Letters to the Editor
Two sides to every aisle
To the editor:
If air passenger traffic over Manchester and the surround communities of southern New Hampshire is encouraged to grow by 87 percent or 143 percent by 2020 (“87% Manchester air traffic increase seen by 2020,” Oct. 13-26 New Hampshire Business Review), would you not think that someone in the government might also have asked what percent increase in air pollution emissions that will cause relative to, say, 1990 levels? And how many additional millions of dollars of subsidies must be paid on top of what federal taxpayers have already given to support MHT?
What will the increase be in terms of estimated cost on public health? Or, just for example, what is the cost in dollars annually in automobile emissions testing fees that have and will be incurred by motorists because MHT air traffic is contributing to the non-compliance category of ambient air quality in the region?
Will MHT be the largest single air polluter in New Hampshire? What about global warming gases? What percent of New Hampshire carbon dioxide emissions (not including automobiles) will MHT air traffic contribute? Who will pay for that?
And has there been an analysis of the losses on property valuations due to ever-rising noise?
I ask only because governments everywhere from Singapore to London are trying to answer the same questions. In general the U.S. aviation industry’s political lobby and MHT’s management, in particular, refuse to face up to the challenge because they are afraid of taking responsibility for the problems.