It will be discussed at Landgoed De Zwaluwenberg in Hilversum – under the approach route of the Aalsmeerbaan. Or perhaps in Het Logement in The Hague, where the planes come over for the queue to the Polderbaan.
Anywhere, at a certain point in the formation, the four parties that form the Rutte-IV cabinet asked themselves the question: what do we want with aviation in the Netherlands? What do we do with Schiphol?
Now that a new cabinet is almost ready to leave, those questions seem far from being answered. And that has caused a lot of stress in The Hague lately. The problems surrounding Schiphol are even more complex than expected. This has to do with nitrogen, but also with the lack of regulations around Schiphol. Noise violations were tolerated for seven years, but now the Human Environment & Transport Inspectorate (ILT) warns that the courts will no longer accept this tolerance. The government is in danger of losing a lawsuit from residents of Aalsmeer. As a result, Schiphol would have to hand in a fifth of its flights per year.
The government of Rutte III allowed aviation to continue to grow. Initially unbridled, as the ‘motor of the Dutch economy’, later Schiphol had to ‘earn’ growth. The airport climbed to 500,000 flight movements – take-offs or landings – and the Aviation Memorandum last year even stated 650,000 flights per year in 2030 and 800,000 in 2050. KLM could also count on billions of euros in support during the share buyback and during the corona crisis. And Lelystad Airport was allowed to open.
Also read: Amsterdam lacks space for homes. Can it grow around Schiphol?
But that growth is no longer self-evident. In The Hague, it is now more about the costs than the benefits of flying: the climate effects, limited space for housing in Greater Amsterdam, noise pollution, the poor working conditions for low-skilled airport staff. This week, the FNV drew attention to platform employees who spend almost their entire working day in jet blasting. Through long-term exposure to ultrafine particles they suffer more than average from heart, vascular and lung diseases and cancer. The Labor Inspectorate will investigate.
It will also become clear at the formation table that not everyone is in favor of growth anymore. Judging by the election programs, there is one proponent, one opponent and two doubters. The VVD advocates growth. The ChristianUnion is against. The opening of Lelystad Airport will definitely be canceled, the program reports.
CDA and D66 make demands on growth. For example, the Christian Democrats want “less nuisance for the immediate environment” and no low flight routes to Lelystad. Also D66 falls over the low flying. That alone seems like an impregnable hurdle.
The reorganization of Dutch airspace, which the government and stakeholders are now discussing, offers Schiphol a fourth approach route. Flying low over the Veluwe seems inevitable due to intersecting air traffic. D66 also demands that “no nitrogen problem arises” when Lelystad opens. That seems impossible and it is starting to get through in The Hague. Certainly after the court decision this week about the Amercentrale – more about that later.
Nitrogen Concerns
‘Great concerns for the cabinet about Schiphol, number of flights at risk’ headlined the NOS on Wednesday. Legal advisers to the cabinet would advise ‘draconian measures’, because Schiphol does not comply with nitrogen rules and nuisance provisions. In addition, the airport has not had any nature permit. This also applies to Eindhoven, Lelystad, Rotterdam and Maastricht. They assumed that they did not need a permit, but it is required under the Nature Conservation Act.
No new is possible without a nature permit airport traffic order (LVB) are taken. An LVB states, among other things, how many flights may take place annually. The decision for Schiphol has expired; The new also contains rules to limit nuisance. But that is still not accepted. It has led to an uncertain, ‘lawless’ situation for local residents and for Schiphol. Supervisor ILT was forced to tolerate violations. This has been happening since 2015 and that is far too long, the ILT warned Minister Barbara Visser (Infrastructure and Water Management, VVD) on 5 November. It makes the government legally vulnerable.
The issue is topical due to a complaint from the Aalsmeerders group about noise nuisance from Schiphol. First with the ILT – which rejected the case – and then appealed to the court. If the latter agrees with the complainants, this will remove the bottom line under the ILT’s tolerance policy and the Inspectorate will have to fall back on the old, expired LVB. This stipulates that Schiphol may operate between 420,000 and 450,000 flights. A fifth less than before the corona crisis.
Part of the House of Representatives (without GroenLinks, SP, Party for the Animals) was already aware of the acute problems. In a secret consultation At the beginning of November, Minister Visser updated the aviation spokespersons about the ‘legal alternatives’ that she is investigating to quickly grant Schiphol a nature permit. And an LVB. And the space to grow again to 500,000 or more.
pronunciation Amercentrale
The problems are not new. Activist Johan Vollenbroek of environmental organization Mobilization for the Environment had already pointed out in mid-2019 that the airports did not have nature permits. Vollenbroek is the man who started a case against the Programmatic Approach to Nitrogen (PAS), after which the Council of State rejected the cabinet’s nitrogen policy in 2019.
Under his pressure, Minister Carola Schouten (Agriculture, CU) stated that the airports must apply for a nature permit. In February, Schouten published draft permits. Environmental organizations and other stakeholders responded with views, and then it went silent.
Vollenbroek tells by telephone that Schiphol has no nitrogen space for 400,000 flights a year, let alone 500,000. In addition, a new legal problem arose on Wednesday. The court in Den Bosch annulled the nature permit for the power plant in Geertruidenberg. that case was brought by Vollenbroek cs. The province of Noord-Brabant had issued a permit on the basis of old, unused nitrogen rights, but these could not simply be transferred to the power station.
The Schiphol Group is doing the same. He wants to use the supernumerary rights in Amsterdam for Lelystad. Then the Flevo airport would receive a nature permit and be able to open. First for 10,000 flights a year, rising to 45,000.
What next with Schiphol? Insufficient nitrogen space is not a nature permit, so it is not an airport traffic decree, and is therefore not 500,000 or more flight movements. Alternatives are being circulated in The Hague to reduce nitrogen emissions around Schiphol. Buy out farmers in the area, reduce the maximum speed locally to 80 kilometers per hour, take a stricter approach to polluting companies in the area. Flying less seems to be the very last option that the government is considering. And many local residents find that unreasonable.
The municipality of Aalsmeer, which is in trouble with its housing plans because of the airport, had a Social Cost and Benefit Analysis (SCBA) carried out on Schiphol this spring. CE Delft research bureau concludes: “Smart shrinkage of Schiphol will yield prosperity gains”. According to the municipality, a shrinkage scenario of the airport is linked to an improvement in prosperity for the first time. From the research: “The growth to 540,000 flights leads in all calculated scenarios to a welfare loss between 2.3 and 3.1 billion euros”. Shrinking to 375,000 flights actually yields a profit of 6.5 billion in a scenario with an ambitious CO2-reduction.
Economic value
According to the cabinet, the shrinkage of Schiphol will certainly damage the economy. “The Netherlands is very internationally oriented and has an open economy,” it wrote in 2020 about the corona support to KLM. “For the Netherlands, connection with the rest of the world via Schiphol is very important.”
Schiphol and KLM’s network of international destinations provide thousands of jobs, directly and indirectly, according to the cabinet. But does more aviation also lead to more economic growth? There is little to no evidence for that conclusion office CE Delft in July 2019. “There is no reason to believe that the Dutch economy would be harmed by a moderation in growth or a limited contraction of aviation. The environment would benefit,” the report says Does aviation need to grow to maintain our prosperity?
Commissioned by the Ministry of Infrastructure, Decisio calculated in 2019 what the economic significance of Schiphol is. Before corona, the airport was good for 114,000 jobs (93,000 FTE, direct plus indirect) and an added value of 10.4 billion euros. Both job growth and the economic contribution lagged behind the national average, according to Decisio. The number of flights, passengers and freight volume also grew much faster than employment.
Schiphol offers relatively much work to lower and intermediate educated personnel. Now that the crisis has led to reorganisations among service providers at Schiphol, and the work as a baggage handler, security guard or ramp employee is unsafe and sickening according to the FNV, Schiphol is becoming a less pleasant workplace for this group.
Transfer passengers
Will shrinkage lead to economic damage at Schiphol and KLM? Yes, say the airline companies. Dutch aviation follows the ‘hub & spoke’ strategy. Schiphol is the wheel and KLM brings passengers to and from all ‘spokes’. The model revolves around transfer passengers. They feed the network, but from an economic point of view they do not provide the Netherlands with more than a sporadic purchase of coffee or a sandwich at the airport. In addition, a transfer passenger lands and takes off twice: double emissions, double noise.
The Schiphol Environment Council (ORS), the umbrella organization of residents’ organisations, believes that Dutch aviation is better off with fewer transfer passengers. Matt Poelmans and Hans Buurma from ORS worked an alternative for a smaller Schiphol Airport. The hub will remain, as will some of the transfers, but with 350,000 flights instead of 500,000. Buurma: “220 of the 330 destinations are sufficient to offer all business and private passengers to and from the Netherlands a direct connection.” According to Buurma, it is a detour to remove the consequences of too many aircraft by artificially netting nitrogen space. “Take a direct approach to the source, then you will also achieve the other goals, such as health and quality of life.”
Correction (10/12/2021): Groningen Airport Eelde was in the list of airports that do not have a nature permit. That is not correct. GAE is licensed.
A version of this article also appeared in NRC Handelsblad on 11 December 2021
A version of this article also appeared in NRC in the morning of December 11, 2021
#Whats #Schiphol