05/06/2015

It's the Economy, stupid!

The airport admits to the communes that there will be progressively more noise as the traffic and the number of movements rises.


The admission came on the day of the third information session between the Cantonal authorities and the communes which are, or could be, affected by noise. The main information was reported either by the RTS TV teletext (which stated that the information was announced "en toute discretion"), or the freebie newspaper "20 minutes", or in a short radio announcement. According to these sources, between now and 2030 an extra 6000 people in and around Geneva (including France!) will find themselves living in a zone where aircraft noise exceeds acceptable limits. The consequences of this are an inevitable large drop in property value, stress from overflights and a possible increased air pollution. According to 20 Minutes, even regions around Aire-la-Ville, Chancy, Avully et Cartigny will be affected.

What is not specifically stated, but certainly true, is that people currently living in zones exposed to noise will get more noise. Perhaps some could even reach the "Alarm" limit!

In looking for more information, I find that the main newspapers (Tribune de Genève, Le Temps, Le Matin, Le Courrier) and the RTS TV news emissions seem to have completely ignored this. I ask myself why, and I find several possible answers :-

- The media get lots of revenue from aviation, revenue which they need to survive, so they do not want to upset the applecart.

- Geneva needs the money from the airport, so who cares if a few (thousands of) people live in unacceptable conditions?

- Most people (those living in regions unaffected by aircraft noise) don't want to know about increased noise (but are happy to have lots more cheap flights to anywhere!).

Then there are individual reactions such as :-

- I am used to aircraft noise, which does not bother me (It was proved long ago that, internally, people do NOT get used to aircraft noise!).

- Aircraft are becoming less noisy (try saying that when a big aircraft with 300 passengers takes of on a long-distance flight!).

- People around the airport should have realised long ago what would be the expansion (no-one would have forecast, 50 years ago, what would be this expansion!).

- People in noise zones should simply move elsewhere (but when you remember that Geneva is in a permanent crisis for living accommodation, and that any move inevitably seems to involve paying more money, often for less space!).

- I don't think there is any problem (normally because I already live far from the airport!).

What really seems to me to be a problem is that the sizable minority of people living with aircraft noise (and maybe also other sources of serious noise) will be sacrificed by the majority of people who don't suffer such problems. However, in any society where the majority ignores the plight of significant minorities, tensions build up which, in the long-term, can explode.

10:43 Posted in Noise around Geneva airport | Permalink | Comments (2) | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

Comments

De par sa position géographique, l'aéroport ne pourra pas se développer beaucoup plus. On a tout juste réussi à caser une halle Est et il ne restera toujours qu'une piste. A moins que la France cède du terrain, ce qui ne risque pas d'arriver vu la compétition avec Lyon.
Si les discussions autour du Grand Genève continuent, il faudra bien se résigner à délocaliser l'aéroport, mais pour où ? Personne n'en voudra.
Parfois on se demande si Genève n'a pas intérêt à rester provincale et mignonnne. Zürich n'est qu'à 1/2 heure de vol. Ah mais j'oublie que ZH subit aussi des plaintes de la proche Allemagne et ne pourra pas non plus se développer beaucoup...

Posted by: Pierre Jenni | 05/06/2015

Pierre Jenni is obviously unaware of the plans for Geneva airport: I could suggest that he does his homework better. Already over two years ago Robert Deillon announced that by extra runway entries and exits the aircraft movement capacity would go from 40/hour to 46-48/hour. Add onto that the increasing restrictions on all except scheduled and charter airlines (OFAC are desperately looking for places to where to move the rest of the traffic!). The East Wing will have capacity for 9 aircraft and will be much used for non-Schengen traffic. Finally, ask for a look at the (unpublished) Cointrin Vision plan to redevelop the current main terminal (at a cost far beyond the East Wing!), then developments north of the runway once the aéroclub have been forced out.
Gatwick, one runway (and lots of fields around it!) handles up to 55 movements per hour and over 38 million passengers in 2014).

Posted by: Mike Gerard | 05/06/2015

The comments are closed.