Risk assessment on airports - Kuopio workshop case study

From Opasnet
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Release This page contains the general information about risk assessment conducted as a case study in the Kuopio workshop. Before the workshop begins this page serve as a place to discuss how the case study should be done, e.g. the methodological approaches to be used, the tools to be used, the scoping of the case study, data availability etc. Some of these discussion can be found clicking the discussion tab of this page.

The case is still incomplete and frozen for the time being. Given the unclarities and several unresolved issues concerning the Intarese framework and method, the resources available in the workshop were not sufficient to complete the case within the workshop period. During the workshop the focus was thus deliberately shifted towards discussing and working on the Intarese framework and method descriptions. See workshop report for further information on the progress of the workshop. The case assessment may be continued later if seen necessary and reasonable.

Case study description

Scope:

Following a suggestion originally from David, we chose to focus on airports as the case, and Schiphol especially. A preliminary suggestion of the scoping is to concentrate on air pollution, noise, and road accidents. Airplanes, airport ground transportation and connecting road traffic are the emission sources. Airport related emissions near the airport (say, horizontally 10 km, vertically 1 km [or average boundary mixing layer]) will be considered, but not emissions from the air traffic as whole. Also the target geographic area or population for the risk assessment should be defined. The simplest solution is to target on the same 10 km radius (to be defined on a map). The airport isn't exactly a point source.

The possible policy scenarios include

  • time limitations of airport use (restirctions on night-time activity; noise)
  • air traffic restrictions, e.g. overseas only (air pollution + noise)
  • plane types/sizes (EU airplane noise restrictions already apply, otherwise only indirectly contriollable as a consequence of the previous)
  • more efficient flight profiles or a more optimised route network (these relate to between-airport issues, yes? We do not have data to deal with this)
  • and more advanced noise abatement arrival and departure procedures (we do not have data for this, either)

Excluded are:

Sources:

  • air traffic as a whole (what is ment by this? Air traffic outside of the 10 km rad 1 km x volunme?)
  • economic activities outside airport (hotels, storage, etc)

Releases/ exposures:

  • odour
  • climate change effects
  • water/soil pollution
  • indoor environment
  • loss of public space/ natural habitat
  • waste problems
  • occupational problems (eg people working at airport with chemicals, fires, etc)

Effects

  • accidents with airplanes
  • hearing impairments
  • transport of infectious diseases
  • possible effects related to releases mentioned above

Any actions/ policies!

Framework

This is a draft of the framework that could be used for the airports case study. It includes tasks. Please send me (Anne) comments!!
Each variable presented in this model works as a link to the corresponding variable in wiki

Error: Image is invalid or non-existent.


Click here to download original Analytica file used to make this diagram. The names of people responsible for different tasks are not in this analytica file.

Comments from Erik & Alex moved to discussion page

Variables identified/used in this case

Link to variable and method descriptions are listed here. You can reach variables also by clicking corresponding variable on the above framework picture.


Variables

Necessary inputs/methods

Cross-cutting methods


Please have a look at Tools needed in Intarese toolbox for an overview of phases, steps, methods/guidance and tools making risk assessment using the Intarese framework and method.

Policy assessment of nighttime noise limits

As a policy assessment, we have chosen to look at the effects of reducing nighttime noise levels around Schiphol on sleep disturbance in the area around Schiphol. The desired outcome would be 'number of people sleep disturbed' in the two scenarios (with and without noise limits). DALYs are not useful for this specific policy question. Costs might be useful, especially if the costs of implemeting the noise limits (economical costs) are also known. Data on monetary valutation exist for coronary (fatal, not fatal), angina pectoris, hypertension, sleep disturbance (cost-of-illnes and willingness-to-pay).

The following diagram provides an overview (limited!) of some ways to get to the desired outcome. In the specific case of Schiphol, we have the green nodes available, which makes it possible to come to the desired outcome (via the yellow nodes).

The diagram also shows some other options to derive the different variables. In white, a few question are asked that should be posed when doing this assessment in reality. Everything is just an example, not everything is covered

A question that is not addressed in this diagram is where to set the boundaries for the assessment.

Click here to download original Analytica file


The noise policy case in the Schiphol assessment (see figure) tests and applies the selected Intarese methods and tools (see table). We start with the green and yellow variables, since there are data available. For each variable we describe the methods and tools needed and give an example/application of available methods and tools in the noise policy case.

Noise level distribution: Application in noise policy case

Original variable: Noise levels

Methods and tools needed

Development of noise level indicator

Methods and tools available:

  • WHO indicator development methodology
    • Application in case:
    • Input to method: Noise level measurements
    • Output of method: Noise level indicator

Population distribution

Original variable: Exposed population

Methods and tools needed


Methods and tools available:

    • Application in case:
    • Input to method:
    • Output of method: Noise level indicator


Number of people exposed to certain noise levels: Application in noise policy case

Original variable: Noise exposure

Methods and tools needed

Noise exposure model

Methods and tools available:

  • WP1.2 exposure models
    • Application in case:
    • Input to method:
    • Output of method:

Development of noise exposure indicator

Methods and tools available:

  • WHO indicator development methodology
    • Application in case:
    • Input to method: None
    • Output of method: Noise exposure indicator (for example: Fraction of population with a given Lden of <55 dB(A), 55-60 dB(A), >60 dB(A))


Model to translate noise levels into sleep disturbance : Application in noise policy case

Original variable Sleep disturbance (noise related)

Methods and tools needed

  • WP1.3 methods of systemtic review/meta-analysis
    • Application in case:
    • Input to method: specific epidemiological studies dealing with noise and sleep disturbance
    • Output of method: One specific study/ model that can be best used to model noise related sleep disturbance. (For example: Miedema functions, see Sleep disturbance (noise related)

The data or literature part was archived and can be found from a previous version

Suggested case study topics were removed, but they can be found from a previous version.

Retrieved from "https://en.opasnet.org/index.php?title=Risk_assessment_on_airports_-_Kuopio_workshop_case_study&oldid=16318"