thesis on drone technology

• DSpace@MIT Home
• MIT Libraries
• Graduate Theses

SwarmSim : a framework for execution and visualization of drone swarm simulations

Alternative title

Other contributors, terms of use, description, date issued, collections.

Show Statistical Information

Possible Inspiration: Drone-Related Literature and its Potential for Public Perception Research

• Regular paper
• Published: 27 October 2021
• Volume 103 , article number  54 , ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Sarah Komasová   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8405-6404 1  

435 Accesses

6 Citations

Explore all metrics

This article identifies the current leading streams in the research of drones across multiple disciplines in order to identify topics and factors that have not been sufficiently considered in the context of public opinion research to date. A sample of drone-related literature is analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis. Qualitative thematic analysis is a method that systematizes and characterizes the main themes and main factors included in texts. As a result, the article proposes a systemization of drone-related research and an overview of the main factors considered within the identified categories. Beyond the literature systemization, the article evaluates which of the themes and factors have and which have not been researched in regard to public perception. Based on this analysis, the article concludes that, even though they have been researched in other contexts, two essential aspects are missing in the research of public opinion regarding drone use: 1) a systemic reflection and theorization of privacy, 2) measurements of the perception of the actual technological capabilities of drones. Therefore, these topics should be addressed in future surveys and interviews. Moreover, the analysis shows the prevalence of American public samples in existing surveys and points out a possible bias in conclusions made based on these works. Broader international representation is recommended for future works.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Who Are the Stakeholders of Drone Use? Roles, Benefits, Risk Perceptions, and Solutions

“I Am the Eye in the Sky – Can You Read My Mind?” How to Address Public Concerns Towards Drone Use

Big Data, Drone Data: Privacy and Ethical Impacts of the Intersection Between Big Data and Civil Drone Deployments

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence

Data Availability

List of the examined literature is included in the annex, coding scheme and assigned codes can be made available on request.

Komasová, S., Tesař, J., Soukup, P.: Perception of drone related risks in Czech society. Technol. Soc. 61 , 101252 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101252

Article   Google Scholar  

Heen, M.S., Lieberman, J.D., Miethe, T.D.: The thin blue line meets the big blue sky: perceptions of police legitimacy and public attitudes towards aerial drones. Crim. Justice Stud. 31 , 18–37 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2017.1404463

West, J.P., Klofstad, C.A., Uscinski, J.E., Connolly, J.M.: Citizen support for domestic drone use and regulation. Am. Politics Res. 47 , 119–151 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X18782208

Anania, E.C., Rice, S., Pierce, M., Winter, S., Capps, J., Walters, N.W., Milner, M.N.: Public support for police drone missions depends on political affiliation and neighborhood demographics. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHSOC.2018.12.007

Klauser, F.: Interacting forms of expertise in security governance: the example of CCTV surveillance at Geneva international airport. Br. J. Sociol. 60 , 279–297 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2009.01231.x

Kotsemir, M.: Unmanned aerial vehicles research in Scopus: an analysis and visualization of publication activity and research collaboration at the country level. Qual. Quant. 53 , 2143–2173 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-019-00863-z

Washington, A., Clothier, R.A., Silva, J.: A review of unmanned aircraft system ground risk models. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 95 , 24–44 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2017.10.001

Clarke, R.: What drones inherit from their ancestors. Comput Law Secur Rev. 30 , 247–262 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2014.03.006

Luppicini, R., So, A.: A technoethical review of commercial drone use in the context of governance, ethics, and privacy. Technol. Soc. 46 , 109–119 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2016.03.003

Clarke, R., Bennett Moses, L.: The regulation of civilian drones’ impacts on public safety. Comput Law Secur Rev. 30 , 263–285 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2014.03.007

EBSCO Academic Search Complete, https://www.ebsco.com/products/research-databases/academic-search-complete

Boyatzis, R.E.: Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development. SAGE. (1998)

Yao, Y., Xia, H., Huang, Y., Wang, Y.: Free to Fly in Public Spaces: Drone Controllers’ Privacy Perceptions and Practices. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 6789–6793. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2017)

Wang, Y., Xia, H., Yao, Y., Huang, Y.: Flying eyes and hidden controllers: a qualitative study of People’s privacy perceptions of civilian drones in the US. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies. 2016 , 172–190 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1515/popets-2016-0022

Ghatas, R.W., Comstock, J.R., Vincent, M.J., Hoffler, K.D., Tsakpinis, D., DeHaven, A.M.: UAS Detect and Avoid – Alert Times and Pilot Performance in Remaining Well Clear. Presented at the (2017)

Chang, V., Chundury, P., Chetty, M.: Spiders in the Sky: User Perceptions of Drones, Privacy, and Security. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 6765–6776. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2017)

JaneL, E., IleneL, E., Landay, J.A., Cauchard, J.R.: Drone & Wo: Cultural Influences on Human-Drone Interaction Techniques. CHI ‘17. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025755

Nelson, J., Gorichanaz, T.: Trust as an ethical value in emerging technology governance: the case of drone regulation. Technol. Soc. 59 , 101131 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.04.007

Rao, B., Gopi, A.G., Maione, R.: The societal impact of commercial drones. Technol. Soc. 45 , 83–90 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2016.02.009

Freeman, P.K., Freeland, R.S.: Agricultural UAVs in the U.S.: potential, policy, and hype. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment. 2, 35–43 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2015.10.002

Aydin, B.: Public acceptance of drones: knowledge, attitudes, and practice. Technol. Soc. 59 , 101180 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101180

Lidynia, C., Philipsen, R., Ziefle, M.: Droning on about drones—acceptance of and perceived barriers to drones in civil usage contexts. In: Savage-Knepshield, P., Chen, J. (eds.) Advances in Human Factors in Robots and Unmanned Systems, pp. 317–329. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017)

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Sandbrook, C.: The social implications of using drones for biodiversity conservation. Ambio. 44 , 636–647 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-015-0714-0

Markowitz, E.M., Nisbet, M.C., Danylchuk, A.J., Engelbourg, S.I.: What’s that buzzing noise? Public Opinion on the Use of Drones for Conservation Science. BioScience. 67, 382–385 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix003

Rosenfeld, A.: Are drivers ready for traffic enforcement drones? Accid Anal Prev. 122 , 199–206 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.10.006

Clothier, R.A., Greer, D.A., Greer, D.G., Mehta, A.M.: Risk perception and the public acceptance of drones. Risk Anal. 35 , 1167–1183 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12330

Rice, S., Tamilselvan, G., Winter, S.R., Milner, M.N., Anania, E.C., Sperlak, L., Marte, D.A.: Public perception of UAS privacy concerns: a gender comparison. J. Unmanned Veh. Sys. 6 , 83–99 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1139/juvs-2017-0011

Clarke, R.: Understanding the drone epidemic. Comput Law Secur Rev. 30 , 230–246 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2014.03.002

Royal Aeronautical Society Drones Polling, https://comresglobal.com/polls/royal-aeronautical-society-drones-polling/ , (2017)

Kahan, D.M., Braman, D., Slovic, P., Gastil, J., Cohen, G.: Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Nat. Nanotechnol. 4 , 87–90 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2008.341

Nelson, J.R., Grubesic, T.H., Wallace, D., Chamberlain, A.W.: The view from above: a survey of the Public’s perception of unmanned aerial vehicles and privacy. J. Urban Technol. 26 , 83–105 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2018.1551106

Lidynia, C., Philipsen, R., Ziefle, M.: The Sky’s (not) the limit - influence of expertise and privacy disposition on the use of multicopters. In: Chen, J. (ed.) Advances in Human Factors in Robots and Unmanned Systems, pp. 270–281. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2018)

Yao, Y., Xia, H., Huang, Y., Wang, Y.: Privacy mechanisms for drones: Perceptions of drone controllers and bystanders. In: CHI 2017 - Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: Explore, Innovate, Inspire. pp. 6777–6788. Association for Computing Machinery, (2017)

Zwickle, A., Farber, H.B., Hamm, J.A.: Comparing public concern and support for drone regulation to the current legal framework. Behav Sci Law. 37 , 109–124 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2357

Winter, S.R., Rice, S., Tamilselvan, G., Tokarski, R.: Mission-based citizen views on UAV usage and privacy: an affective perspective | request PDF. J Unmanned Vehicle Syst. 4 , 125–135 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1139/juvs-2015-0031

Lofland, L.H.: The public realm: exploring the City’s quintessential social territory. Transaction Publishers

Clarke, R.: The regulation of civilian drones’ impacts on behavioural privacy. Comput Law Secur Rev. 30 , 286–305 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2014.03.005

Valente, J., Cardenas, A.: Understanding Security Threats in Consumer Drones Through the Lens of the Discovery Quadcopter Family. Presented at the November 3 (2017)

Zhu, X., Pasch, T.J., Bergstrom, A.: Understanding the structure of risk belief systems concerning drone delivery: a network analysis. Technol. Soc. 62 , 101262 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101262

Zhu, X.: Segmenting the public’s risk beliefs about drone delivery: a belief system approach. Telematics Inform. 40 , 27–40 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.05.007

Wallace, R., Loffi, J.: Examining Unmanned Aerial System Threats & Defenses: A Conceptual Analysis. International Journal of Aviation, Aeronautics, and Aerospace

Finn, R.L., Wright, D.: Unmanned aircraft systems: surveillance, ethics and privacy in civil applications. Comput Law Secur Rev. 28 , 184–194 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2012.01.005

Lum, C., Gauksheim, K., Deseure, C., Vagners, J., McGeer, T.: Assessing and Estimating Risk of Operating Unmanned Aerial Systems in Populated Areas. Presented at the September 20 (2011)

Musavi, N., Onural, D., Gunes, K., Yildiz, Y.: Unmanned Aircraft Systems Airspace Integration: A Game Theoretical Framework for Concept Evaluations. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics. 40, 96–109 (2017). https://doi.org/10.2514/1.G000426

Wild, G., Murray, J., Baxter, G.: Exploring civil drone accidents and incidents to help prevent potential air disasters. Aerospace. 3 , 22 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace3030022

Truong, D., Choi, W.: Using machine learning algorithms to predict the risk of small unmanned aircraft system violations in the National Airspace System. J. Air Transp. Manag. 86 , 101822 (2020)

Clothier, R., Walker, R., Fulton, N., Campbell, D.: A casualty risk analysis for unmanned aerial system (UAS) operations over inhabited areas. In: Sinha, A. (ed.) Proceedings of AIAC12: 2nd Australasian Unmanned Air Vehicles Conference. pp. 1–16. Bristol UAV Conference, CD Rom (2007)

Primatesta, S., Rizzo, A., la Cour-Harbo, A.: Ground risk map for unmanned Aircraft in Urban Environments. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 97 , 489–509 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-019-01015-z

Öztekin, A., Flass, C., Lee, X.: Development of a framework to determine a mandatory safety baseline for unmanned aircraft systems. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 65 , 3–26 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-011-9578-0

Cour-Harbo, A. la: The Value of Step-by-Step Risk Assessment for Unmanned Aircraft. 2018 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS). (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICUAS.2018.8453411

Soffronoff, J., Piscioneri, P., Weaver, A.: Public Perception of Drone Delivery in the United States, https://www.oversight.gov/report/usps/public-perception-drone-delivery-united-states , (2016)

Yoo, W., Yu, E., Jung, J.: Drone delivery: factors affecting the public’s attitude and intention to adopt. Telematics Inform. 35 , 1687–1700 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.04.014

MacSween, S.: A public opinion survey- unmanned aerial vehicles for cargo, commercial, and passenger transportation. Presented at the (2003)

Kindervater, K.H.: The technological rationality of the drone strike. Critic Stud Secur. 5 , 28–44 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1080/21624887.2017.1329472

Wilcox, L.: Embodying Algorithmic War: Gender, Race, and the Posthuman in Drone Warfare: Security Dialogue. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010616657947

Espinoza, M.: State terrorism: orientalism and the drone programme. Critic Stud Terror. 11 , 376–393 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2018.1456725

Gurcan, M.: Drone warfare and contemporary strategy making: does the tail wag the dog? Dynam Asymm Conflict. 6 , 153–167 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2013.859284

Zegart, A.: Cheap fights, credible threats: the future of armed drones and coercion. J. Strateg. Stud. 0 , 1–41 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2018.1439747

Ordoukhanian, E., Madni, A.M.: Human-systems integration challenges in resilient multi-UAV operation. In: Chen, J. (ed.) Advances in Human Factors in Robots and Unmanned Systems, pp. 131–138. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2018)

Kallenborn, Z., Bleek, P.C.: Swarming destruction: drone swarms and chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons. Nonproliferation Rev. 25 , 523–543 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/10736700.2018.1546902

Couture, N., Bottecchia, S., Chaumette, S., Cecconello, M., Rekalde, J., Desainte-Catherine, M.: Using the Soundpainting language to Fly a swarm of drones. In: Chen, J. (ed.) Advances in Human Factors in Robots and Unmanned Systems, pp. 39–51. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2018)

Sanders, B., Vincenzi, D., Shen, Y.: Investigation of gesture based UAV control. In: Chen, J. (ed.) Advances in Human Factors in Robots and Unmanned Systems, pp. 205–215. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2018)

Chandarana, M., Trujillo, A.C., Shimada, K., Allen, B.: A natural interaction Interface for UAVs using intuitive gesture recognition. Presented at the (2017)

Gettinger, D., Michel, A.H.: Drone Sightings and Close Encounters: An Analysis

Murray, C.W., Anderson, D.: A CFD-based procedure for airspace integration of small unmanned aircraft within congested areas: International Journal of Micro Air Vehicles. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/1756829316669957

Szabolcsi, R.: Numerical Analyis of the low-altitude air turbulence mathematical models used in modelling of the spatial motion of the small unmanned aerial vehicles. International conference KNOWLEDGE-BASED ORGANIZATION. 23 , 120–130 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1515/kbo-2017-0165

Campolettano, E.T., Bland, M.L., Gellner, R.A., Sproule, D.W., Rowson, B., Tyson, A.M., Duma, S.M., Rowson, S.: Ranges of injury risk associated with impact from unmanned aircraft systems. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 45 , 2733–2741 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-017-1921-6

Solodov, A., Williams, A., Al Hanaei, S., Goddard, B.: Analyzing the threat of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) to nuclear facilities. Secur. J. 31 , 305–324 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-017-0102-5

Bunker, R.J.: Terrorist and Insurgent Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Use, Potentials, and Militrary Implications. Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College (2015)

Rossiter, A.: Drone usage by militant groups: exploring variation in adoption. Defense & Security Analysis. 34 , 113–126 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/14751798.2018.1478183

Jackson, B.A., Frelinger, D.R., Lostumbo, M.J., Button, R.W.: Evaluating novel threats to the homeland: unmanned aerial vehicles and cruise missiles. RAND Corporation (2008)

Kim, S.J., Lim, G.J., Cho, J.: Drone relay stations for supporting wireless communication in military operations. In: Chen, J. (ed.) Advances in Human Factors in Robots and Unmanned Systems, pp. 123–130. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2018)

Boyle, M.J.: The legal and ethical implications of drone warfare. Intl J Human Rights. 19 , 105–126 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2014.991210

Calhoun, L.: Totalitarian tendencies in drone strikes by states. Critic Stud Terror. 11 , 357–375 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2018.1456726

Figliozzi, M.: Lifecycle Modeling and Assessment of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (Drones) CO2e Emissions. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2017.09.011

Chao, H., Cao, Y., Chen, Y.: Autopilots for small unmanned aerial vehicles: a survey. Int. J. Control. Autom. Syst. 8 , 36–44 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12555-010-0105-z

Download references

This study was supported as part of the project “Design of U-space implementation for the Czech Republic” (CK01000185) by Technology Agency of the Czech Republic.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The Department of Air Transport, Faculty of Transportation Sciences, Czech Technical University, Prague, Czech Republic

Sarah Komasová

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Not applicable (one author).

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Komasová .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval.

Not applicable.

Consent to Participate

Consent to publish, conflict of interest, additional information, publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

(XLSX 91 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Komasová, S. Possible Inspiration: Drone-Related Literature and its Potential for Public Perception Research. J Intell Robot Syst 103 , 54 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-021-01498-9

Download citation

Received : 12 January 2021

Accepted : 09 September 2021

Published : 27 October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-021-01498-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• UAV, unmanned aerial vehicle
• Literature review
• Capabilities

Advertisement

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Drone Technology and Its Applications

15 Pages Posted: 27 Oct 2021

Atharva Abhijeet Kale

Amity Education Group; Amity University Mumbai; All India Management Association; Central Gov. University of India, Mizoram; C.B.S.E , DELHI

Date Written: September 13, 2021

The utilization of unmanned ethereal/ aerial vehicles (UAVs) is developing quickly in numerous regions of common implementation: ongoing checking, remote inclusion, remote detecting, search and salvage, freight conveyance, security and observation, exactness cultivating, and examination. non-military personnel framework. Canny UAVs are the following real unrest in UAV innovation, which should offer new open doors in various applications, especially in common framework, as far as hazard decrease and cost decrease. Common framework is relied upon to rule more than $ 45 billion in UAV use. In this review, we present the common uses of UAVs and their difficulties. We additionally examine ebb and flow research slants and give future data on potential employments of UAV. What's more, we present the principle challenges for common UAV applications, including: stacking difficulties, crash shirking and swarming difficulties, and systems administration and security challenges. In light of our audit of late writing, we talk about the difficulties of open research and infer abnormal state data on how these difficulties could be tended to. List Terms - UAV, remote inclusion, ongoing observing, remote detecting, search and salvage, merchandise conveyance, security and observation, exactness cultivating, common framework review.

Keywords: UAV, remote inclusion, ongoing observing, remote detecting, search and salvage, merchandise conveyance, security and observation, exactness cultivating, common framework review

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Atharva Abhijeet Kale (Contact Author)

Amity education group ( email ), amity university mumbai ( email ), all india management association ( email ), central gov. university of india, mizoram, c.b.s.e , delhi, do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on ssrn, paper statistics, related ejournals, criminal procedure ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Law & Society: Public Law - Crime, Criminal Law, & Punishment eJournal

Information systems ejournal, aerospace engineering ejournal.

Downloadable Content

Drones in Precision Agriculture: Corn Field Testing and Sampling Through Drone Mapping

• Masters Thesis
• Pearson, William Andrews
• Jordan College of Agricultural Sciences and Technology
• Seth, Balaji
• Alexandrou, Athanasios
• Nambiar, Arun
• Industrial Technology
• California State University, Fresno
• Drone Mapping
• Agriculture
• 2019-06-12T22:51:39Z
• http://hdl.handle.net/10211.3/210902

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 21 July 2023

Critical assessment of emissions, costs, and time for last-mile goods delivery by drones versus trucks

• Aishwarya Raghunatha 1 , 2 ,
• Emma Lindkvist 3 ,
• Patrik Thollander 1 , 3 ,
• Erika Hansson 3 &
• Greta Jonsson 3  

Scientific Reports volume  13 , Article number:  11814 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

6989 Accesses

5 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Energy efficiency
• Environmental impact
• Sustainability

An Author Correction to this article was published on 02 September 2023

This article has been updated

Electric drones as an autonomous mode of transport are scaling up to transform last-mile goods delivery, raising an urgent need for assessing impacts of drone transport from a systems perspective. In this paper, we conduct systems analyses to assess the environmental, economic, and delivery time impact of large drones for delivery scenarios to pick-up centers between mid-size cities predominantly in rural areas, and deliveries within city limits compared with electric and diesel trucks. Results show that large drones have lower emissions than diesel trucks for deliveries in rural areas and that drones don’t compete with electric trucks, mainly due to the high energy demand required for take-off and landing for each delivery. Furthermore, we show that electric drones are an economically more cost-effective option than road-bound transport modes such as diesel and electric trucks due to the high degree of automation, and also provide the fastest delivery times. Our analysis provides unique insights that drones can address rapid electrification and emergency applications due to low costs, high flexibility, and fast operations. However, for regulators and practitioners to realize it as an emission-friendly option it is necessary to determine the optimal size of drones, particularly for use cases in urban areas, avoid very low landings for deliveries, and have home deliveries instead of pick-up points.

Similar content being viewed by others

Drone routing problem model for last-mile delivery using the public transportation capacity as moving charging stations

Challenges and opportunities in truck electrification revealed by big operational data

Decarbonising road freight transport: The role of zero-emission trucks and intangible costs

Introduction.

The transportation sector globally gave rise to over 7 Gt CO 2 in 2020 which is estimated in the IEA (2021) Net Zero Emission scenario to be reduced to 5.5 Gt CO 2 by 2030 and 0.7 Gt CO 2 by 2050 1 . This vast reduction in global CO 2 emissions from the transportation sector is estimated even though freight transports are estimated to increase by a factor of 2.5 1 . Currently, 96% of all medium and heavy trucks in the European Union are diesel-driven 2 . Along with this growth in demand for transportation, demand for fast deliveries has increased significantly due to the growth in e-commerce, which brings about an amplified impact on the environment, particularly in the last part of the supply chain where the load reaches the destination 3 . The environmental impact is mainly due to the last-mile delivery trucks being partially loaded, an increase in delivery frequency, and suboptimal delivery logistics 4 . Such low efficiency and poor environmental performance call for optimizing delivery efficiency via development of new freight systems and usage of vehicles with low-emission fuels 3 , 5 . This in turn calls for exploring disruptive new technology solutions to phase out use of fossil fuels and reach this massive reduction in CO 2 emissions in transportation. Though both e-mobility and change in transport modes are key means in the built environment to reach this change according to the International Energy Agency’s Net Xero roadmap, the 2030 and 2050 scenarios for transportation remain conventional and land-based 1 .

One novel solution that is deemed to hold such potential is electric drones, or electric vertical take-off and landing vehicles (eVTOLs) as a mode of transport. While some studies claim no clear environmental benefits 6 , other studies show a vast (94%) reduced energy demand for small drones 7 . The concept, entitled Urban Air Mobility (UAM) begun in recent years to address transportation issues in dense cities 8 . It was estimated that the introduction of drones could bring new conditions to transportation systems in and around urban areas, where some of the possible benefits could be traffic reduction, time savings, environmental relief, and improved accessibility 9 . Quickly, the potential for use of such drones in a wide range of transportation use cases in urban, suburban, and rural regions has been recognized under an umbrella term called Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) 10 .

Studies show that environmental benefits of AAM would be greater in rural areas 11 , better than fossil-fueled trucks 12 and electric trucks 13 , and the estimated effectiveness of drones deliveries to be within shorter distances 14 . Small drones delivering in urban areas are seen to have higher energy consumption due to high customer density and low delivery distances 15 . However, optimally routing drone logistics is suggested to improve energy efficiency and carbon emissions 16 . While drone delivery is shown to be cost efficient for the provider 16 , 17 , there is conjecture that they may be very expensive and unaffordable for people 18 and possibly lead to increase in emissions in urban use cases and possibly give more incentive for urban sprawl 19 in growing mid-sized cities. One main advantage of drone deliveries is stated to be speed and reduction of delivery times 20 . Impacts of drone delivery is context-dependent and vary upon the system in which they are employed 14 and emissions are greatly dependent on the drones’ energy requirements, distance travelled, and number of deliveries 21 with energy being a critical constraint in maximizing the benefits of using drones 22 . Despite such uncertainty there is research suggesting the potential benefits of promoting green image of drone deliveries to cater to certain consumer demographics and increase profitability 23 , 24 . As this field gains increased attention, there is an urgent need for systems analysis of drone impacts for different delivery scenarios for environmental, economic, and delivery time impact in order to make the relationship between the impacts of drone delivery and the context of drone use clear 9 , 25 .

Therefore, the aim of this paper is to address this gap by evaluating the systems performance of an electric drone for parcel deliveries in mid-sized cities in urban and rural environments. We perform a systems analysis with focus on environmental and economic impacts as well as delivery time. We calculate CO 2 emissions to assess the global warming potential and conduct life cycle cost (LCC) assessment to uncover the economic impacts. The functional unit (FU) is an important basis for environmental assessment and enables alternative services or goods to be compared and analysed 26 . In this study the FU was chosen as one standard delivery of 250 packages, weighing 2 kg each, divided into three stops, with maximum payload of 500 kg. The calculations are made for drones as well as road-bound delivery vehicles that run on (1) electricity (e-truck), and (2) diesel (diesel truck) in urban and rural scenarios. The system included last-mile deliveries from a logistics center to a pick-up point for both the drone and the alternative road-bound vehicles. Accordingly, four scenarios are evaluated: (1) long route between cities (LBC); (2) short route between cities (SBC); (3) long route within city (LWC); and (4) short route within city (SWC). These estimations provide critical insights regarding the impact drones may have in serving as a disruptive new technology solution to bring down CO 2 emissions in transportation. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis was conducted particularly for varying energy use and reduced distance in connection with the environmental impact, the number of deliveries in connection with economic impact, and the increase in velocity for delivery time. It should be noted that drones are in an early phase of development, and as for renewable technologies such as photovoltaics that experience rapid advancement until they reach a certain level of maturity 27 the same can be expected for drones. Thereby we take an ex-ante approach to predict the possible transitions in transport technologies in upcoming decades to determine the factors related to the necessary advancement of technology and the role it will play in society, as urgently needed during early adoption.

This section presents the findings of the environmental impact assessment for the use phase, economic impact assessment for the life cycle, and delivery time for the chosen electric drone, e-truck, and diesel truck. It was found that overall, in the use phase, the electric drone competes with diesel trucks, but the e-truck is the option with the least environmental impact. In the life cycle of vehicles, the electric drone is the most economically feasible and the fastest alternative. The three assessments and sensitivity analysis of critical parameters are presented separately.

Environmental impact assessment

In Fig. 1 , the results of the environmental assessment are presented. We set the result for the drone to 100% for all routes and present the results for the trucks in relation to this. In all cases, the e-truck has significantly lower GHG emissions per FU in all cases. This can be explained by the low energy demand per km compared with the drone and the diesel truck. We find that the environmental performance of the drone is more comparable to the diesel truck where the drone has lower GHG emissions than the diesel truck for LBC by 36% and SBC by 8% but higher GHG emissions for LWC by 6% and SWC by 59%. However, e-truck outperforms environmentally by a minimum of 75% to a maximum of 92%.

Results from the environmental assessment, where the greenhouse gas emissions per functional unit are presented relative to the greenhouse gas emissions caused by the drone per functional unit.

The results indicate that the environmental performance of the drone improves when the distance increases. This is mainly due to the reduced energy demand per km for the drone for the longer cases, where the efficient cruise mode is utilized to a higher extent. Since the two trucks follow the same roads in all routes, the only difference between the e-truck and the diesel truck is the fuel consumption and the emission factor for the fuel. Both aspects are larger for the diesel truck compared with the e-truck, which is reflected in the difference in their estimated emissions.

Economic impact assessment

The results for the economic assessment are presented below in Fig. 2 , where costs over the life cycle per FU are presented, and we set the outcome for the drone to 100% and the outcomes for the other vehicles are in relation to the drone. We observe that the drone significantly has the lowest LCC per FU for all routes, while the LCC for the trucks are in the same magnitude. Drones were cheaper than electric trucks by a minimum of 117% and cheaper than diesel trucks by a minimum of 131%.

Results from the economic assessment, where the lifecycle costs per functional unit are presented relative to the lifecycle costs of the drone per functional unit.

The results indicate that drone overall has less than half of the cost per FU in all cases compared with the other vehicles. The largest difference is however seen in the LWC scenario, where the drone has 2.5 times lower LCC per FU. We visualize the reasons for the differences in the LCC for each vehicle by presenting the average distribution of LCC of each vehicle in Fig. 3 below. The largest cost during the lifetime of the drone is from fuel consumption (40%), followed by purchase cost (31%). The largest cost for both trucks is however from staff (76% for the e-truck and 70% for the diesel truck). We therefore conclude that the biggest reason for the lower LCC for the drone is due to cost savings for staff.

Lifecycle costs split for each vehicle during their lifetime.

Since fuel costs are high for the drone during its life cycle, we find that parameters linked to this are of key importance. The drone is most favorable compared with the other vehicles when the distance saved is longer. This can explain why the LBC scenario is more beneficial for the drone than the SBC scenario, where the reduced distance is 23% compared with 14% in the shorter route. The same reasoning can be used for the routes within cities, where the reduced distance for LWC scenario is 39% versus 30% for SWC scenario, which is an explanation for the lower costs compared with the other vehicles in this route. As stated earlier, the energy usage per km also differs between the routes depending on the distance between the stops, which affects the cost for fuel on the routes. Other variable parameters affecting the results for the economic assessment are factors like cost for service and cost for new parts which vary depending on distance.

Delivery time assessment

The results of the assessment regarding delivery time are presented in Fig. 4 , where the results per FU are presented in relation to the drone for all routes. The delivery time for the drone is seen to be evidently less than the delivery time of both trucks in all cases by a minimum of 128%.

Results from the assessment of delivery time, where the delivery time for trucks per functional unit is presented relative to the delivery time of the drone per functional unit.

Indeed, more time is saved by the drone since the reduced distance is larger for free flying without pre-determined flightpaths. The most time effective route, LWC scenario, is the route in which the most distance is reduced (39%) and the least time effective route, SBC scenario, is the route with the least distance reduced (14%). Furthermore, the reduction in delivery time per FU is affected by the velocity of the vehicles. The speed limits are in general lower in urban areas which leads to a bigger difference between the drone and the trucks regarding speed in these cases. However, we find that the velocity does not seem to have as big an impact as the results for reduced distance.

Sensitivity analysis

The results from the three assessments have been assessed for varying emission factors and energy usage for all vehicles, the distance taken, number of deliveries made, and velocity assumed for the drone.

Sensitivity analysis for emission factor

The results from the sensitivity analysis for different emission factors for the vehicles for each scenario are presented in Fig. 5 below. We varied the emission factors by assuming different primary fuel from each vehicle. For electric drone and truck primary fuel, the base case emission was calculated assuming primary fuel to be electricity mix from Sweden. Therefore, low estimation was made using electricity from nuclear power and high estimation using European electricity mix. For diesel trucks however lower emission factors were considered by assuming hydrogenated vegetable oil (HVO) from Sweden for medium estimation, and HVO from pine oil for low estimation, since existing combustion engine trucks are expected to transition to biofuel use in the next decade.

Sensitivity analysis using the low, base case, and high estimation of emissions factors for the fuels used by vehicles under consideration.

The origin of electricity indeed has a big impact on the results. The GHG emissions for the drone increase by approximately 5 times when using the higher estimation compared with the base case and decrease by approximately 12 times when using the low estimation. Compared with the truck fueled by diesel, the drone charged with a Swedish electricity mix is better in all cases. Drone charged with Swedish electricity mix has slightly lower emissions than truck fueled with Swedish HVO for BC scenarios, however the opposite is true for WC scenarios. E-trucks, however, remain less affected since the energy demand per km is low. Although electricity from nuclear and HVO pine seem to have the lowest emissions for the use case of all vehicles, they raise concerns for other sustainability-related issues over their life cycle.

Sensitivity analysis for energy use and distance

Variations for the environmental impact are dependent on the energy demand per km of the drone as visualized in absolute values in Fig. 6 below. The black line for every bar of the drone represents the environmental impact if the energy usage per km is either increased or decreased by 50%. When we assume the energy usage of the drone to be 50% higher, the environmental impact of the drone is greater than both trucks in all cases. If the energy usage of the drone instead is decreased by 50%, the drone has lower emissions than the diesel truck for all routes, except the SWC scenario, but still higher than the e-truck for all cases.

Greenhouse gas emissions from varied energy usage for the drone. The black lines represent ± 50% of the energy usage calculated in the main results.

Since both the drone and the e-truck use electricity as fuel, the emission factor is assumed to be the same (Swedish electricity mix). Therefore, the only factor that differentiates them regarding environmental impact is the energy usage per km and the distance. The environmental impact of the drone is seen to be lower than the impact from the trucks, the distance reduced either needs to be sufficiently large and/or the energy usage of the drone needs to be sufficiently low. To get a better understanding of the relation between reduced distance and energy usage, these two parameters were combined in a break-even analysis. See Fig. 7 a, b where the drone is compared with an e-truck and diesel truck. We varied the energy usage per km between 0.5 and 4.5 kWh/km, and the distance reduction between 0 and 60% to include all the values obtained in the results. A green box indicates that the drone has lower GHG emissions than the alternative vehicle, while a red box indicates an increase.

Illustration of the increased (red) and reduced (green) emissions for the drone compared with ( a ) e-truck and ( b ) diesel truck, where the energy demand and distance for the drone is varied, darker colour indicates larger increase/reduction.

It is seen that the drone generally causes larger GHG emissions than the e-truck and generally lower GHG emissions than the maximum emission value of diesel truck for a variation of value. The drone starts to perform better than e-truck when energy usage is reduced to and the distance reduced by the following: 3 kWh/km, and the distance reduced by 60%, 2.5 kWh/km and 50%, 2 kWh/km and 40%, 1.5 kWh/km and 15%. Further reduction in energy usage and distance makes drones better perform. We note from this that drones must then have energy usage lower than 1.5 or 1 kWh/km, which would be the energy usage of smaller drones than the one in consideration. Since the energy usage per km for the e-truck is only 0.23 kWh/km, and it is assumed that the energy demand per km for a drone of this size will be 0.5 kWh/km at the lowest, the reduced distance for the drone needs to be at least 55% shorter than for the e-truck for the drone to be the better option. In that case, less than 0.1 kg CO2-eq/FU can be saved. For the worst-case scenario, when it is assumed that the reduced distance is 0% and the energy usage per km is 4.5 kWh/km, the drone accounts for more than 2 kg CO2-eq/FU compared with the e-truck.

When comparing the drone to the diesel truck, the drone accounts for less GHG emissions in all cases compared. Even when the reduced distance is 0%, and the energy usage is 4.5 kWh/km, the drone decreases the GHG emissions by less than 0.1 kg CO2-eq/FU compared with the diesel truck. For the best-case scenario of the drone, when the reduced distance is 60% and the energy usage is 0.5 kWh/km, the drone causes more than 2 kg CO2-eq/FU less than the diesel truck.

Sensitivity analysis for varied number of deliveries

In the base case, we assume all vehicles perform delivery missions 8 h a day, where the number of deliveries depends on the delivery time which means that the drone can perform more deliveries per year than the truck, making the solid costs lower per FU. In the sensitivity analysis, we set the lower limit to the same number of deliveries per year as the trucks, assuming the demand of parcel deliveries to be limiting. We set the higher limit of deliveries to 24 h a day instead of 8 h a day, neglecting the time needed for charging. The result from the analysis is presented in Fig. 8 where the lower limit of deliveries is represented by the higher LCC per FU and the increased number of deliveries gives a reduced LCC.

Results for lifecycle costs per functional unit depending on the number of deliveries made by the drone.

The results of the sensitivity analysis show that when drones deliver all day, costs are reduced by almost 100%. With a decrease in number of deliveries to the same number as trucks, costs increase by close to 100%. Even with this 100% increase in costs, the drone still has lower costs than the trucks in all cases. This indicates that the economic result for the drone can be changed significantly without the cost exceeding the trucks.

Sensitivity analysis for varied velocity

We varied the velocity of the drone from 50 to 150% and observed its effect on the delivery time but did not vary the velocity of the trucks since they are bound by speed limits. This relative decreased time of drones compared with trucks is presented in Fig. 9 below. The results are shown for base case, low and high estimation (50% and 150% respectively) for all scenarios. Even when the velocity is lowered by 50% from the base case, the delivery time of the drone still outperforms that of the trucks.

Results for relative time saved per functional unit when using a drone instead of trucks. The low and high estimations represent ± 50% of the velocity in the base case.

The relative time saved by using drone for low estimation is the lowest for LBC scenario, and highest for SWC. High estimation shows drone to have highest time saved for LBC scenario and lowest for SWC. However, for all scenarios, even the low estimates provide significant time savings. The decreased time per FU is always positive, hence, we observe that delivery with drone is faster than delivery with trucks even if the velocity is reduced by half. This further reinforces that the most important parameter for the decreased delivery time is the shorter distance that the drone uses for deliveries and not the velocity of the drone. It is also natural that the decrease in delivery time is larger in the longer routes, i.e., for BC scenarios, than for the shorter routes, i.e., WC scenarios, because the absolute numbers are generally larger for these routes and additionally reduced distance is longer. It can further be seen that more time per FU is saved when going from the low estimation to base case, than from base case to the high estimation. The BC scenarios are more affected by the change of velocity compared with the shorter WC scenarios, which is a consequence of the longer distance travelled in these cases.

The primary objective of this study was to fill a gap in scientific systems analysis of drone deployment for delivery by undertaking a comparative analysis of drones with electric trucks and diesel trucks for a case study conducted in mid-sized cities. The results of this paper show the emissions, life-cycle costs, and delivery time delimited to the use phase of the vehicles compared for two mid-size cities. Typically for transportation and city planners, the paper shows the importance of understanding various factors that come into play to determine the most suitable options for future transportation design. Implicit decision-making for these actors occurs within the frames of environmental mobility goals, citizens’ needs, and business interests. Results show that it is crucial to understand that the impacts of drones are highly use-case dependent, primarily based on factors explored in this study.

The key findings of this study show that out of the three vehicles, e-trucks consistently emerge as the option with significantly lowest emissions. In contrast, the drone has the highest emissions for the scenarios within city limits and the diesel-fueled truck has the highest emissions in the scenario between two cities. This study indicates that drones compete directly with diesel trucks when it comes to environmental impact. This has to do with the energy efficiency of the vehicles. Notably, the study is carried out without including the infrastructural requirements for the different transport modes, i.e., construction and maintenance of roads needed for the trucks and vertiports for drones.

Irrespective of the scenarios, drones surprisingly turn out to be the most economically efficient option. The major cause for this is due to the lack of need for staff to operate the drones. Lastly, drones are also the fastest option in all cases due to their flexibility as an air mode of transport. The findings from this paper in part contradict the results from Rodrigues et al. (2022) 7 , which shows drones to be able to reduce emissions by up to 94%. Such difference in results could be dependent on the choice of the drones, putting its application in a real-systems context in varying topographies, and getting a fair comparison based on the future technological capacities of the vehicles in comparison. This contradiction also shows that the results of this paper can be generalizable only for drones carrying up to 500 kg in and around mid-sized cities.

In this study, the nature of delivery points in the delivery scenarios between cities, where drones can be considered instead of diesel-fueled trucks, is within rural areas, as supported by previous studies 11 . Rural areas, which struggle with infrastructure issues and lower loads as well as the lower frequency of package deliveries, can be an effective place to consider the use of drones. However, the use of drones is indicated in the industry to begin within urban areas so that a bigger market can be reached, and the business segment can obtain a higher chance of developing the technology, infrastructure, and services. The issue with such a development scenario, in light of drones having the highest emissions in delivery scenarios within urban environments while being the most cost-effective and fastest option, is that this can create increased competition in business, thus increasing interest of business and end users, creating lock-ins that are difficult to change over time, particularly within complex urban infrastructures. This can lead to increasing and even worsening emissions due to the convenience of enhancing the use of the delivery system.

Drones could create a possibility to achieve more optimized load factors than trucks since they are not dependent on the ability to carry a pilot. The drone could therefore potentially be improved by adjusting the size of the drone according to the size and weight of the parcel, giving a higher load factor, which is not as applicable for trucks. In that case, a smaller drone with less energy demand could be utilized when delivery size does not require more, and a larger one applied when needed. Furthermore, trucks and electric motors are innovations that have been built for a very long time, leading to improved efficiency. However, this is not the case for drones which is an emerging technology, wherefore results from this paper should be seen in this perspective that as drone operations may become more efficient attributable to steep learning curves in its production, results may very well fall in the favor of drones, e.g. as has been the case for PV 27 . Until then it is practical to limit the size of drone based on their application, as suggested by Stolaroff et al., (2018) 14 .

Results show that the emissions from drones reduce with smaller distances, and the use of drones is not yet valid in the same way as conventional logistics systems, i.e., deliveries from the logistics center to pick-up points. Instead, final delivery to customers directly from pick-up points to end users would be a rather valid use for drones. Therefore, the logistics system can be multimodal, drones can complement the use of trucks, and can be flexible and localized to improve efficiency.

Drones are mostly acclaimed for their ability to provide delivery services to end users’ doorsteps. Although this aspect is delimited by this study, the findings of the study nonetheless show that the most energy-using operations are during take-off and landing, while cruise and hover are energy-optimized. This significantly implies that for deliveries at multiple stops using drones, the drones may be used to make rooftop deliveries and not doorstep deliveries, thus reducing take-offs and landings and improving their energy efficiency during the deliveries.

There is a possibility that if the technology readiness levels increase with payload increase, the energy efficiency may not necessarily improve due to higher operational energy requirement 28 . This implies that technology developers must have energy efficiency as the target parameter and not very high payloads. From the findings, it is also evident that from an emission standpoint, tactical drones are comparable with diesel trucks in the evaluated scenarios and not with e-trucks since e-trucks have the highest energy efficiency. This further indicates that while designing logistics models, one might not have to consider drones as a competition to trucks, but rather as complements in specific use cases that are highly time-critical, and/or energy efficient in case of unavailability of e-trucks.

Another context to be considered is the actual transition of delivery trucks to electric. A major share of delivery trucks currently use diesel as the primary fuel 2 . Transition pathways for e-trucks today face challenges such as heavy weights of the trucks, reduced payloads, and reduced distances per charge. Through such operational and human-based challenges, the findings from this paper imply that drones may hold the potential to accelerate the transition from fossil-driven vehicles in intra-city last-mile delivery logistics. The adoption of electric drones can be higher due to cost savings and fast delivery times. This could further enable possibilities for accelerating renewable energy production and charging infrastructure.

The significantly high cost-efficiency for 24-h services and low delivery times implies that drones’ deliveries can be particularly beneficial for cases that involve medical services and deliveries to hospitals and rehabilitation centers. This would help significantly cut costs for healthcare.

The deliveries in the study are limited to deliveries from warehouses to pick-up points, excluding the first mile of the delivery mission, the last delivery to the customer, and the parcels reaching the logistics center from several warehouses. A strong recommendation for future studies is to develop scenarios for the last part of the supply chain, from pick-up point to customer, where the supply chain varies depending on the customers (e.g., distance travelled, vehicle type, and allocation for purpose of the trip).

The values and assumptions considered in this study are based on highly reliable data e.g., peer reviewed publications, vehicle manufacturers’ data, in-depth interviews, and inputs from relevant actors in the field. In-depth explanation and sources for data used for calculations are presented in the “ Methods ” section and Supplementary material. Due to the scope, this study is delimited to consider combined truck and drone delivery scenarios, which has been previously modeled in transportation research using small drones carried by trucks 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 . Given the substantial variation in impacts and reliance on specific scenarios, integrating them with trucks is a possible concept for more reliable and better energy efficient transportation. However, it is important to note that the feasibility of this combined truck-drone approach becomes questionable when considering larger drones with payloads comparable to trucks as done in this study due to size and efficiency. The results of this paper are therefore limited to holding significance while weighing the choice between a drone and a truck of similar payloads for the last-mile delivery. In addition, pricing for drone transportation could be significantly impacted by congestion prices for lower altitude airspace management systems 17 , 35 . However, the consideration for such pricing when drones are yet to be deployed poses huge uncertainty and depends majorly on the demand for drones which this study is delimited to do. Therefore, we strongly recommend future research to consider multimodal scenarios and drone congestion pricing.

Finally, during the study, it was identified that there is a lack of regulation regarding the velocity of drone flights. This lack of regulatory standards for what the velocity should be during take-off, landing, and cruise needs to be addressed in future studies, to determine the right velocity for safety within flight paths, built infrastructure, nature, impact on package items, and such. This study provides significant implications particularly for transportation and city planners, with respect to impacts that need to be considered while contemplating implementation of drone transportation systems. Indications are provided regarding the consequences of future scenarios, along with insights into considerations regarding what type of applications can be beneficial while designing such logistics. For technology developers, this study emphasizes the importance of focusing on energy efficiency primarily instead of load capacity for improving the impacts of use of drones for delivery. Additionally for regulators a critical policy gap regarding the lack of regulations for the drone during take-off and landing as well as cruising of the drone is identified.

In this paper, a comparison between electric drone, e-truck, and diesel truck was conducted through environmental impact assessment, life cycle cost (LCC) assessment, and delivery time assessments. The functional unit was chosen as one standard delivery of 250 packages, weighing 2 kg each, divided into three stops, with maximum payload of 500 kg. Parcel deliveries using these vehicles from a logistics center to several pick-up points (often located at grocery stores in Sweden) was studied, see Fig. 10 . An ex-ante approach was used by predicting the technological advancements for the years 2027–2032, when the usage of drones is more likely to be in a commercial stage, and assuming parameters and scenarios accordingly. The system boundaries were defined individually according to the appropriate parameters for each assessment. The ex-ante approach of this study creates a level of uncertainty for the results, especially for the drone that has not reached a commercial stage in Sweden today. Sensitivity analyses were therefore performed for the results of the assessments to evaluate the robustness of the estimated parameters, and to further analyse the impact of different parameters.

The different parts of a delivery chain. The orange border shows the parts included in this study.

Scenario description

The established functional unit gives a delivery of approximately 83 packages per pick-up point. To make a representative comparison of the drone and the trucks in different topographical contexts, four scenarios have been formulated in mid-sized Swedish cities Norrköping and Linköping, as follows:

Long route between cities (LBC)

Short route between cities (SBC)

Long route within city (LWC)

Short route within city (SWC)

Intercity deliveries or route between cities entails deliveries to pick-up points in rural areas between Linköping and Norrköping, where the starting point is Linköping’s logistics center in the north of Linköping and the end point is the logistics center located in the north of Norrköping. Intracity deliveries or routes within cities refer to deliveries in urban and suburban areas in Norrköping and the end point is the same as the starting point.

Routes between cities—BC scenarios

In intercity delivery cases packages are delivered from Linköping to Norrköping with stops in smaller villages in between the cities. Two possible routes of intercity deliveries are investigated, where one was longer and included villages further away from the highway connecting the two cities and the other was shorter with stops closer to the highway. Even though the longer route gives a detour for the truck and therefore could be seen as unlikely for real-life delivery-missions, it was seen as interesting variations to include different contexts in the study. The longer route has stops in Ljungsbro, Kimstad and Söderköping before arriving in Norrköping, which gives a total distance of 95.1 km for the road-bound vehicles and 72.8 for the drone. The shorter route has stops in Tallboda, Linghem and Norsholm which gives a total distance of 47.5 km for the trucks and 41.0 km for the drone. The two routes LBC and SBC are shown in Figs. 11 and 12 respectively.

The longer truck route between cities (left) with a total distance of 95.1 km and the drone path (right) with a total distance of 72.8 km (Retrieved from Google Maps 36 , https://goo.gl/maps/ngLZEXyrxQwdQxpk7 ). The starting and end points are indicated by orange circles and the three stops are indicated by yellow circles.

The shorter truck route between cities (left) with a total distance of 47.5 km and the drone path (right) with a total distance of 41.0 km (Retrieved from Google Maps 36 , https://goo.gl/maps/JrSxpXLfeJhwE3XaA ). The starting and end points are indicated by orange circles and the three stops are indicated by yellow circles.

Routes within cities—WC scenarios

Two different routes for the second case, deliveries within Norrköping, were computed where one included transport to the more suburban areas, and one was focused on the city center. Both routes depart and arrive at the logistics center in Norrköping. The different routes for the two cases and different vehicles are shown in Figs. 13 and 14 below. The longer route (LWC gives a total distance of 23.1 km for the trucks and 14.1 km for the drone, and the SWC gives a total distance of 7.4 km for the trucks and 5.2 km for the drone). The stops were combined into routes suitable for the urban and suburban scenario based on where the pick-up places in Norrköping are located today.

The longer truck route within the city (left) with a total distance of 23.1 km and the drone path (right) with a total distance of 14.1 km (Retrieved from Google Maps 36 , https://goo.gl/maps/XHLHCTVaGgDmxsgM9 ). The starting and end point are indicated by an orange circle and the three stops are indicated by yellow circles.

The shorter truck route within the city (left) with a total distance of 8.4 km and the drone path (right) with a total distance of 5.2 km (Retrieved from Google Maps 36 , https://goo.gl/maps/jACU616etC9YkbeY7 ). The starting and end point are indicated by an orange circle and the three stops are indicated by yellow circles.

Electric drone under consideration

The parameters for the drone chosen in this study are mainly based on the conceptual electrical “side-by-side” (see Fig. 12 ) designed by Johnson et al. (2018) 37 . This eVTOL is based on a series of studies performed by NASA to analyse the drone’s requirements for future AAM system and the type of use cases expected 37 , 38 , 39 . The electrical side-by-side is a duo-copter with a range of 137 km (and a reserve of 20-min cruise mode). It is a tactical drone with the ability to carry a payload of 544.3 kg. The drone is designed to carry people, but since it has the desired capacity for this study it is assumed to be representative for deliveries of parcels without a pilot, complete specifications for which are provided in supplementary material. eVTOL manufacturers estimate the price of the drone to be between 0.6 and 1.5 MSEK while the lifetime of the drone is estimated to be 10,000 flight hours. Based on 2024 yearly flight hours (8 h a day for 253 days) this would equal a lifetime of five years with no residual value at the end. See Table 1 for more technical information about the electric drone.

Delivery trucks under consideration

Most delivery trucks today run on diesel. However, the ex-ante approach of this study considers the competitive vehicles for technologically advanced drones in the period 2027–2032 for a fair comparison. While road vehicles are largely expected to be electric by this period, diesel trucks are included as well, since currently 96.3% of all medium and heavy trucks in the European Union are diesel-driven 2 . Thus, the two vehicles for comparison with drones are e-truck and diesel truck, with payloads of 975 kg and 846 kg, prices of 0.605 MSEK and 0.355 MSEK, and residual values of 0.301 MSEK and 0.177 MSEK respectively as shown in Table 1 . The lifetimes of the trucks were assumed to be 5 years, to facilitate the calculations. Complete specifications of the trucks are provided in supplementary material.

Energy and emissions calculations

In Fig. 15 , an overview of operations for the mission of drone flight is presented. There are five stages of drone flight operations: hover, climb, cruise, descend and hover 40 . The flight operations are performed one time for each stop plus one extra to reach the destination. The flight between cities is assumed to be performed at an altitude of 500 feet (152.4 meters). Flights within cities are assumed to be performed at an altitude of 100 meters since the shorter distance between the stops limits the time of climb. The vertical and horizontal speeds in the different stages are assumed from Silva et al. (2018) 39 where the cruise speed is chosen as the best range speed.

Drone speed vertically and horizontally, and flight altitude during different stages of flight.

The different stages of the flight require different amounts of energy where hovering and climbing are the most demanding stages. Given that the studied scenarios have different length and duration in the different stages, the energy requirements per km for the drone will differ between the scenarios. Therefore, the total energy needed for drone during one delivery will be the sum of the energy required for each flight operation 40 , 41 .

Following Kasliwal et al. (2019) 41 , power required for the different stages is calculated using Eqs. ( 1 , 2 , 3 ,  4 ) which are modelled upon parameters such as sea level air density ( \(\rho\) ), disk load of the drone ( \(\delta\) ), hover system efficiency ( \({\eta }_{h}\) ), climb system efficiency ( \({\eta }_{cl}\) ), cruise system efficiency ( \({\eta }_{cl}\) ), potential energy conversion from altitude into distance ( \(L/D\) ) for cruise, climb and descent, rate of climb ( \(ROC\) ), rate of descent ( \(ROD\) , which is −  \(ROC\) ), speeds in different phases ( \(V\) ), mass of the drone \(m\) , and gravitational acceleration ( \(g\) =9.82 m/s 2 ) 41 . These parameters for the drone in consideration in this paper are provided in supplementary material.

The energy requirements for drones thus calculated are presented in Table 2 . Out of the four scenarios the required energy per km for LBC scenario, which is the longest of the four routes, is the lowest and the required energy per km for SWC scenario, which is the shortest route, is the highest.

The energy requirements per km for the trucks are collected from the manufacturers’ websites and are based on the Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicles Test Procedure. The value is then adjusted based on the changed load factor during the route. The energy requirement is increased by 5.6 Wh/km per 100 kg additional weight according to the assumption made by Ellingsen et al. (2016) 42 . The load factor has low impact on the required energy for the trucks as shown in Table 2 .

The objective of the environmental assessment was to evaluate the impact for global warming potential (GWP) of the scenarios. Each package is assumed to weigh 2 kg, since 75–90% of large companies’ last-mile deliveries weigh below 2.3 kg 13 . The study took a tank-to-wheel approach, assessing the potential environmental impact from the vehicles’ use phase. The system boundary for fuel and electricity was however wider, applying cradle-to-grave, including the environmental impact from production to combustion. To calculate the environmental impact from the different cases and vehicles, emission factors for electricity and diesel were found through the Swedish Environmental Institute 43 , see Table 3 . The emission factor for electricity is a complex parameter since it is dynamic depending on the momentary production of electricity and on geographic location. In this study Swedish electricity mix including consideration of import and export was chosen. For gaining the environmental impact from the vehicles’ use phase, the emission factors were multiplied by the vehicle’s fuel consumption and the distance of the route.

Life-cycle costs calculation

In the economic assessment, the aim was to get an overview of the costs for each of the vehicles. Therefore, a life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) was performed using the equation for net present value (NPV). The NPV represents the present value of all costs and benefits linked to an investment where the future costs are discounted to present value 44 . The net present value benefits from the vehicles’ operations are however excluded due to the study being conducted for a future scenario. Therefore, the most economically beneficial alternative in the study is represented by the alternative with the lowest costs during their life cycle. The equation for calculating the NPV 44 , 45 is presented below.

To discount future values, the discount rate was set to 12% based on a recommended required rate of return of 10% and 2% inflation 43 . Furthermore, most costs are assumed to be nominally unchanged and are based on today’s values (excluding value-added tax). The values assumed with today’s values are then recalculated with the rate of inflation to each year of the study period, except fuel costs which are assumed to increase above inflation, and battery cost which is expected to decrease from current value. Costs included in the study are initial costs, service and maintenance cost, operating costs, disposal costs, and vehicle insurance costs. These costs differ for each alternative vehicle and hence are deemed important; other costs that are uncertain in terms of predictability such as taxes, fees, and insurance of goods are excluded. Thus, the system boundaries for LCC conducted is shown in Fig. 16 . The summary of all cost parameters used is shown in Table 4 . For more details regarding procurement of parameters see supplementary material.

The system boundaries for life cycle cost assessment of the vehicles, where the orange border shows the parts included in this study.

Delivery time calculations

The delivery time was defined as the time from departure at one logistic center, via deliveries to three pick-up points, to arrival at the other logistic center for each route and vehicle. The assessment includes both time for driving and delivery. We assume that both electric and diesel trucks drive at the same speed limits and on the same route in all cases. Hence, the delivery times for drones are identical. To estimate the time of driving for the trucks, the fastest route was used during non-congested times on Google Maps. The drone is assumed to fly the shortest possible path between the nodes at a constant speed (see scenario description). Drop-off with a truck is assumed to take an average time of 3 min 13 . It is furthermore assumed that the drone will land on the ground when delivering, requiring extra time for take-off and landing. The time required for the drone to lift and land is set to 1 min. The procedure consists of 30 s hovering down from an altitude of 30 meters and then 30 s hovering up to an altitude of 30 meters. The extra minute is then added to the delivery time for the drone, making the total delivery time 4 min for the aerial vehicle.

Sensitivity analysis calculations

Parameters that were tested in sensitivity analysis were:

Emission factor—for all vehicles

Energy usage—for the drone

Reduced distance by the drone

Numbers of deliveries—for the drone

Velocity—for the drone

Emission factor, energy usage and reduced distance when using a drone instead of road-bound vehicles, are important categories for the study in general, and especially for the environmental assessment since these parameters affect the consequences of the use phase. The emission factors are a critical parameter for all vehicles since it is dependent on the future market scenarios and production of fuel. To see how the results were affected by different scenarios, the emission factor for electricity was changed to both higher and lower values, and the emission factor for diesel was changed to two different lower values. The emission factor for electricity was adjusted to a higher value corresponding to the electricity mix in the EU in 2019, and a lower value corresponding to electricity from nuclear power. The diesel truck can also be fueled with HVO without conversion and therefore, the emissions corresponding to HVO mix in Sweden 2020 are used as a medium estimate. The lower case for the diesel truck is HVO made from pine oil. The values used for the different fuels can be found in Table 5 .

Energy usage per km and reduced distance when using an electric drone are vital parameters for the environmental assessment. To see the robustness of the results and to find break-even points, sensitivity analyses were performed where different energy and reduced distance were varied to see when the electric drone is beneficial. Break-even analyses were also performed for an e-truck and a diesel truck, as well as a truck fueled with HVO, to get a broader picture of the variations on the environmental impact of the electric drone when comparing to different vehicles.

To test how much the number of deliveries affects the results from the economic assessment, the number of deliveries made by the drone were set to a higher and a lower value. The lower limit is set to the same number of deliveries per year as the trucks, assuming the demand for parcel deliveries to be limiting. The higher limit of deliveries is set to 24 h a day instead of 8 h a day, which was assumed to be possible since the drone is unmanned. The number of deliveries made during a lifetime impacts the results for economic assessment where the impact is total cost per standard delivery based on the functional unit for the lifetime of the vehicles.

For delivery time, the velocity of the drone during cruising and climbing is an uncertain parameter due to current lack of legal standards. Sensitivity analysis for higher (increased by 50%) and lower (decreased by 50%) velocities of the drone is conducted to understand the impact on delivery time. It is assumed that the drone flies at constant speed in all cases while the speed of the truck remains constant since it is dependent upon established speed limits.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].

Change history

02 september 2023.

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41725-x

IEA. Net Zero by 2050 (2021).

ACE., Vehicles in use Europe 2022 (2022).

Jaller, M. et al. Empirical analysis of the role of incentives in zero-emission last-mile deliveries in California. J. Clean. Prod. 317 , 128353 (2021).

Article   Google Scholar  

Muñoz-Villamizar, A. et al. The environmental impact of fast shipping ecommerce in inbound logistics operations: A case study in Mexico. J. Clean. Prod. 283 , 125400 (2021).

Savchenko, L. et al. Combination of different means of parcel deliveries in urban logistics in adverse weather conditions. J. Sustain. Dev. Transp. Logist. 6 (1), 6–17 (2021).

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Koiwanit, J. Analysis of environmental impacts of drone delivery on an online shopping system. Adv. Clim. Chang. Res. 9 (3), 201–207 (2018).

Rodrigues, T. A. et al . Drone flight data reveal energy and greenhouse gas emissions savings for very small package delivery. Patterns . 3 (8) (2022).

Hasan, S. Urban Air Mobility (UAM) Market Study (2019).

Kellermann, R., Biehle, T. & Fischer, L. Drones for parcel and passenger transportation: A literature review. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 4 , 100088 (2020).

Google Scholar  

Cohen, A. P., Shaheen, S. A. & Farrar, E. M. Urban air mobility: History, ecosystem, market potential, and challenges. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 22 (9), 6074–6087 (2021).

Park, J., Kim, S. & Suh, K. A comparative analysis of the environmental benefits of drone-based delivery services in urban and rural areas. Sustainability 10 (3), 888 (2018).

Bulusu, V. et al. A traffic demand analysis method for urban air mobility. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 22 (9), 6039–6047 (2021).

Figliozzi, M. A. Lifecycle modeling and assessment of unmanned aerial vehicles (Drones) CO 2 e emissions. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 57 , 251–261 (2017).

Stolaroff, J. K. et al. Energy use and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of drones for commercial package delivery. Nat. Commun. 9 (1), 409 (2018).

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Kirschstein, T. Comparison of energy demands of drone-based and ground-based parcel delivery services. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 78 , 102209 (2020).

Chiang, W.-C. et al. Impact of drone delivery on sustainability and cost: Realizing the UAV potential through vehicle routing optimization. Appl. Energy 242 , 1164–1175 (2019).

Borghetti, F. et al. The use of drones for last-mile delivery: A numerical case study in Milan, Italy. Sustainability 14 (3), 1766 (2022).

Fleischer, T. et al. Personal aerial transportation systems (PATS)—A potential solution for the urban mobility challenges? Futures 109 , 50–62 (2019).

Straubinger, A. et al. An overview of current research and developments in urban air mobility—Setting the scene for UAM introduction. J. Air Transp. Manag. 87 , 101852 (2020).

Fu, M. et al. Modelling mode choice including urban air mobility—A case-study of Munich. Transp. Res. Procedia 41 , 45–47 (2019).

Goodchild, A. & Toy, J. Delivery by drone: An evaluation of unmanned aerial vehicle technology in reducing CO 2 emissions in the delivery service industry. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 61 , 58–67 (2017).

Zhang, J. et al. Energy consumption models for delivery drones: A comparison and assessment. Transp. Res. Part D-Transp. Environ. 90 , 102668–102668 (2021).

Hwang, J., Kim, H. & Kim, W. Investigating motivated consumer innovativeness in the context of drone food delivery services. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 38 , 102–110 (2019).

Hwang, J., Lee, J.-S. & Kim, H. Perceived innovativeness of drone food delivery services and its impacts on attitude and behavioral intentions: The moderating role of gender and age. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 81 , 94–103 (2019).

Raghunatha, A., Thollander, P. & Barthel, S. Addressing the emergence of drones—A policy development framework for regional drone transportation systems. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 18 , 100795 (2023).

Rebitzer, G. et al. Life cycle assessment: Part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications. Environ. Int. 30 (5), 701–720 (2004).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Elshurafa, A. M. et al. Estimating the learning curve of solar PV balance–of–system for over 20 countries: Implications and policy recommendations. J. Clean. Prod. 196 , 122–134 (2018).

Thibbotuwawa, A., et al. Energy consumption in unmanned aerial vehicles: A review of energy consumption models and their relation to the UAV routing, in Information Systems Architecture and Technology: Proceedings of 39th International Conference on Information Systems Architecture and Technology—ISAT 2018 (Springer International Publishing, 2019).

Aurambout, J., Gkoumas, K. & Ciuffo, B. Last mile delivery by drones: An estimation of viable market potential and access to citizens across European cities. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 11 , 1–21 (2019).

Dukkanci, O., Kara, B. & Bektaş, T. Minimizing energy and cost in range-limited drone deliveries with speed optimization. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 125 , 102985 (2020).

Gonzalez-R, P. L. et al. Truck-drone team logistics: A heuristic approach to multi-drop route planning. Transp. Res. Part C-Emerg. Technol. 114 , 657–680 (2020).

Moshref-Javadi, M., Lee, S. & Winkenbach, M. Design and evaluation of a multi-trip delivery model with truck and drones. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 136 , 101887 (2020).

Murray, C. & Raj, R. The multiple flying sidekicks traveling salesman problem: Parcel delivery with multiple drones. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 110 , 368–398 (2020).

Wang, D. et al. Routing and scheduling for hybrid truck-drone collaborative parcel delivery with independent and truck-carried drones. IEEE Internet Things J. 6 (6), 10483–10495 (2019).

Merkert, R. & Bushell, J. Managing the drone revolution: A systematic literature review into the current use of airborne drones and future strategic directions for their effective control. J. Air Transp. Manag. 89 , 101929 (2020).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Author created routes for delivery scenarios using roads and direct flight paths . Google Maps (2022).

Johnson, W., Silva, C., & Solis, E. Concept vehicles for VTOL air taxi operations, in AHS Specialists''Conference on Aeromechanics Design for Transformative Vertical Flight (2018).

Patterson, M. D., Antcliff, K. R., & Kohlman, L. W. A proposed approach to studying urban air mobility missions including an initial exploration of mission requirements, in Annual Forum and Technology Display (2018).

Silva, C. et al . VTOL urban air mobility concept vehicles for technology development, in 2018 Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference .

Mudumba, S. V. et al. Modeling CO 2 emissions from trips using urban air mobility and emerging automobile technologies. Transp. Res. Rec. 2675 (9), 1224–1237 (2021).

Kasliwal, A. et al. Role of flying cars in sustainable mobility. Nat. Commun. 10 (1), 1555 (2019).

Ellingsen, L.A.-W., Singh, B. & Strømman, A. H. The size and range effect: Lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of electric vehicles. Environ. Res. Lett. 11 (5), 054010 (2016).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Administration, S. T. Analysis Methodology and Socio-Economic Costings for the Transport Sector: ASEK 7.0. (2020).

Žižlavský, O. Net present value approach: Method for economic assessment of innovation projects. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 156 , 506–512 (2014).

Analysis, T. Development of the Road Vehicle Fleet by 2030 (2020).

BNEF. Battery Pack Prices Fall As Market Ramps Up With Market Average At $156/kWh In 2019 (2019).

Preem. List Prices Business Cards . (2020).

Verksamt. Calculate the cost of an employee . 2020 [cited 27-04-2022; Available from: https://www.verksamt.se/alla-e-tjanster/rakna-ut/rakna-ut-vad-en-anstalld-kostar?p_auth=hrzMSxBR&p_p_id=tvv_webcalc_WAR_tvv_webcalc&p_p_lifecycle=1&p_p_state =.

Sweden, S. Salary Statistics—How Much do you Earn...? 2020 27-04-22]; Available from: https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/sverige-i-siffror/lonesok/ .

Agency, S. E. Fuels 2020: Reporting of Reported Data Under the Fuels Act, the Sustainability Act and the Reduction Obligation (2021).

Fransson, N., Lundblad, M., & Lätt, A. Emission factors for fuels for electricity and heat production. IVL Svenska Miljöinstitutet (2020).

Gode, J. et al . Estimated emission factors for fuels, electricity, heat and transport (2011).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We sincerely thank the drone manufacturers, logistics companies, and County Insurance in Sweden for their inputs on quantitative values assumed in this paper.

Open access funding provided by University of Gävle. This work has been carried out under the auspices of the industrial post-graduate school Future Proof Cities (Grant Number 2019-0129), which is financed by the Knowledge Foundation (KK-Stiftelsen). We kindly thank the funding bodies for their financial support.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Building Engineering, Energy Systems and Sustainability Science, University of Gävle, 801 76, Gävle, Sweden

Aishwarya Raghunatha & Patrik Thollander

Independent Business Group Sweden AB, 602 21, Norrköping, Sweden

Aishwarya Raghunatha

Division of Energy Systems, Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping University, 581 83, Linköping, Sweden

Emma Lindkvist, Patrik Thollander, Erika Hansson & Greta Jonsson

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

A.R. Conceptualization, Supervision, Analysis, Writing- Original draft preparation. E.L. Methodology, Supervision, Writing-Original draft preparation. P.T. Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing-Reviewing and Editing. E.H. and G.J. Methodology, Calculations, Results, Writing-Thesis report. All authors have contributed to and reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aishwarya Raghunatha .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this Article was revised: The original version of this Article contained an error in Figure 15, where the values for vertical and horizontal speed in the cruise phase and the vertical speed in the hover phase for landing were incorrect.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary information., rights and permissions.

Open Access 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/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Raghunatha, A., Lindkvist, E., Thollander, P. et al. Critical assessment of emissions, costs, and time for last-mile goods delivery by drones versus trucks. Sci Rep 13 , 11814 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-38922-z

Download citation

Received : 06 April 2023

Accepted : 17 July 2023

Published : 21 July 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-38922-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

The Technology of Drones Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Military use, policing and public safety, safety and regulation, positive impact on civilian tasks, ethical concerns, works cited.

In the last two decades, the manufacture and use of drones have increased rapidly. Drones are unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) used in military, search and rescue, commercial, and civilian operations (“Drones” 1). Advancements in computer technol0gy have contributed largely to the development of innovative applications for use in drones as well as their widespread use. Drones were forts used by military organizations for the purpose of aerial surveillance and airstrikes. Originally, they existed in the form of balloons and kites. However, as technology advancement occurred, they morphed into semi-independent, partly automated aerial vehicles. Drones are an emerging sector of the aviation industry that has been received differently by the public primarily due to the possibility of misuse, infringement of privacy, and military use in combat. Drones are important, innovative, and cost-effective technologies that are used for commercial, military, recreational, and civil purposes.

In the 19 th Century, drones in the form of balloons and kites were used by military organizations for surveillance. In contemporary society, they are used by military organizations to improve security by conducting surveillance on groups and organizations that pose threats to national security. Drones are used for this purpose because of their precision and accuracy (Bracken-Roche 167). In that regard, they are used to monitor people and groups without the possibility of being noticed. On the other hand, drones offer a bird’s eye view as opposed to a fixed, terrestrial gaze (Bracken-Roche 167). A bird’s eye view offers better surveillance with a three-dimensional view that is better for military activities and enhancement of security. The ethical advantages of drones include discriminatory attacks and precise targeting (Bracken-Roche 169).

In that regard, they enhance the safety of civilians during combat. The use of drones became a key element of America’s counterterrorism strategy owing to the security policy of President Barack Obama. The Obama administration used drones as a means of combat because it eradicated the need to rely on information from Pakistan’s intelligence services (Anderson 15). It was effective, convenient, and highly successful. Therefore, it has become a core component of the United States’ strategy on counterterrorism. The use of drones in counterinsurgency attacks in Yemen, Afghanistan, and Pakistan against terrorist groups is proof enough that drones are an important component of security-enhancement strategies because they target both individuals and groups (Anderson 16).

The adoption of drones in the domestic realm has been highly criticized because critics argue that it infringes on the privacy of people. However, the technology is widely used by government and public agencies for surveillance and monitoring of the public for the purpose of enhancing national security (Bracken-Roche 168). The drone technology is primarily used in policing and public safety programs to collect data and conduct monitoring. Drones are effective surveillance tools because they lack an onboard pilot and the possession of remote vision (“Drones” 5). Their increased mobility and aerial capabilities make them superior surveillance technologies (Bracken-Roche 169). Moreover, they are less conspicuous when compared to other forms of aerial surveillance such as helicopters.

One of the main issues surrounding the development and use of drones is safety. In the domestic realm, drones are used for civil and commercial purposes such as photography and recreation. However, regulatory agencies and manufacturers are concerned that technology has the potential to infringe on people’s security and pose security threats (Bracken-Roche 167). The majority of policies and regulations enacted around drone technology are founded on safety. Opponents of drone technology argue that little focus has been placed on the issue of privacy and human rights. However, his argument is erroneous because industry stakeholders and public safety and transportation agencies are doing their best to develop and implement regulations to govern the use of UAVs (Bracken-Roche 168). It is important to evaluate the issue of privacy because regulating drone technology in order to enhance privacy could render it obsolete especially in the application of surveillance applications to enhance security.

Studies have shown that drones have significant socio-economic impacts that have contributed to the widespread acceptance and use of drone technology. They are beneficial in transportation, communication, agriculture, environment preservation, and disaster mitigation (Floreano and Wood 460). For instance, farmers use them to monitor crop growth and construction companies use them to assess the progress of their projects. In the mining industry, the drone technology can be used to monitor and collect volumetric data of excavations while energy companies can use it to monitor their pipelines, cables, and other infrastructure (Floreano and Wood 460). Humanitarian organizations can use drones to monitor their work in refugee camps and during rescue missions in order to enhance the delivery of medical supplies and aid (Floreano and Wood 460). Fire-fighting agencies can use drone technology to assess the safety and dangers of confined spaces during rescue missions. Drones are used by logistics, security, and disaster mitigation companies.

Opponents of drones argue that they are unethical because they infringe on the privacy of people. Moreover, they argue that their use involves large numbers of civilian casualties, and the argument that they conduct discriminatory attacks is wrong (Anderson 20). Some of the public concerns regarding the use of drones include military use, misuse of technology, and privacy (Clothier et al. 1167). The public is concerned that terrorist groups use drones to launch attacks. Despite their varied benefits, the public is concerned about the risks associated with their use. The aforementioned arguments are baseless because every technology has benefits and risks. In order to evaluate the viability of the technology, it is important to consider the pro and cons. Drones have a wide range of applications that include aerial photography, infrastructure inspection, crop spraying, surveillance for law enforcement agencies, military combat, and monitoring during rescue missions (Clothier et al. 1168). Therefore, the benefits of drones outweigh the risks. Studies have shown that the public has not fully accepted drone technology because of a lack of knowledge on how the technology works and its numerous benefits. Public perception of the technology is likely to change as knowledge about drones increases (Clothier et al. 1171).

Drones are widely used in different sectors for various purposes. They were first used by military organizations for surveillance during the 19 th Century. However, as technology advanced, they morphed in shape from kites and balloons to automated aerial vehicles. The technology has not been accepted fully by the public because of the lack of knowledge regarding drones, their benefits, and risks. Opponents argue that they infringe on the privacy of people and that they are a form of exaggerated technology that causes more harm than good. However, studies have shown that drones have numerous benefits that include military combat, aerial photography, infrastructure inspection, crop spraying, and commercial use such as recreation.

Anderson, Kenneth. “The Case for Drones.” Commentary , vol. 135, no. 6, 2013, pp. 14-23.

Bracken-Roche, Ciara. “Domestic Drones: The Politics of Verticality and the Surveillance Industrial Complex.” Geographica Helvetica , vol. 71, 2016, pp. 167-172.

“Drones”. EBSCO Information Services, Inc . 2016. Web.

Floreano, Dario, and Robert, Wood. “Science, Technology and the Future of Small Autonomous Drones.” Nature , vol. 521, 2015, pp. 460-466.

Clothier, Reece, et al. “Risk Perception and the Public Acceptance of Drones.” Risk Analysis , vol. 35, no. 6, 2015, pp. 1167-1183.

• Elsevier Publisher: Technologies Solutions
• Optical Tools: History of Invention and Consequential Development
• Drones Benefits in Law Enforcement and Industries
• Drones’ Psychological and Sociological Effects on US and Conflict Zones
• Artificial Intelligence in Drone Technology for Farming
• Innovation in Textiles: New Fabric
• Virtual Reality's Main Benefits
• Television, Its Invention and Technical Evolution
• Virtual Reality' Sports Training System Working Steps
• Virtual Reality Technology in Soccer Training
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, October 19). The Technology of Drones. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-technology-of-drones/

"The Technology of Drones." IvyPanda , 19 Oct. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/the-technology-of-drones/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'The Technology of Drones'. 19 October.

IvyPanda . 2020. "The Technology of Drones." October 19, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-technology-of-drones/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Technology of Drones." October 19, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-technology-of-drones/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Technology of Drones." October 19, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-technology-of-drones/.

Drone buzz: India must buckle up for today’s AI-equipped arms race

• As US-China rivalry heats up to propel both Cold War II archrivals ahead, sneaky drones and hypersonic missiles are blazing trails we cannot ignore. To defend India’s strategic autonomy in the digital age of warfare, our weaponry must keep up—sensibly.

Innocuous news from China shouldn’t make anyone sit up, but any technological edge it gains over the West in the Cold War II that’s underway should. On Sunday, China test-flew a large unmanned aircraft—or drone— with a payload capacity of 2 tonnes. 

It’s just a cargo carrier, developed by the state-funded Sichuan Tengden Sci-Tech Innovation Company, but it is bigger than the four-seater Cessna-172. A separate Chinese firm aims to rival this drone, at least on size, and yet another is looking to fly passenger drones. 

What makes pilotless planes buzzy in defence circles, however, is the unseen stuff behind the show: digital guidance via a live data-feed. Military mavens speak of such technology as a revolution in warfare, an early example of which were stirrups hanging from saddles that once gave horseback warriors a spatial advantage. 

Also read: Cold War 2: Do not let it spark off a nuclear arms race

Drones have been deployed in both the Ukraine and Gaza wars, as well as the Red Sea hostilities. The barrage of projectiles launched by Iran and its proxy militia Hizbullah against Israel this April was a mix of missiles and drones. 

While almost all were intercepted, combat experts have warned of warhead carriers that may be too sneaky to detect and neutralize. And on this front, China seems to be ahead of the US-led West.

The Cold War nightmare was about nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles that can blast off the planet and re-enter the atmosphere to strike a target across oceans. This projectile technology has been mastered by spacefarers, a club that includes India. 

But the booster phase of such a launch generates enough heat and light to render it detectable, and even if it’s hard to track once fired, it follows a preset path. In contrast, cruise missiles that fly low are sneakier but slower. 

Today’s Cold War II era of digitally guided drones, however, is evolving towards blended weapons that push the frontiers of speed, agility and path deception. In recent years, hypersonic gliders have blazed a trail, except that they aim to ensure neither their blaze nor trail is spotted by an adversary. 

The sophistication of China’s latest hypersonic glide vehicles (HGVs), like its DF-ZF, has alarmed the US and driven it to scramble a response. 

Since software is a key differentiator, artificial intelligence (AI) may pick the winner of this arms race, even though the idea of any command that leaves humans out of its loop is a moral affront.

Also read: In a first, India delivers BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles to Philippines

Where does all this action leave India? By one thesis, an age of hi-tech threats would make geo-strategic neutrality difficult to sustain as the US-China rivalry heats up to propel them both forth, with neither side ready to cover us under its defence dome without New Delhi signing up as a subordinate ally. 

If the going gets tough, as it could in time to come, given Beijing’s ambitions of power projection, our neutral stance might put us in a tight spot. As a matter of national resolve, though, we have kept any breach of Indian autonomy off the table of alliance talks. This means we must play catch-up on weaponry. 

Recently, an Agni-5 test of a missile with multiple warheads placed India in a league of powers with only the US, UK, Russia, China and France as members. Clearly, our top brass wants to keep up with other powers. But as AI-enabled drones and HGVs emerge as whizzy new threats, we’ll need to leap ahead. 

Yet, we must not let enlarged defence outlays get the better of sound economic policies. China risks slipping into a middle-income trap. So does India. To avert such an outcome, we must focus on the quality of people’s lives, not just the inequity of power gaps.

Also read: Govt approves procurement of 12 HAL manufactured Su-30 MKI fighter jets, Dhruvastra missiles

Mint specials, wait for it….

Log in to our website to save your bookmarks. It'll just take a moment.

You are just one step away from creating your watchlist!

Oops! Looks like you have exceeded the limit to bookmark the image. Remove some to bookmark this image.

Your session has expired, please login again.

Congratulations!

You are now subscribed to our newsletters. In case you can’t find any email from our side, please check the spam folder.

Subscribe to continue

This is a subscriber only feature Subscribe Now to get daily updates on WhatsApp

Design and Fabrication of a Quadcopter Delivery Drone

• August 2021
• Thesis for: B.S Mechanical Engineering
• Advisor: Engr. Muhammad Kaleemullah Khalil

• University of Engineering and Technology, Peshawar

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Guladab Bawa

• Abhisek Bag

• Athanasios Milidonis

• Constantine Samaras
• Emma R. O’Neill
• Daniel Ceperley
• S L Waslander
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Development of dynamic four-dimensional printing technology for patterned structures by applying microcellular foaming process.

1. Introduction

2. materials and methods, 2.1. materials, 2.1.1. specimen, 2.1.2. blowing agents, 2.2. experiment, 2.2.1. microcellular foaming process, 2.2.2. three-dimensional printing of patterned specimens, 2.2.3. microcellular foaming 4d printing, 2.3. characterization, 3. results and discussion, 3.1. foaming characteristics, 3.1.1. gas absorption, 3.1.2. foaming ratio, 3.1.3. cell morphology, 3.2. bending dynamics induced by patterning and foaming, 3.3. application, 4. conclusions, author contributions, institutional review board statement, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

• Ngo, T.D.; Kashani, A.; Imbalzano, G.; Nguyen, K.T.Q.; Hui, D. Additive Manufacturing (3D Printing): A Review of Materials, Methods, Applications and Challenges. Compos. B Eng. 2018 , 143 , 172–196. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jandyal, A.; Chaturvedi, I.; Wazir, I.; Raina, A.; Ul Haq, M.I. 3D Printing—A Review of Processes, Materials and Applications in Industry 4.0. Sustain. Oper. Comput. 2022 , 3 , 33–42. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hussain, A.; Jabeen, N.; Tabassum, A.; Ali, J. 3D-Printed Conducting Polymers for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells. 3D Print. Conduct. Polym. 2024 , 17 , 179–195. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tibbits, S. 4D Printing: Multi-Material Shape Change. Archit. Des. 2014 , 84 , 116–121. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Song, H.; Kim, J. 4D Printing with Smart Materials and Structures. Ceramist 2020 , 23 , 27–37. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Goo, B.; Hong, C.H.; Park, K. 4D Printing Using Anisotropic Thermal Deformation of 3D-Printed Thermoplastic Parts. Mater. Des. 2020 , 188 , 108485. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mahmood, A.; Akram, T.; Chen, H.; Chen, S. On the Evolution of Additive Manufacturing (3D/4D Printing) Technologies: Materials, Applications, and Challenges. Polymers 2022 , 14 , 4698. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• McLellan, K.; Sun, Y.C.; Naguib, H.E. A Review of 4D Printing: Materials, Structures, and Designs towards the Printing of Biomedical Wearable Devices. Bioprinting 2022 , 27 , e00217. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alshebly, Y.S.; Nafea, M.; Mohamed Ali, M.S.; Almurib, H.A.F. Review on Recent Advances in 4D Printing of Shape Memory Polymers. Eur. Polym. J. 2021 , 159 , 110708. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Le Duigou, A.; Correa, D.; Ueda, M.; Matsuzaki, R.; Castro, M. A Review of 3D and 4D Printing of Natural Fibre Biocomposites. Mater. Des. 2020 , 194 , 108911. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Correa, D.; Papadopoulou, A.; Guberan, C.; Jhaveri, N.; Reichert, S.; Menges, A.; Tibbits, S. 3D-Printed Wood: Programming Hygroscopic Material Transformations. 3D Print. Addit. Manuf. 2015 , 2 , 106–116. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liman, G.; Mutluturk, E.; Demirel, G. Light- and Solvent-Responsive Bilayer Hydrogel Actuators with Reversible Bending Behaviors. ACS Mater. Au 2024 , 4 , 385–392. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Tang, L.; Wu, X.; Xu, Y.; Li, Y.; Wu, S.; Gong, L.; Tang, J. Bilayer Hydrogel Actuators with High Mechanical Properties and Programmable Actuation via the Synergy of Double-Network and Synchronized Ultraviolet Polymerization Strategies. Polymers 2024 , 16 , 840. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Eristoff, S.; Kim, S.Y.; Sanchez-Botero, L.; Buckner, T.; Yirmibeşoğlu, O.D.; Kramer-Bottiglio, R. Soft Actuators Made of Discrete Grains. Adv. Mater. 2022 , 34 , 2109617. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zolfagharian, A.; Kaynak, A.; Khoo, S.Y.; Kouzani, A. Pattern-Driven 4D Printing. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2018 , 274 , 231–243. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Waldman, F.A. The Processing of Microcellular Foam. Master’s Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1982. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cha, S.W. A Microcellular Foaming/Forming Process Performed at Ambient Temperature and a Super-Microcellular Foaming Process. Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1994. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jeon, B.; Kim, H.K.; Cha, S.W.; Lee, S.J.; Han, M.S.; Lee, K.S. Microcellular Foam Processing of Biodegradable Polymers—Review. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. 2013 , 14 , 679–690. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Taki, K.; Nakayama, T.; Yatsuzuka, T.; Ohshima, M. Visual Observations of Batch and Continuous Foaming Processes. J. Cell. Plast. 2003 , 39 , 155–169. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kim, H.K.; Sohn, J.S.; Ryu, Y.; Kim, S.W.; Cha, S.W. Warpage Reduction of Glass Fiber Reinforced Plastic Using Microcellular Foaming Process Applied Injection Molding. Polymers 2019 , 11 , 360. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Cha, S.W.; Cho, S.H.; Sohn, J.S.; Ryu, Y.; Ahn, J. Reflectance According to Cell Size, Foaming Ratio and Refractive Index of Microcellular Foamed Amorphous Polymer. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019 , 20 , 6068. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yang, H.; Liu, Y.; Sun, K.; Fang, L.; Lu, C.; Xu, Z. Precise Prediction of Photothermally Induced Irreversible Bending Deformation Based on Non-Uniform Thermal Expansion of Layer-Structure Films. Smart Mater. Struct. 2022 , 31 , 095041. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lim, D.; Kim, J.; Hong, J.; Kim, K.; Cha, S.W. Development of Smart Materials with Versatile Bending Capabilities Using Microcellular Foaming Process: Influence of Foaming and Desorption Time. Smart Mater. Struct. 2024 , 33 , 065008. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Brütting, C.; Dreier, J.; Bonten, C.; Altstädt, V.; Ruckdäschel, H. Glass Transition of PLA-CO 2 Mixtures after Solid-State Saturation. J. Cell. Plast. 2022 , 58 , 917–931. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nofar, M.; Tabatabaei, A.; Ameli, A.; Park, C.B. Comparison of Melting and Crystallization Behaviors of Polylactide under High-Pressure CO 2 , N 2 , and He. Polymer 2013 , 54 , 6471–6478. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wong, A.; Mark, L.H.; Hasan, M.M.; Park, C.B. The Synergy of Supercritical CO 2 and Supercritical N 2 in Foaming of Polystyrene for Cell Nucleation. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2014 , 90 , 35–43. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kim, J.; Kim, K.H.; Lim, D.H.; Kwon, B.C.; Hong, J.; Yoon, H.S.; Cha, S.W. Modeling and Experiment for the Diffusion Coefficient of Subcritical Carbon Dioxide in Poly(Methyl Methacrylate) to Predict Gas Sorption and Desorption. Polymers 2022 , 14 , 596. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Seo, J.H.; Han, J.; Lee, K.S.; Cha, S.W. Combined Effects of Chemical and Microcellular Foaming on Foaming Characteristics of PLA (Poly Lactic Acid) in Injection Molding Process. Polym.-Plast. Technol. Eng. 2012 , 51 , 455–460. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pang, Y.; Cao, Y.; Zheng, W.; Park, C.B. A Comprehensive Review of Cell Structure Variation and General Rules for Polymer Microcellular Foams. Chem. Eng. J. 2022 , 430 , 132662. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xue, S.; Jia, P.; Ren, Q.; Liu, X.; Lee, R.E.; Zhai, W. Improved Expansion Ratio and Heat Resistance of Microcellular Poly(L-Lactide) Foam via in-Situ Formation of Stereocomplex Crystallites. J. Cell. Plast. 2018 , 54 , 103–119. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, P.; Wang, W.; Wang, Y.; Yu, K.; Zhou, H.; Wang, X.; Mi, J. Crystallization-Induced Microcellular Foaming of Poly (Lactic Acid) with High Volume Expansion Ratio. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2017 , 144 , 231–240. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kim, K.H.; Kim, J.H.; Lim, D.H.; Kwon, B.C.; Hong, J.; Yoon, H.S.; Cha, S.W. In Situ Changes in Mechanical Properties Based on Gas Saturation Inside Pressure Vessels. Polymers 2024 , 16 , 1276. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kostopoulos, G.; Stamoulis, K.; Lappas, V.; Georgantzinos, S.K. Shape Morphing of 4D-Printed Polylactic Acid Structures under Thermal Stimuli: An Experimental and Finite Element Analysis. Aerospace 2024 , 11 , 134. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yeo, S.D.; Kiran, E. Formation of Polymer Particles with Supercritical Fluids: A Review. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2005 , 34 , 287–308. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Kim, K.H.; Kim, J.H.; Hong, J.; Cha, S.W. Development of Dynamic Four-Dimensional Printing Technology for Patterned Structures by Applying Microcellular Foaming Process. Polymers 2024 , 16 , 2242. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym16162242

Kim KH, Kim JH, Hong J, Cha SW. Development of Dynamic Four-Dimensional Printing Technology for Patterned Structures by Applying Microcellular Foaming Process. Polymers . 2024; 16(16):2242. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym16162242

Kim, Kwan Hoon, Jae Hoo Kim, Jin Hong, and Sung Woon Cha. 2024. "Development of Dynamic Four-Dimensional Printing Technology for Patterned Structures by Applying Microcellular Foaming Process" Polymers 16, no. 16: 2242. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym16162242

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

That Drone in the Sky Is Here to Warn New Yorkers About Flooding

Mayor Eric Adams, an avowed technology geek, is using the city’s drones to deliver a recorded message warning vulnerable New Yorkers of flooding dangers.

By Dana Rubinstein and Emma G. Fitzsimmons

New York City officials have found a new way to deploy their stable of drones: flying them above vulnerable neighborhoods to blare safety messages that flash flooding may be coming.

Five teams of drone operators began to fan out across the city around 1 p.m. Tuesday to send the aircraft — equipped with loudspeakers — skyward to warn of the potential dangers to New Yorkers from the coming rain.

City officials say heavy rainfall is expected to start Tuesday afternoon and last until Wednesday, and that basement dwellers should take particular note. Flash flooding has become a major issue for the city in the age of climate change: In 2021, rains tied to Hurricane Ida drowned 11 New Yorkers in their basements .

Zachary Iscol, the commissioner of the city’s emergency management department, said in a brief interview Tuesday afternoon that it was Mayor Eric Adams’s idea to use drones for these purposes.

The mayor, a self-described tech geek, has championed all manner of technological gadgetry, from a subway patrol robot to devices that fire Kevlar tethers at people fleeing police officers .

But he seems to harbor a particularly soft spot for drones. Under his leadership, New York City officials have deployed the aircraft to inspect buildings, monitor protests and keep an eye out for both sharks and struggling swimmers. In one experimental program, the city said it would equip drones with flotation devices that could theoretically be dropped to swimmers in need.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Press centre

Nuclear technology and applications.

• Climate change
• Environment
• Food and agriculture
• Nuclear science
• Nuclear safety and security
• Human and organizational factors
• Governmental, legal and regulatory framework
• Nuclear installation safety
• Radiation protection
• Security of nuclear and other radioactive material
• Radioactive waste and spent fuel management
• Emergency preparedness and response

Safeguards and verification

• Basics of IAEA Safeguards
• Safeguards implementation
• Safeguards legal framework
• Assistance for States
• Member States Support Programmes

Technical Cooperation Programme

• How it works
• How to participate

Coordinated research activities

• Legislative assistance

Key programmes

• Atoms4NetZero
• International Project on Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles (INPRO)
• Together for More Women in Nuclear
• NUTEC Plastics
• Peaceful Uses Initiative
• Rays of Hope
• The SMR Platform and Nuclear Harmonization and Standardization Initiative (NHSI)
• Zoonotic Disease Integrated Action (ZODIAC)

Review missions and advisory services

• Catalogue of review missions and advisory services
• Peer review and advisory services calendar

Laboratory services

• Analytical reference materials
• Dosimetry calibration
• Dosimetry auditing
• Inter-laboratory comparisons
• Global Nuclear Safety and Security Network (GNSSN)

Education and training

• Training courses
• Online learning

Scientific and technical publications

• Full catalogue
• Safety Standards
• Nuclear Security Series
• Nuclear Energy Series
• Human Health Series
• Conference Proceedings
• Newsletters
• Nuclear Fusion Journal

General interest material

• IAEA Bulletin
• Nuclear Explained
• Photos (Flickr)
• Photo essays
• Briefs and factsheets
• IAEA Virtual Tours

Official documents

• Information circulars

NUCLEUS information resources

• International Nuclear Information System (INIS)
• Power Reactor Information System (PRIS)
• Advanced Reactors Information System (ARIS)
• Integrated Nuclear Fuel Cycle Information System (iNFCIS)
• Spent Fuel and Radioactive Waste Information System (SRIS)
• Nuclear Data Services (NDS)
• Research Reactor Database (RRDB)

Other resources

• Library – Nuclear Information Services
• Impact stories
• Press releases
• Media advisories
• Director General statements
• Photo library
• Press contacts
• Press enquiries
• General Conference
• Board of Governors
• Scientific and technical events
• Scientific Forum
• Medium-Term Strategy
• Partnerships
• Gender at the IAEA
• Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
• Multilingual content
• List of Member States

Management team

• Director General
• Deputy Directors General

Organizational structure

• Offices Reporting to the Director General
• Technical Cooperation
• Nuclear Energy
• Nuclear Safety and Security
• Nuclear Sciences and Applications
• Working at the IAEA
• Types of Employment

Procurement

• Procurement overview

Search form

You are here, update 242 – iaea director general statement on situation in ukraine.

If you would like to learn more about the IAEA’s work, sign up for our weekly updates containing our most important news, multimedia and more.

• Arabic (monthly)
• Chinese (monthly)
• English (weekly)
• French (monthly)
• Russian (monthly)
• Spanish (monthly)

Vienna, Austria

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) experts at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) witnessed thick dark smoke coming from the north-western area of the plant, after hearing multiple explosions throughout the evening. The team was informed that an alleged drone attack on one of the plant’s cooling towers took place today. There is no impact on nuclear safety, IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi confirmed.

The IAEA team reported hearing an explosion today at the same time the ZNPP informed them that a drone had allegedly struck one of the plant's two cooling towers.

In order to ascertain the extent and possible cause of this event, the IAEA Support and Assistance Mission to Zaporizhzhya (ISAMZ) is requesting immediate access to the cooling tower to assess the damage.

ZNPP has two cooling towers located at the northern side of the cooling pond, outside of the ZNPP perimeter. Cooling towers are used during power operation of the plant. Their damage does not directly impact the safety of the six units in shutdown. However, any kind of fire on the site or in its vicinity represents a risk of spreading the fire also to facilities essential for safety.

The plant confirmed to the team that there is no risk of elevated radiation levels as there is no radioactive material in the vicinity of the alleged attack area. The team independently verified the radiation levels and confirmed it remained unchanged.

IAEA Director General Grossi reiterated that any military action taken against the plant represents a clear violation of the  five concrete principles  for protecting the facility, which were established at the United Nations Security Council in May last year.

“These reckless attacks endanger nuclear safety at the plant and increase the risk of a nuclear accident. They must stop now,” said Director General Grossi.

Related resources

• Update 241 - IAEA Director General Statement on Situation in Ukraine
• Rafael Mariano Grossi

More on the IAEA

• Privacy Policy
• Logo Usage Guidelines

Scientific resources

• Information Circulars
• Standards and guides
• Safeguards and Additional Protocol

Stay in touch