF te ontwikkelen. Deze behoefte komt voort uit het verplicht bijmengen van SAF in conventionele kerosine. Ook hebben bestaande routes voor SAFs te maken met oplopende tekorten in grondstoffen. De productieroute in dit project maakt gebruik van vetzuren, waarmee een veelheid van afvalstromen kan worden verwerkt naar brandstoffen. De vetzuren uit dit project worden geproduceerd door ChainCraft uit organische reststromen via fermentatie. ChainCraft is begonnen als startup vanuit Wageningen Universiteit en heeft bewezen per jaar ongeveer 2000 ton vetzuren te kunnen produceren. Met een chemische reactie worden deze vetzuren omgezet naar ketonen. Dit wordt ketonisatie genoemd. Deze ketonen kunnen opgewerkt worden naar SAF, maar kunnen ook andere chemische toepassingen hebben, zoals het vervangen van palmolie. Het keton dat ontstaat is dus een tussenproduct waarmee verschillende markten bedient kunnen worden. Dit is van belang voor ChainCraft dat nieuwe markten voor haar vetzuren wil ontsluiten. De belangrijkste te ontwikkelen stap in deze productieroute is de verbetering en optimalisatie van de ketonisatiereactie. Dit wordt gedaan door de Hogeschool Rotterdam bij het CoE HRTech, binnen het cluster Verduurzaming Industrie en de opleiding Chemische Technologie. Bij de ketonisatiereactie ontstaat calciumhydroxide als bijproduct. Door dit terug te voeren naar het fermentatieproces kunnen de integrale proceskosten verlaagd worden en de milieu impact gereduceerd. Deze verbeterde fermentatie wordt door ChainCraft geanalyseerd. De te verwachten milieubesparing is 67% minder broeikasgasemissies ten opzichte van petrochemische kerosine. De te verwachten productiekosten zijn vergelijkbaar met gangbare SAFs. Naast ChainCraft en de Hogeschool Rotterdam wordt het voorstel gesteund door SkyNRG. SkyNRG is sinds 2010 de wereldwijde leider op het gebied van SAFs.
Client: Foundation Innovation Alliance (SIA - Stichting Innovatie Alliantie) with funding from the ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW) Funder: RAAK (Regional Attention and Action for Knowledge circulation) The RAAK scheme is managed by the Foundation Innovation Alliance (SIA - Stichting Innovatie Alliantie) with funding from the ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW). Early 2013 the Centre for Sustainable Tourism and Transport started work on the RAAK-MKB project ‘Carbon management for tour operators’ (CARMATOP). Besides NHTV, eleven Dutch SME tour operators, ANVR, HZ University of Applied Sciences, Climate Neutral Group and ECEAT initially joined this 2-year project. The consortium was later extended with IT-partner iBuildings and five more tour operators. The project goal of CARMATOP was to develop and test new knowledge about the measurement of tour package carbon footprints and translate this into a simple application which allows tour operators to integrate carbon management into their daily operations. By doing this Dutch tour operators are international frontrunners.Why address the carbon footprint of tour packages?Global tourism contribution to man-made CO2 emissions is around 5%, and all scenarios point towards rapid growth of tourism emissions, whereas a reverse development is required in order to prevent climate change exceeding ‘acceptable’ boundaries. Tour packages have a high long-haul and aviation content, and the increase of this type of travel is a major factor in tourism emission growth. Dutch tour operators recognise their responsibility, and feel the need to engage in carbon management.What is Carbon management?Carbon management is the strategic management of emissions in one’s business. This is becoming more important for businesses, also in tourism, because of several economical, societal and political developments. For tour operators some of the most important factors asking for action are increasing energy costs, international aviation policy, pressure from society to become greener, increasing demand for green trips, and the wish to obtain a green image and become a frontrunner among consumers and colleagues in doing so.NetworkProject management was in the hands of the Centre for Sustainable Tourism and Transport (CSTT) of NHTV Breda University of Applied Sciences. CSTT has 10 years’ experience in measuring tourism emissions and developing strategies to mitigate emissions, and enjoys an international reputation in this field. The ICT Associate Professorship of HZ University of Applied Sciences has longstanding expertise in linking varying databases of different organisations. Its key role in CARMATOP was to create the semantic wiki for the carbon calculator, which links touroperator input with all necessary databases on carbon emissions. Web developer ibuildings created the Graphical User Interface; the front end of the semantic wiki. ANVR, the Dutch Association of Travel Agents and Tour operators, represents 180 tour operators and 1500 retail agencies in the Netherlands, and requires all its members to meet a minimum of sustainable practices through a number of criteria. ANVR’s role was in dissemination, networking and ensuring CARMATOP products will last. Climate Neutral Group’s experience with sustainable entrepreneurship and knowledge about carbon footprint (mitigation), and ECEAT’s broad sustainable tourism network, provided further essential inputs for CARMATOP. Finally, most of the eleven tour operators are sustainable tourism frontrunners in the Netherlands, and are the driving forces behind this project.
PBL is the initiator of the Work Programme Monitoring and Management Circular Economy 2019-2023, a collaboration between CBS, CML, CPB, RIVM, TNO, UU. Holidays and mobility are part of the consumption domains that PBL researches, and this project aims to calculate the environmental gains per person per year of the various circular behavioural options for both holiday behaviour and daily mobility. For both behaviours, a range of typical (default) trips are defined and for each several circular option explored for CO2 emissions, Global warming potential and land use. The holiday part is supplied by the Centre for Sustainability, Tourism and Transport (CSTT) of the BUas Academy of Tourism (AfT). The mobility part is carried out by the Urban Intelligence professorship of the Academy for Built Environment and Logistics (ABEL).The research question is “what is the environmental impact of various circular (behavioural) options around 1) holidays and 2) passenger mobility?” The consumer perspective is demarcated as follows:For holidays, transportation and accommodation are included, but not food, attractions visited and holiday activitiesFor mobility, it concerns only the circular options of passenger transport and private means of transport (i.e. freight transport, business travel and commuting are excluded). Not only some typical trips will be evaluated, but also the possession of a car and its alternatives.For the calculations, we make use of public databases, our own models and the EAP (Environmental Analysis Program) model developed by the University of Groningen. BUAs projectmembers: Centre for Sustainability, Tourism and Transport (AT), Urban Intelligence (ABEL).
