From:            Bernedine Lund
To:                Commission-Public-Records
Subject:           [EXTERNAL] written public comment
Date:              Monday, October 12, 2020 9:51:39 PM
Attachments:      PoS Commissioner 10-13-2020.pdf
StART - overview of Recommended actions 12-19-18.pdf

WARNING: External email. Links or attachments may be unsafe.
HI, attached are two pages for my written comment. Have an appt at 11:40 am
tomorrow morning (sick dog) so will most likely just watch recording when I get back
home.

Bernedine

PoS Commission's meeting, Oct. 13, 2020, Public Comment 
Hello, Commissioners, I am Bernedine Lund, resident of Federal Way and a member of the 350
Seattle Aviation Team 
At the Capital Investment Plan study session last week, projections were given for growth in the
airline industry. The PoS estimate was lowered to take into account Covie-19 reductions, though
there was an increase after a 5 year recovery period 
Instead of growth, the PoS and airlines should be planning for reductions in flights to reduce
emissions. Estimates of 1 -2% increase in fuel efficiency per year is quicky overwhelmed by the 
increase in the number of flights. Flights need to be reduced to help meet the Paris CO2 goals
for climate change as well as to reduce the negative heath impacts on populations living under
flight paths.
We need to encourage using less flying. For example, trips to local areas can replace flights to
far off places and conferences calls (like this one) can replace many working trips. Mass tourism
can harm local cultures and ecosystems, and various tourist attractions around the world and
National Parks in the US are limiting the number of visitors. The saying is that many of these
places are being loved to death.
Attached is a summary of recommendations to the StART committee in Dec 2018. Since then
there is only one recommendation that I would change, and that would be to delete the comment
to site another airport. Throughout the world, more and more airports and runways are being
built, and the industry tends to fully use the airports once built, which leads to more flights and
more emissions. This is not sustainable in a closed system like the earth, the beautiful blue ball
photographed by the astronauts on the moon landing (as mentioned in my comment on Sept
22.).

StART Meeting 12-19-18: Public Comment: Bernedine Lund 
Overview of Recommended Actions:
1.   Update FAA policy: The FAA policy dictates much of what the Port of Seattle (PoS) can and cannot do with
revenues from the Port.
Airlines are not currently responsible for the noise and air pollution that is harming local residents and the 
local, state, national and global environment.
Currently the PoS is paying to clean up toxic sites left from previous businesses. 
It seems logical that the costs of mitigation and environmental clean-up should come from the flying public 
and/or airlines to cover all the areas affected.
This can be done with added cost to each ticket, or additional gate fees at the PoS. A change in the policies
will have to be done to make this happen. 
2.   Regulate airline growth: The large growth in the airline industry is not regulated, and in the words of one
article the emissions are "..frying the planet".
The airline industry needs to curtail this unrestrained growth, at the PoS and other airports across the
world, to meet the CO2 limits set by the state, the US, and the UNFCCC.
The legislature needs to develop a realistic CO2, CO, ozone, etc. emissions calculation that includes all the
jet fuel used, not just that included for take offs and landings.
Other activities that cannot grow fast enough to reduce the emissions from the large airline growth include:
1) increased fuel efficiency, 2) CO2 offsets, 3) biofuels, 4) electric planes. 
3.   Address public demand for airline growth: The large growth is being pushed by the airline industry and
airports. There are many ways this happens, just as the tobacco companies used to push cigarette smoking.
Larger and larger airports are being built to be very appealing to the public, almost serving as small cities,
e.g., the almost $1 billion International Building at PoS.
The cost of flights is artificially low, and does not cover the overall costs; e.g., the PoS is increasing King
County property taxes to pay for some additional activities, and the costs do not include mitigation costs.
The dangers of flying to the public and airline staff should also be made more prominent (like a disclosure
statement) when the public purchases tickets. 
Increase in ticket prices due to mitigation and costs of multiple health damages will help drive down the
demand (e.g., there is a direct correlation between increased tobacco costs and reduced tobacco use).
Independently, there are several public movements to limit airline use: people in Sweden are using a word
for mileage shaming; some are recommending setting mileage limits; and some airlines have stop offering
frequent flyer miles. Real change will most likely have to come from legislation. For example, legislation
restricted tobacco company advertising and asbestos use has stopped; however, these companies are still
being sued for the harm they have done to people's health. 
4.   Promote job growth in alternative transportation: The PoS says that job creation from the airline growth is
positive for the local area.
Building and maintaining other transportation options could have similar job opportunities. For example,
high speed trains or hyperlink could transport people up and down the coast using renewable energy. Right
now, train tickets are more expensive than airline flights.
5.   Site a region wide freight and/or passenger airport : that is, one used for the entire region, including nearby
states, not just Seattle, with trains carrying the freight to/from the airport.
Another airport is still needed to accommodate the overcrowding at the current PoS.
Stop further building at PoS until the overall airline growth is addressed.