Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Guidelines for the Study Visit Report
1. Objectives of the Study Visit Report:
a) It will allow the hosting partner and participating project partners to give
feedback on the study visit (projects and challenges presented, discussion
between project partners etc.) and to keep track of their initial objectives for
each visit.
b) It will allow project partners who have not attended the study visit to better
understand the practices and challenges of the hosting partner. This is
necessary for the transferability of the identified good practices.
c) It will allow for the identification of good practices and the compilation of data
and information for the final “transnational best of document”. Indeed, the
identification of good practices is based on a bottom-up approach, a peer
review by partners through study visits. Questionnaires are thus the main
element for the identification of good practices
Therefore, the information provided in the Study Visit Report should be precise and
detailed, keeping in mind that partners not having attended the study visit should be able
to understand the practices and challenges as well.
2. Methodology
- The Study Visit Report is to be drafted by the host partner(s) after each visit
- It should be sent to the Lead Partner ([email protected] and
[email protected]) and to the ARC ([email protected] and
- It shall be accompanied by:
o A documented report on media impact:
A copy of the press releases issued on the occasion (in English and in the
initial languages)
The press occurrences (copy of articles whenever possible)
Check the website as well, as some are available
o The electronic files of all the presentations made during the meeting (Check
the website as well)
o Photos and videos (on the website as well)
o Details of all attendees (from outside the D-AIR partnership.)
3. What is the size of my study visit report?
There is no definitive rule on the size of the study visit report, but we advise you to keep
it simple. Ideally the answer to each question should be around one paragraph (5-10
lines maximum) and provide detailed information, including quantitative data, where
available, on the measures presented.
In addition to this detailed information, website links can be included for the interesting
measures, for partners wishing to get more information.
4. When shall I submit my study visit report?
Our advice is that you draft the report immediately after the study visit, and submit it as
soon as possible. The first reason is that it will make your work easier: our experience is
2
that the sooner the reports are written the fresher your mind and recollection of the day
will be.
The report template requires to have a survey made amongst the participants. We advise
you to have it filled at the end of the visit rather than having to chase the answer.
In all cases, we ask you to submit your study visit report no later than 1 month after the
visit.
5. To whom shall the report be sent?
We ask you to send the report to the Lead Partner and to the ARC.
6. Publication
The study visit reports will be published under the restricted section of the website (i.e.
accessible only to the members of the partnership)
4
Table of contents
Study Visit Report .................................................................................................................................... 3
Project Partner n11 ................................................................................................................................. 3
El Prat de Llobregat ................................................................................................................................. 3
and Barcelona-El Prat Airport Region...................................................................................................... 3
1. For the hosting partner ..................................................................................................... 5
A. Background information .................................................................................................... 5
B. CO2-reduction - Introduction .......................................................................................... 8
C. Airport operator activities................................................................................................. 9
D. Surface access .................................................................................................................... 12
2. For visiting partners ......................................................................................................... 15
A. Airport operator activities............................................................................................... 15
B. Surface Access .................................................................................................................... 16
C. General questions .............................................................................................................. 17
5
For the hosting partner
A. Background information
Programme of the visit:
Decarbonised Airport Regions 18-20 June 2012, El Prat, Spain
venue: Civic Center St. Jordi-Ribera Baixa
[Monday 18 June]
9.00 – 10.30 Pre-meeting for Lead partner and component leaders – Eindhoven, ARC,
Swedavia and El Prat – other partners are excused! Subjects:
Responsibilities, start position reports, study visit report, identification
of good practices and additional activities
10.30 – 11.00 Coffee + registration
11.00 – 11.15 Welcome by the Partner representative (El Prat – Sergi Alegre)
11.15 – 13.00 1. Opening by Chairperson (Ron Nohlmans)
2. Minutes Meeting of 20 - 21 March 2012
3. Check conclusions and deadlines
4. Appointment of Vice-chairperson
5. Working guidelines
6. Content related issues
a. Start position reports
b. Planning events and Matchmaking Study Visits (see Annex) c. Study visit report
d. Concept note on stakeholder forums
e. Work Plan 2012 (see Annex)
13.30 – 14.00 Lunch
14.00 – 15.00 7. Questions raised
Additional activities by the 4 PP regions (Component 3) – explanation
by Wim de Kinderen
8. Communication activities (Léa Bodossian)
a. Communication Plan (see Annex)
b. communication products (website, newsletter etc.)
15.00 – 15.15 Coffee break
15.15 – 17.15 9. Progress report, including financial aspects (Delia Mitcan)
17.15 – 17.30 10. Conclusions: Summary and Deadlines (internal, national and
Programme level)
17.30 – 21.00 Free time
21.00 Dinner in Barcelona
6
[Tuesday 19 June]
Barcelona-El Prat Airport Region 9.10 Bus to Barcelona Airport Terminal 1
9.45 – 12.00 Workshop on CO2-reduction by AENA, the organisation which owns all
Spanish Airports – presentation of master plan on CO2-reduction, actions
in the past, present and future, ACA accreditation; interaction and discussion
by:
Ms Pilar Montalvo - Head of the environmental Department of the Airport
authority-
12.00 – 13.00 Airport visit
13.00 – 14.00 Lunch at Terminal 1
14.00 - 14.45 Bus to El Prat Civic Centre
15.00 – 17.00 Workshop on Sustainable Surface Access by the Metropolitan Transport
Authority – presentation on present surface access, future plans and as
special subject the “Round Table of Mobility” in which regional stakeholders
have their say; interaction and discussion with the workshop.
Participants:
Lluis Alegre Valls Head of Mobility Service, Metropolitan Transport
Authority (ATM) file in PDF.
Joan Ma Bigas Technical Manager of Transport and Mobility Department,
Metropolitan Barcelona Area (AMB)
Guillem Alsina, Metropolitan Barcelona Area (AMB )
20 June 2012 – Venue: Civic Centre St. Jordi-Ribera Baixa- El Prat de Llobregat
9.00 – 13.00 Mobility and airport operator stakeholders meeting (Innovation projects)
9.00 - Presentation
9.20 - Cluster 6m- Jorge Fuentes – Manager of Clúster 6m (PDF)
9.40 - Mobecpoint – Jordi Ventura - General Manager (PDF)
10.00 - TMB project retrofit – Michael Pellot Director of research & development (PDF)
10.20 - Alg Mobility Management – Rosend Bosch - Project Manager (PDF)
11:00 - Coffee break.-
11.30 - Technet.- Francisco Gala – Project Manager (Power Point)
11.50 - Geminis.- Moisés Bolekia - Sales Engineer (PDF)
12:10 - Capmar – Jaciel Reyes - Director of product design & development (PDF)
12.30 - Otem 2000.- Antoni Orti - CEO & Project Manager (PDF)
12:50 - Questions and the end
7
We planned this agenda because we thought that to meet the responsible people of the
airport and the surface access in order that could they explain their real situation and
their real plans from the future was necessary and useful. We invited also companies
from these regions which are developing concrete projects to reduce CO2 and they are
already implementing them.
Data of Barcelona-El Prat Airport:
Number of flights: 290.004
Number of passengers: 35.145.176
Type of passengers: 52% Vacation + 23% Business + 25% others
(Survey data EMMA 2012)
Number of workers: 19.000 (Aena + airlines + concessionaire, others.. )
Barcelona -El Prat Airport is located south-west of Barcelona, about 12-14 km from the
city centre
1) What is the key message that you initially intended to convey through
this visit to the other D-AIR partners?
The message we wanted to give was the real situation of Barcelona-El Prat airport
concerning D-AIR objectives and the enormous potential of reduction of CO2 even
with the economic crisis. We wanted to show that there are plenty of projects going
on.
2) Could you explain how you think the presentations made on the day
supported the overall D-AIR objective, and yours. Please fill in the table
for each presentation.
Presentation No
impact
Low Medium High No opinion
Air quality control X
Environmental management X
Situation of mobility to/from
the airport
X
3) Do you consider that your programme matches the partners’ expectations in
their start position reports?
With the program we arranged, we tried to answer the expectations from the partners
due that this was the first study visit.
8
1
not at all
2
to a limited
extent
3
fairly
4
to a large
extent
5
outstandingly
No
opinion
X
B. CO2-reduction – Introduction
In a medium-term are aimed at:
Improving the management and efficiency of energy
Replacement of our vehicles according to environmental criteria
From an environmental perspective the proposed criteria are focused on the possible
acquisition of vehicles with lower emissions of air pollutants:
1. Zero emissions (local)
2. Low emission of NOx / Lower emissions of PM10
3. Lower emissions of hydrocarbons (C6H6, etc..)
4. Lower emission of CO2
5. Lower emissions of other gaseous pollutants
First, are the electric vehicles (local zero emission, given the levels of pollution in the
metropolitan area). There is no indication of the economic constraints in terms of cost.
It should be noted that in 2011, have been incorporated seven electric vehicles to fleet
Aena Airports SA at the airport in Barcelona -El Prat, which represents 4,7% of the total
vehicle fleet
Extending the Emission Reducing Plan (NOx and PM) until 2015
The measures Aena Airports committed to renewing the plan indicated (2011-2015) are:
o Optimizing the use of auxiliary power units for aircraft (APU)
o Replacing ground service equipment (GSE) that uses diesel engines with
electric motors equipment.
o Optimization of aircraft ground operational
o Developing a Plan of mobility of people to access the Airport
o Reducing emissions from fixed sources Airport
More information about the Plan can be found on the website: www.gencat.cat
http://www20.gencat.cat/portal/site/mediambient/menuitem.8f64ca3109a92b904e9cac3bb0c0e1a
0/?vgnextoid=e82448d456e63310VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e82448d456e633
10VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD
9
We have carried out measures to reduce the electric energy consumption in our
installations: new lighting system in the T1 parking lot, visual help systems on the
apron and the taxiways, lighting of gangways in T1, lighting in T2…
Electric vehicles purchase for Aena fleet in the year 2011
C. Airport operator activities
4) What is the main message that you want to convey to the D-AIR partners
concerning C02 reduction measures from airport operator activities?
The message we wanted to give was the real situation of Barcelona-El Prat airport
concerning D-AIR objectives and the enormous potential of reduction of CO2 even
with the economic crisis. The most interesting measure concerning C02 reduction
will be the application of Collaborative Decision Making process (CDM is a tool
being used in a lot of airports. It consists that all actors take part of the landing –
take off cycle working together in order to avoid interruption or/and wasting
times) we think is the most interesting because in one hand shows the
participation of a lot of people and, on the other, it can reduce a lot quantities of
CO2 emission
5) Please provide a short summary of each measure or idea presented
during the visit
Measure Responsible entity/
operator
Description
1 AIRLINES Optimizing the use of APU in aircraft
(Auxiliary Power Units)
2 COMPANIES Replacement of the diesel engines from
ground service equipment of the handling
3 AIRPORT Improving the plan for ground aircraft
operations (taxiing)
4 PUBLIC AUTHORITY Improving the mobility plan (access to
airport)
5 AIRPORT Emission reduction stationary sources of
the airport
6 AIRPORT Motion detectors for lights in the way zones
in T1 and T2. Automatic regulation system
(DALI system) by luminosity level detectors
and heliometers data in T1.
7 AIRPORT Free Cooling system which takes advantage
of the outside air when the external
conditions are favourable
8 AIRPORT Production of domestic hot water. There are
696 devices with a total area of 1.535 m2
which produces the 70% of the total
bathroom hot water.
10
6) Amongst all the measures on airport activities presented during the visit,
which are in your opinion the 1 to 3 best measures?
1.- Optimizing the use of APU in aircraft (Auxiliary Power Units)
2.- Replacement of the diesel engines from ground service equipment of the
handling
3.- Improving the mobility plan (access to airport)
7) To what extent do you think these 1 to 3 measures will help achieve the
objectives of the dAIR project? Please complete the table below for each
measure presented in the previous question.
No impact Low Medium High No
opinion
Comments
Measure 1 AIRLINES X Optimizing the use of APU
in aircraft (Auxiliary Power
Units)
Measure 2 COMPANIES X Replacement of the diesel
engines from ground
service equipment of the
handling
Measure 3 PUBLIC
AUTHORITY
X Improving the mobility
plan (access to airport)
8) Involvement of external organisations to contribute to the “CO2
neutrality of airport operator activities” goal (in stimulating innovation,
i.e. new products and services to be deployed; through
buying/procurement policy, serving as a Living Lab…)
a) Private companies and R&D communities
1. Do you cooperate with companies?
Yes No Explanation (why and – if yes – how)
X
2. Do you cooperate with R&D communities?
Yes No Explanation (why and – if yes – how)
X
3. Do you cooperate with companies and R&D communities combined ?
Yes No Explanation (why and – if yes – how)
X
b) Other organisations and stakeholders
1. Do you cooperate with other organisations and stakeholders?
11
Type Yes No Explanation (why and – if yes – how)
Citizens
(individual
and/or
organised)
X
Public authorities
(local/
regional/…)
X
Tenants of
airport premises
X
[other]
9) Are there any relevant innovation projects in your region (including
those not shown during the study visit)? If yes, please explain the
project(s)
10) To what extent do you think these projects will help achieve the
objectives of the dAIR project? Please complete the table below for each
project presented in the previous question.
No
impact
Low Medium High No
opinion
Comments
Project 1
Project 2
Project 3
[project x]
11) Did the discussions/exchanges with other dAIR project partners during
the study visit give you some answers to your challenges/difficulties
(identified in the Start Position Report, for ex) on airport operations?
No
12) What project did you find more interesting of the projects submitted in
the regional transport stakeholders’ forum meeting or expert coordination
meeting?
We think this question should not be here
13) Which CO2 reduction measure from airport operator activities can you
implement/ replicate in the short/medium/long term?
12
14) Are there any similar projects implemented at other airports in Europe?
If yes, please explain the implementation process.
We don't know
15) Which measures presented should be considered as good practices?
Replacing the old vehicles to electric ones
D. Surface access
16) What is the main message that you want to convey to the other dAIR
partners concerning CO2 reduction measures from surface access?
The good situation even if structures of the (metro or train) are not still going on.
The most important challenges are: improving information to users of public
transport, improving the facility of getting tickets of public transport, to get facilities
for greener taxis and greener private cars, to improve the % of employees using the
public transport as the main, to increase the number of alternative transport systems
like: car-sharing, bike electric motorbikes, etc.
17) Please provide a short summary of each measure or idea presented
during the visit.
Measure Responsible entity /
operator
Description (Maite)
1- Fast bus AMB A direct bus to downtown
2- Permanent
forum with all
actors
Public administration
3- Night bus AMB Bus services all the night
4- Bike line Local government/AENA A bike line from the northwest city to all
terminals and cargo area
Etc.
Implementation of project
PROJECT Short term Medium
term
Long term
Improving the management and
efficiency of energy
X
Replacement or our vehicles
according to environmental criteria
X
Extending the Emission Reducing
Plan (NOx and PM) until 2015
X
13
18) Amongst all the measures on surface access presented during the visit,
which are in your opinion the 1 to 3 best measures?
1, 2 and 4
19) To what extent do you think these 1 to 3 measures will help achieve the
objectives of the dAIR project? Please complete the table below for each
measure presented in the previous question.
No
impact
Low Medium High No
opinion
Comments
Measure 1 X
Measure 2 X
Measure 3 X
20) Involvement of external organisations to contribute to the “sustainable
surface access” goal (in stimulating innovation, i.e. new products and
services to be deployed; through buying/procurement policy, serving as
a Living Lab,…)
a) Private companies and R&D communities
1. Do you cooperate with companies?
Yes No Explanation (why and – if yes – how)
X
2. Do you cooperate with R&D communities?
Yes No Explanation (why and – if yes – how)
X
Yes No Explanation (why and – if yes – how)
X
1. Other organisations and stakeholders: Do you cooperate with other
organisations and stakeholders?
Type Yes No Explanation (why and – if yes – how)
Citizens (individual
and/or organised)
X
Public authorities
(local/ regional/…)
X
Tenants of airport
site and premises
X
[other]
21) question for public authority partner) Have you taken or do you intend
to take ‘innovation’ measures that fall completely within the scope of
14
your own competences and which have or will contribute (d) positively
to the dAIR objectives ? (such as buying and procurement policies)
Yes No Explanation (why and – if yes – how)
X Setting the mobility plan for the city
22) Are there any relevant innovation projects in your region (including
those not shown during the study visit)? If yes, please explain
the project(s).
1. Electric bus
23) To what extent do you think these projects will help achieve the
objectives of the dAIR project? Please complete the table below for
each project presented in the previous question.
No
impact
Low Medium High No
opinion
Comments
Project 1 X
Project 2
Project 3
[project x]
24) Did the discussions/exchanges with project partners during the study
visit give you some answers to your challenges/difficulties (identified
in the Start Position Report) on surface access?
Yes, the FILÉO bus service in Paris
25) What project did you find more interesting of the projects submitted
in the regional transport stakeholders’ forum meeting or expert
coordination meeting?
Bus on demand
26) What action should be implemented to improve surface access to/from
the airport visited?
Bus on demand
27) Are there any similar projects implemented at other airports in Europe?
If yes, please explain the implementation process.
28) Which measures presented should be considered as good practices?
The Aerobus
15
1. For visiting partners
A. Airport operator activities
29) Which C02 reduction project/measure from airport operator activities
was the most interesting? Please explain.
30) Which measures presented during the visit should be considered as
good practices for Airport Operator activities for the dAIR project?
Please fill in the following information for each measure.
Measure 1: Name/Description
Yes No
Mature Project
Innovative project
No
impact
Low Medium High No opinion
CO2 reduction
Financial costs
Other external costs
(noise, pollutants
etc.)
Measure 2: Name/Description
Yes No
Mature Project
Innovative project
No
impact
Low Medium High No opinion
CO2 reduction
Financial costs
Other external costs
(noise, pollutants
etc.)
31) What action should be implemented to improve airport operator
activities at the airport visited?
32) Which CO2 reduction project(s)/measure(s) from airport operator
activities can you implement / replicate in the
short/medium/long/term?
33) Which CO2 reduction measure from airport operator activities is not
suitable for your airport? Please explain why.
Project / Measure Short term Medium term Long term
16
34) Are there any similar projects implemented at your airport or at other
airports in Europe? If yes, please explain the implementation process.
B. Surface Access
35) Which surface access project/measure was the most interesting? Please
explain.
36) Which measures presented during the visit should be considered as
good practices for surface access for the dAIR project? Please fill in the
following information for each measure.
Measure 1: Name/Description
Yes No
Mature Project
Innovative project
No
impact
Low Medium High No opinion
CO2 reduction
Financial costs
Other external costs
(noise, pollutants
etc.)
Measure 2: Name/Description
Yes No
Mature Project
Innovative project
No
impact
Low Medium High No opinion
CO2 reduction
Financial costs
Other external costs
(noise, pollutants
etc.)
37) What action should be implemented to improve surface access to/from
the airport visited?
38) Which surface access project(s)/measure(s) can you
implement/replicate in the short/medium/long/term?
39) Which surface access project is not suitable for your airport? Please
explain why.
40) Are there any similar projects implemented at your airport or at other
airports in Europe? If yes, please explain the implementation process.
Project / Measure Short term Medium term Long term
17
C. General questions
You may want to ask the D-AIR partners to fill an (anonymous if they wish) form where
they can provide comments. Marius Nicolescu from ARC
([email protected]) will help you putting the survey as an on line
survey
Questionnaire
1. Express your overall satisfaction of the visit from 1 (the less satisfied) to
5 the more satisfied
1
not at all
2
to a limited
extent
3
partially
4
to a large
extent
5
totally
No
opinion
2. Did the programme meet your expectations?
1
not at all
2
to a limited
extent
3
partially
4
to a large
extent
5
totally
No
opinion
3. Please rate the study visit on the following items:
1: - - 2: - 3 4: + 5:
++
No
opinion
Comments
Content
Organisation
Creating interest in
topics
Involvement of
participants
Included sufficient
examples
4. To what extent was this Study Visit useful to you?
1
not at all
2
to a limited
extent
3
partially
4
to a large
extent
5
totally
No
opinion
Comments:
5. To what extent can you apply the information presented today to your
work?
1
not at all
2
to a limited
extent
3
partially
4
to a large
extent
5
totally
No
opinion
18
Comments:
6. Of the information presented during the Study Visit, how much is useful
to you
0-20%
21-40%
41-60%
61-80%
81-100%
7. What three elements from this study visit were most useful to you?
8. The things that could have been omitted from the study visit are:
9. Were you satisfied with the field visit(s)?
1
not at all
2
to a limited
extent
3
partially
4
to a large
extent
5
totally
No
opinion
Comments:
10. Do you think there was the right number of participants from the D-AIR
project?
Too many Right
number
Not enough
11. Do you think there was the right number of participants from outside the
D-AIR project?
Too many Right
number
Not enough
12. From theory to practice: do you think that the visit was putting emphasis
on the practical /theoretical aspects of surface access/airport
operations?
No
emphasis
Low Medium High No opinion
Surface access
Practical
aspects
19
Theoretical
aspects
Airport operations
Practical
aspects
Theoretical
aspects
Comments:
13. If during the visit you have noted a good or bad practice, aspect etc.
referred to the D-AIR project even if it is not coming from the organised
visit, please explain.
14. Do you think that issues addressed or solutions presented could be useful
for other EU-parties? Which ones?
15. Please rate the challenges listed below according to their level of severity
(for the current study visit)
Airport Operator Activities
No
impact
Low Medium High No opinion
Lack of ACA scheme
Lack of data on annual CO2
emissions
Lack of new
technologies/operational
procedures leading to lower
energy usage
Lack of efficient energy
management team/strategy
Lack of strategy on surface
vehicles
Lack of emission reduction
plan
Lack of measures regarding:
Conveyor belts
Elevators/escalators
Monitoring of energy
consumption from
electric appliances
Renewable energies
(wind power,
photovoltaic energy)
Alternative energies
(biogas,
Lighting systems
Heating/cooling
20
systems
Lack of strong mechanisms of
cooperation between
different stakeholders
Lack of cooperation for
innovation
Lack of measures for off-
setting remaining emissions
Other:
Other:
Other:
Surface access
No
impact
Low Medium High No opinion
Not enough passengers
using public transport
Not enough staff using
public transport
Lack of adequate
information on public
transport (schedule, fare,
real-time information)
Lack of adequate
transport connections
Not enough use of new
transport technologies
(electric cars/buses,
motorbikes etc)
Lack of alternative modes:
car-sharing offers etc
Lack of strong
mechanisms of
cooperation between
different stakeholders
Lack of cooperation for
innovation
Other:
Other:
Other:
16. In your view, what kind of data is important for the assessment of the
impact of the measures presented during the study visit? If known,
please state relevant data sources.
17. Please list references to any studies or documents of relevance with links
to online download where possible.
18. How can the next study visits be improved?
Feel free to add as many elements as you feel relevant