3 ms·
I wonder how they plan to keep the engines maintained. Jet engines aren't exactly cheap, and maintenance, spare parts, and fuel aren't free, either.
by Derbasti 10y ago
I wonder how they plan to keep the engines maintained. Jet engines aren't exactly cheap, and maintenance, spare parts, and fuel aren't free, either.
- jdavis703 10y agoMy guess is they only turn these on during the most polluted days. In many colder climates they have power plants of last resort that are basically old jet engines. They only fire them up when power demand hits peak of the peak levels.
- robszumski 10y agoI agree with your thought that these are part time, but for a different reason. I think they'll only be turned on when the temperature/env conditions are right to form the inversion. Fire the jet up for a day or two to prevent the smog from getting trapped under the inversion layer, then turn the jet off once the conditions subside. None of this 20mm a year business will end up happening.
- pp19dd 10y agoIndeed. Though I don't think they intend to maintain them. The article cites donated 'retired' engines. So this is an experiment, or a P.R. stunt. But if they'd take this seriously, it'd be so weird to estimate the maintenance costs. $5 mil per engine, 3-4 months uptime, 2 months downtime for rebuild so you'd need multiple engines, constant sandblasting by particles sucked in the turbines.
- notahacker 10y agoIn theory there's no shortage of engines available for scrap value because they're obsolete and/or their expensive moving parts have reached their life limit for airworthy aircraft, and most of them will keep running for a while yet. The fuel bill is a bigger deal than the supply of old engines I still agree with the people here that think this is a colossally stupid idea.