Costs and benefits of US aviation noise land-use policies |
| |
| Institution: | 1. University of Belgrade, Faculty of Transport and Traffic Engineering, Division of Airports and Air Traffic Safety, 305 Vojvode Stepe Street, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia;2. University of Belgrade, Faculty of Organizational Sciences, Department of Statistics, 154 Jove Ilica Street, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia;1. Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Delft University of Technology, P.O. Box 5058, 2600 GB Delft, the Netherlands;2. Faculty of Transport and Traffic Engineering, University of Belgrade, 305 Vojvode Stepe Street, Belgrade, Serbia;1. Acoustics Research Center, Department of Electronics and Telecommunications, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway;2. Laboratory of Acoustics/Noise Control, Empa - Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology, 8600 Dübendorf, Switzerland;1. ARPAT – Environmental Regional Agency of Tuscany, Dept. of Lucca, Via Vallisneri 6, Lucca, Italy;2. IPCF–CNR Uos, Via G. Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy;3. Department of Physics, University of Siena, Via Roma 56, 53100 Siena, Italy;4. Department of Physics, University of Pisa, Largo B. Pontecorvo 3, 56127 Pisa, Italy;5. ARPAT – Environmental Regional Agency of Tuscany, Dept. of Pisa, Via V. Veneto 27, Pisa, Italy |
| |
| Abstract: | Aircraft noise affects human health and welfare. One method US airports use to mitigate the impact of noise on nearby residents is through sound insulation and residential land acquisition projects. Costs of residential insulation and acquisition projects are taken from federal grant summaries while the benefits of noise reduction are calculated as the combined willingness-to-pay for abatement and direct and indirect costs of illness from hypertension, myocardial infarction, and stroke. We show that the average cost of sound insulation projects is $15,600 per person affected while that of land acquisition is $48,900 per person affected. We find that for only in 15% of projects do the benefits to residents from willingness-to-pay for reduction and reduced risk of mortality and morbidity exceed the costs of sound insulation for residences exposed to 65 dB Day Night Level (DNL) of noise. Our estimates suggest that noise insulation projects are more cost-effective than fleet wide mandatory aircraft retirement. |
| |
| Keywords: | Aviation Noise Cost benefit analysis Airports Annoyance |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
