Life cycle assessment of an uncrewed military aircraft: a methodological approach for confidentiality-constrained analyses

R. P. Newsham; S. Rekker; P. J. Crothers; K. Camrass

doi:10.1007/s11367-026-02614-3

Back

Life cycle assessment of an uncrewed military aircraft: a methodological approach for confidentiality-constrained analyses

Journal article

Open access

Peer reviewed

Life cycle assessment of an uncrewed military aircraft: a methodological approach for confidentiality-constrained analyses

R. P. Newsham, S. Rekker, P. J. Crothers and K. Camrass

International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol.31(1-3), pp.1-17

2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-026-02614-3

Files and links (2)

pdf

s11367-026-02614-31.93 MBDownload View

Published Version Open Access CC BY V4.0

url

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-026-02614-3View

Published Version Open CC BY V4.0

Abstract

Life cycle assessment (LCA)

Military aircraft emissions

Uncrewed aircraft system (UAS)

Manufacturing emissions

Cradle-to-grave assessment

Aviation decarbonisation

Greenhouse gas emissions

Purpose: We present the first comprehensive cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment (LCA) of a military aircraft. We developed a methodological approach for conducting LCA under confidentiality constraints through simplified material allocation, including robust data quality and validation strategies. This provides baseline data for military carbon accounting whilst demonstrating a transferable method for environmental assessment in data-constrained industrial sectors. Methods: We conducted a cradle-to-grave LCA for an uncrewed aircraft system. Twenty-five process-based models represented 95% of aircraft mass across material categories (metallics, composites, electrical, electronics, miscellaneous). Primary energy data from power measurements covered 30% of manufacturing emissions, supplemented with validated secondary data. Operational emissions were estimated using business jet parametric analysis supplemented with validated secondary data. Five sensitivity analyses examined operational intensity, material simplification, excluded mass, end-of-life alternatives, and manufacturing energy transitions. Data quality was assessed using pedigree matrix methodology. The ReCiPe 2016 LCIA methodology was applied across all 18 midpoint impact categories. Results and discussion: The UAS demonstrates a fundamentally different emissions profile than commercial aircraft. Non-operational phases contributed 56% of total lifecycle emissions compared to <5% in commercial aviation, with operations contributing only 44% versus >95% for commercial aircraft. Sensitivity analyses confirmed this pattern persists across all scenarios, with non-operational phases contributing 32–56% even under wartime assumptions. Carbon fibre composites, aluminium fabrication, and final assembly emerged as the key emission hotspots. Composites represent 17% of aircraft mass but 34% of manufacturing emissions. Normalised impacts revealed Human Toxicity-Cancer exceeds climate change impacts by factor of seven, primarily from coal-based electricity. Conclusions: Military aircraft demonstrate significantly greater non-operational emissions than commercial aviation. The methodological framework – validated through systematic data quality assessment and sensitivity analyses – is transferable to other data-constrained sectors facing security requirements, proprietary restrictions, or supply chain complexity. Future research should focus on composite manufacturing emissions reduction.

Details

Title: Life cycle assessment of an uncrewed military aircraft: a methodological approach for confidentiality-constrained analyses
Authors: R. P. Newsham (Corresponding Author) - The University of Queensland
S. Rekker (Author) - The University of Queensland
P. J. Crothers (Author) - Boeing (Australia)
K. Camrass (Author) - University of the Sunshine Coast
Publication details: International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol.31(1-3), pp.1-17
Publisher: Springer
Date published: 2026
DOI: 10.1007/s11367-026-02614-3
ISSN: 1614-7502
Copyright note: © The Author(s) 2026. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Data Availability: The following supplementary information is available: database sources and inventory data (Table S1), data quality and uncertainty assessment using the Weidema et al. (2013) pedigree matrix approach (Tables S2-S4), complete LCIA results for all 18 ReCiPe 2016 midpoint categories (Tables S5-S6), and sensitivity analyses (Tables S7-S10). The life cycle inventory (LCI) data and associated life cycle assessment (LCA) models contain sensitive data and cannot be publicly disclosed due to export control regulations.
Grants: Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship, RTP, Department of Education (Australia, Canberra)
Grant note: Boeing-UQ Research Alliance Scholarship program.
Organisation Unit: School of Law and Society
Language: English
Record Identifier: 991228952902621
Output Type: Journal article

Metrics

1 Record Views