Green organisations tell Sir Howard Davies that allowing another runway jeopardises UK climate goals
Eight of the key environmental organisations in the UK have written an open letter to Sir Howard Davies, Chairman of the Airports Commission, to express their concern about the Commission’s “emerging thinking” that more runway capacity is needed for the south east, as expressed in Sir Howard’s speech on 7th October. They have serious concerns about how adding a new runway could be compatible with UK climate targets, and they call on the Commission to demonstrate how its recommendations will avoid gambling on our future ability to meet the UK climate target. The NGOs say the Committee on Climate Change’s analysis concluded that stabilising UK aviation’s emissions at their 2005 level could translate to a maximum 60% growth in the number of passengers at UK airports. They set out 4 key arguments why no new runway capacity is needed even if passenger numbers are permitted to grow by up to 60%. They also urge the Commission to retain a “no new runways” option in its deliberations as the best way of achieving the targets set in the UK Climate Change Act. The eight green NGOs which have signed the letter are: Aviation Environment Federation; Campaign for Better Transport; Friends of the Earth; Greenpeace; RSPB; Stop Climate Chaos; The Woodland Trust; WWF-UK.
.
Tweet
Green organisations tell Sir Howard Davies that allowing another runway jeopardises UK climate goals
31.10.2013
Green groups have written to Airports Commission chairman Sir Howard Davies challenging his view that new runway capacity is compatible with the Government’s climate change goals (1). Letter The letter is a response to a recent speech by Davies which he used to rule out a “no new runway solution”(2). Speech
The eight national environmental NGOs argue that the Airports Commission’s intention to look at additional runway capacity in the South East cannot be reconciled with the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) recommendations on how the UK should achieve its national climate goal (3).
The UK organisations to sign the letter are Aviation Environment Federation, the Campaign for Better Transport, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, RSPB, Stop Climate Chaos, the Woodland Trust and WWF-UK.
The organisations argue in the letter that the Commission should explicitly recommend keeping aviation emissions at or below 2005 levels by 2050, in line with the CCC guidance. They argue that even this level of emissions gives aviation a very generous target, when compared to the very deep cuts required of other sectors of our economy. For the UK to achieve overall cuts of 80% in CO2 emissions in 2050, compared to their 1990 levels, which means cuts of some 85% for other sectors of the economy.
The CCC’s analysis concluded that stabilising UK aviation’s emissions at their 2005 level could translate to a maximum 60% growth in the number of passengers at UK airports. The NGOs set out four key arguments why no new runway capacity is needed even if passenger numbers are permitted to grow by up to 60%:
1. Such growth is achievable within existing runway capacity.
2. Any new infrastructure will require capping of capacity at other airports. This will impact airports both in the South East and the rest of the UK.
3. Future climate targets will need to take account of aviation’s non-CO2 contribution to climate change. As suggested by the CCC.
4. Carbon trading in the EU or globally cannot be relied on to bring aviation’s emissions down.
The group of environmental organisations are urging the Commission to retain a “no new runways” option in its deliberations as the best way of achieving the targets set in the UK Climate Change Act.
Doug Parr, Policy Director at Greenpeace UK said: “Building new runways when there can be no confidence that aviation will meet its fair share of climate change emissions constraints is an economic and environmental gamble. The expansionist agenda of the aviation industry needs to be contained until we properly understand what the climate consequences would be.”
Jean Leston, Transport Policy Manager, WWF-UK said: “Although we are pleased that Sir Howard has taken on board the importance of climate change, his emerging views—which favour expansion—aren’t backed by any clear evidence. We’d like to see Sir Howard come clean on his assumptions so that we have more confidence in his final conclusions.”
Sue Armstrong-Brown, RSPB head of policy, said: “Climate change is the biggest long term threat to wildlife and we must do all we can to keep a lid on damaging carbon emissions. But building airports will have a massive immediate impact on our natural environment if precious green spaces which are home to threatened wildlife are destroyed to make way for roads, runways and terminals.”
“For these reasons we are calling on the Government to think longer term about what our country needs. We need to look more seriously at sustainable transport alternatives and smarter use of the aviation capacity we already have. We can have good transport links and a healthy countryside in the future if we make the right decisions today.”
Hilary Allison, Policy Director of the WoodlandTrust said: “The environmental impact of airport expansion is of key concern to the Trust, especially as we know that loss and damage to ancient woods is highly likely to follow. Increased emissions from aviation also threaten to build on the long-term impacts of climate change which adds further pressure to the rare wildlife and vulnerable ecosystems found within irreplaceable woodland habitats which cannot easily adapt, as well as intensify the risks to the UK’s woods and trees of pests and diseases. With just 2% ancient woodland remaining in the UK, this must be avoided.”
Tim Johnson, Director of the Aviation Environment Federation said: ” The only thing we can predict with certainty is that a new runway will lead to an increase in emissions: but there is no guarantee that we will have the right technological innovation, policy measures and regulations to ensure this doesn’t threaten our climate targets. With sufficient capacity already available to meet growth, this is not a gamble we need to take now.”
ENDS
Notes for Editors
(1). Letter Joint NGO response to the Airports Commission’s emerging thinking on airport capacity in the UK
(2). Speech given on the 7th October, “Emerging thinking: aviation capacity in the UK”. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/aviation-capacity-in-the-uk-emerging-thinking
(3). The Committee on Climate Change are the Government’s official advisers. Their analysis concluded that stabilising UK aviation’s emissions at their 2005 level (37.5MtCO2) could translate to a maximum 60% growth in the number of passengers at UK airports. http://downloads.theccc.org.uk/Aviation%20Report%2009/21667B%20CCC%20Aviation%20AW%20COMP%20v8.pdf
The eight green NGOs which have signed the letter are:
Aviation Environment Federation
Campaign for Better Transport
Friends of the Earth
Greenpeace
RSPB
Stop Climate Chaos
The Woodland Trust
WWF-UK
.
.
.
.