Airports Commission: Interim Report

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Airports Commission: Interim Report Airports Commission: Interim Report December 2013 Airports Commission: Interim Report December 2013 Airports Commission 6th Floor Sanctuary Buildings 20 Great Smith Street London SW1P 3BT Web: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/airports-commission Email: [email protected] © Crown copyright 2013, except where otherwise stated Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown. You may re-use this information (not including logos or third-party material) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected]. Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Contents Chair’s foreword 4 Executive summary 6 1. Background and methodology 16 2. The global aviation sector 23 3. The UK airports sector 54 4. The UK’s long-term capacity requirements 102 5. Making best use of existing capacity 136 6. Adding capacity in London and the South East 172 7. Next steps 207 Glossary 214 List of figures and tables 223 Appendices and technical reports1 Appendix 1: Supporting Appendix on short-term options Technical Report on short-term options Appendix 2: Supporting Appendix on long-term options Technical Report on long-term options Appendix 3: Technical Appendix: forecasting and modelling 1 The suite of supporting documentation underpinning Chapters is available on the website, https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/airports-commission 5 Chair’s foreword When the Airports Commission membership was announced in November last year, my colleagues and I received more commiserations than congratulations. Few commentators failed to point out that ours was the latest in a long series of so far largely fruitless attempts to grapple with the problem of airport capacity in a densely populated island. A few supportive voices noted that the problem nonetheless needed to be solved, more particularly at a time when, in the aftermath of the financial crisis, the country was thinking hard about its place in the world. While that process of rethinking has not concluded, there is a broad consensus that the UK must further develop its links with the fastest growing regions of the world. Whether that involves growth in exports of goods and services or of inbound tourists and students, aviation connectivity seems likely to be an important element in the mix. And around 6 million Britons travel abroad each year, the great majority by air. So the economic imperative to resolve the problem is strengthening by the year, but there is also a growing realisation that the expansion of aviation must be set in the context of a comprehensive approach to the challenge of climate change. As the other sectors of the economy decarbonise more rapidly, aviation emissions will become a larger proportion of the total. And local environmental impacts, notably the nuisance and health implications of noise, must be weighed in the balance. My colleagues and I are not naïve enough to think that the analysis in this report will miraculously deliver a consensus on the way forward. But we hope that the many people who have responded to our consultations – and we are grateful to all of them – will accept that we have made an effort to grapple with the conflicting points of view and to produce reasonable responses to their points. We hope we have clarified the arguments, updated earlier analysis, assessed the way the aviation world is changing and identified a realistic set of options for future expansion. We were conscious of the importance of avoiding unnecessary costs and anxiety for communities across the South East, unless we saw a credible case for a commercially viable and sustainable development at a proposed site. Speaking personally I am very grateful to my Commission colleagues – John Armitt, Ricky Burdett, Vivienne Cox and Julia King (and Geoff Muirhead who stood down in September) – for their thoughtful and committed work so far. We are also grateful to our hard-working team of officials and others, ably led by Phil Graham. 6 Chair’s foreword In sporting terms, this is a game of two halves. The Interim Report, published here, is the end of the beginning. In 2014 we will move on to the next phase of our work. We remain confident that a solution can be found, which allows the UK to maintain its strong position in world aviation, while respecting the inhabitants of those communities which most feel the side effects. Sir Howard Davies Chair, Airports Commission 7 Executive summary 1 Decisions on airport location and capacity are among the most important strategic choices a country or city can make, influencing the economic, environmental and social development of cities and regions more than almost any other single planning decision. They are also among the most contentious. 2 Alongside economic benefits, airports bring noise, air pollution and carbon emissions, all of which can have significant impacts on the environment and on the quality of life for people who live or work nearby. The planning process must therefore ensure that decisions on airport capacity balance local considerations with the national interest. 3 In addition, most major UK airports are – unusually in international terms – in private ownership. This means that airport planning must also take proper account of commercial considerations. Airports will not choose to finance and build additional capacity unless they are confident it will be heavily utilised. 4 The question of UK airport capacity has been considered a number of times over past decades. The Roskill Commission in 1968 recommended a new airport at Cublington, with a minority report favouring Maplin Sands. Neither airport was built. More recently, the 2003 White Paper The Future of Air Transport concluded that a second runway should be built at Stansted, followed by a third at Heathrow, if certain environmental standards could be met. That conclusion was rejected by the incoming coalition Government after the 2010 General Election. 5 The Airports Commission (the Commission) was set up in 2012 to take a fresh and independent look at the UK’s future airport capacity needs. It has been tasked with producing: ●● An Interim Report (this document) by the end of 2013, setting out the nature, scale, and timing of steps needed to maintain the UK’s status as an international hub for aviation, alongside recommendations for making better use of the UK’s existing runway capacity over the next five years; and, ●● A final report by summer 2015, setting out recommendations on how to meet any need for additional airport capacity in the longer-term. 8 Executive summary 6 To facilitate the process of reaching final recommendations, and reduce uncertainty, it has also sought to identify a list of the most credible options for new runway capacity, which will be further developed and appraised before the final report. 7 The Commission has aimed to generate a greater consensus on airport policy by following an approach that is: ●● Integrated: The Commission has considered a range of economic, social and environmental factors that affect how much – and what sort of – airport capacity is needed in the UK. It has not followed a mechanistic ‘predict and provide’ model, based on forecasting future demand for aviation and then meeting that demand no matter the cost. It has commissioned new research and analysis and sought to consider impacts across the whole of the system, including on air traffic and air space, surface access to airports, cost and deliverability. ●● Collaborative: The Commission has engaged extensively with a broad range of interested parties, through public evidence sessions, a programme of meetings and visits, and a series of discussion papers on key topics. As the number of responses to the discussion papers indicates, the papers were important for advancing debate on key topics such as connectivity, climate change, aviation noise, and airport operational models. The Commission also invited submissions on how to make best use of existing runway capacity, and proposals for adding new airport capacity in the longer-term. It also appointed a panel of leading experts to advise it on key issues. The world has changed since previous reviews of UK airport capacity 8 While the UK has debated airport policy the world has changed. Globalisation and technological innovation are driving an increase in cross-border flows of goods, services and people. The global economy’s centre of gravity is shifting from west to east. Lifestyles have also changed, with many people taking advantage of European integration to live and work outside their country of origin. 9 Aviation has had to adapt to these changes. Two parallel trends can be seen: ●● Consolidation and network integration focused on major aviation hubs. In the most liberalised markets such as the United States and, increasingly, Europe, significant market share has been captured by very large carriers, often formed through mergers. Three major global ‘alliances’ between airlines have emerged – Star Alliance, SkyTeam, and oneworld. These alliances have developed global route networks focused on major aviation hubs in the United States, Europe and, more recently, the Middle East and Asia. 9 ●● The emergence of new competitors and new business models, especially in the low-cost and point-to-point markets. The position of the major American and European carriers is being challenged by rapidly growing Middle Eastern and Asian airlines and by competition from low-cost carriers. The low-cost sector has grown rapidly since the early 1990s, and is continuing to expand into new markets such as business travel and long-haul services.
Recommended publications
  • Review of the Airports Commission's Final Report
    5HYLHZRIWKH$LUSRUWV&RPPLVVLRQ V )LQDO5HSRUW WK'HFHPEHU Introduction 1. In September 2012 the Coalition Government set up the Airports Commission to examine the scale and timing of any requirement for additional capacity to maintain the UK's position as Europe's most important aviation hub, and identify and evaluate how any need for additional capacity should be met in the short, medium and long term. 2. Sir Howard Davies was appointed to chair the Commission, which was required to produce: • an Interim Report by the end of 2013, assessing the evidence on the nature, scale, and timing of steps needed to maintain the UK’s status as an international hub for aviation; and to make recommendations for the better use of current runway capacity consistent with credible long term options; and • a Final Report by summer 2015, giving its assessment of the options for meeting the UK's international connectivity needs, including their economic, social and environmental impact; its recommendations for the optimum approach to meeting any needs; and its recommendations for ensuring that the need is met as expeditiously as practicable within the required timescale. 3. The Commission’s Final Report was published in July 2015. It was a substantial piece of work that took nearly three years to complete. Given the scale of the exercise undertaken by the Commission, the body of evidence and analysis produced is an important contribution to the Government's considerations in respect of future airport capacity in the UK. However it is necessary for the Department to review the appropriateness of the Airports Commission's evidence base and of its assessment of that evidence base to inform any Government decision on how to proceed, and to identify whether any areas of that work may need to be assessed by the Government in further detail.
    [Show full text]
  • United Kingdom Airport Policy, Airport Surface Access Strategy, Multi-Airport Systems, Airport Planning
    TRENDS IN AIRPORT SURFACE ACCESS IN THE LONDON MULTI-AIRPORT SYSTEM Richard Moxon1 Cranfield University Abstract The London multi-airport system is described and changes in ownership from state organisations to competing private enterprises are assessed. A taxonomy of United Kingdom government action related to airport planning policy is presented with critical analysis in relation to airport surface access strategy. Changes in public transport use by passengers and employees at London airports are quantified to illustrate the success or otherwise of government policy. Passenger groups (defined by nationality and trip purpose) driving the increase in public transport are identified. Current London airport surface access strategic targets for passengers and employees are compared with the early versions suggested by the government to highlight the changed airport approach. Emerging surface airport access issues at London’s airports are discussed. Key words: United Kingdom airport policy, airport surface access strategy, multi-airport systems, airport planning. 1 Centre for Air Transport Management, Cranfield University, Bedfordshire, MK43 0TR, UK E: [email protected] 1 1. INTRODUCTION London has moved from four government (national and local) owned airports before 1986 to the current market of six competing private enterprises designated as serving the capital. In parallel with this (since 1998) the United Kingdom government has chosen to publicise a variety of reports, guidance and policy relating to airport surface access. The regularity and detail of such publications has varied and they have not been mandatory in composition. In the last decade of numerous airport ownership changes in London, published research has not tracked the nature or the impact of government attempts to influence the move from private to public transport by airport employees and staff in the London multi-airport system.
    [Show full text]
  • A Short Guide to the Department for Transport July 2015 Overview Rail Roads Local Transport Aviation, Maritime and Other
    A Short Guide to the Department for Transport July 2015 Overview Rail Roads Local transport Aviation, maritime and other | About this guide This Short Guide summarises what the | Contact details Department for Transport (DfT) does, how much it costs, recent and planned changes and what to look out for across its main business areas and services. If you would like to know more about the NAO’s work on the Department for Transport, please contact: Rebecca Sheeran Director, Value for Money [email protected] 020 7798 7815 Matt Kay Director, Financial Audit [email protected] 020 7798 7916 If you are interested in the NAO’s work and support The National Audit Office scrutinises public spending for Parliament and for Parliament more widely, please contact: is independent of government. The Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG), Sir Amyas Morse KCB, is an Officer of the House of Commons Adrian Jenner and leads the NAO, which employs some 810 people. The C&AG certifies the accounts of all government departments and many other Director of Parliamentary Relations public sector bodies. He has statutory authority to examine and report [email protected] to Parliament on whether departments and the bodies they fund have 020 7798 7461 used their resources efficiently, effectively, and with economy. Our studies evaluate the value for money of public spending, nationally and locally. Our recommendations and reports on good practice For full iPad interactivity, please view this PDF help government improve public services, and our work led to Interactive in iBooks or GoodReader audited savings of £1.15 billion in 2014.
    [Show full text]
  • The Power for Flight: NASA's Contributions To
    The Power Power The forFlight NASA’s Contributions to Aircraft Propulsion for for Flight Jeremy R. Kinney ThePower for NASA’s Contributions to Aircraft Propulsion Flight Jeremy R. Kinney Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Kinney, Jeremy R., author. Title: The power for flight : NASA’s contributions to aircraft propulsion / Jeremy R. Kinney. Description: Washington, DC : National Aeronautics and Space Administration, [2017] | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2017027182 (print) | LCCN 2017028761 (ebook) | ISBN 9781626830387 (Epub) | ISBN 9781626830370 (hardcover) ) | ISBN 9781626830394 (softcover) Subjects: LCSH: United States. National Aeronautics and Space Administration– Research–History. | Airplanes–Jet propulsion–Research–United States– History. | Airplanes–Motors–Research–United States–History. Classification: LCC TL521.312 (ebook) | LCC TL521.312 .K47 2017 (print) | DDC 629.134/35072073–dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017027182 Copyright © 2017 by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The opinions expressed in this volume are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the United States Government or of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. This publication is available as a free download at http://www.nasa.gov/ebooks National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington, DC Table of Contents Dedication v Acknowledgments vi Foreword vii Chapter 1: The NACA and Aircraft Propulsion, 1915–1958.................................1 Chapter 2: NASA Gets to Work, 1958–1975 ..................................................... 49 Chapter 3: The Shift Toward Commercial Aviation, 1966–1975 ...................... 73 Chapter 4: The Quest for Propulsive Efficiency, 1976–1989 ......................... 103 Chapter 5: Propulsion Control Enters the Computer Era, 1976–1998 ........... 139 Chapter 6: Transiting to a New Century, 1990–2008 ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • United States Patent (19) 11 Patent Number: 4,836,469 Wagenfeld 45 Date of Patent: Jun
    United States Patent (19) 11 Patent Number: 4,836,469 Wagenfeld 45 Date of Patent: Jun. 6, 1989 (54) SYSTEM FOR REDUCING AIRCRAFT NOISE 4,723,626 2/1988 Carr et al. ........................... 181/213 AND HUSHKT OTHER PUBLICATIONS (75 Inventor: Robert E. Wagenfeld, New York, "Silencing an Executive Jet Aircraft', Noise Control N.Y. Engineering, vol. 5, No. 2, Sep.-Oct. 1975, J. R. Brooks, 73) Assignee: Walsan Partners Limited Partnership, et al. New York, N.Y. "Quieting the JT3D Powered 707", Sound and Vibra (21) Appl. No.: 55,635 tion, vol. 8, No. 2, Feb. 1974, J. Woodall. Primary Examiner-Galen Barefoot (22 Filed: May 29, 1987 Assistant Examiner-Rodney Corl 51) Int. Cl........................ B64D 29/00; B64D 33/04 Attorney, Agent, or Firm-Cooper & Dunham 52) U.S. Cl. ................................... 244/1 N; 181/213; [57] ABSTRACT 181/220; 181/222; 181/296 58) Field of Search ................. 244/1 N, 55; 181/213, A system is provided for existing three-engine jet air 181/220, 222, 296 craft to reduce the noise levels at take-off and landing in order to meet governmental noise regulations. The (56) References Cited system is particularly suitable for 727-200 aircraft hav U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS ing three JT8D engines. A hush kit is formed of the 3,002,341 10/1961 Muzzy et al. ....................... 181/220 modified components for installation in existing air 3,237,891 3/1966 Wotton ................................. 244/55 planes. 4,379,191 4/1983 Beggs et al. .......................... 52/806 4,456,204 6/1984 Hapke ................................... 244/55 4 Claims, 4 Drawing Sheets U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Airport Sustainability Practices Airport Sustainability Practices
    TIVE M A A RCH A ESE ROGR AIRPORT COOPER R P pts 14 YNTHESIS 10 S INE COPY = P ACRP S A Synthesis of Airport Practice Airport Sustainability Practices 96+ pages; Perfect Bind with INE WIDTH ACRP Synthesis 10 Airport Sustainability Practices TRB P EED S N TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD Non-profit Org. 500 Fifth Street, NW U.S. Postage Washington, DC 20001 PAID Washington, DC Permit No. 8970 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED Pantone 202 CV RP# XXX H C N o. XXXX _ N Job ACRP OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE* TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2008 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE* Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications: CHAIR OFFICERS AAAE American Association of Airport Executives JAMES WILDING Chair: Debra L. Miller, Secretary, Kansas DOT, Topeka AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials Independent Consultant Vice Chair: Adib K. Kanafani, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Berkeley ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America VICE CHAIR Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act JEFF HAMIEL MEMBERS APTA American Public Transportation Association Minneapolis–St. Paul ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers Metropolitan Airports Commission J. BARRY BARKER, Executive Director, Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, KY ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ALLEN D. BIEHLER, Secretary, Pennsylvania DOT, Harrisburg ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials MEMBERS JOHN D. BOWE, President, Americas Region, APL Limited, Oakland, CA ATA Air Transport Association LARRY L. BROWN, SR., Executive Director, Mississippi DOT, Jackson ATA American Tr ucking Associations JAMES CRITES DEBORAH H.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Noise Regulation in the European Union: the Hushkit Problem
    Journal of Air Law and Commerce Volume 65 | Issue 2 Article 6 2000 Aircraft oiN se Regulation in the European Union: The uH shkit Problem Benedicte A. Claes Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc Recommended Citation Benedicte A. Claes, Aircraft oN ise Regulation in the European Union: The Hushkit Problem, 65 J. Air L. & Com. 329 (2000) https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol65/iss2/6 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Air Law and Commerce by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. AIRCRAFT NOISE REGULATION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: THE HUSHKIT PROBLEM BENEDICTE A. CLAES* ** 1 I. INTRODUCTION T HE AVIATION industry has changed tremendously since the seventies. The doubling in air traffic volume coupled with increased airport congestion awakened the aviation indus- try to the adverse impact of aviation on the environment. Emis- sions of pollutants, such as hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen oxide, and increasing noise pollution in the vicin- ity of airports represent the clearest examples of how air traffic 2 threatens the environment. Simultaneously, national and international bodies realized the limits of total trade liberalization and recognized the impor- tance of protecting the environment. Both within the former General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade ("GATT") framework * At the time this article was written, the author was a graduate student at the Georgetown University Law Center, where she completed a Masters degree in Common Law Studies (LL.M.).
    [Show full text]
  • The Airports Commission Report Follow-Up: Carbon Emissions, Air Quality and Noise
    House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee The Airports Commission Report Follow-up: Carbon Emissions, Air Quality and Noise Seventh Report of Session 2016–17 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 7 February 2017 HC 840 Published on 23 February 2017 by authority of the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee The Environmental Audit Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to consider to what extent the policies and programmes of government departments and non- departmental public bodies contribute to environmental protection and sustainable development; to audit their performance against such targets as may be set for them by Her Majesty’s Ministers; and to report thereon to the House. Current membership Mary Creagh MP (Labour, Wakefield) (Chair) Peter Aldous MP (Conservative, Waveney) Caroline Ansell MP (Conservative, Eastbourne) Dr Thérèse Coffey MP (Conservative, Suffolk Coastal) Geraint Davies MP (Labour (Co-op), Swansea West) Glyn Davies MP (Conservative, Montgomeryshire) Luke Hall MP (Conservative, Thornbury and Yate) Peter Heaton-Jones MP (Conservative, North Devon) Peter Lilley MP (Conservative, Hitchin and Harpenden) Caroline Lucas MP (Green Party, Brighton Pavilion) John Mc Nally MP (Scottish National Party, Falkirk) Kerry McCarthey MP (Labour, Bristol East) Scott Mann MP (Conservative, North Cornwall) Dr Mathew Offord MP (Conservative, Hendon) Joan Ryan MP (Labour, Enfield North) Mr Gavin Shuker MP (Labour (Co-op), Luton South) The following Member was also a member of the Committee during the inquiry Margaret Greewood MP (Labour, Wirral West) Powers The constitution and powers are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No.
    [Show full text]
  • Expanding Airport Capacity Under Constraints in Large Urban Areas: Summary and Conclusions
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Thompson, David; Perkins, Stephen; Van Dender, Kurt Working Paper Expanding airport capacity under constraints in large urban areas: Summary and conclusions International Transport Forum Discussion Paper, No. 2013-24 Provided in Cooperation with: International Transport Forum (ITF), OECD Suggested Citation: Thompson, David; Perkins, Stephen; Van Dender, Kurt (2013) : Expanding airport capacity under constraints in large urban areas: Summary and conclusions, International Transport Forum Discussion Paper, No. 2013-24, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), International Transport Forum, Paris This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/97086 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen)
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Transport to Airports
    House of Commons Transport Committee Surface transport to airports First Report of Session 2015–16 HC 516 House of Commons Transport Committee Surface transport to airports First Report of Session 2015–16 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 22 February 2016 HC 516 Published on 26 February 2016 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 Transport Committee The Transport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Transport and its associated public bodies. Current membership Mrs Louise Ellman MP (Labour (Co-op), Liverpool, Riverside) (Chair) Robert Flello MP (Labour, Stoke-on-Trent South) Mary Glindon MP (Labour, North Tyneside) Karl McCartney MP (Conservative, Lincoln) Stewart Malcolm McDonald MP (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South) Mark Menzies MP (Conservative, Fylde) Huw Merriman MP (Conservative, Bexhill and Battle) Will Quince MP (Conservative, Colchester) Iain Stewart MP (Conservative, Milton Keynes South) Graham Stringer MP (Labour, Blackley and Broughton) Martin Vickers MP (Conservative, Cleethorpes) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/transcom and by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the inquiry page of the Committee’s website. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Gordon Clarke (Committee Clerk), Gail Bartlett (Second Clerk), Adrian Hitchins (Committee Specialist), Emma Gordon (Committee Specialist), Stewart McIlvenna (Committee Assistant) and Estelle Currie (Media Officer).
    [Show full text]
  • Virtual Stocktaking Seminar Agenda
    Day 1 – Tuesday, 08 September 2020 Time (EDT) Session Description 08:00 – 08:45 Opening and green aviation high level keynotes The opening session will introduce the objective and dynamic of the four-day event. Moderator: - Mohamed Rahma, Director, Air Transport Bureau – International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Presenters: - Fang Liu, Secretary General – ICAO - Valérie Plante, Mayor – City of Montréal - Bertrand Piccard, Initiator & Chairman – Solar Impulse Foundation 08:45 – 09:00 Setting the scene: ICAO’s Environmental work This session will provide an introduction to ICAO’s Environmental activities, including a description of how the ICAO Stocktaking process relates to ICAO’s various work streams. Presenter: - Jane Hupe, Deputy Director, Environment – ICAO 09:00 – 09:45 Setting the scene: challenges, trends and energy requirements for aviation This session of the event will aim to present the state of knowledge on climate change based on the IPCC findings, as well as to introduce the challenges, trends, achievements and prospects related to aviation. Powering aircraft with clean energy sources could be one of the keys to decarbonise the aviation sector. An overview of the potential CO2 emissions reductions technologies will be presented, along with the energy requirements for the aviation sector and technical limitations. Presenters: - Valérie Masson-Delmotte, Co-Chair, Working Group I. – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 3 - David Lee, Professor, Atmospheric Science and Director, Centre for Aviation, Transport,
    [Show full text]
  • Airport-Site-Selection.Pdf
    CPB Corporate Partnership Board Airport Site Selection Case-Specific Policy Analysis The International Transport Forum The International Transport Forum is an intergovernmental organisation with 57 member countries. It acts as a think tank for transport policy and organises the Annual Summit of transport ministers. ITF is the only global body that covers all transport modes. The ITF is politically autonomous and administratively integrated with the OECD. The ITF works for transport policies that improve peoples’ lives. Our mission is to foster a deeper understanding of the role of transport in economic growth, environmental sustainability and social inclusion and to raise the public profile of transport policy. The ITF organises global dialogue for better transport. We act as a platform for discussion and pre- negotiation of policy issues across all transport modes. We analyse trends, share knowledge and promote exchange among transport decision-makers and civil society. The ITF’s Annual Summit is the world’s largest gathering of transport ministers and the leading global platform for dialogue on transport policy. The Members of the ITF are: Albania, Armenia, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China (People’s Republic of), Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico,
    [Show full text]