Quote:
Originally Posted by drpgq
CATCH's highlighting of November airport stats seems kind of defeatist. If Hamilton does well and creates higher end R&D jobs, there will be an increased demand for passenger services. As has already been said, picking the 3 year period was obviously done to "catch" the effect of WestJet moving their Eastern hub. Is there a chart in the CATCH report? Not everything goes in a straight monotonic increase.
I am not sure I buy CATCH's views on what Peak Oil means for Hamilton, especially with regards to air travel. Peak Oil theory says there will be less and less oil every year after the peak when it occurs, not zero. Even with almost $100 a barrel oil, air travel is hardly cratering. In twenty years, people in Southern Ontario will still want to fly, even if the prices quadruple to allow displacement for other uses of liquid fuels for air travel. Is Hamilton supposed to get rid of its airport now because CATCH falls on the doomer side of the Peak Oil spectrum?
|
Agreed. Peak oil does not mean the end of air travel - it means the end of air travel as it now stands. We are already noticing the effect peak oil is having/will have on air travel. Airlines and air couriers are looking for planes that are more fuel efficient and/or carry larger loads so to minimize number of individual trips. Many passenger airlines scrambled for the new Boeing 787 aircraft because they are so much more fuel efficient. AS the pressure of peak oil continues, the R&D industry will kick into overdrive to develop better designs using lighter metals. Hamilton will directly benefit from this due to the relocation of the CanMet labs to Innovation Park.
Another peak oil reaction which coincidentally contributed to fewer air movements at Munro as mentioned in an earlier post (conveniently left unmentioned in the CATCH article), is the fact that the cargo carriers using the airport are now flying much bigger airplanes into the airport. Instead of two smaller craft, they are flying in one aircraft with a cargo capacity greater than the other two craft combined. This is a combined gain at the airport as traffic is easier to manipulate and the overal environmental impact on the surrounding lands improve. Oh yeah, and there is more money to be made when the big planes pay their landing fees. Profit at the airport doubled last fiscal year to over $1 mil, another fact that somehow failed to make it into the CATCH article.
The anti-aerotropolis folks are trying to brand Munro as another Mirabel. Good luck with that. Unlike Mirabel, both passenger and cargo loads are increasing at Munro, as is its profitability.
RTH, I'll take you up on your suggestion to contact CATCH. However, I do so with very low expectations. Ever since the defeat of favourite punching bag DiIanni last year, the group seems desperate to find a new enemy to fight, and it looks like they have settled on aerotropolis, most likely because this is seen as the only potential legacy for the former mayor, and they seem determined to scuttle any positive legacy being associated with his name (not counting the Red Hill Parkway of course.) Hey, I am no fan of DiIanni, but there is such a thing as taking a personal vendetta one step too far...