Our company has completed various work contents of this project in conformity with the contractual requirements for the current year. The main implementation results are described as follows:
1. Research and discussion of reviewing and simplifying the current land transportation system noise control standards and feasible improvement strategies based on different receptor heights.
- Completed collection of the rail system traffic noise control regulations, standards, and indicators adopted in various countries or regions, such as the compilation and analysis table of the maximum noise levels allowed for the rail system adopted in different countries (as shown in Table 2.1-2) and the compilation and analysis table of noise levels generated from the rail system in various countries or regions (as shown in Table 2.1-3). It can be seen from these tables that the regulations, standards, and indicators adopted by different countries vary greatly. Compared with other countries, currently the control standards of our country seem to be neither looser nor stricter.
- Completed collection and compilation of petitions against noises from rail traffic of the land transportation system of various counties and cities in our country (as shown in Table 2.2-1). The noise control measures adopted in foreign countries are shown in Table 2.3-1. The feasible improvement of control techniques of the rail transportation system in our country are shown in Table 2.3-8.
- Completed collection of the “traffic noise improvement plans” for rail traffic of the land transportation system that have been approved in our country (as shown in Table 2.4-6). The absolute value of arithmetic mean error of the estimated and actual noise reduction is about 1.8 dB(A), showing a pretty good noise reduction effect.
- Completed analysis of noises generated by actual operation of the rail transportation system in our country, as well as assessment of their sphere of influence. In terms of measurement results from different heights, the trends of distribution curves of measurement results from various floors are similar, indicating that there is no specific “abnormal noise” interference. Generally, acoustic barriers can only exert noise reduction effect on “one to two floors” above their specific locations and have much less effect on higher floors.
2. Establishment of autonomous management mechanism at airports in our country.
To this end, we have collected the practices for maximum sound level control adopted by airports of various countries, as well as noise management measures promulgated by ICAO and ACI. In terms of noise control, most airports are implementing noise control measures on airport operations such as departure, arrival, engine run-ups, and curfews, which are the four airport operations that have the most prominent influence on aircraft noises.
With regard to maximum noise level control at airports, the maximum noise limits adopted by various airports are shown in Table 3.1-15. Table 3.1-16 further compares the maximum noise limits, time frames, measurement of certified noises, and imposition of fines. Only airports in the UK impose fines or add-on fees on aircrafts producing noise exceeding the maximum noise limits, including London Gatwick Airport, London Stansted Airport, and Manchester Airport.
Currently, the main noise control measures implemented at airports across the world include: limit on use of Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) by aircrafts at the airport (encouraging use of Ground Power Unit), limit on the timeframe for engine run-ups, single engine taxiing (SET), nighttime curfews, limit on number of aircraft takeoff and landing per year, rules on noise budget or noise quota, limit on total noise volume per month at the airport, implementation of noise quota for airlines (imposing fines for exceeding the noise quota), limit on single event noise exposure level (SENEL), and imposition of landing fees or additional noise charges based on aircraft noise level.
This project organized meetings with the Civil Aeronautics Administration to discuss on the “Establishment of Autonomous Management Mechanism at Airports in Our Country – Environment-Friendly Rankings of Airports in Aircraft Noise”, with an aim to encourage airports to implement the Fly Quiet Program in the vicinity of the airport, alleviate the noise level generated from airport operations, reduce the number of public complaints and petitions, and provide clear and understandable messages as far as possible, in order to meet or exceed the requirements of all noise-related rules and regulations. With the establishment of a ranking mechanism based on the performance of airlines and introduction of economic incentives on aircraft noise emission or preferential flight paths, airlines might be encouraged to use quieter and more environment-friendly aircraft models. By doing so, the noise-affected area might be shrunk and single event noise exposure level as well as the overall noise level in the vicinity of the airport reduced.
We have also completed collection and analysis of aircraft noise monitoring data of the sensitive areas under flight paths. We suggest that the maximum noise level is set as 100 dB(A) for both Taipei Songshan Airport and Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport. In addition to airports, the use of indicators still needs the cooperation of the Air Navigation and Weather Services and coherent units. The three indicators recommended for our country include: noise points/aircraft sorties, noise points/airplane seating, noises exceeding statutory restrictions and night flights.
3. Assistance in check-up of aircraft noise monitoring data for airports in our country in order to improve the quality of declared data.
- Completed collection, compilation, and update of data of the 17 aircraft noise monitoring stations at airports that have been required, through public announcement, to establish automatic monitoring facilities to continuously monitor the aircraft noises in the surrounding areas of the airport. There are 203 stationary aircraft noise monitoring stations across the country in total.
- Completed maintenance and update of interpretation tools for aircraft noise monitoring data, as well as examination of the quarterly aircraft noise monitoring report at 3 airports. We have also reminded those airports of the following matters: frequently test the communication between the monitoring center and noise monitoring station, strictly comply with noise preferential operation timeframe and routes, plan for run-up noise monitoring stations, regularly review the duration time and trigger level of noise monitoring stations (once six months or a year), and plan neighborly work and do it well.
- Completed revision of the “Guidelines for Checkup of the Operations of the Aircraft Noise Monitoring Station and Monitoring Center, as well as Review of the Report on Aircraft Noise Monitoring in the Vicinity of the Airport”. We have also conducted analysis of the economic benefits of implementing this project.
