Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
20 chapter five ALTERNATIVE ENERGY WIND Wind energy is a growing industry in the United States, and some airports are now using wind power to help offset costs and resource use associated with other power sources (DeVault et al. 2012). If conditions at an airport are suitable, wind turbines can produce a significant portion of power needs. Many airports are also under pressure to reduce pollution and the impacts their buildings and operations have on natural resources; and integrating wind-generated power into their overall plan may help meet this goal. In addition, consistent wind energy and storage of wind power can help maintain airport operations in case of an emergency power outage that would otherwise cripple an airportâs crucial lighting and navigation systems. For example, after an earthquake knocked out power to Honolulu International Airport (HNL) in 2006, wind turbines were installed on the main airport building to serve as back-up power generators in case of a similar power failure. One potential drawback to wind energy is that large turbines can interfere with ground and air-based radar (DeVault et al. 2012). The FAA is researching technologies to reduce this conflict (Infanger 2010; Kintisch 2010). Tall wind turbines may also pose a risk to flight paths if not posi- tioned well. Because tall turbines are not appropriate for use near aircraft flight paths, they will not cause the bird mortality that has been documented in other areas where large turbines are common (Osborn et al. 2000). However, smaller turbines attached to buildings have not been reported to attract wildlife, and may be useful sources of energy on airport buildings (DeVault et al. 2012). SOLAR Some U.S. airports have had success installing solar fields to reduce or eliminate their demand for electricity from an outside source, and to reduce the area of vegetation requiring maintenance such as shrubs and turf grass. Issues with installing solar-powered electricity-producing structures may include up-front costs and some concern of creating a new shelter for wildlife. From the examples of airports using solar field electricity production that were available [FresnoâYosemite International (Figure 8) and Lakeland Linder Regional (p. 21)], costs were quickly returned through savings on utili- ties. When properly maintained, according to manager observations, solar structures did not create a new attractant to wildlife, which is supported by Dolbeer et al. (2000, 2009) and DeVault et al. (2012). There was initially concern that solar arrays near airports would produce a dangerous glare that could interfere with safe aircraft operations. However, that has not proven to be the case, as photovoltaic panels are designed to absorb most of the light rather than reflect it (DeVault et al. 2012).
21 FIGURE 8 Solar field at FresnoâYosemite International Airport (Source: FAT). Airport StructuresâAlternative Energy: Lakeland Linder Regional (LAL) Properly operating an airport can be very expensive, and efforts to reduce costs influence almost every decision. Some North American airports have installed solar panels on roofs of buildings to help offset utility costs as well as to earn credits for programs such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). Other airports in particularly sunny climates have taken these efforts further by installing expansive solar fields. LAL in Lakeland, Florida, established a collaborative partnership with Sun Edison and the city of Lakeland to construct a 40-acre solar field. The airport provided the land, Sun Edison paid for construction, and the city received power production in exchange for energy credits worth nearly $250,000 annually. Several concerns were addressed during the planning stage of the solar field. The panels needed to be located so as to maintain safety for air operations as well as maximize efficiency in power production. Additionally, the FAA had initial concerns about glare from the panels interfering with safe landing, so LAL conducted an analysis of glare produced by common surfaces and found that solar panels with anti-reflective coating produce 60% of the glare produced by dry sand and coniferous trees. An environmental impact analysis determined two additional issues that needed to be addressed. One was that several protected gopher tortoises would need to be professionally relocated; and the other was that a local ordinance required the airport to mitigate the removal of over 350 trees. LAL also consulted a certified wildlife hazard biologist about potential new attraction of wildlife to the solar field. After all concerns were addressed and final approvals were provided, the airport and its collaborators were able to install over 18,000 solar panels. This project nearly eliminated the airportâs electricity costs, reduced carbon emissions by an estimated 324 million pounds over 25 years (equivalent to the pollution from 31,000 cars), and produced power for over 22,000 homes. The project took about four years to plan and approve, and one year to install. There has been no observed increase in use of the area by wildlife. Solar field installed at LAL (left) and comparison with reflectivity of common land surfaces (right) (Source: LAL).
