Many Sydney-siders now advocate that the airport should be outside the Sydney Basin. The tricky question is whether an off-shore airport is outside the basin. Let's consider this issue in the context of the concerns raised in the Airport & Urban Environmental News

How Far Off-Shore | How Sydney Basin Traps Pollution | Airport Air Pollution | Off-Shore Expansion | VFT Costs | Off-Shore - Next Best? | Floating Airports

How far off-shore

It needs to be recognized that one of the off-shore proposals is not a "floating airport", but rather one which is constructed like bridges (piered into the sea-bed).

The proponents of the proposal, Pacific Airport Group, have claimed that noise from the off-shore airport would not be noticed by coastal residents (i.e. would be below ambient), as no aircraft fly directly overhead - and if necessary sharp turns on takeoff and landing could be used.

It would be right to have an open mind about how accurate this is - but it deserves independent investigation.

In the worst case, if the proposal must be shifted further offshore, perhaps we should view that as a cost the air industry ought to bear.

Just as we might say to them that the extra costs of an out-of-basin solution is something they ought bear, except now we allow them another possibly lower cost option to evaluate.

Airport Air Pollution

PAG's proposal is to service the airport with light rail via ANZAC parade.

Suppose it were built with no car parks and private transport Maybe that would address the air pollution from ground transport.

The other thing to remember is that the only money spent on the PAG proposal is that of the Tierney syndicate (i.e. privateers). They can't be expected to flesh out all the details without some indication from the community and government that the idea might be acceptable.

The Sydney Basin Pollution Traps

The Sydney Basin is like a "half-basin" formed by the mountains ringing Sydney (on North, West, and South). There is a "land-locked" lobe in Sydney's South west, which makes it somewhat "ear-shaped", rather than a simple basin. (see Sydney Smog Basin )

The basin flattens out at the coast. Pollutants produced out to sea can disperse to the North, South or East. There are fewer conditions where pollutants end up "trapped" in the inland parts of the Sydney Basin. The NSW EPA Sydney Metropolitan Air Quality study made some qualitative suggestions along this line, with a call for further research.

So this is something that needs independent evaluation by experts e.g. in meteorology and air quality assessment.

Perhaps an interesting way to look at the offshore location is that it is "half-way" out of the basin.

It's untested whether it's better than being in the basin, or better than being out of it. It's got to be at least better than a fourth and fifth runway in Botany Bay.

Off-Shore Expansion

The proposal includes options for 3 runways, with the possibility of a further 2 seaward runways in 20-30 years time. If this is so, is it any more limited that Badgerys ? 

VFT Alternatives & Costs

The "consensus" amongst airport groups to seek an outside the basin solution is understandable. The idea of a VFT connecting Sydney and Canberra, and eventually Melbourne is very likeable.

The VFT's historically were costed at circa $6 billion, and may reduce airport usage - as well as enable Gundary Plains options. Badgerys is "costing" (can we believe the EIS ??) between $4b and $6b (including infrastructure). Taking the construction costs at GP as the same, and adding the cost of a VFT, gives $10 to $12 b, which is higher than the offshore proposal.

While there are advantages, VFT's are pretty noisy critters (when they are VFT'ing and not coasting through urban areas). They leave a pretty ugly environmental scar across the landscape they cross. And the electricity they'll presumably be powered with has serious environmental costs.

So VFT's aren't cost-free.

The questions that need answers are:

1. is the cost less than the next best option,
2. is it less than the quantifiable benefits, and
3. are the unquantifiable costs acceptable to the community.

To date, most studies of VFT proposals have suggested that they aren't viable. This doesn't mean that will always be so, but it does suggest that a proper study ought look at more than a VFT option.

Offshore - Stepping Toward Next Best Option ?

The offshore option may be the "next best option".

It's "untested" and highly experimental - but it will take some serious innovation to solve the problem of where to acceptably locate an airport.

Looking in someone else's backyard isn't innovative, its just doing the same dumb things in some other place.

Some politicians may see the "outside the Sydney Basin" argument this way (e.g. Hockey and other's dismissal of the outside the basin argument).

If we think of offshore as "half-way" out of the basin, it's a good step to take government, industry and political minds away from in-the-basin sites. It's a good step away from a fourth runway.

Getting to out-of-the-basin sites directly might be too big a leap (e.g. for Hockey etc.,.) and may only be possible if they first visit the half-way point of the off-shore proposal.

Let's not be too negative about the offshore proposal, if it can serve this role (at the least) or offer a solution after it's been tested in a serious EIS with independent auditing.

Who knows, it may well fail that process. But on the other hand we could be throwing out our best chance of moving Toward an acceptable airport location.

 

Floating Airports?

The idea of an offshore airport is not just a pipe-dream. The Very Large Floating Structures site documents some alternate proposals based on floating structures.

In Tokyo Bay, the Japanese government Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport's Maga-float project has built a 1 km runway prototype based on floating pontoons, connected to land by pontoon supported bridges (prototype completed in 2001). This is not an open-ocean system, but would be very easily adapted to use for additional KSA runways in Botany Bay.

Float Inc has put forward a serious proposal for San Diego -Float Port.This is an open-ocean proposal 3 miles off-shore (well out of noise range) and connected to the mainland by road tunnels.

Land costs around Tokyo Bay will probably drive these projects to fruition - expect to see it within the next 5 to 10 years !