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.
No comments:
Post a Comment