Aircraft are the latest and greatest symbol of the machine age.  On page 37 of the Transportation (October 1997) issue of Scientific American is a graph of projected per capita traffic volume as a function of average national income.  The graph shows that as income rises, so does distance travelled.  The graph is part of an article by A.Schafer & D. Victor on "Global Mobility" and forecasts that high speed transport will account for 25% of passenger miles in 2020, up from 9% in 1990.  High speed transport is aircraft or very fast train.

In Sydney Australia there is furore about aircraft noise.  Sydney airport is within five kilometers of the city center, and aircraft movements are over densely populated areas.  The federal government (which controls airports) has just rescheduled air traffic that previously annoyed the seagulls of Botany Bay and sent it over the most densely settled part of Sydney. (The Kings Cross - Woollahra section).  The "No Airports" political party fails to see the necessity of airports in Sydney Basin.  (I think I am beginning to agree with them).  The inhabitants of Badgery's Creek in Western Sydney (where the government proposes to open a second airport) do not want an airport either.

Below are catalogued the disadvantages of airports in cities, and reasons for concentrating airports in remote locations.

1. Aeroplanes spread disease.  The first defence against the expected pandemics of the third millenium will be restrictions on rapid international travel.  Placing international airports in remote areas would simplify any quarantine procedures found necessary.
2. Aircraft are beginning to regularly fly into the ground near airports.  It does not seem like a very good idea to have densely populated areas near airports.
3. Airports are unwelcome additions in any city.  They are noisy and smelly.  An Australian federal government that promised to move all commercial airports out of the Sydney basin might well earn itself an extra handful of seats in the Representatives & an extra seat in the Senate.  Melbourne people might well feel the same way.
4. International tourism would be only marginally affected if airports were relocated to remote areas.  One international airport for South-eastern Australia near Condobolin NSW should suffice.  Condobolin is about equidistant from Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane and Adelaide, and is sparsely settled.  Very fast (250 MPH) trains could deliver passengers within two or three hours to the major cities. Sightseeing tourists could start their holiday in "outback" Australia.
5. Aeroplanes produce massive pollution and consume enormous amounts of energy.  I have not calculated exact figures, but aeroplanes appear to consume about half as much energy as is used to provide the total electricity budget for Australia.

• An aeroplane engine (RB211) powers up to about 30 megawatts.
• Per capita Australian consumption of electricity was 8278 kWh p/a (for 1995) which is (divide by 365.25 & then divide by 24) about 950 watts per person averaged continuously.
• Maximum electricity generating capacity in Australia (1994) was 38,830,000 kW
• Sydney has a population of about 3,750,000 and Australia has about 18,500,000.(1997)
• According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics on domestic airlines aircraft movements in Australia there are more than 500,000 aircraft movements and more than 450,000 hours are flown per annum.

• A four engined jetliner operating continuously could produce 120 MW which is as much power as would be used by 130,000 people.
• Twenty-nine four engined aeroplanes operating continuously could produce sufficient electricity to power Sydney.
• Three-hundred-twenty-four (324) four engined aeroplanes could supply the maximum power load for Australia.
• One hundred and fifty four (154) four engined aeroplanes could produce enough energy (averaged) to power Australia.
• Australia has fifty one domestic airlines aeroplanes in the air continuously (averaged 24 hour basis).

• I have used the maximum power figure (30MW) of the RB211.  However since flights average 54 minutes I believe that this is not too unreasonable.
• Overseas aircraft movements were not included.
• Regional aircraft movements were not included.
• Aircraft probably produce more pollution per output joule than coal fired power stations.
• Consequently the "deductions" could have errors, but are I believe within an order of magnitude of the actuality.  I would appreciate it if anyone who found errors or disagrees with my assumptions reported them to me.
• Much of the data is from the CIA.  The CIA seems to be moving & changing it's html pages.   This does make the task of keeping up-to-date linksI attempt to

Updated 23 December 1997 , This update 23 February 1998. (modifications on 8 March 98)
For corrections, complaints, comments, email here.