The citizen groups around Basel EURO AIRPORT are to find in France, Switzerland and Germany. This group below is located at the Southern part of the Black Forest area.

BISF press release 02/25

In its press release for 2024, Euro airport focuses on economic development and its expansion plans. This is only at the expense of local residents and the planet. It is a return to the world before the COVID crisis with additional burdens to be expected.

It is not apparent that those responsible for the airport have learned from the multiple crises and the resulting need for action in recent years. The airport sees its future exclusively in economic development based on growth: the infrastructure is being expanded for more travel and leisure consumption. Unfortunately, a concept for necessary air traffic that can be handled economically successfully with sensible flight procedures is neither in sight nor obviously in the airport’s field of vision.

After all, the airport admits that previous measures have not reduced noise at night and that local residents continue to suffer as a result.

Given the airport’s objectives, there is little likelihood of any improvement in this respect. On the contrary, the airport is promoting new leisure destinations further afield. The low-cost tourism that predominates at Basel-Mulhouse Airport is hardly in a position to compensate for the known harmful effects. According to the French air traffic control authority DGAC, around 495,000 tons of CO2 were generated at Basel-Mulhouse Airport in 2021, largely uncompensated.

The improvements promised in passing, such as photovoltaic systems, a biomass co-generation plant, electric vehicles on the tarmac or a rail link, can in no way “compensate” for the greenhouse gas emissions from air traffic. If the exorbitant costs for the rail link were invested in a complete electrification of the runway, the environment would be better served by a significant reduction in ultra-fine particulate matter

In addition to the largely concealed air and soil pollution, which neighboring organizations in Switzerland, France and Germany have been campaigning against for years, there is the new issue of drinking water contamination in France. It was only recently revealed that the drinking water of Saint-Louis and Blotzheim has been heavily contaminated with PFAS for around 50,000 residents for decades. PFAS are so-called perpetual pollutants (per- and polyfluorinated alkyl compounds). The pollution from the airport stems from the former use of fire-fighting foam.

The contamination is 1.5 to 4.5 times above the limit value of 100 ng/liter and could therefore be the most heavily contaminated drinking water in France.

On the German side, we have the problem that around half of take-off and landing traffic is routed through lower German airspace. That is about 100 flights per day. The lowest low-altitude flights are only 300 meters above the Markgräflerland region.

Unfortunately, the airport is very restrictive when it comes to data transparency. Despite repeated requests, it was not possible for us residents to obtain flight data on the use of airspace by take-offs and landings at Basel-Mulhouse Airport. This is all the more astonishing given that BIAF is an official member of the airport’s tri-national environmental commission. Only the intervention of the Freiburg Regional Council provided insight into the flight movements from January to October 2024 – November and December were not disclosed, for whatever reason?

The first 10 months of 2024 at least allow an insight into the way in which flights are flown.

The detour take-off procedure known as ELBEG 7S is problematic for all active residents’ representatives. After the initial take-off from the south, it leads clockwise around the airport to Kandern. Only then do the jets disperse in the direction of their respective destinations. Of the 9600 take-offs using this procedure up to October, only 3000 destinations had to be flown to using this procedure. The vast majority of 6600 take-offs could have been routed directly to the south. There is no reason to burden the residents in the north of the airport if the flight goes to Egypt, Italy or Kosovo. ELBEG 7S for southern destinations generates a detour of around 100 km per flight. Depending on the type of calculation, the above-mentioned unnecessary ELBEG take-offs result in large quantities of unnecessarily generated pollutants and CO2. The problematic night flight activities admitted by the airport mean for Germany that the average maximum noise events per flight after 11 p.m. are almost twice as loud as during the day. The problematic night flight activities admitted by the airport mean for Germany that the average maximum noise events per flight after 11 p.m. are almost twice as loud as during the day. There is an urgent need for discussion and action here. In addition, this take-off procedure lacks the necessary approval in Germany. The BISF is currently having an expert opinion prepared on the significance of this lack of approval for the use of lower German airspace. The use of German airspace is not a good neighborly situation.

We are happy to accept the airport’s argument that 20% of all passengers come from Germany. We should be very satisfied with a 20% load and a consistent night’s rest from 10 pm to 6 am.