Regulation of Airport NoiseULB

10th December 2007

MIMENoise Trading

forAircraft Noise Mitigation

Peter HullahEUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Brétigny sur Orge, France

The former Yugoslav Republic of MacedoniaMaltaMoldova MonacoThe NetherlandsNorwayPolandPortugalRomaniaSlovakiaSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUkraineUnited Kingdom

FI

GEAM

AZ

EE

UA

MD

TR

CY

FR

LV

LT

GB

IE BY

RO

ALMK

BG

GR

CH

IT

AT HU

YU

ESPT

DK

NO SE

PL

CZ

MT

BA

MA DZ TN

SY IQ

IR

KZ

RU

SK

SI HR

LU

BENL

DE

MC

Albania AustriaBelgiumBosnia and HerzegovinaBulgariaCroatiaCyprusCzech RepublicDenmarkECFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIrelandItalyLuxembourg

EUROCONTROL: 38 Member States

EUROCONTROL

European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation European Air-Traffic Management organisation Currently 38 Member States 5 objectives

Heighten Safety Increase Capacity Reduce Delays Enhance Cost-Effectiveness Minimise Environmental Impact

4 activity pillars: Co-operative network design; Pan-European functions; Regional ATC services; Regulatory activities and support to

EC regulation.

EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre (EEC) – Brétigny/Orge entrusted with executing the Agency’s research, development and

validation programmes

Noise Trading – An Example

2-hour Leq at a major international airport produced by ENHANCE European Harmonised Aircraft Noise-contour Modelling Environment Produces noise contours from 3D radar trajectories Can be used to produce contours on a “per-airline” basis

Aircraft Noise Calculation

Noise values found in Noise-Power-Distance (NPD) tables Noise = fthrust(distance)

log-integrated over audible part of flight

To calculate noise from radar data we only have X, Y, Height

Need to calculate Speed and Thrust Speed is easy, Thrust is not!

… but it’s not all thrust!

Noise Sources

High directivity of engine noise

Configuration Noise

Flaps Gear Slats

Effect of approach noise

Approach noise as function of slats/flaps angle and gear position (up/down) for constant N1 (Idle thrust)

120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Speed CAS (kt)

No

ise

le

ve

l (D

BA

ma

x)

00/00 down

20/00 down

23/22 down

23/26 down

23/32 down

00/00 up

20/00 up

23/22 up

23/26 up

23/32 up

2 dBA

Data from Sourdine II

What slows a plane down?

Reducing thrust Less noise at source

Extending flaps, slats, gear More noise at source

How can ENHANCE tell? Aircraft noise modellers need configuration and thrust

information

Like getting blood from a stone!

Operation of a Market-based System

Fundamental principle of environmental economics: Any externality should be internalised as close to its source as possible

Noise Permits? issued to meet desired measure of total impact across specified region

Number of permits allocated to a particular company based on previous impact, declared future impact, or by auction etc.

Reducing impact leaves surplus permits may be traded

If impact limited, available permits will be limited supply and demand – increased value - encourages trading of permits

Advantages of a Market-based System

Easier than charge or tax-based approach more cost effective

Can be revenue neutral airlines wouldn’t see them as “just another tax-collection scam” initial permits could be freely allocated up to the predefined limits all financial transactions between the companies themselves

Excess permits due to reduced pollution sold to recuperate investment in less polluting equipment cover pollution from increased production

Taxes, charges and fines restrict growth

Tradable permits encourage it

Noise per Airline

Area of 24-hour 55dB(A) Leq Contour vs Mvts per airline

Major carrier is just less than 50% of all flights! All other companies in bottom left sector

y = 0.0904xR2 = 0.9909

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Number of Operations

LA

eq

-24

h 5

5 d

BA

Co

nto

ur

Are

a (

km

^2

)

All flights

Main “Hub” carrier

Noise per Airline

y = 0.0904x

R2 = 0.9909

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Number of Operations

LA

eq-2

4h 5

5 d

BA

Co

nto

ur

Are

a (k

m^

2)

“QuietAir.com” 51 mvts with noise of

44 mvts

“Heavy Metal Airlines” 2 mvts with noise of 65 mvts

“Air Rightnoise” 22 mvts with noise of

22 mvts

Economic value

The UK’s recent £5 additional “environmental surcharge” on (economy!) passenger tickets Average aircraft with 120 passengers = £300 = €450 Imagine this as a noise permit value, instead of a tax

Say “QuietAir.com” has 51 movements per day, 365 days per year Sells 7 permits per day (only needs 44) 7 x 365 x €450 = €1,149,750 per annum additional return on investment from this

airport alone

Say “HeavyMetal Airlines” has 2 flights (= 4 movements) per week If they bought a new aircraft that produced “average” noise Would free-up 2 x 63 = 126 permits per week 126 x 52 x €450 = €2,948,400 per annum – just from this airport!

Permit definition

The previous example was just that – an example Need good, usable, definition acceptable to airlines and residents Noise contours are not easily addable - non linear Does not take annoyance into account

More annoyance from many quiet flights than from a few loud ones Why count noise where there aren’t any people?

What granularity is needed? How will permits be attributed?

Sale, grandfather rights, auction etc. How to combat restrictive practices? How will airports know if noise rading will work for them? What regulation is needed?

MIME will find the answers! Market simulation Noise technology

MIME partners

Industry: Boeing R&TE (Spain)

(Co-ordinator)

R&D: SINTEF (Norway)

QinetiQ (UK)

Universities: U. Leeds (UK)

TU Munchen (Germany)

SMEs: ENVISA (France)

EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre (France)

MIME

Thank you

Peter HullahEUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Brétigny sur Orge, France