Bill Overview
Title: Air Traffic Noise and Pollution Expert Consensus Act of 2022
Description: Air Traffic Noise and Pollution Expert Consensus Act of 20 This bill requires the Federal Aviation Administration to enter into an arrangement with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to examine and report on the various health impacts of air traffic noise and pollution.
Sponsors: Sen. Warren, Elizabeth [D-MA]
Target Audience
Population: People living near airports or under flight paths
Estimated Size: 30000000
- Air traffic noise and pollution primarily affects people living near airports or under flight paths.
- Noise pollution can lead to sleep disturbance, cardiovascular issues, and other health impacts.
- Air pollution from aircraft can contribute to respiratory issues and other health problems.
- Major airports are typically situated near or within large cities, potentially affecting millions of residents globally.
- Noise and environmental policies may lead to broader public health and urban planning repercussions, impacting a wider community indirectly.
Reasoning
- People living directly near airports or under frequent flight paths tend to be most affected by noise and air pollution from airplanes.
- It is not only the residents living closest to the airports that are affected, but those in broad urban areas under significant flight paths.
- While the policy aims to examine health impacts, actual improvements would depend on consequent regulatory actions and is unlikely to alter immediate day-to-day experiences for all affected.
- Given the budget constraints, the scope of the policy is likely limited to conducting studies and suggesting potential changes rather than implementing large-scale mitigations.
Simulated Interviews
Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The noise from planes early in the morning is unbearable at times.
- I'm glad that there might be more research, but what we need are concrete measures to reduce noise and pollution.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Software Developer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Air pollution has always been a concern, especially with my asthma.
- This bill might be the step we need to push for stricter air quality standards.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Retired (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The constant hum of airplanes is stressful, hoping studies lead to action.
- It's better than nothing, but let's see if it really leads to change.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Taxi Driver (New York, NY)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We deal with noise pollution daily, it's hard to even hear my clients in the cab sometimes.
- The study is good, but action would be better.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Graduate Student (Seattle, WA)
Age: 25 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The initiative could lead to significant public health findings.
- I'm hoping it generates momentum for real policy changes afterward.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Healthcare Worker (Miami, FL)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about what my kids breathe and the noise they are exposed to.
- Hopefully, this will set the stage for stronger protective measures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Construction Worker (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My job takes me near the airport often, and the noise can be overwhelming.
- The policy is promising if it leads to practical outcomes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Barista (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Noise pollution seems to be getting worse, especially at night.
- It's reassuring to know that something is being done, at least.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Freelance Artist (Las Vegas, NV)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a constant problem that affects my work and home life.
- The study is a start, but it's change that we need.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retired Teacher (Boston, MA)
Age: 70 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've gotten used to the noise to some extent over the years.
- I hope this leads to development of better municipal strategies for dealing with airport noise.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 3: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The study will increase understanding of air traffic noise and pollution impacts, informing future policy decisions.
- The cost is relatively low compared to potential health care cost savings if the study leads to public health improvements.
- There is significant public interest in reducing air traffic-related nuisances, especially in densely populated areas.