Water hazards
Airports in the united states are essential infrastructures that form the backbone of transportation in the country. Airports provide a fast and reliable transportation mode that can transit people and goods over long distances in a short time as much as airports offer people the possibility of a quicker, safer, and reliable transportation mode. Airports also have disadvantageous factors that can pose severe damages to infrastructures in airports and the surrounding environment. This essay will dive into the negative impacts of standing water and stormwater on airports in the USA and the world. Lastly, the essay will focus on various methods that airports in the USA and worldwide have implemented to handle water hazards.
The availability of water facilitates the sustenance of life on this planet. Water can be used to perform many airports like quenching travelers’ thirst that flock to airport terminals. Also, water can be used in washrooms around airports. As much as water has its merits, it also has its demerits. According to the federal aviation administration (FAA), all water resources at and near an airport, in the form of both surface water and contained runoff, are recognized as potential attractants to wildlife, thus pose hazards to aviation safety. (FAA,2007)
according to an analysis conducted on 40 airports by federal aviation, the administration found that approximately 6% of the land titled under these airports was covered by water. The research also found out that of all the 50 species of birds that are involved in bird-aircraft strikes, a minimum of 15 species of the birds has foraging and breeding ecologies primarily associated with water (Blackwell et al. 2013).furthermore the research also found out that the 15 species of birds were responsible for more than 50% of damaging strikes between 2000 and 2011. (Dolbeer et al., 2000; DE Vault et al., 2011). The attraction of wildlife like birds as a result of still water possess an aviation hazard to airports.
Airports cover large tracts of land when they are constructed. Most of the land titled under airports is covered by pavements or tarmacked, resulting in a lot of runoff water in storms resulting from poor planning or lack of appropriate infrastructure to handle runoff water in times of storms, flooding becomes inevitable. Flooding in airports results in unexpected disruptions to air traffic, further resulting in severe economic losses in passenger and cargo traffic. As was evidenced in the aftermath of typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines, flooding resulting from stormwater from the storm led to the closure of all the region’s airports. As a result of this closure, the delivery of relief supplies and medical assistance to all affected areas the storm struck was negatively impacted.
Stormwater that causes flooding in airports also damages airport infrastructures such as radars, communication networks, and landing lights; this results in unplanned expenses. In 2016, the UK Environment Agency published a non-technical report on the 2013-2014 flooding of southern England and Wales. The agency reported the flooding of two airports, Gatwick and Shoreham. The flood resulted in damages to electrical systems supplying Gatwick’s North Terminal, which resulted in the cancellation of over 70 departing and arriving flights. Furthermore, the flood had severe economic impacts as the report estimated that more than 3 million euros stood to be lost throughout the flooding.
Runoff water from airports is known to compose chemical pollutants that may pose serious health risks to people and the surrounding environment. Deicing chemicals, usually applied to runways and pavements around the airport during winter, are significant contributors to water sources’ pollution around airports. Chronic leakage of aviation fuels and contaminants brought about from routine aircraft maintenance is also more agents of pollution. These Pollutants have severe health results where people have reported experiencing severe acute pains and unexplained allergic reactions due to contact with contaminated water. Furthermore, contaminated water from airports that flows into natural water bodies like rivers Has resulted in the depletion of vital nutrients in the water. The depletion of vital nutrients has resulted in the death of aquatic animals and plants.
Governments have resolved in the forming of bodies responsible for overseeing the implementation of safety measures in airports worldwide. These bodies are responsible for ensuring that airports are made and maintained to reach set safety regulations as safety is the main underlying goal of any airport. In the USA, the federal aviation administration (FAA) is responsible for performing such duties.
Handling of runoff water and other water hazards are site-specific to individual airports. For proper water handling practices, factors like runoff volume, pick flow, and water quality objectives must be considered to identify the most suitable and efficient way for a specific airport. Construction of infrastructures such as dry detention ponds and retention ponds can effectively ensure the collection of storm runoff water and further facilitate the treatment of runoff water to rid it of pollutants like deicing chemicals. Furthermore, the conversion of suitable unused land within the airport to lagoons facilitates glycol-based fluid waste collection.
Wildlife like birds that flock retention ponds, as seen earlier, can have adverse effects on aviation traffics. Due to such animals posing as potential hazards, airports have sought to implement synthetic covers, floating covers, nettings, or wire grids. Overhead wires laid out in various arrangements have been able to repel a variety of bird species. (McAtee and piper 1936) although the efficiency of such infrastructure is site-specific. At Detroit metro airport in Michigan, the installation of parallel steel wires effectively repelled most know birds like the Canadian geese, gulls, and mute swans that used the airport containment ponds.
The construction of aerated gravel beds, popularly known as subsurface flow wetlands, is another alternative in controlling stormwater as they are easy to construct, operate, and maintain. At the Air Express Airport in Wilmington, Ohio, subsurface flow wetlands were constructed and were found to be effective in managing storm and runoff water in the airport. This wetland has an advantage over conventional retention ponds as they are underground; thus, they don’t attract any wildlife. (Higgins and Liner. 2007).
Improving infiltration around airports can prove advantageous in the control of runoff water. The building of infrastructures such as infiltrations trenches, porous pavements, and rain gardens can allow for the quick percolation of water to the soil’s subsoil layers. Infiltration trenches are mostly viewed as underground injection control devices as they can collect, temporarily store, and adequately allow for infiltration of stormwater and runoff to groundwater. Porous pavements contain a high number of voids within the cemented aggregate. Porous pavements are very useful in airport packing areas and service roads that are regularly used. This pavement allows for the temporary storage of surface runoff and the fast drainage of still water into the soil. Such pavement is not advised to be laid on aircraft maneuvering and parking areas due to weight concerns. (FAA, 2009).
Collecting runoff water can economically bring down costs related to irrigating plants that cover the land surrounding airports. In areas that receive huge downpour during warmer, drier months, such as the Midwest and southeastern parts of the USA, infrastructure construction such as rain-barrels can be built to collect substantial runoff be used for irrigation. Enacting green roofs, which cover a roof with vegetation, can have beneficial effects in controlling the high volume of rooftop runoff. (Oberdorfer et al. 2007) furthermore, these roof types reduce the urban heat island effect and an overall cap on airport buildings’ energy requirements by reducing ventilation and maintaining favorable air conditioning inside airport buildings such as a terminal. (Velazquez, 2005).
To effectively handle any possibilities that can lead to flooding of an airport. Authorities have resolved in the development of infrastructures, such as flood barriers. Such kinds of barriers can be very beneficial in airports in the close environment of water bodies such as rivers or lakes as such kinds of bodies can break their banks during heavy storms. The development of dykes around airports near water bodies also helps prevent flood that occurs due to high tides from the sea or ocean. Kansai international airport in Osaka, Japan, is an example of an airport that faces the constant threat of flooding due to ocean water. Land used in the airport’s construction was originally reclaimed from the sea; thus, engineers designed huge dykes that ensured the reclaimed land would not be encroached by the ocean. (smart island report, 2017).
References
Blackwell, B. F., Felstul, D., & Seamans, T. W. (2013). Managing airport stormwater to reduce the attraction to wildlife.
Switzenbaum, M. S., Veltman, S., Mericas, D., Wagoner, B., & Schoenberg, T. (2001). Best management practices for airport deicing stormwater. Chemosphere, 43(8), 1051-1062.
Velazquez, L. S., 2005. European airport green roofs-a potential model for North America. http://www.greenroofs.com/pdfs/exclusives-european%20_airport…,greenroofs.pdf.
FAA. Federal Aviation Administration. 2008. Management of airport industrial waste. Advisory Circular lS0/S320-1SA. US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, USA.
FAA. Federal Aviation Administration. 2009. Airport pavement design and evaluation. Advisory Circular 1S/S320-6E. US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, USA.
FAA. Federal Aviation Administration. 2011. FAA wildlife strike database. http://wildlife-mitigation.tc.faa.gov/wildlife/default.aspx.
FAA. Federal Aviation Administration. 2012. Airport design. Advisory Circular150/5300·13A. US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, USA.
Higgins, J., and M. Liner. 2007. Engineering runoff solutions. Airport Business 21:22-2S.
Martin, J. A., J. L. Belant, T. L. DE Vault, L. W. Burger Jr., B. F. Blackwell, S. K. Riffell, and G. Wang. 2011. Wildlife risk to aviation: a multiscale issue requires a multiscale solution. Human-Wildlife Interactions 5:198-203.