Author Correction: Energy use and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of drones for commercial package delivery

In the original version of this Article, the first sentence of the sixth paragraph of the “Comparing emissions” section, the Results originally incorrectly read as ‘In the base case, delivery of a small (0.5 kg) package with the small quadrotor drone has lower impacts than delivery by diesel truck,...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Joshuah K. Stolaroff, Constantine Samaras, Emma R. O’Neill, Alia Lubers, Alexandra S. Mitchell, Daniel Ceperley
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Nature Portfolio 2018
Materias:	Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/f0e6e4c29ec54581a8dfd7a1bab8c385
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:f0e6e4c29ec54581a8dfd7a1bab8c385
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:f0e6e4c29ec54581a8dfd7a1bab8c3852021-12-02T16:49:24ZAuthor Correction: Energy use and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of drones for commercial package delivery10.1038/s41467-018-03457-92041-1723https://doaj.org/article/f0e6e4c29ec54581a8dfd7a1bab8c3852018-03-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03457-9https://doaj.org/toc/2041-1723In the original version of this Article, the first sentence of the sixth paragraph of the “Comparing emissions” section, the Results originally incorrectly read as ‘In the base case, delivery of a small (0.5 kg) package with the small quadrotor drone has lower impacts than delivery by diesel truck, ranging from a 59% reduction in GHGs in California, to a 17% reduction in Missouri’. The correct version states ‘54%’ instead of ‘59%’ and ‘23%’ instead of ‘17%’. The fourth sentence of the same paragraph originally incorrectly read as ‘In the base case, delivery of a medium-sized (8 kg) package has 17% lower GHGs than delivery by truck in California, is about equivalent to delivery trucks for the U.S. average electricity mix, but has 77% higher GHGs than truck delivery in Missouri, which has a carbon-intensive electricity grid’. The correct version states ‘In the base case, delivery of a medium-sized (8 kg) package has 9% lower GHGs than delivery by truck in California, is about 24% higher than delivery trucks for the U.S. average electricity mix, and has 50% higher GHGs than truck delivery in Missouri, which has a carbon-intensive electricity grid. The last sentence of the seventh paragraph of the same section originally incorrectly read as ‘Because of the importance of electricity used to power the octocopter, charging with low-carbon electricity of 200 g GHG/kWh can reduce delivered package GHGs by 34% compared to diesel trucks’. The correct version states ‘37%’ instead of ‘34%’. These errors have been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article.Joshuah K. StolaroffConstantine SamarasEmma R. O’NeillAlia LubersAlexandra S. MitchellDaniel CeperleyNature PortfolioarticleScienceQENNature Communications, Vol 9, Iss 1, Pp 1-1 (2018)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Science Q
spellingShingle	Science Q Joshuah K. Stolaroff Constantine Samaras Emma R. O’Neill Alia Lubers Alexandra S. Mitchell Daniel Ceperley Author Correction: Energy use and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of drones for commercial package delivery
description	In the original version of this Article, the first sentence of the sixth paragraph of the “Comparing emissions” section, the Results originally incorrectly read as ‘In the base case, delivery of a small (0.5 kg) package with the small quadrotor drone has lower impacts than delivery by diesel truck, ranging from a 59% reduction in GHGs in California, to a 17% reduction in Missouri’. The correct version states ‘54%’ instead of ‘59%’ and ‘23%’ instead of ‘17%’. The fourth sentence of the same paragraph originally incorrectly read as ‘In the base case, delivery of a medium-sized (8 kg) package has 17% lower GHGs than delivery by truck in California, is about equivalent to delivery trucks for the U.S. average electricity mix, but has 77% higher GHGs than truck delivery in Missouri, which has a carbon-intensive electricity grid’. The correct version states ‘In the base case, delivery of a medium-sized (8 kg) package has 9% lower GHGs than delivery by truck in California, is about 24% higher than delivery trucks for the U.S. average electricity mix, and has 50% higher GHGs than truck delivery in Missouri, which has a carbon-intensive electricity grid. The last sentence of the seventh paragraph of the same section originally incorrectly read as ‘Because of the importance of electricity used to power the octocopter, charging with low-carbon electricity of 200 g GHG/kWh can reduce delivered package GHGs by 34% compared to diesel trucks’. The correct version states ‘37%’ instead of ‘34%’. These errors have been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article.
format	article
author	Joshuah K. Stolaroff Constantine Samaras Emma R. O’Neill Alia Lubers Alexandra S. Mitchell Daniel Ceperley
author_facet	Joshuah K. Stolaroff Constantine Samaras Emma R. O’Neill Alia Lubers Alexandra S. Mitchell Daniel Ceperley
author_sort	Joshuah K. Stolaroff
title	Author Correction: Energy use and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of drones for commercial package delivery
title_short	Author Correction: Energy use and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of drones for commercial package delivery
title_full	Author Correction: Energy use and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of drones for commercial package delivery
title_fullStr	Author Correction: Energy use and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of drones for commercial package delivery
title_full_unstemmed	Author Correction: Energy use and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of drones for commercial package delivery
title_sort	author correction: energy use and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of drones for commercial package delivery
publisher	Nature Portfolio
publishDate	2018
url	https://doaj.org/article/f0e6e4c29ec54581a8dfd7a1bab8c385
work_keys_str_mv	AT joshuahkstolaroff authorcorrectionenergyuseandlifecyclegreenhousegasemissionsofdronesforcommercialpackagedelivery AT constantinesamaras authorcorrectionenergyuseandlifecyclegreenhousegasemissionsofdronesforcommercialpackagedelivery AT emmaroneill authorcorrectionenergyuseandlifecyclegreenhousegasemissionsofdronesforcommercialpackagedelivery AT alialubers authorcorrectionenergyuseandlifecyclegreenhousegasemissionsofdronesforcommercialpackagedelivery AT alexandrasmitchell authorcorrectionenergyuseandlifecyclegreenhousegasemissionsofdronesforcommercialpackagedelivery AT danielceperley authorcorrectionenergyuseandlifecyclegreenhousegasemissionsofdronesforcommercialpackagedelivery
_version_	1718383371555438592

Author Correction: Energy use and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of drones for commercial package delivery

Ejemplares similares