【草莓酱拌饭组】2argument112 by deeper99

deeper99UID: 2606523

参考https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=998129&highlight=
前提：
1.
增加跑道可以减少延迟；
2.
*即使增加，是否一定要填补900亩才可以？
3.
重整湿地可以弥补填海对野生动物的影响；
4.
*填海所造成的对tidal patterns的影响不是灾难性的；
5.
改机场至少能从这次修建中维持；（收支平衡）

The passage holds a view that by adopting the plan of Franklin Airport, the flight delays could be reduced and the bay’s environment will actually be helped rather than hurt, based on several premises: firstly, the method of building new runway could reduce delay. Secondly, the 900 acres are the necessary areas for building the runway. Thirdly, the restoration of wetlands could compensate the negative effect on wildlife brought by filling the bay. Fourthly, the airport could regain enough profits to balance the cost of the plan.

To begin with, although the new runways are able to increase the capacity of the airport, it does not equally mean that the flight delays of Franklin Airport would be reduce. The basic problem is that the major cause of its flight delays is still kept unknown. In other word, if the delays were not resulted from the lack of capacity of the airport but some other factors, such as the frequently changing weather, the low efficiency on planes’ management, and so on, then no matter how large the capacity of the airport is, the situation might not be improved anyway. For instance, the most flight delays might be the results of the inefficient plane schedules and bad management, because of which, several planes often arrive at approximately the same time, falling on some wrong position and leaving the airport in chaos. And such problems could have been solved by adjusting the schedule rather than the necessity of enlarging the capacity.
Furthermore, no datas could prove that 900 acres should be the least requirement of building the new runways. After all, the area of filling land should be controlled into the smallest size, considering its negative effect on nature.

Even if the increase of new runways can solve the problems, it is still questionable whether the whole plan would actually improve the wild animals’ life rather than damage it. At first glance, the areas of restoration, 1000 acres, is larger than the new runways’ one of 900 acres. However, with deeper rumination, even though the restoration of wetlands might enlarge the habitat of wildlife by 100 acres, but the price is to drive them out of their original homes, as well as destroying the whole former environment. What’s more, the destruction on the former 900 acres would be performed swiftly enough for a couple of months while the restoration of the polluted wetlands might take years. How could those wildlife survive during those years without homes and food? Not to mention that they may not learn to immigrate into the restored wetlands when the restoration process has finished. In that sense, the plan may bring disasters to the wildlife instead of helping them.

Moreover, the influence of filling action imposes on tidal patterns seems to be unclear. Even if the plan would actually help wildlife, it doesn’t imply that the plan will not do harm to the local environment on the aspects of tidal patterns. The first thing could be ensured is that the restoration of wetlands could bring little effect on compensating the influence of plan on tidal patterns. Supposedly, if the tidal patterns have been alterred due to the plan, not only the fish migration may be affected, causing few fish visit sea areas nearby and thus bringing huge strike on the local fisheries, but the peaceful tidal as well, which may turn so violent that fewer ships would park on it. Such suppositions may not come true. But as long as the probability of them hasn’t been eliminated, more evaluation of the plan should be conducted before approving it.

What would cast more questions is whether Franklin Airport could, at least, balance its paid by increase its capacity. Would more passengers like to enjoy the service of Franklin Airport just because of its reduction of flight delays? Since the airport has already spoil its fame, it is doubtful that the former passengers would forgive it by just the reduction of delays rather than no delays. Set this aside at the moment. The author also fails to offer an estimation about how much percentage of delays would be reduced by increasing the runways. What if the flight delays of Franklin Airport still sounds to many from the perspect of passengers? At least, the plan should ensure its flight delays not exceeding other airports nearby or the whole one would be meaningless.

From what has been discussed above, the plan of building new runways and restoring wetlands indeed sounds attractive. Before approving of it, however, more researches are required until evidences are sufficient enough to prove that such plan would not bring large negative effect on environment while its postive action would compensate the loss on nature, and the airport could balance its cost by this plan.