Thursday, November 21, 2013

Atlanta International Airport.

Atlanta international airport which is commonly known as Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport is located eleven kilometers (seven miles) from the CBD of the City of Atlanta in Georgia. It is considered the busiest airport in the world serving over ninety million passengers annually. The airport accounts for the highest number of landings as well as takeoffs in the world. It is the hub of world major airlines such as the Delta Air Lines which is the largest airline in the world and AirTran Airways among others. The Delta Air Lines accounted for more than half of the passengers in the airport in 2008. Atlanta International Airport has one hundred and fifty one domestic gates and twenty eight international gates.
Expansion and planning of Atlanta International Airport
The Problem
   
Atlanta International Airport is rated as the busiest airport in the world. It serves the highest number of passengers (over ninety million) and has the highest number of flights (almost one million flights). Although majority of these flights are domestic, it is a major hub for international airline especially to North, South and Central America, Asia, Europe and Africa. It is rated as a major international gate way to the US although it is behind other big airports such as John F. Kennedy international airport which is located in New York City. However, the number of international flights in the airport is increasing at a very high rate. A 3.18 percent increase in international travel was recorded in 2008 with the number of passengers on board international flights reaching 4.6 million.
   
In order to attain its mission of being the best airport in the world by providing services that are beyond the customers expectations, the airport authority have made numerous attempts to improve the facilities in the 5.8 million square foot of land. Some of these attempts have been to increase the effectiveness of transport and communication services for the ever increasing number of visitor and personnel in the airport. Other improvement strategies have aimed at increasing the security surveillance due to the increased threat of international crime such as terrorism and drug trafficking. It is predicted that by the year 2015, the number of passengers served by the airport will have surpassed one hundred and twenty million per year. As a result of increased demand, the City of Atlanta planned to expand the airport in order to meet the immerging challenges as a result of increased passenger numbers as well as security threats. The Hartsfield Development Project was therefore initiated in 2000 which was to cost 5.4 billion dollars and last for ten years. This project was the largest project to have ever been initiated in the State of Georgia. However, the cost and time overrun the project where the project is expected to run up to the year 2015 and cost over six billion dollars (Airport technology. Com Para 1).
Fifth Runway Construction     
   
In the United States, Atlanta International Airport is rated among the major airports most affected by delays. In order to increase customer satisfaction by reducing these delays, there was a need to construct an unrestricted runway. This fifth run way was officially opened in the mid 2006. This was a massive project which resulted in destruction of several building and structures in the neighborhoods for safety reasons. The runway cuts through two cemetery (Flat Rock and Hart) and has structures with firm foundations which are up to eleven storeys. The construction of this runway cost 1.28 billion dollars and runs up to nine thousands feet. This is the first and the major addition of runway in the airport since its construction in the mid 1980s. When this runway was constructed, it was expected that capacity of the airport would increase by 40 with the number of flight per hour increasing from an average of 184 to 237. To ease the movement of passengers in the runway which extends for over four thousands feet to the south compared to previous runways, there are taxiways throughout its length. The runway is designed to allow landing and takeoffs in any weather which reduces delays caused by adverse weather.
   
The runway crosses roads (Interstate 285) with bridges that can withstand 606,271t which means any aircraft including a Boeing 747 or an Airbus A380 can safely be accommodated by the strength of the bridge. Big aircrafts therefore touch the ground before they reach the bridge while the smaller ones can land directly on top of the bridge. The width of this bridge is 152 meters and its length is 3,640 meters but its strength can support the weight of a Boeing 747.  With this runway, the Atlanta international airport can allow the easy takeoff and landing of bigger aircrafts such as the Boeing 777 which requires a longer runway to take off. The runway also allows simultaneous landing which is not possible in many major international airports all over the world (Airport technology. Com, Para 6).

Control Tower
   
To facilitate the movement of air traffic in the newly constructed runway, there was need for a new and more improved control tower. An FAA control tower was therefore constructed for clear sight of the extensive runway. This tower emerged to be the tallest among all towers in the United States airports with over 398 feet. The construction of this tower which was just over five hundred feet away from the old tower meant that the old tower was useless and it was demolished after the new tower was operational. 
   
The modernization and expansion project of Atlanta International Airport which had a budget of 5.4 billion dollars was managed by Hartsfield Jackson Construction Management ventures and Bovis Lend Lease. The main contractor of the runway and taxiway bridge serving it was Archer Western Construction Limited. Other construction companies involved in the project by providing support services such as earth moving includes Yancey Brothers Company, APAC Georgia and Thrasher Trucking Company and Allied RMC (Airport technology. Com, Para 17). 
Maynard and Jackson Jr International Terminal
   
In the same project, Maynard and Jackson Jr International Terminal which is also called the east international terminal was also constructed at a cost of 1.35 billion dollars. Boyken International from Georgia and Connico Incorporated who partnered with Gateway Designers were awarded the contract to designing an international terminal in the airport. The international terminal which measured over 1.2 million square feet had twelve gates, facilities to handle passengers luggage and facilities that facilitated inspection of passengers and their luggage by the federal security officials. The terminal also included space for retail and a parking space that can accommodate over one thousand cars. The construction of this terminal on the eastern end of the field was started in 2008 and is expected to take a minimum of four years (Airport technology. Com, Para 19).

Consolidated Car Rental
   
A consolidated Car Rental facility (commonly known as CONRAC facility) which was officially opened in 2009 was also constructed on one hundred acres piece of land which was previously used as rental car space. The CONRAC is located on the western side of Instate 1-85 and towards the lower side of Camp Creek Parkway. The facility was constructed by the Jacobs Engineering Group Incorporated. The garage in this facility has eight thousand five hundred spaces which is constructed in a four level construction covering up to sixty thousands square feet where customers can get services. The facility includes packing areas, roadways as well as several fueling and washing bays. The most unique feature of this facility is the Automated People Mover which is designed to have a station in every terminal in the complex. The APM system is so efficient and has many advantages over other methods of passenger transport. It eliminates the need to have shuttles to ferry the passengers and contribute in the reduction of pollution. The over all effect is elimination of vehicle traffic as well as reducing human traffic at the terminals.
   
The whole airport has been connected to an underground Automated People Mover which connects the terminals and all the six concourses. The terminals are served with forty nine vehicles which operate for twenty hours a day, everyday. The facility serves all the thirteen stations within the duration of two minutes between any two stations. The facility has the ability to move over two thousand passengers in the airport at a cost of one hundred and sixty thousand dollars (Airport technology. Com, Para 20).

Future Expansion
   
It is predicted that there will be even a higher growth in the number of flights and passengers in the Atlanta in the coming years. This will include local as well as international travels as a result of changing lifestyles which makes air travel more preferable to other modes of transport. Moreover, more international destinations are being opened especially to African countries and Asia. Therefore the airport authority has planned to construct thirty one more gates for domestic flights to ease the anticipated rise in air traffic. This project which is expected to be completed at the end of the year 2010 at a cost of 1.22 billion dollars will be located to the south and is thus known as the southern terminal.
   
The Automated People Mover will be expanded to provide a connection of the southern terminal to other existing terminals in the airport. The road network serving the terminal and the airport will need to be expanded to ease the access of all the terminals both the existing and the new one to the Interstate roads. The plans for the construction of south terminal are underway and the rate at which the plans will be implemented will depend on the demand for the services.

Passengers complex

The passengers complex has also undergone several improvements as a result of the high increase in the number of travelers being served by the airport. The improvement has also aimed at increasing the customers satisfaction by providing world class services. This improvement has touched on the security check systems which are managed by the federal security officials, ticket counters, sidewalks and concourses as well as the luggage handling systems. The taxiways have also been improved to provide better and more reliable services to the passengers. The expansion and enhancement of cargo handling facilities as well as planes maintenance has also been undertaken together with the improvement of other facilities.

Further improvement and modification includes extending the 9L-27R runway by further five hundred feet towards east and nine hundred feet towards west. There are also plans for the construction of taxiways to connect passengers from and to various destinations. This modification is expected to cost about 381 million dollars. In the future, there may be a demand for development of more flight kitchens, maintenance facilities, cargo and luggage handling facilities and even more support services which will continue even after 2010 at a cost of 673 million dollars. Some of the old runways such as 8R-26L have also been renovated in the recent past and reopened.

Airlines have also contributed in the improvement and expansion of the Atlanta international airport. This is because the airport is a regional hub for major airlines. The AirTran Airways have constructed a hangar facility worth 14.5 million dollars at the airport where it has established a hub. The hangar is about fifty six thousands square feet and can accommodate two Boeing 717 at the same time and has over twenty thousands square feet offices in a two storey building.
The airport authorities have also embarked on a plan to upgrade the communication facilities in the airport by installing modern telecommunication facilities at a cost of eleven million dollars. The aim of this up grading is aimed at adopting the most modern technological advancement to both the airport workers, passengers and the airlines. Project is expected to be undertaken in three phases within a period of four years. The first phases involve construction of communication rooms and initial installation and it was contracted to the LGC Wireless. The last phase will include the installation of the system which will have Wi Fi access where the public will be able to connect to the system through wireless communication. The airport is also planning to install a new inline luggage screening system which will cost about twenty million dollars and will be funded by the Transport Security Administration while the Federal Aviation Administration will fund the construction of an apron at the cost of 14 million dollars. This are aimed at increasing security due to the increasing number of passengers and security threats (Airport technology. Com Para 20).


Environmental and Location Factors
   
The location and environmental issues are major factors in the expansion plan of any airport. The Atlanta International Airport is not an exceptional in this case. The location of the airport a few miles away from a major city is a major boost for its expansion plan. Its located in the south and links it to other parts of the United States and other parts of the world. It has a large space for expansion which total up to 0.54 square kilometers with two large terminals. This large space gives room for expansion of runways and passenger complexes as well as other facility.
  
Environmental issues have always been a big issue in the expansion of airports. This is more so when the expansion leads to encroachment of natural resources or leads to displacement of people in residential areas. The expansion of an airport introduces new environmental challenges as a result of the need to have better waste management programs in the airport. Therefore, the development of airports and the ever growing operations in major international airport has negative effects on the surrounding environment. Today, it is clear that it is becoming more difficult to balance the operations and expansion of an airport and the environmental concern that are raised by regulators and environmentalists. The need to reduce environmental effects of the airport operations and limitation of flight hours has reduced the capacities of airports creating a need for expansion. Expansion is also associated with several environmental challenges and therefore the airport authority is faced with competing demands.
   
Some of the main environmental issues that are related to airports operations and expansion include noise pollution from the aircrafts, deterioration of water quality and emissions produced in the airports and by aircrafts. Over the years, federal agencies and state entities involved in airport and environmental regulations and management have made numerous attempts to reduce the adverse effects of airport operations and expansion on the environment. There are set laws that regulate the impacts of airport operations on water and air quality and the regulation of noise pollution by the aircrafts. The Federal Airport Authority together with the Atlanta international airport works together in the minimization of the negative effects of the airport expansion on the environment. The Federal Airport Authority provides grants to different airport authorities for the implementation of environmental impact reduction strategies. Moreover, the National Environmental Policy Acts requires the airport authority to present an environmental assessment impact study before undertaking any development project which has a significant impact on the surrounding environment.
   
As the Atlanta International Airport undergoes massive expansion, the airport authority with the assistance from the Federal Airport Authority has made attempts to balance their activities with the environmental impact. However, some airport authorities argue that some of their expansion plans such as expansion of terminals or modification of taxiways do not require any environmental assessment. While the Atlanta International Airport continues to expand, the need for better waste management strategies emerges. For example, due to the high number of passengers and workers in the Atlanta international airport, the amount of wastes which includes organic matter such as foodstuffs and inorganic plastics reach up to seventy tons daily. This may pose a big environmental problem if a proper strategy is not implemented. The airport authority has therefore launched a recycling system which is one of the biggest such programs in the southern of the United States. The GreensortATL facility does not require separate containers for wastes since it sorts out recyclable materials for recycling while the organic material is taken to a landfill. The facility is managed by the Atlanta Airlines Terminal Corporation. The program aims at reducing the amount of waste produced in the airport by over 70 in two years. The use of automated people mover in the airport has reduced the need for a shuttle service which in turn reduces the amount of air pollution (HJAIA, Para 1).
Privatization and Deregulation of Airport
   
The Atlanta International Airport is a public airport owned by the City of Atlanta and operated on its behalf by the Department of Aviation. However, some of the facilities in the airport such as cargo handling facilities are owned and operated by private firms. In other major international airports in the United States and other parts of the world, more facilities are owned privately. For example, at the JFK International Airport and O Hare International Airport, some terminals were developed and are operated by private firms. Many hangar facilities around the United States are also developed and owned by private investors. There are also several private firm managed airports with more and more companies developing interest in airport business. Privatization of airport operations started two decades ago in Britain when the British Airport Authority was sold to the private sector. Other governments followed the British footstep when the move proved to be more efficient. However, in majority countries, many facilities in airports are managed by the private sectors under a contract. Privatization of airport has been seen to introduce the business idea in the management which intern leads to more profit and efficiency. In many airports where the private sector is involved, there have been numerous expansions. However, privatization of airports is yet to take place in the United States. The deregulation of airport has however transformed the airports into commercially oriented facilities which has resulted into the recent expansion to improve their efficiency (Gesell, pg 1).

Airport Planning and Expansion An Analysis of Factors Affecting the Airport.

The number of airline passengers increased annually in the past decade according to the conducted studies. This has put a great strain on this means of transportation. There has been a need to expand the airport facilities and at the same time build new airports this is brought about by the escalating volume of freight and passenger flows. The airport design and operation are closely related, though, in previous instances they were dealt with separately. This is evident by the fact that if poor designs are implemented then this affects operations adversely. At the same time a proper comprehension of the operation is required in order to attain good design (Ares, Barclay,  Butcher 2009). There are several factors to be considered when it comes to the design and operation of the airport and, hence, to the expansion of the airport.

There are various ways to expand an airport by adding a runway and a terminal. The expansion could also be in terms of how the airport is used and the direction of flights, the number of take-offs and landings. At the moment, London Heathrow Airport operates in the segregated mode this means that the arriving traffic is allocated to a certain runway and the same happens to the departing traffic. The expansion could mean that the use of the runways is altered within a certain period of time. This increases the number of take offs and landings. This is known as the mixed mode. It improves flexibility, reduces delays and at the same time has the potential to provide extra capacity (Ares, Barclay,  Butcher 2009).

Factors to be considered in the expansion of an airport

The transport policy

This is a brief history of the airport and all the information about any expansions that have been made previously to the time it was constructed. This includes an overview of the surface access issues of the airport. In the case of London Heathrow Airport, it has undergone several expansions since the Second World War. The transport policy should include the policy initiatives in addition to the decisions made by the Government previously (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).
London Heathrow Airport was officially opened in May 1946 and this was after it had been transmitted from the military to civilian control. At that time Heathrow Airport was designated as a long-distance airport making it an international airport. The airport has 5 terminals terminal 3 was expanded in 970 and this was to accommodate the new Boeing 747. In 1976 operations began and in 1986, Terminal 4 was opened. All Terminals opened progressively till the last one which was opened in February 2008 (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).

In 2007, London Heathrow Airport had 67.9 million terminal passengers. This was recorded as the highest number of passengers in any of the European airports in addition to being the third highest around the world. Out of the 67.9 million a good number, 62.1 million were on international flights. This was also the highest number out of the all the airports world wide. In 2007, London Heathrow Airport accounted for about 31 percent terminal passengers at the airports in the United Kingdom.

However, the growth of the London Heathrow Airport was recorded to be relatively slower than other airports in the United Kingdom it had an increase of 17 percent more passengers as of 2007 as compared to 1997. All the other airports had an increase of about 66 percent over the 10 years and this would be a good motivator to have the airport expanded. In 2007, London Heathrow Airport had 476,000 air transport movements and this included landings and take-offs. It catered to 24 percent of the United Kingdom total population in addition to being the highest of all the airports. However, the air transport movements had been slower in 2007 as compared to 1997 it had 11 percent more flights as compared to other United Kingdom Airports that had an increase of 44 percent. London Heathrow Airport also handled other cargo excluding passengers luggage and mail and this amounted to about 1.3 million in 2007 and this was 58 percent of the United Kingdom airports total (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).

The argument in favor of the expansion of London Heathrow Airport should be that it would facilitate the fullest possible use to be made of the Heathrows runways at the same time give the resident airlines room for expansion. This makes sense to allow traffic at Heathrow to build up to its full potential, because it is rather obvious that the demand would grow. Reports show that since Heathrow is an international airport, it would afford a greater benefit to the air transport passengers and the industry.

Other information that would be put into consideration when expanding the airport would be the number of airlines that fly and to how many destinations. For the London Heathrow Airport, it had 92 airlines to around 187 destinations that are diverse. It has created employment for 70,000 people and supports 100,000 other jobs indirectly (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).

When expanding an airport the aims should be well defined for example when the London Heathrow Airport got Terminal 5 in 2008, it was presented with an opportunity to assist alliances and airlines relocate. In addition to all that there was redevelopment and improvement in the rest of the airport. Expansion of the airport should potentially afford capacity to amplify the movement in the night period. Currently the night movement or rather the night flights are controlled strictly between 2300 and 0700 hours. This includes limits on the permitted numbers of flights landing and taking off in relation to the total amount of noise allowed at night.

Economic impact

London Heathrow Airport is very important to the national economy of the United Kingdom and it has a very unique function as a major hub airport. Regardless of the fact that over the years, 1997-2007 the increase may not be as much as that of other airports in the United Kingdom, it is the busiest international airport worldwide. It is recorded that in 2005, about 35 percent of its passengers were business travelers. These are the people that support the economy and the international competitiveness of London. London has highlighted Heathrow as vital for the economy and to investors that are international. The demand at London Heathrow Airport is said to be in excess of the five runways capacity. In the past five years the growth the passengers flow was 5 percent in comparison to the overall 27 percent in the United Kingdom airports. Heathrow is said to be in an increasingly uncompetitive situation and this is in relation to other UK airports. This means it has less runway capacity in comparison to other airports. As a result, its network is principally motionless. At this point the London Heathrow Airports competitiveness would be decreasing at the disadvantage of the UK economy (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).

Increasing the capacity would be of credit to the economy, but the economic benefits need to be compared to the environmental disadvantages of the expansion of the airport. The officials, including the government, should support the development of the airport. There are factors to be conditioned for example a noise limit this means that there should be increase in the size of the area that should significantly affect the aircraft noise. The air quality limits is the second factor to be considered the air quality limits should be met around the airport and to be exact for nitrogen dioxide which is said to be the most significant pollutant around London Heathrow Airport. The third condition would be to make sure that the public transport access to the airport is improved. It would be senseless to expand the airport and not have it accessible to the public (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).

Surface access

Currently, London Heathrow Airport is accessible through the London Underground, through the Piccadilly Line, taxis and private hire cars, private cars, Heathrow Express and Heathrow Connect from Paddington, buses and coach services from other towns and London. The expansion of this airport would outrightly mean that the pressure on the transport system that moves people from and to the airport should be increased. London Heathrow Airport should connect to the rest of the United Kingdom and the Central London. The passengers unfortunately bear with congestion and traffic to and from the airport a reporter remarked that they spend more time in their cars than in the planes (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).

The surface access has been an issue for a very long time in the 1950s there were discussions of supplementing the then surface transport with a helicopter service to link Gatwick, Heathrow and Southend. In April 196, before terminal 4 was opened, the Government commissioned a study on the Heathrow surface access. In 1995, there was an announcement about the formation of a high-level group which would examine the scope and how to improve the rail and road support to and between Londons airports (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).

It is the job of the airports operator to come up with a surface access strategy for the expanded airport and this is part of the comprehensive transport assessment which should be ahead of any planning application. This is inclusive of working with the local authority and Highways Agency. They should help the operator to identify any demand management measures that would be needed to address road traffic congestion around the airport (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).

This should be a condition to be fulfilled in order for the expansion to be allowed by the authorities. There should be major improvement in the public transportation. In the near past major improvement in rail access have been announced. This included an increase in the capacity of the Piccadilly line and the introduction of cross rail services from 2017. This should provide a maximum capacity of 6,000 passengers per hour in return this will cover the demand for rail access to an expanded airport. There should also be progress in providing direct rail access to the airport at the added terminals and runways to avoid too much congestion.

Problem statement

The additional expansion of Heathrow would place strain on the already packed roads and rail networks. Currently, the government has not made known any plans to further widen the motorway in this area beyond that which was made known in July 2003. The solution would be to improve the public transport. This requires the operators of the airport to spend several hundred million pounds on new-fangled rail infrastructure. Other factors to be considered would be to introduce a road user charging. This is by charging those who want to enter the airport or rather a pricing across a wider area (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).
Focusing on the future, the prospective departments should work with the operator of the airport and the Network Rail to consider schemes that should provide better connections to the Great Western main line at the same time maximize the efficiency of the few railway lines. To this effect the department already put up a company, High Speed Two Ltd. It advises the Ministry on the credibility and feasibility of all the plans the operator comes up with.

Environmental Issues

Without a doubt, there would be debates on the environmental issues that relate to the expansion of an international airport for example the London Heathrow Airport. Some of the issues would reflect on the carbon emissions and how to tackle them. Others issues to address would be the impact of increased flights on levels of  noise and air pollutions in addition to the impact of augmented greenhouse gas emissions on atmosphere change. A runway is estimated to produce approximately 3 million tones of carbon and this is just in one year. The local air quality standard of the area surrounding the airport is immensely affected by the aviation. It is said that the impact of aviation has been noted and the pollutants include carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons and soot. In addition to the emissions from the planes, local air quality is said to also be compromised by the pollutants from the vehicles that provide access to the airport through the road network (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).

The health impacts include both morbidity and mortality effects, whereas environmental impacts range from effects on crops, damages to the buildings and forests it reduces visibility and effects of the ecological unit. This issue has been so serious because in previous expansion projects, the residents campaign groups have been joined by national campaign groups, around 21 local authorities and politicians and environmentalists to protect against any airport expansions. Recently, the Hounslow Council aired its views that London Heathrow Airport had reached its limits of sustainability and any expansion through the mixed mode and another runway would have severe impacts on the people. Some of these problems can be addressed by increasing efficiency by reducing the weights and using of larger airplanes. This results in the reduction of emissions per passenger, although the number of landings and take-offs will increase. While putting the expansion of the airport into plan, the Climate Change Act should be put into consideration. This is because it sets lawfully binding targets for greenhouse gas emissions in the United Kingdom. It states that by 2020 the reductions in carbon dioxide emissions should be at least 26 percent (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).

The planning process

There are several ways to go about the process of expanding an airport of such considerable importance as London Heathrow Airport.  This is the process that involves the application of the project to the respective authorities. The application for an expansion whether it is another runway or another terminal would be decided by a procedure in the Planning Act 2008. This procedure is deemed faster than what was used before. This means that most applications for infrastructure of national importance would require a new consent form known as the development consent. This Act should contain the ideal definitions of major infrastructure projects and this would include the expansion of an airport. The applicants are required to have had a lot of pre-application discussions with the Infrastructure Planning Committee before the actual submission of the application. The IPC should make assessments of the issues and concurrently meet the applicants and all other interested parties. There should be open floor meeting and the examination should not consist of very long sessions. The Act is unambiguous about the time that the procedure should take. The examination done by the IPC should be over in about six months from the starting day. The IPC should not be going back to the start in deciding whether to meet requirements for higher airport capacity. It should take the National Policy Statement as its starting point.

Statistical analysis

Cost benefit analysis
In the process of assessing the expansion of the London Heathrow Airport, a technique known as the cost benefit analysis is used. This involves the analysis of the relative benefits and costs of a project over a certain period of time and is expressed in terms of money. This includes both fundamentals usually expressed in financial values for example profits and those that are assigned a monetary value for example pollution.  The benefits that are considered are benefits to the passengers, the airport operator, the government in terms of the economy and the air freight users. The key factors that are benefits, but are not included in the cost-benefit analysis, include the wider economic benefits, reduced delays and greater airport resilience. The costs put into consideration are infrastructure costs, noise, local air quality, accidents and greenhouse gases. The costs not put into consideration in the cost-benefit analysis are the landscape and townscape, community severance, road congestion and noise, biodiversity and historic environment. Community severance means the implication of the expansion on the people who live near the airport. These people, without a doubt, would be affected and they should be compensated because there interests are affected (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).

There are several factors to put into consideration using the cost-benefit analysis all the estimates should be positive. This means that under no circumstances considered should the cost of the expansion of the London Heathrow Airport exceed the benefits. The estimated net monetized benefits should be given a range so that variations are put into consideration. There should be a sensitivity analysis and the operator should be ready for any combination of factors for example high radiative forcing factor, higher oil price or a lower GDP. These factors can reduce the benefits expected from the expansion, all other factors held constant. At the same time the combination of factors that in reverse help to increase benefits are hardly put into consideration.

Projection of the benefits and costs

A range of statistical models and econometrics should be used to estimate the costs and benefits of the expansion of London Heathrow Airport. The two most important forecasts include the forecasts of air passenger demand and the forecasts of the emissions of carbon dioxide. There should be sufficient demands in the future for flights in order to justify the costs incurred for example infrastructure at the cost of the emissions emitted (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009). The air passenger demand is forecast using the National Air Passenger Demand Model. Projections of the economic data are combined with the projections of the air fares which have been consequently estimated through the projections of duty rates, carbon charges and fuel costs. The second method would be to come up with the constrained demand which is derived from the National Air Passenger Allocation Model. Allocation of passengers to airports is done taking into consideration future airport capacity constraints. The air passenger demand in the United Kingdom has revealed a strong uphill trend over the years putting aside the short term fluctuations. These are associated with oil price shocks and recessions. Projections shows that the projects that inhibited United Kingdom air travel demand would double from around 228 million passengers per year in 2007 to 445 million passengers per year by the year 2030.

The research shows some patterns there has been a rapid growth in 2004 and 2005 in air travels, giving a movement average of 6 percent yearly growth of the total number of the United Kingdoms airport passengers. It also shows that the movement was slower in 2006 and 2007 but it was still positive. In November 2008, there was a fall in the numbers of demand there were 9.8 percent fewer passengers a compared to the same month in 2007.these recent falls in passenger movement should not necessarily mean that long term projects of expansion are not necessary. For example, in the last recession in 1990, the number of air passenger movement increased steadily through 1991 (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).
Anther type of projections that should be considered is for the costs to be incurred due to the expansion of the London Heathrow Airport. The projections of inhibited air passengers feed into their carbon dioxide forecasting model through the fleet mix model, which in turn takes into account the projected fuel effectiveness of the air fleet. It is estimated that the United Kingdom emissions due to aviation would rise hastily from 37.9 Mt carbon dioxide in the year 2007 to 50.3 Mt carbon dioxide in 2020 (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009) .

Other projections

There are other projections that are required in order to estimate the net benefit due to the expansion of the London Heathrow Airport. These should include the estimates of the capital, land and construction costs that should be related with the expansion. The second estimate should be that of financial worth of the air quality implications. There should be an assessment of the visual impact and the landscape. The operator should get an evaluation of the historical environment impact in addition to the assessment of the possibility of having massive biodiversity implications (Ares, Barclay, Butcher 2009).
One of the serious environmental problems faced by the world today is from commercial aviation activities.  However, to sustain the aircraft industry and to ensure that aviation is present to shape our future, people have to act together rather than depend on the contribution of the airports for protecting the environment.  Many airports have individually put in their own efforts to protect the environment (ACI, 2007).  However, a much greater global program would be required to ensure rather than having merely obtained certifications from the environment control agencies is made. 
   
When an airport is being developed or operated several issues need to be taken into consideration including land usage, noise level control, wildlife mitigation, air quality levels, water quality control, prevention of various potential pollutants from impacting environment, prevention of air accidents, etc.  Besides, airports need to take into consideration effective use of resources and prevent cleanup delays of the environment.  One of the programs that airports need to strongly consider is to reuse and recycle the any waste or existing infrastructure and ensure that it can be put to some use in the future.  One of the most hazardous effects of airports on the local environment and population is noise pollution.  If an airport can reduce noise emission levels to the local communities there are chances that people in the community would be not seriously affected by the presence of the airport in the local area and hence improve the relations with the public (ABIA, 1998).
   
The Airport should strongly consider sustainable practices from the planning, designing and implementation stages itself.  A city would expect the airport to effectively and efficiently use the resources, provide beneficial means of transport to the city and at the same time preserve the natural environment that is existent around the city.  Besides, the airport also needs to consider collaborations with the local agencies such as local transport department in developing an environmentally friendly mass means of transpiration from the airport to the city (ABIA, 1998).  Greater involvement of the community is also required in developing a plan for the new airport and to have open houses so that the voice of the public are also heard (ABIA, 1998).  Air traffic has grown recently and a huge bulk of the air traffic is occupied by the low cost carriers. 

Aircraft noise measurement and mitigation
   
One of the most serious impacts of the airport on the local environment is the high and intense noise levels.  Often it is very difficult to determine the extent and level of noise pollution from the airport and hence it would be very difficult to determine how the public are affected.  In one study conducted in New York City it was found that the people who felt that the local noise levels from the airports were high had a poor general health compared to those who felt that the local noise levels were low.  Thus it can be said that subjective feeling of noise levels would have an impact on the general health of individuals.  Arline Bronzaft who is a Professor at the Lehman College at New York, conducted a study on the effect of noise pollution in children.  She took two groups, one group which studied near a railway track and another group which studied away from the railway track.  She found that those students who studied their elementary school at the classes situated on the side of the railway track were about one year behind than those children who studied in the classrooms away from the railway track. Following this study, a noise abatement device was installed and now it was possible for the students to have identical levels of performance at school.  Arline Bonzaft felt that the effects of having noise pollution in schools near airports would be similar on the school children.  It has been found that children deal with high levels of noise through the mechanism of filtering out.  This works on the phenomenon that the childrens brain as a coping mechanism would ignore high levels of noise including certain human speech.  This ability to ignore human speech would result in retardation of intellectual skills (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997). 
   
In the UK and the US Studies have demonstrated that people who stay near airports have more number of hospitalizations to the psychiatric wards compared to people who stay away from hospitals.  The exact cause for this is not known, but there is a lot of controversy regarding the ability of noise to cause a psychiatric disorder.  High noise levels can in fact raise emotional disturbance which can be an initiating factor for developing mental disorders.  The WHO has recommended 75 decibels maximum noise limit in industrial areas, 55 decibels of daytime noise and 45 decibels of nighttime noise.  However, aero planes and trains can cross 120 decibels in excess.  In industrial areas, with the high noise levels, people suffer from loss of hearing, whereas high sounds at night time can result in difficulties falling asleep.  The society today is ignoring the fact that sound pollution can have a disastrous effect on health.  Although no study can actually confirm that heart disease can arise from exposure of high noise levels, there are certain amount of evidences present that heart disease can be secondarily affected by exposure to high noise levels.  In a study conducted in Japan in 1991, it was found that high noise levels had a negative effect on blood pressure.  In 1977, another public health survey in areas around airports demonstrated that heart diseases were prone in areas around airports (CSE India, 2006).  In a study conducted in the Cornell University in Ithaca in 1993, it was found that blood pressure rose by 4 to 8 mm in school children exposed to high levels of noise and hence suffering from learning and cognitive problems (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997).  In the 1980s, the flights over New York and Newark airports had to be rerouted and planes had to vertically drop suddenly over populated areas.  Citizens faced huge number of problems including high anxiety levels.  Residents in these areas are constantly facing over 78 decibels of noise (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997).
   
To overcome the noise problems, several measures are required.  Aircrafts should be given lower take-off and landing distances such that noise sensitive land located around the airports are reduced.  Flights have to use greater amounts of laser technology which can cut down on the mechanical operations that go on in the engine and in the process reduce the noise levels.  It has become a statutory requirement that flights have technology that can reduce the noise levels by the year 2000.  Stage 2 aircrafts cut down the noise levels to 50  of the conventional aircrafts and stage 3 aircrafts can reduce the noise levels to a further 10 decibels.  Stage 2 and stage 3 aircrafts use dampeners retrofitted that can dramatically reduce the noise levels from about 78 decibels to 72 decibels (62 decibels in case of stage 3 aircrafts).  Studies have shown that residents are mostly annoyed with aircraft noise above 90 to 100 decibels (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997). 
   
Under the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) of section 150, airports should engage in planning to reduce the noise levels.  This program is often called as the Part 150 Program and several airports in the US have become a part of it.  Efforts have been made to reduce noise levels in urban areas and keep it below 65 decibels at day and night times.  All new aircrafts should be compliant with technology that reduces the noise levels.  All old noisy aircrafts should be organized under a retirement program.  Under this program a single system of measuring exposure to noise levels would be implemented.  Along with noise control, the Part 150 program would also look into several other areas including the land use around airports (Federal Aviation Administration, 1983).          

Air quality and air pollution mitigation
   
Airports have been reportedly causing pollution at various levels of altitudes through the aircrafts.  The main problem of aircraft pollution is that it may adversely affect those that stay away from the airport.  Besides toxic substances are released into the sensitive parts of the atmosphere that can have a disastrous effect on the environment.  It has been found that aircrafts release huge amounts of nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, etc.  It can cause havoc such as climate change, ozone depletion and even acid rain.  Aircrafts travel huge distances at very high speeds and can affect various altitudes.  This can have an effect not only on the local environment, but also the national, regional and global.  It is said that along its part, an aircraft would release toxic substances that spread over large areas including 12 miles in each direction. Aircrafts with two runways would pollute a larger area compared to those which have a single runway.  Newer planes although have greater control over pollution than the older planes, are known to release much smaller particles which can be even more disastrous than the larger particulate matter released.  The UN has recently said that more than 50  of all pollution attributed by the transport industry across the world is from aircrafts and airports.  Although there are about 35000 civil aircrafts and 6000 commercial aircrafts in the US, it is no comparison to the surface aviations which may be millions in number.  This goes on to demonstrate that aircrafts and airports are huge polluting objects.  On mere take off, a plane would be consuming thousand of gallons of fuel (ARECO, 2009). 
   
Another major environment concern for airports is that aircrafts often use deicing agents such as ethylene glycol and propylene glycol which is used to prevent freeing of the fuel at high altitudes.  These substances can result in CNS depression, liver damage, renal damage, etc.  Studies have demonstrated that such chemicals have a negative affect over aquatic and animal life (ARECO, 2009). 
  
 In the year 1993, the amount of pollutants released from planes was more than double that was emitted in 1970, which was a huge cause for concern as some of these gases could result in breathing problems.  One of the problems of airport-released pollution is that the ground level ozone can rise and often these precursors may be released by aircrafts.  In turn, the ground level ozone is responsible for about 10 to 20  of all respiratory related disorders.  Studies have demonstrated than in any major city, an airport would be the greatest source of pollution.  According to the EPA, about 56  of the volatile organic compounds are released by ground vehicles, whereas 32  are released by aircrafts during landing and take-off.  On the other hand, ground vehicles release 39  of the nitrogen oxides and 46  are from aircrafts.  Most of the airports that are busy in the US are unable to achieve satisfactory ground ozone levels (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997).
   
However, many experts feel that aircrafts are more energy conversant and release much less amount of pollutant compared to ground vehicles.  One of the problems with imposing local regulations on airports is that one type of aircraft (such as an Airbus A320) would be having different standards of the maximum pollution levels in different states.  Hence, the states should try to sort out and rectify ground pollution rather than concentrating on aircraft pollution.  One mean of saving fuel is the single-engine taxiing process, in which only one engine would be used to fly and reduce pollution by about 50 .  In the year 1995, Delta Airlines tried greater amount of fuel efficiency through taxiing and found that it saved about 5.9 million dollars that year.  There is a need to train the pilots with this type of technique, as during wet weather flying conditions it may be unsafe for the passengers (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997). 
   
NASA on the other hand had developed new technology that can reduce the release of nitrogen oxides by about 70 .  The engines need to have larger combustion zones.  In order to reduce the carbon dioxide levels, the planes should be lighter.  At higher temperatures of the engine, nitrogen oxide levels are increased, but carbon dioxide levels are decreased.  Within the next few decades, aircrafts that release low levels of nitrogen oxides and carbon dioxides would be produced (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997).     
   
There are other means of reducing air pollution from airports.  An environmentally-friendly mass transportation system should exist from the airport to the city that depends on electricity or alternative means of fueling.  This can save the city from huge amounts of pollution.  Another means of reducing pollution is to use electricity to run the basics of the aircraft when it is parked at the airport.  The auxiliary engines of the flight need not be used and lower amounts of emission would be released.  Ground service vehicles which provide transportation from the flight to the airport should operate on electricity, battery or an alternative fuel source.  Another method of reducing emissions is to have an advanced flight landing system that can reduce the need for flights to wait in the air and idle around.  The aircraft makers are also considering greater use of alternative sources of fueling aircrafts that can greatly help to reduce pollution (ABIA, 1998). 

Water pollution and mitigation
   
Some of the most serious water pollutants are the aircraft deicing agents that are required in huge quantities.  In the year 1989, 1990 and 1991, about 4 million gallons of glycols were used in the US by about 93 airports.  Most of the aircraft require about 55  of glycol and 45  of water mixture.  With the current technology used, about 50 to 80  of the glycol would be lost in the water bodies.  Glycols can be toxic both to human and animal life.  They can deplete the water bodies of any oxygen and can cause liver and kidney damage in man and animals.  When they decompose they consume huge amounts of oxygen (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997). 
   
One way reducing the effects of glycol pollution over water would be to have greater amount of regulations for safe disposal of glycol products.  If there state pollution acts apply for prevention of storm water pollution then contamination of the local water bodies with glycol mixed in the storm waters would be prevented.  Many airports across the world are effectively recapturing the glycol and are using them for recycling.  Many of the airports have glycol disposition and decomposition units, which can effectively decompose the glycol.  Besides, airports should also have techniques to capture storm water and ensure that the same is treated for glycol and other contaminants.  In the Denver airport, there is a very effective glycol recapturing and treatment system that helps to recapture 65  of the glycol (EPA, 2006).  In Europe, the recycled glycol is used back in flights, but in the US such a policy does not exist.  However, the recycled glycol can be used in other industries including the coal industries.  Another process strongly considered to prevent icing of the fuel is the use of infrared rays that can heat up the aircraft and prevent the fuel from icing.  In such a case, there would not be a need to use glycol at all (ABIA, 1998). 

Wildlife protection
   
In the US, one of the huge concerns with aircrafts, air safety and wildlife conservation is that frequently aircrafts come in a collision course with wildlife including birds and mammals resulting in compromises of air safety and destruction of the local wildlife.  According to the Federal Aviation Administration about 97  of the collisions are with birds, 3  with mammals (mostly deers) and 1  with reptiles.  In between the year 1990 to 2008, more than 90, 000 animal strikes had occurred.  Bird strikes usually occur during the day time, whereas mammal strikes usually occur at night time.  Most of the animal strikes occur during landing than take off.  One of the most serious aircraft strikes was with flight number 1549, in which the flight had hit a fleet of flying geese and was forced to land in the Hudson River.  During the period 1990 to 2008, more than 16 human fatalities had occurred as a result of strikes with wildlife.  Besides, huge economic losses for the aircrafts, wildlife had suffered damages.  Studies have demonstrated that with a reduction in noise levels of the aircrafts, there has been a dramatic increase in collisions with wildlife.  Besides, wildlife often seek refugee in the airports as a means of finding a way out from the city.  There has been a dramatic increase in the number of aircrafts in the recent years and all this suggests that more and more collisions with wildlife are occurring (Federal Aviation Administration, 2009). 
   
Often to reduce the chances of fatal wildlife strikes, the aircraft personnel should work with the biologists in finding out the potential wildlife hazards and the way it can be mitigated.  All the wildlife strikes need to be reported to ensure that more and more data can be obtained and further analysis can help develop a solution for the same problem.   Airports should work with the biologist in developing wildlife control programs.  Such programs should consider the rehabilitation of animals to other locations and prevention of any catastrophic events that can result in loss of life and property (Transport Canada, 2009).    

Within the United States itself, there has been a doubling of passenger air traffic in the last two decades which has caused the airports and air traffic to be a huge environmental concern.  With a rise in the population further, there would be more and more people staying around airports even if they those areas went beyond the 65 decibel sound limit.  Besides, there is going to be a further rise in the passenger traffic as the same has become more and more affordable and more and more people are finding time as a major constraint to use surface travel.  To prevent further damage to the environment both administrative and technological means should be utilized.  Noise levels cannot only be reduced by setting limits but also by using technology to reduce the sound emitted from the engine.  Air pollution can be reduced by using technology that can use fuel more effectively and prevent release of nitrogen oxides and carbon dioxide into the environment.  In whatever way they can, airports should consider the use of electricity and alterative fuels.  Glycol should be recycled and disposal regulated.  Greater efforts should be made to recapture the glycol and setup plants to decompose the same.  Wildlife protection can be beneficial not only in reducing human casualties but can also seek to protect and rehabilitate wildlife to other locations.  The airport authorities need to consider the standards set by various regulatory boards and use processes that aim to be environmentally-friendly.  Further, airports should also consider using innovative ideas that can help to conserve the environment and ensure that other airports can use the same. 

Overview Design, Characteristics and Capability.

The Mil Mi-24 Hind is a gunshiptransport helicopter developed by the former Soviet Union (Russia).  There are 6 basic variants and several sub-variants and exported to over 50 nations.  In the west, it goes by the North Atlantic Treaty (NATO) designation, Hind.
   
The development of the Hind started as early as the 1960s by the Mil design bureau who saw the potential of the helicopter not only as a form of transport but also as a flying weapons platform after keenly observing the use of helicopters by the Americans during the Vietnam War.  After seeing the Americans make use of the helicopter in a ground support role, the Russians followed suit. However, unlike the American UH-1 Huey which cannot perform the two roles of transport and gunship at the same time, the Russians intend to design a helicopter that can perform both roles.
   
The large body of the Hind is a derivative of the Mi-8 (Hip) transport helicopter.  It has two turboshaft engines mounted at the top which is crowned by a 5-blade main rotor and a 3-blade tail rotor which can be folded to allow for loading in ships or large transport aircraft.  Another feature is the pylon which are sometimes mistaken or regarded as wings with a 12-degree anhedral.  They were added to the aircraft to prevent it from doing a Dutch Roll or uncontrollable waggling at high speeds.
   
The earlier model Hinds had an angular greenhouse canopy while the later models starting with the D-model has a tandem cockpit that houses the pilot and gunner in separate stations topped by a bubble canopy for each station (Gordon  Kommisarov, 2001).
   
Survivability is one of the key characteristics of the Hind.  Being a gunship intended to provide close air support to ground forces and to provide rapid deployment and extraction, the helicopter needs to be tough enough to take enemy fire and be safely return to base.  The armored body of the Hind is strong enough to resist .50 caliber rounds. During the Cold War, the west was the enemy and in anticipation of a potential conflict, they designed the Hind in a way to enable it to be up to the challenge posed by western weaponry.  The cockpit section is reinforced with titanium tubs to protect both the pilot and gunner.  The main rotor is made of titanium to enable it to withstand hits from all but the heaviest armaments as well.  The Hind is also capable of auto-rotation in the event of severe damage.  Through this method, the engines are shut off and the helicopter merely glides down to the ground while the rotors are spinning.  In the hot and dusty environment of Afghanistan, the Hind is fitted with intake filters to prevent fine sand or dust from entering the engines where it could foul up the turbines.  These features make the Hind a very rugged and robust helicopter that gives it an edge over the more sophisticated models fielded by western armies.
   
The wings of the Hind serve as weapons pylons and can carry a variety of armaments such as 23mm gun pods, anti-tank missiles and dumb rockets for dealing with enemy troops.  The gunner also controls an integral chin-mounted 23mm cannon as well.  In addition to these armaments, the Hind can also be configured for air-to-air combat with other helicopters by mounting surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) on its wings.  For additional firepower, a 7.62mm machine gun is mounted on the windows beside the cargo door and manned by the crew chieftechnician who would simply switch to the other side should any enemy force emerge.
   
Another key characteristic of the Hind is its speed.  Despite its large body and role as an airborne troop carrier, the body of the Hind is streamlined to compliment the 1,700 horsepower Izotov turboshaft engines to further prevent drag, the Hind is fitted with a retractable landing gear instead of skids or fixed wheels.  However, its speed is negated whenever it is carrying troops in its transport role making it rather difficult for it to engage in its gunship role which requires agile manoeuvrability.

The Hind in Syrian Service
   
Among the various nations that imported the Hind, Syria is one of the principal users.  Following a series of defeats at the hands of their numerically inferior but qualitatively superior neighbour, Israel in previous wars, Syria rebuilt its armed forces with the Soviet Union as its chief supplier of military armament although they also acquire their military hardware from other states.  Among the weaponry they have acquired, they picked the Mi-24 Hind over other the choices besides the fact that they are the client state of the Soviet Union. 

They liked the ruggedness and simplicity (maintenance-wise) of the Hinds as opposed to the seemingly flimsy build of helicopters built in western countries that also require higher maintenance such as the French-built Aerospatiale Gazelle.  The Syrian military leaders see the Hind as suitable for the environment where it will be operating owing to the dust filters that can be used to protect the engines from the very fine dust that is a staple in the desert environment of the Middle East.  The Syrians received their Hinds in the 1980s and were pressed into service with the Syrian Air Force after a long wait as the Soviets were keeping the Hinds they had in Europe to face down the forces of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Germany  during the 1970s .  As a stopgap, the Syrians acquired Gazelles until the Soviets were finally able to deliver Mi-25 Hinds, the export version of the Mi-24 (Cooper, 2004).
   
Contrary to earlier reports or accounts, Syrian Hinds did not see action during the conflict in Lebanon as the Syrians once again went toe-to-toe with their Israeli adversaries.  Instead, the Gazelles were the ones sent into action. This was because there not enough Hinds for the Syrians to field and as a result, the handful of Hinds the Syrians had sat out the entire conflict against the Israelis.  Surprisingly, even though the Syrians werent able to stop the Israeli advance into Lebanon, they have still acquitted themselves by giving a proverbial bloody nose to the Israelis in the early stages of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon.  During the conflict, the Syrians utilized the hunter-killer tactics against the Israelis using intelligence which told them where the Israelis were likely to go.  The Syrian Air Force attack helicopters would team up with special units of the Syrian Army as they prepare to engage the Israelis once again.  The tactic was very simple.  The ground forces would ambush advancing Israeli forces and tie them down while the helicopter gunships (Gazelles) would move in and finish the job.  The tactic worked as the Syrian hunter-killer team inflicted heavy losses against Israels vaunted tank force which included their new Merkava main battle tank which proved to be very vulnerable when attacked from above where the roof armor is very thin.  But in a bid to promote the Hind, the Soviets fabricated reports that gave the Hinds credit for savaging the Israeli armoured spearheads which eventually be picked up by western intelligence services and were convinced of the Hinds capabilities (Cooper, 2004).

The Hinds would belatedly see action throughout the civil war which would ravage Lebanon throughout the 1980s and ironically alongside the Allied coalition forces during Operation Desert Shield and Storm as Syrias former Soviet-built weaponry were deployed alongside western-made weaponry they were supposed to oppose (Trustees of the Royal Air Force Museum, 2008).  But even though they missed a chance to take on the Israelis, the Hinds would have fared equally better had they been fielded along with the Gazelles.  The Gazelles speed and agility and the Hinds speed and ruggedness would have made a formidable pair alongside the anti-tank infantry forces of the hunter-killer team.  Nevertheless, the success of the tactic was not forgotten and continues to be applied in the Syrian armed forces inventory as they now have enough Hinds to do the job as the Gazelles.

A Research Proposal in Partial Fulfillment.

Oil has become a significant part in our lives since we use the oil for generating machine in plants, to move our vehicles, and to fly people across the continents. Although, since the past decades we face issues of global warming, fossil fuels are still humans greatest energy source.
   
For airline industry, fuel costs contribute significantly to the total operating costs of airlines. This situation encourages airlines to manage the guide line in controlling fuel operation cost for airlines since it heavily impacts the continuity of airlines operation in long term.

Figure 1 shows typical costs contribution of airlines where about 31 of the total airlines costs come from fuel costs. It means that any fluctuations of oil price would drive the airlines to increase their airfares with risks of declining number of passengers or else they can maintain their airfares to be affordable but it hurts the airlines profitability. This kind of trade-off is the most usual challenges that airlines face as the results of oil price fluctuations.


Figure 1    Operational costs
Source IATA, 2009

According to analysts, the most attractive solution to energy crisis is the use of bio fuel to run vehicles and machines at plants. To cope with the fluctuations of jet fuel in the future, airlines have set up several alternatives to reduce the operating costs without grounding their ground staffs or reducing the flight. As figure 2 displays, the alternative to reduce operational costs are from technical operations, operational planning, and ground operational, and flights operations.

Figure 2    Operational costs reduction by area
This diverse alternative solution has risen dramatically in use in major European countries like Germany and Netherlands (JeriCan, 2007) as the jet fuel is predicted to arise in the near future (See Figure 3).  

However, the use of bio fuel in large number also presents another problem as it cause shortage of vegetable oil quickly. The situation leads to another major issue like global warming as many forests in tropical countries are cut down for land transform into palm oil plants. Figure 4 displays the figure of crude oil price that almost doubles in 2007-2008 and further reduce in 2009 but it occurs to be doubling during 2009-2010 period into 74.09 in Jan 24, 2010 from about 45 in Jan 2009.

Figure 4    five-year figure of Oil price 2005-2010
Source httpwww.oil-price.net

Effects on the Rising Oil Price
The undulating oil price presents a significant impact on airline industry, people, and companies working around this business. Below is the brief the impact of fuel increase or decrease on airline operator and people.

Objectives

Concerning the rising of oil price, this paper has three aims and objectives as following
This paper intends to set a guideline for airline operator on how to react when the face an increase in their Fuel operation cost due to increase in fuel price
Using the non-participant observation method, collecting data and analyzing qualitative information from journal, books, magazine and other online materials, this paper is to overcome any future increase such as (reduce fare, ground aircraft, more increase in ticket fare, layoff people, re-engineer their company structure etc)

This paper will help airlines finding sectors to reduce operational costs without carrying out employee lay off
To deliver a guideline for airline operators in preparing the costs reduction program for 2010-2011 period.

Outcomes

Despite the increasing use of oil that greatly influence the transportation sectors especially the airline industry, it also raises concerns over the impact on environment as the use of fossil fuel becomes the major driving factors that cause global warming. In addition, fuel costs that contribute about 31 to the total airlines are indispensable so the outcome will be a well established guideline to deliver a strategy with goals and objectives to be followed by the airline operators in order to reduce or maintain their operating cost. Several alternatives that could be added into this guideline are

Four major areas for costs reduction
IATA estimates that in 2009, the total costs that airlines spend reach over US464 billion (2009) in which 25 (US116 billion) is spent for fuel. Due to the significant costs coming from fuel costs, there are fuel potential savings that IATA Green Teams identify as following
Asset Management
Flight Operations
Technical Operations
Ground Operations
(IATA, 2010)

Using Alternative Fuel
   
In terms of oil consumption, customers tend to decrease the use of gasoline to bring down the costs associated with it. One of the solutions is by using more fuel-efficient cars or buy new hybrid cars. The need for hybrid card and other vehicle that use energy alternative is driven by the fact that in the U.S., vehicles use up the oil reserve.

Research methods
This paper will use the qualitative approaches, which are the research that is carried out through observations. Moreover, observation becomes an important technique for collecting data concerning what occurs in a real-life situation. This method also helps us to reach an understanding about the perceptions of those who are being studied, in that situation. To be specific, we employ non-participant observation method especially by analyzing qualitative information from journals, books, magazines and many more.
In addition, the data retrieval was performed through indirect approach, which means that the information obtained is secondary in nature. The most important of conducting observation is it provides researchers with an understanding about the perceptions about things or people we observe.

However, since observation deals with someones perception, we plan to avoid preconceptions since it would provide this research with some bias. In addition, to provide comprehension, I will do some researches in my company using the data and observation of the working environment. In this situation, I will employ various sources including electronics journals and surceases investigations and books that relate to the topics of discussion in oil and airlines industry.

Gantt chart

Table 1    Time Schedule of Finalization of my Research
No.ActionsTime ScheduleNote1Proposal FinalizationJan  Feb 2010The proposal will have finalization on several aspects including the aims and objective, literature review, recommendation etc.2Composition of Literature ReviewMarch 2010  April 2010Once the proposal is accepted. I will start composing the literature review based on topics accepted in the proposal3Data CollectionMay 2010  August 2010Collecting data from various sources both primary and secondary data4Data AnalysisSeptember 2010  October 2010Composing data analysis from the findings I obtain in the data collection5Formulation of Recommendation to airlines industry to reduce operational costsNovember 2010Formulating recommendation based on the previous findings and drawbacks in the past policy6Conclusion December 2010

Buying tickets online.

Purchasing traveling tickets online will save both time and money for the aviation industry and also for the passengers. The area to be covered in the research is the process that will be involved in purchasing traveling tickets online as opposed to buying them from the airports or through the designated agents. The time taken to purchase a ticket online and the cost incurred will be taken into consideration so as to compare them with instances when such tickets are purchased from the authorized agents or at the airport (BrianX, 2003).

The problem that the research aims to address is the high cost and the great amount of time spent in selling of traveling tickets manually or at authorized outlets. The research is also aimed at making recommendations that will reduce inconveniences associated with buying such tickets through the use of traditional means as opposed to the fast automated means. Some of the research questions that will be answered by the research project include, the amount of time and money that will be saved, the safety of the new method both to the passenger and to the aviation industry and also how convenient the system will be to the passengers purchasing these tickets (BrianX, 2003). 

In approaching this problem, it is important to ensure that all the necessary steps are followed so that the chances of either the passenger or the aviation industry losing money paid are minimal. Both aviation management team and the consumers of the aviation services should be considered when developing and implementing the new system so that it can easily achieve its objectives. Both qualitative and quantitative methods will be used in order to determine in an objective manner the real benefits of the system (BrianX, 2003).  

Airport Environmental Issues.


One of the serious environmental problems faced by the world today is from commercial aviation activities.  However, to sustain the aircraft industry and to ensure that aviation is present to shape our future, people have to act together rather than depend on the contribution of the airports for protecting the environment.  Many airports have individually put in their own efforts to protect the environment (ACI, 2007).  However, a much greater global program would be required to ensure rather than having merely obtained certifications from the environment control agencies is made. 
   
When an airport is being developed or operated several issues need to be taken into consideration including land usage, noise level control, wildlife mitigation, air quality levels, water quality control, prevention of various potential pollutants from impacting environment, prevention of air accidents, etc.  Besides, airports need to take into consideration effective use of resources and prevent cleanup delays of the environment.  One of the programs that airports need to strongly consider is to reuse and recycle the any waste or existing infrastructure and ensure that it can be put to some use in the future.  One of the most hazardous effects of airports on the local environment and population is noise pollution.  If an airport can reduce noise emission levels to the local communities there are chances that people in the community would be not seriously affected by the presence of the airport in the local area and hence improve the relations with the public (ABIA, 1998).
   
The Airport should strongly consider sustainable practices from the planning, designing and implementation stages itself.  A city would expect the airport to effectively and efficiently use the resources, provide beneficial means of transport to the city and at the same time preserve the natural environment that is existent around the city.  Besides, the airport also needs to consider collaborations with the local agencies such as local transport department in developing an environmentally friendly mass means of transpiration from the airport to the city (ABIA, 1998).  Greater involvement of the community is also required in developing a plan for the new airport and to have open houses so that the voice of the public are also heard (ABIA, 1998).  Air traffic has grown recently and a huge bulk of the air traffic is occupied by the low cost carriers. 

Aircraft noise measurement and mitigation
   
One of the most serious impacts of the airport on the local environment is the high and intense noise levels.  Often it is very difficult to determine the extent and level of noise pollution from the airport and hence it would be very difficult to determine how the public are affected.  In one study conducted in New York City it was found that the people who felt that the local noise levels from the airports were high had a poor general health compared to those who felt that the local noise levels were low.  Thus it can be said that subjective feeling of noise levels would have an impact on the general health of individuals.  Arline Bronzaft who is a Professor at the Lehman College at New York, conducted a study on the effect of noise pollution in children.  She took two groups, one group which studied near a railway track and another group which studied away from the railway track.  She found that those students who studied their elementary school at the classes situated on the side of the railway track were about one year behind than those children who studied in the classrooms away from the railway track. Following this study, a noise abatement device was installed and now it was possible for the students to have identical levels of performance at school.  Arline Bonzaft felt that the effects of having noise pollution in schools near airports would be similar on the school children.  It has been found that children deal with high levels of noise through the mechanism of filtering out.  This works on the phenomenon that the childrens brain as a coping mechanism would ignore high levels of noise including certain human speech.  This ability to ignore human speech would result in retardation of intellectual skills (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997). 
   
In the UK and the US Studies have demonstrated that people who stay near airports have more number of hospitalizations to the psychiatric wards compared to people who stay away from hospitals.  The exact cause for this is not known, but there is a lot of controversy regarding the ability of noise to cause a psychiatric disorder.  High noise levels can in fact raise emotional disturbance which can be an initiating factor for developing mental disorders.  The WHO has recommended 75 decibels maximum noise limit in industrial areas, 55 decibels of daytime noise and 45 decibels of nighttime noise.  However, aero planes and trains can cross 120 decibels in excess.  In industrial areas, with the high noise levels, people suffer from loss of hearing, whereas high sounds at night time can result in difficulties falling asleep.  The society today is ignoring the fact that sound pollution can have a disastrous effect on health.  Although no study can actually confirm that heart disease can arise from exposure of high noise levels, there are certain amount of evidences present that heart disease can be secondarily affected by exposure to high noise levels.  In a study conducted in Japan in 1991, it was found that high noise levels had a negative effect on blood pressure.  In 1977, another public health survey in areas around airports demonstrated that heart diseases were prone in areas around airports (CSE India, 2006).  In a study conducted in the Cornell University in Ithaca in 1993, it was found that blood pressure rose by 4 to 8 mm in school children exposed to high levels of noise and hence suffering from learning and cognitive problems (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997).  In the 1980s, the flights over New York and Newark airports had to be rerouted and planes had to vertically drop suddenly over populated areas.  Citizens faced huge number of problems including high anxiety levels.  Residents in these areas are constantly facing over 78 decibels of noise (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997).
   
To overcome the noise problems, several measures are required.  Aircrafts should be given lower take-off and landing distances such that noise sensitive land located around the airports are reduced.  Flights have to use greater amounts of laser technology which can cut down on the mechanical operations that go on in the engine and in the process reduce the noise levels.  It has become a statutory requirement that flights have technology that can reduce the noise levels by the year 2000.  Stage 2 aircrafts cut down the noise levels to 50  of the conventional aircrafts and stage 3 aircrafts can reduce the noise levels to a further 10 decibels.  Stage 2 and stage 3 aircrafts use dampeners retrofitted that can dramatically reduce the noise levels from about 78 decibels to 72 decibels (62 decibels in case of stage 3 aircrafts).  Studies have shown that residents are mostly annoyed with aircraft noise above 90 to 100 decibels (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997). 
   
Under the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) of section 150, airports should engage in planning to reduce the noise levels.  This program is often called as the Part 150 Program and several airports in the US have become a part of it.  Efforts have been made to reduce noise levels in urban areas and keep it below 65 decibels at day and night times.  All new aircrafts should be compliant with technology that reduces the noise levels.  All old noisy aircrafts should be organized under a retirement program.  Under this program a single system of measuring exposure to noise levels would be implemented.  Along with noise control, the Part 150 program would also look into several other areas including the land use around airports (Federal Aviation Administration, 1983).          

Air quality and air pollution mitigation
   
Airports have been reportedly causing pollution at various levels of altitudes through the aircrafts.  The main problem of aircraft pollution is that it may adversely affect those that stay away from the airport.  Besides toxic substances are released into the sensitive parts of the atmosphere that can have a disastrous effect on the environment.  It has been found that aircrafts release huge amounts of nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, etc.  It can cause havoc such as climate change, ozone depletion and even acid rain.  Aircrafts travel huge distances at very high speeds and can affect various altitudes.  This can have an effect not only on the local environment, but also the national, regional and global.  It is said that along its part, an aircraft would release toxic substances that spread over large areas including 12 miles in each direction. Aircrafts with two runways would pollute a larger area compared to those which have a single runway.  Newer planes although have greater control over pollution than the older planes, are known to release much smaller particles which can be even more disastrous than the larger particulate matter released.  The UN has recently said that more than 50  of all pollution attributed by the transport industry across the world is from aircrafts and airports.  Although there are about 35000 civil aircrafts and 6000 commercial aircrafts in the US, it is no comparison to the surface aviations which may be millions in number.  This goes on to demonstrate that aircrafts and airports are huge polluting objects.  On mere take off, a plane would be consuming thousand of gallons of fuel (ARECO, 2009). 
   
Another major environment concern for airports is that aircrafts often use deicing agents such as ethylene glycol and propylene glycol which is used to prevent freeing of the fuel at high altitudes.  These substances can result in CNS depression, liver damage, renal damage, etc.  Studies have demonstrated that such chemicals have a negative affect over aquatic and animal life (ARECO, 2009). 
   
In the year 1993, the amount of pollutants released from planes was more than double that was emitted in 1970, which was a huge cause for concern as some of these gases could result in breathing problems.  One of the problems of airport-released pollution is that the ground level ozone can rise and often these precursors may be released by aircrafts.  In turn, the ground level ozone is responsible for about 10 to 20  of all respiratory related disorders.  Studies have demonstrated than in any major city, an airport would be the greatest source of pollution.  According to the EPA, about 56  of the volatile organic compounds are released by ground vehicles, whereas 32  are released by aircrafts during landing and take-off.  On the other hand, ground vehicles release 39  of the nitrogen oxides and 46  are from aircrafts.  Most of the airports that are busy in the US are unable to achieve satisfactory ground ozone levels (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997).
   
However, many experts feel that aircrafts are more energy conversant and release much less amount of pollutant compared to ground vehicles.  One of the problems with imposing local regulations on airports is that one type of aircraft (such as an Airbus A320) would be having different standards of the maximum pollution levels in different states.  Hence, the states should try to sort out and rectify ground pollution rather than concentrating on aircraft pollution.  One mean of saving fuel is the single-engine taxiing process, in which only one engine would be used to fly and reduce pollution by about 50 .  In the year 1995, Delta Airlines tried greater amount of fuel efficiency through taxiing and found that it saved about 5.9 million dollars that year.  There is a need to train the pilots with this type of technique, as during wet weather flying conditions it may be unsafe for the passengers (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997). 
   
NASA on the other hand had developed new technology that can reduce the release of nitrogen oxides by about 70 .  The engines need to have larger combustion zones.  In order to reduce the carbon dioxide levels, the planes should be lighter.  At higher temperatures of the engine, nitrogen oxide levels are increased, but carbon dioxide levels are decreased.  Within the next few decades, aircrafts that release low levels of nitrogen oxides and carbon dioxides would be produced (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997).     
   
There are other means of reducing air pollution from airports.  An environmentally-friendly mass transportation system should exist from the airport to the city that depends on electricity or alternative means of fueling.  This can save the city from huge amounts of pollution.  Another means of reducing pollution is to use electricity to run the basics of the aircraft when it is parked at the airport.  The auxiliary engines of the flight need not be used and lower amounts of emission would be released.  Ground service vehicles which provide transportation from the flight to the airport should operate on electricity, battery or an alternative fuel source.  Another method of reducing emissions is to have an advanced flight landing system that can reduce the need for flights to wait in the air and idle around.  The aircraft makers are also considering greater use of alternative sources of fueling aircrafts that can greatly help to reduce pollution (ABIA, 1998). 

Water pollution and mitigation
   
Some of the most serious water pollutants are the aircraft deicing agents that are required in huge quantities.  In the year 1989, 1990 and 1991, about 4 million gallons of glycols were used in the US by about 93 airports.  Most of the aircraft require about 55  of glycol and 45  of water mixture.  With the current technology used, about 50 to 80  of the glycol would be lost in the water bodies.  Glycols can be toxic both to human and animal life.  They can deplete the water bodies of any oxygen and can cause liver and kidney damage in man and animals.  When they decompose they consume huge amounts of oxygen (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1997). 
   
One way reducing the effects of glycol pollution over water would be to have greater amount of regulations for safe disposal of glycol products.  If there state pollution acts apply for prevention of storm water pollution then contamination of the local water bodies with glycol mixed in the storm waters would be prevented.  Many airports across the world are effectively recapturing the glycol and are using them for recycling.  Many of the airports have glycol disposition and decomposition units, which can effectively decompose the glycol.  Besides, airports should also have techniques to capture storm water and ensure that the same is treated for glycol and other contaminants.  In the Denver airport, there is a very effective glycol recapturing and treatment system that helps to recapture 65  of the glycol (EPA, 2006).  In Europe, the recycled glycol is used back in flights, but in the US such a policy does not exist.  However, the recycled glycol can be used in other industries including the coal industries.  Another process strongly considered to prevent icing of the fuel is the use of infrared rays that can heat up the aircraft and prevent the fuel from icing.  In such a case, there would not be a need to use glycol at all (ABIA, 1998). 

Wildlife protection
   
In the US, one of the huge concerns with aircrafts, air safety and wildlife conservation is that frequently aircrafts come in a collision course with wildlife including birds and mammals resulting in compromises of air safety and destruction of the local wildlife.  According to the Federal Aviation Administration about 97  of the collisions are with birds, 3  with mammals (mostly deers) and 1  with reptiles.  In between the year 1990 to 2008, more than 90, 000 animal strikes had occurred.  Bird strikes usually occur during the day time, whereas mammal strikes usually occur at night time.  Most of the animal strikes occur during landing than take off.  One of the most serious aircraft strikes was with flight number 1549, in which the flight had hit a fleet of flying geese and was forced to land in the Hudson River.  During the period 1990 to 2008, more than 16 human fatalities had occurred as a result of strikes with wildlife.  Besides, huge economic losses for the aircrafts, wildlife had suffered damages.  Studies have demonstrated that with a reduction in noise levels of the aircrafts, there has been a dramatic increase in collisions with wildlife.  Besides, wildlife often seek refugee in the airports as a means of finding a way out from the city.  There has been a dramatic increase in the number of aircrafts in the recent years and all this suggests that more and more collisions with wildlife are occurring (Federal Aviation Administration, 2009). 
   
Often to reduce the chances of fatal wildlife strikes, the aircraft personnel should work with the biologists in finding out the potential wildlife hazards and the way it can be mitigated.  All the wildlife strikes need to be reported to ensure that more and more data can be obtained and further analysis can help develop a solution for the same problem.   Airports should work with the biologist in developing wildlife control programs.  Such programs should consider the rehabilitation of animals to other locations and prevention of any catastrophic events that can result in loss of life and property (Transport Canada, 2009).    

Within the United States itself, there has been a doubling of passenger air traffic in the last two decades which has caused the airports and air traffic to be a huge environmental concern.  With a rise in the population further, there would be more and more people staying around airports even if they those areas went beyond the 65 decibel sound limit.  Besides, there is going to be a further rise in the passenger traffic as the same has become more and more affordable and more and more people are finding time as a major constraint to use surface travel.  To prevent further damage to the environment both administrative and technological means should be utilized.  Noise levels cannot only be reduced by setting limits but also by using technology to reduce the sound emitted from the engine.  Air pollution can be reduced by using technology that can use fuel more effectively and prevent release of nitrogen oxides and carbon dioxide into the environment.  In whatever way they can, airports should consider the use of electricity and alterative fuels.  Glycol should be recycled and disposal regulated.  Greater efforts should be made to recapture the glycol and setup plants to decompose the same.  Wildlife protection can be beneficial not only in reducing human casualties but can also seek to protect and rehabilitate wildlife to other locations.  The airport authorities need to consider the standards set by various regulatory boards and use processes that aim to be environmentally-friendly.  Further, airports should also consider using innovative ideas that can help to conserve the environment and ensure that other airports can use the same.