Airports: Running Smoothly Or Still Grounded?

Airports are vital transport hubs that facilitate the movement of people and goods across the globe. However, their operations can be disrupted by various factors, including extreme weather events and unforeseen challenges. In recent times, several airports have faced closures and disruptions due to flooding and mysterious drone sightings. With climate change intensifying and technological advancements posing new threats, the question of whether airports are up and running becomes increasingly pertinent.

Climate change and flooding

Airports are highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, particularly coastal flooding. A rise in global mean temperature by 2°C would place 100 airports below mean sea level, and 364 airports at risk of flooding. If the global mean temperature rise exceeds this, as many as 572 airports will be at risk by 2100, causing major disruptions without appropriate adaptation measures.

The risk of disruption to global flight routes could increase by a factor of 17 to 69 by 2100, depending on the rate of sea level rise. Airports in Southeast and East Asia are most at risk, followed by those in Europe, North America, and Oceania. These coastal airports are critical to the global airline network, and by 2100, 10 to 20% of all routes are at risk of disruption.

The impacts of climate change on airports are already being felt. LaGuardia Airport in New York City, for example, has suffered major flooding during storms, including Hurricane Sandy in 2012, which also impacted two other major airports in the region. The threat of rising sea levels is further exacerbated by the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, such as superstorms and hurricanes, which can cause significant flooding and damage to airport infrastructure.

To address these challenges, adaptation options include increased flood protection, raising land, and relocation of airports. Additionally, the implementation of resilience plans and the development of climate-resilient infrastructure are crucial to safeguard airports and their passengers from the impacts of climate change.

The aviation industry also contributes to climate change, with global air travel emitting over 780 Mt CO2 in 2022, accounting for about 2% of global energy-related CO2 emissions. It is important to reduce heat-trapping pollution from air travel to limit future warming and protect the aviation industry.

Drone sightings

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has expressed its concern, stating that operating drones around airplanes, helicopters, and airports is dangerous and illegal. The FAA imposes restrictions on drone flights within 5 miles of airports without prior authorization. Despite these regulations, drone sightings continue to pose challenges for airports and raise safety concerns.

The mystery surrounding these drone sightings has sparked speculation and anxiety among residents and officials. While some speculate that the drones could be part of a nefarious plot by foreign agents, investigations by the FBI, Homeland Security, and state police have found no evidence to support these fears. The true nature and purpose of these drone sightings remain unclear, and authorities are still working to identify the operators and their intentions.

The impact of these drone sightings on holiday travel is uncertain. While some experts believe it is unlikely to cause significant disruptions, others highlight the potential for immediate ground stops and flight delays if drones are spotted near controlled airspace. As the holiday season approaches, travellers are advised to stay updated with the latest developments and be prepared for potential travel disruptions.

Airport expansions

London City Airport, for example, has returned to its expansion plans, which were initially paused in 2020 due to the pandemic. The airport aims to increase its annual passenger capacity from 6.5 million to 9 million. Similarly, Manston Airport in Kent has been approved for reopening, with RiverOak Strategic Partners' planning application specifically targeting freight operations with some passenger services.

The UK's Climate Change Committee (CCC) advises that to achieve Net Zero by 2050, there should be no more than a 25% increase in passenger numbers from 2018 levels, and any expansion must be accompanied by a UK-wide capacity management framework. Despite this, several UK airports have submitted expansion plans that, if approved, would result in a 70% increase in passenger capacity, far exceeding the CCC's recommendations.

The Aviation Environment Federation (AEF) has criticised the decision-making process for airport expansions, arguing that policies like the Airports National Policy Statement (ANPS) and Making Best Use (MBU) are outdated and do not align with the country's net-zero goals. The AEF also highlights the inadequacy of short-to-medium-term solutions for aviation's substantial climate impact.

Despite the concerns, some airport expansion plans have been approved. Southampton Airport's runway extension, for instance, was given the go-ahead by the Court of Appeal, marking the end of the legal battle. The extension is deemed critical for the airport's viability, accommodating modern airline fleets.

On the other hand, some expansion plans have faced opposition and legal challenges. Bristol Airport's expansion plans were rejected by councillors due to environmental concerns, and campaigners continue to challenge these proposals. Similarly, Leeds Bradford Airport withdrew its expansion application after facing scrutiny from campaign groups and a call for a public inquiry.

The future of airport expansions in the UK remains uncertain, with investor worries about passenger numbers, policy changes, and the upcoming general election. The Climate Change Committee maintains that there should be no net increase in airport capacity for the UK to stay on course for its climate targets.

Border closures

The COVID-19 pandemic saw an unprecedented number of border closures, with over 95% of the world's population impacted. Border closures were implemented to varying degrees, with some countries opting for targeted border closures and others imposing total border closures.

Targeted border closures involve restricting non-essential travel from specific countries, whereas total border closures ban non-essential travel from all countries. Both types of border closures were shown to have some effect on slowing the transmission of COVID-19, although the impact varied depending on the timing and scope of the closures.

A study published in PLOS Global Public Health in 2023 evaluated the impact of border closures on COVID-19 transmission using quasi-experimental methods and real-world data. The study found that targeted border closures had a limited effect on reducing global COVID-19 transmission, while total border closures implemented by a certain number of countries were effective in slowing the spread. Specifically, the study identified that border closures impacting at least 20% of the global population were needed to observe a reduction in global transmission.

During the pandemic, the United States imposed land border closures with Canada and Mexico, beginning on March 21, 2020, and extending through at least July 21, 2021. These closures aimed to curb the spread of COVID-19 while exempting trade, movement of essential goods and workers, transport of food and medicine, and transit by cargo trucks. Additionally, certain individuals, such as US citizens and students, were exempt from the restrictions.

Maintenance expenses

Direct maintenance costs are attributable to specific aircraft or fleet types. This includes line and hangar checks, defect rectification, engine/APU/landing gear maintenance, and modifications. These costs are directly influenced by labour, material, and any subcontracted repairs. For instance, the labour cost is calculated by considering factors such as labour productivity and whether maintenance is handled by in-house staff or outsourced. Material costs, on the other hand, include the expenses for parts and supplies required for maintenance activities.

Indirect maintenance costs, on the other hand, are overhead expenses that are necessary for maintenance operations but cannot be attributed to a specific aircraft or fleet. Examples include maintenance management, planning, engineering, records, reliability, facilities maintenance, tooling equipment, and warehousing. While indirect costs are often overlooked, they can be substantial, with industry estimates suggesting they match direct maintenance costs.

To effectively manage maintenance expenses, airports must consider factors such as fleet type and mix, airline operations, and operator policies. The fleet type, including narrow-body or wide-body aircraft, influences maintainability, design quality, reliability, and maintenance intervals. Airline operations, such as the operating environment and aircraft utilisation, also impact maintenance costs. Additionally, operator policies, including labour cost and productivity, maintenance contracts, stock levels, and service bulletins, play a crucial role in managing expenses.

In addition to these direct and indirect costs, airports also incur expenses related to contractual services, such as operating, maintenance, and planning functions. These services are influenced by market conditions and tend to increase at least in line with the inflation rate. Airports may also choose to implement energy-saving projects, such as switching to LED lighting or generating solar power, which can impact utility expenses.

Overall, maintenance expenses are a critical component of airport operations, requiring careful consideration and management to ensure safe and efficient aircraft operations.

Frequently asked questions