Brussels Options for a New Airport How to Foster a Growth-Environment for Airline Traffic
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Brussels Options for a New Airport How to foster a growth-environment for airline traffic January 19th, 2015 Contents 1. Introduction page 2 2. Goals and Specifications page 4 S pecifications 3. Main european airport configurations page 5 4. Runway requirements page 6 5. Configurations page 7 New Options 6. Hub map page 8 7. - Veltem page 9 8. - Beauvechain page 12 9. - Zoersel page 15 10. - Eksaarde page 18 11. - Chièvres page 21 12. - Ursel page 23 13. - Charleroi Airport page 25 14. - Liège-BiersetAirport page 27 Budgets 15. Main expenses page 29 16. Budget summary page 31 17. Financing page 33 18. Compensation programs page 34 19. Schedules and intermediate steps page 36 Zaventem Options 20. Potential evolutions at Zaventem page 38 21. - New runway 25R page 30 22. - New runway 25L page 40 23. - New runway 02 page 42 24. - New runway 27 page 44 25. - New set of twin runways 27 page 47 26. Budgets for Zaventem options page 49 Synthesis 27. Overall ratings page 51 28. Summary tables page 53 29. Best options summary page 56 30. Short-term decisions page 57 31. Conclusion page 58 Appendixes Selected international airport maps page 59 Selected airport flight corridor examples page 60 The Coeur-Europe Task Force Speaker Jean-Noël Lebrun Avenue Albert Jonnart 41 1200 Woluwe Saint Lambert [email protected] +32 471 316 915 1 1. Introduction Brussels Airport has grown organically over the last few years, with political decision-makers left scrambling to find a way to accommodate traffic growth. Now is the time to make the right choices for our future. This White Paper evaluates the different options which will drive economic growth while respecting our environmental rights. - In order to bring transparency to the decision-making process we disclose the true costs of new runways and terminals, both east of Zaventem and in new locations. - We also disclose the tremendous benefits which Brussels Airport may enjoy through the progressive closure and resale of the Zaventem runways (700 hectares). This major infrastructure project is a key employement opportunity for many years to come. Let's make it right. A. Following the forthcoming removal of the 2014 Wathelet plan a single plane from the Zaventem airport will still fly over 5.5 times more inhabitants than an average plane from the top 30 European airports during its first 10 kilometers of flight. The numbers of inhabitants severly hit by the noise of a singe take-off are as follows : 5 airports hit less than 5,000 inhabitants per take-off - Munich - Copenhagen - Gatwick - Dublin – Barcelone. 4 airports hit between 5,000 to 10,000 inhabitants per take-off - Madrid Barajas - Palma de Mallorca - Oslo Gardemoen – Vienne. 3 airports hit between 10,000 to 20,000 inhabitants per take-off - Rome Fumicino - Manchester - Domodedovo Moscou. 9 airports hit between 20,000 to 40,000 inhabitants per take-off - Paris CDG - Schiphol Sheremetyevo Moscou - Paris Orly - Antalya - Stockholm - Istanbul SG - Milan Malpensa – Helsinki. 4 airports hit between 40,000 to 60,000 inhabitants per take-off - London Heathrow - Dusseldorf - Istanbul A. - London Stanstead. 2 airports hit between 60,000 to 80,000 inhabitants per take-off - Frankfort – Zurich. 2 airports hit between 80,000 to 120,000 inhabitants per take-off - Lisbonne - Berlin Tegel. One one airport hits more than 120,000 inhabitants per take-off Zaventem after 'moratoire': 175,000 - Zaventem during the Wathelet plan: 255,000 Detailed calculations are made using a single methodology to support direct comparisons between airports, based on the number of inhabitants under the first 10 kilometers of flight: http://www.coeur-europe.be/images/Comparatif/Comparatif-nuisances-avions-top-30.pdf Apart from Berlin Tegel and Lisbon Airports, no European Airport supporting over 10 million visitors per year is located within its main city boundaries. The complete closing of Berlin Tegel is already scheduled for 2018, following the transfer of all flights to Berlin Schönefeld, 26 kilometers further. In Lisbon, the Portuguese government has decided in 2011 to convert into a low-cost airport a former military airstrip located on the south-side of the Tage river. In Germany, two new commercial airports have been launched since the 1992 construction of the new Munich airport: Francfort Hahn and Düsseldorf Weeze. Both airports are former military bases located over 40 km away from the nearest town. 2 B. The growing levels of noise pollution and risk generated by the Zaventem airports raise more and more protests from Brussels inhabitants. Such situation is not sustainable. In particular, the two flight corridors of the canal and of Koekelberg cross Brussels from side to side 7 days a week including at night. Such situation is judged to be a shame by all parties, including Eurocontrol and the Airport Top Management. As a comparison, the London City Airport supports 70,000 aircraft movements per year versus over 200,000 at Zaventem. The airport also closes on weekends. C. In contrast to everything happening elsewhere across Europe, the sales & marketing strategy of Brussels Airport increases the level of stress imposed upon local inhabitants, as explained by our recent study dated september 15th 2014 : http://www.coeur-europe.be/images/Comparatif/LesMauvaisChoixEconomiquesDeZaventem.pdf For example, Brussels Airport offers discounts of up to 50% to arlines opening new routes from Zaventem, raising unfair competition to Brussels Airlines. Such artifical growth is done mainly at the expense of local inhabitants who are burdened by increased pollution levels without benefitig from any compensation plan as implemented almost anyhere else in europe. At the same time, British, French, and German governments do levy airport taxes amounting to 20% of airport revenues (apart from ATC charges). The lack of similar government taxes at Zaventem represents a straight loss of over 85 million € a year for Belgium. Our 2014 study also details in-flight cargo accidents for the last 10 years across the top 30 European airports. Zaventem and Copenhagen alone, the two single airports of the Macquarie Group, concentrate 38% of such accidents. It is therefore fair to state that Zaventem's commercial development has been made without paying much attention to systemic risk levels nor the age of airline fleets. D. As a result, we wish to open a debate and offer clear alteratives to the existing Zaventem/Steenokkerzeel airport set-up. Such alternatives are mandatory to foster growth within the respect of legitimate environmental requests. Withing each industry, whenever existing facilities become obsolete, one must question their replacement. The best options for future growth should be promoted, whatever the amount of past investment on legacy systems. E. Our initiative is consistent with the current reflexion around the optimization of flight corridors around the current airport, and provides key new data. - Forbidding night flights around Brussels means finding new take-off and landing runways for cargo and charter flights. The best solutions are listed page 56. - Reducing noise pollution to avoid that the Europan capital remains Europe's noise garbage can will require either setting-up new runways (and terminals) further east or setting-up a new airport with flight corridors further away from key populated areas. - A new airline hub paying more attention to its environment and the lives of european citizen will foster growth and employment. All NIMBY proposals backed by selected associations tend to serve the interests of very few. These proposals only add noise in the quest for a lasting solution and should be dismissed. Let's now take the right decisions for Belgium, for our families, and for future generations. 3 2. Goals and Specifications This white paper reviews 13 options in order to : (i) Set-up an international airport hub near Brussels. (ii) Facilitate jobs & economic growth without compromising the local resident living conditions. The airport specifications are set to meet the following requirements : - Ease of integration within its local environment. - Minimum capacity of two 3,800 meter long runways and one taxiway. - Reduced level of noise pollution. - Ease of access for both Flemish and Walloon communities. - Ease of transfer for part of Zaventem activities and staff. These specifications will allow to increase airport capacity while respecting the rights of local residents. Eight different sites have been selected for further analysis, after eliminatation of several other non-complying sites (i.e. Ostende, too distant) : - Four sites are located in Flandre (Veltem, Zoersel, Eksaarde and Ursel) - Three sites are close to the language divide (Beauvechain, Liège-Bierset and Chièvres) - Another site is located in Wallonie (Charleroi) The order of presentation is based on the distance to the existing airport. The white paper provides for each site : - a site map with runways, terminals, and technical areas. - a plan for land acquisition and land expropriation steps. - a map for take-off and landing flight corridors. - a detailed analysis of noise pollution over 20 km for landings*. - a detailed analysis of noise pollution over 10 km for take-offs*. - an analysis of connections to road and train networks. - detailed cost analysis in chapters 15, 16, ad 26. - detailed implementation schedules in chapter 19. * Noise pollution is often felt well above 20 kilometers away from the runways, both for landing and departing planes. * The figures presented in the white paper calculate the number of overflown residents in a way which preserves the value of comparison between options. This comprehensive study also analyses, as suggested by the airport management, various options for extending or adding new runways further east of the existing airport. Building a new airport is a high priority project for Belgium : It will contribute effectively to the economic, cultural, and political growth of our country. 4 3.