Suvarnabhumi urged to go smoke-free

[Admin]

Suvarnabhumi urged to go smoke-free 
: 4 Oct 2010
Suvarnabhumi urged to be a smoke-free airport

BANGKOK (NNT) - The Thai Health Promotion Institute (THPI) indicates that nicotine content inside the Suvarnabhumi International Airport is still high, asking the Airport of Thailand (AOT) to make Suvarnabhumi 100% smoke-free.

The Institute is currently asking the Public Health Ministry to set up rules to make the airport completely free from smoke. It suggests that nicotine content in the air around smoking room is too high. Although a separate smoking room is provided; the door is open very often.

The THPI cites that 23 out of 30 biggest airports in the United States are completely smoke-free. In Thailand, many small airports have done so as well, leaving only the biggest airport in the Kingdom. The reason, cited by the AOT, that some long haul passengers need to smoke and Suvarnabhumi is a big airport with many passengers on connecting flights, is untenable by the Institute as many bigger airports can also make themselves smoke-free.

In addition, the THPI also suggests that if Suvarnabhumi adopt the strategy, it could climb up the ranking in the Skytrax World Airport Awards, which survey 9.8 million passengers from all over the world. Currently the airport is at number 10th spot.

[nookiebear]

Suvarnabhumi urged to go smoke-free 
: 4 Oct 2010
Suvarnabhumi urged to be a smoke-free airport

BANGKOK (NNT) - The Thai Health Promotion Institute (THPI) indicates that nicotine content inside the Suvarnabhumi International Airport is still high, asking the Airport of Thailand (AOT) to make Suvarnabhumi 100% smoke-free.

The Institute is currently asking the Public Health Ministry to set up rules to make the airport completely free from smoke. It suggests that nicotine content in the air around smoking room is too high. Although a separate smoking room is provided; the door is open very often.

The THPI cites that 23 out of 30 biggest airports in the United States are completely smoke-free. In Thailand, many small airports have done so as well, leaving only the biggest airport in the Kingdom. The reason, cited by the AOT, that some long haul passengers need to smoke and Suvarnabhumi is a big airport with many passengers on connecting flights, is untenable by the Institute as many bigger airports can also make themselves smoke-free.

In addition, the THPI also suggests that if Suvarnabhumi adopt the strategy, it could climb up the ranking in the Skytrax World Airport Awards, which survey 9.8 million passengers from all over the world. Currently the airport is at number 10th spot.

Apart from the smoking room I understood it to be a NO SMOKING AREA already

[fox]

maybe they are talking about all the area of the airport including the parking lots? if so...... it will be very hard to enforce.

[Admin]

Suvarnabhumi may become smoke-free 
Bangkok Post: 8 Nov 2010
Last gasp for airport puffers International terminal could bar smokers

Health authorities are pressing ahead with a plan to close all smoking areas at Suvarnabhumi airport's international terminal.

The ban is in keeping with a ministerial regulation which prohibits smoking in public places, including airports.

The Office of the Tobacco Control Committee will work with Airports of Thailand Plc to put the Public Health Ministry regulation into practice.

The airport has 18 smoking rooms for international passengers.

The ministry in June closed all smoking rooms in the domestic passengers' area at Suvarnabhumi and Don Mueang airports in line with the ban.

The president of the Health Promotion Institute, Hatai Chitanondh, said studies show that airport smoking areas expose non-smokers in adjacent non-smoking areas to significant concentrations of nicotine vapour.

Similar smoking room bans have been imposed at some international airports in Europe.

Those who wish to smoke still have the option to do so outside the building, Dr Hatai said.

Narongchai Tanadchangsaeng, deputy general manager of Suvarnabhumi airport, is worried that travellers will choose to bypass the airport if they cannot smoke inside the terminal.

Dr Hatai, however, believed the smoke-free policy would improve Suvarnabhumi's competitiveness with other airports.

"Most passengers opt for nicotine patches to get their fix," he said.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/205246/last-gasp-for-airport-puffers-international-terminal-could-bar-smokers

[nookiebear]

So now look forward to gasping for air as you walk into the terminal!!!!!!!!

[EastFife4Forfar5]

So now look forward to gasping for air as you walk into the terminal!!!!!!!!

Same as Heathrow  - you have to cut yourway through the entrance.

[nookiebear]

So now look forward to gasping for air as you walk into the terminal!!!!!!!!

Same as Heathrow  - you have to cut yourway through the entrance.

I thought you would get in thro the VIP entrance circa perimeter road!!!!!!!!!

[EastFife4Forfar5]

So now look forward to gasping for air as you walk into the terminal!!!!!!!!

Same as Heathrow  - you have to cut yourway through the entrance.

I thought you would get in thro the VIP entrance circa perimeter road!!!!!!!!!

I don't have your contacts Big Boy 

[maraudingscot]

              

OK now this is very bad news. I just incase I get an ear bashing for being a smoker ---- I  DO NOT SMOKE    (reason  g/f)
I use to smoke and see when you get of that plane after a 12 hour flight you virtually run for that little cubicle and its like 2 drags on your first one and its gone and its on to your next cigarette which you can relax and enjoy, but ok I do agree they smell and for the none smokers you do get a lung full when walking past. Maybe they should make it double door system to get in, second doors do not open until first close and smoke in air is extracted!

            

I feel they should keep them. I feel sorry for the peps that smoke, and to keep them waiting until outside OMG  there will be a few more arguements on way out of airport

[EastFife4Forfar5]

I still remember my first long haul flight from UK to San Francisco in 2002.

After a 12 hour flight and, worse, 2 hours to get through customs - the first drag on my Benson & Hedges sent my legs wobbly !

30 seconds to demolish that first fag before lighting up the second!

Thankfully I gave up in 2003.

[Fish]

I remember the good old days, when if you checked in for your flight early enough you could get a smoking seat at the back of the plane.

[dimple joe]

Arseholes..... There are much worse things happening in Suvarnabhumi than a bit of smoke.

When smoking was allowed on planes, can anyone remember an air rage incident caused someone who had smoked too much?

Regularly we hear about drunks causing mayhem resulting in a flight being diverted or delayed. Where is the demand to ban booze on planes or in airports?

Similarly the ban on smoking in bars; how many cases have you heard of guys smoking too many fags and killing themselves or others while driving? - NONE.

In the last few weeks two bikers died riding home while drunk and Aiden was hit by a car because, I understand, he wandered across the road while mao: and Magnus is in hospital at the moment because he drove home after drinking too much, not because he had smoked too many fags.

I agree smoking is a filthy smelly habit and that there are (possible) long term effects of passive smoking, but there are health benefits too.

When smoking was allowed on flights the air had to be scrubbed at regular intervals, when it was banned, this was no longer necessary and the intervals were either greatly extended or the air cleaning switched off altogether.

The result is a saving for the airline, but on your 12 hour flight you now breath in more of the airborn bugs and nasties carried by your fellow passengers, hence the increase in sniffles and worse etc., when you get home.

Here endeth the rant.....

[maraudingscot]

 
Ah Dimples, yes agree with the side effects caused by to much of the falling down juice. But it is down to the freedom of choice by the individual as to how mao he gets! or not as the case maybe.

I (I hasten to add) feel that in taking away these last few remaining oasis's of heaven for those people that do smoke is putting them under additional strain, now as I have recently given up still feel the urge to rip open a pack and pop that little white stick inbetween my lips, strike alight that match and draw deeply, and feel that smoke drifting down and filling your lungs. and you get that good feeling of peace and calm washing through your body., and life just somehow takes on that "no problem" attitude again. But depriving a smoker for that extra hour while upright and walking amongst other people, and having to deal with situations will make them even more grumpy.

Do not get me wrong yes I agree with you about drink and the serious effects i can reek, but this discussion started regarding the removal of the "wonderful sancion of heaven" at the airport.

 

[EastFife4Forfar5]

Arseholes..... There are much worse things happening in Suvarnabhumi than a bit of smoke.

When smoking was allowed on planes, can anyone remember an air rage incident caused someone who had smoked too much?

Regularly we hear about drunks causing mayhem resulting in a flight being diverted or delayed. Where is the demand to ban booze on planes or in airports?

Similarly the ban on smoking in bars; how many cases have you heard of guys smoking too many fags and killing themselves or others while driving? - NONE.

In the last few weeks two bikers died riding home while drunk and Aiden was hit by a car because, I understand, he wandered across the road while mao: and Magnus is in hospital at the moment because he drove home after drinking too much, not because he had smoked too many fags.

I agree smoking is a filthy smelly habit and that there are (possible) long term effects of passive smoking, but there are health benefits too.

When smoking was allowed on flights the air had to be scrubbed at regular intervals, when it was banned, this was no longer necessary and the intervals were either greatly extended or the air cleaning switched off altogether.

The result is a saving for the airline, but on your 12 hour flight you now breath in more of the airborn bugs and nasties carried by your fellow passengers, hence the increase in sniffles and worse etc., when you get home.

Here endeth the rant.....

Spoken like a true 30 a day man.

[dimple joe]

"Ah Dimples, yes agree with the side effects caused by to much of the falling down juice. But it is down to the freedom of choice by the individual as to how mao he gets! or not as the case maybe."

Exactly my point maraudingscot "freedom of choice by the individual"

I fail to understand why drinkers have freedom of choice to become drunk, cause problems for others, kill themselves and often passing innocents; while smokers are denied their freedom of choice because they might make someone cough.

It matters not if I am a smoker or otherwise - both should have freedom of choice in my opinion.