Comparison of auxiliary power unit (APU) and ground power unit (GPU) with life cycle analysis in ground operations: A case study for domestic flight in turkey

Abstract

In this study, the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) and the Ground Power Unit (GPU) that are required meet the energy demand in ground operations of aircraft were compared in terms of their damages -human health (disability adjusted life years- DALYs), ecosystem quality (PDF.m2.yr) and resources (MJ Surplus). These damages were calculated with gate-to-gate method of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). This assessment was held on three main stages; capital investment, operation and maintenance. SimaPro 7.2.4 was used for this calculation. Human Health Damages (HHDs) of APU were found to be (0.0557 -disability adjusted life years- DALYs) 20.34 days/year while HHDs of GPU were calculated as (0.0411 -disability adjusted life years-DALYs) 15 days/year. While Ecosystem Quality Damages (EQDs) of APU were calculated as 103366.37 PDF.m2.yr, EQDs of GPU were found to be 82651.23 PDF.m2.yr. In other words, although the use of APU gives rise to loss of 0.1 species -1 year, 1 square kilometer area, the use of GPU gives rise to loss of 0.083 species. With regards to Resources Damages (RDs), 62125 MJ surplus energy needed for future extractions of minerals and fossil fuel considering APU, one the other hand 36002 MJ surplus energy needed for future considering GPU. As a result, the use of APU effects on human health, ecosystem quality and resources was determined greater than the use of GPU for 30 minute. The use of GPU has less impact on human health, ecosystem quality and resources in ground operations