EAC: “Government must mitigate environmental impact of new Heathrow runway” – current plans do not

A third runway at Heathrow will expose 47,000 additional homes to dangerous air pollution because more vehicles will travel to the airport, MPs have warned.

The increase in cars, coaches and lorries will add to toxic nitrogen oxide fumes, which come mainly from diesel engines and are linked to the deaths of 23,500 people in Britain every year, it is feared.

With doctors already calling for diesel vehicles to be taken off the road, a damning report says Heathrow’s expansion will risk the health of people living in an extra 47,063 homes.

The House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee claims a third runway risks breaching air pollution limits – a key barrier to it being built.

The big problem is not the aeroplanes, but the fumes pumped out by cars and trains travelling to it.

The committee now reports it has ‘no confidence’ the Government can meet its target to fix the problem, of 60 per cent of all new cars being ultra-low emissions vehicles by 2030.

Figures from the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders show 1.29 million new diesel cars were registered last year, 48 per cent of all car purchases.

Mary Creagh MP, chair of the environmental Audit Committee, said: ‘If the Government wants to get Heathrow expansion off the ground, it needs to show that a third runway can be built and run without exceeding legal limits on air pollution or breaching our carbon budgets.

‘We have seen little evidence of the “step change” in the Government’s approach we called for in our previous report.’

And London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s proposed £3,500 diesel scrappage scheme to pay people to replace their cars.

London breached its annual limit for nitrogen dioxide in just the first five days of this year, with diesel cars pumping out 10 times the tiny particles linked to asthma, heart and lung disease compared to petrol vehicles.

But Heathrow’s runway is feared to worsen the diesel crisis, with the Government admitting it may have a ‘moderate’ impact on health, increasing the risk of respiratory and cardiovascular disease.

The Government’s own appraisal estimates that an increased 47,063 properties could be exposed to air pollution, with dangerous levels also possible at Wraysbury Reservoir, a Site of Special Scientific Interest for its important breeding birds.

The Transport Secretary told the environmental audit committee the problem of air quality must be tackled before the runway, given the go-ahead last year, goes ahead. It is expected to be compleyed by 2025.

But the committee’s Airports Commission Report Follow-Up states: ‘The Government’s reliance on low emission technology as the solution is of concern because we have no confidence that the Government will meet its target for 60 per cent of all new cars to be Ultra-Low Emissions Vehicles by 2030, as a result of our inquiry into sustainability in the Department for Transport.’

The Supreme Court has ordered the Government to produce a new air pollution strategy by April, after ruling that its Air Quality Plan is based on ‘optimistic emissions data’.

The Department for Transport insists that the runway can be delivered within emissions limits and with no extra cars on the road.

However London Mayor Sadiq Khan told MPs: ‘It is yet to be demonstrated that an expanded Heathrow could operate without exceeding legal limits for NO2.’

The environment committee is also calling for the hours of a night-time flight ban to be set, as research suggests an extra 200,000 people could be affected by significant aircraft noise.

Professor Alastair Lewis, Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry at the University of York, said: ‘Whether the areas around Heathrow will meet current air quality standards will be crucially dependent on how emissions from other sectors evolve over time, and whether predicted reductions from these can offset new pollution arising from expansion.’

He added: ‘Elevated air pollution even below limit values is now known to affect health and has a real cost.

‘The ambition should always be for development to aim for as low a concentration of pollution as is practical, not simply to do the minimum necessary to gain a pass-mark.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4251280/Third-runway-Heathrow-increase-health-risk.html

.

The Guardian

Government ‘watering down’ pollution limits to meet Heathrow pledge

MPs say ministers are not doing enough to demonstrate how third runway would meet obligations on noise and air quality

By Gwyn Topham Transport correspondent (Guardian)

Thursday 23 February 2017

The government is set to “water down” limits on aviation emissions and is shifting targets to meet its pledge to mitigate the environmental impact of expanding Heathrow, MPs have said.
The cross-party environmental audit committee said ministers were not doing enough to demonstrate a third Heathrow runway could be built without breaching laws on air quality and carbon emissions.

Its report said the government had persistently failed to define which obligations it would be meeting on climate change, or whether it would keep to EU limits on air quality after Brexit, while assurances on noise respite also fell short on specifics.

Mary Creagh, Labour MP for Wakefield and the committee chair, said: “If the government wants to get Heathrow expansion off the ground it needs to show that a third runway can be built and run without exceeding legal limits on air pollution or breaching our carbon budgets.

“Worryingly, the government looks set to water down the limits on aviation emissions recommended by its own climate change advisers. That would mean other sectors of the economy, like energy and industry, having to cut their carbon emissions even deeper and faster,” Creagh said.

“Mitigating the air quality, carbon and noise impacts of a new runway cannot be an afterthought. Ministers must work harder to show that Heathrow expansion can be done within the UK’s legally binding environmental commitments.”

The committee said it was concerned that the government had given no guarantees that air quality targets would be maintained after the UK leaves the EU, and said a new air quality strategy was urgently required.

While conditions for expansion have included a promise not to increase road traffic at Heathrow, MPs said it would need to be rigorously monitored, with clear accountability and consequences for failure. The MPs said the government was relying on people switching to cleaner cars to reduce air pollution but had no confidence its targets would be met.

Meanwhile, the MPs said figures used by ministers were based on a “hypothetical international framework to reduce emissions” that does not yet exist but which would still leave the UK having to deal with higher levels of carbon emissions from aviation than it had budgeted for in meeting its agreed CO2 targets.

A proposed night flight ban had not been nailed down, and there was little evidence that predictable respite could be achieved, MPs said, adding that it feared the government was watering down the powers it would give to a new body overseeing noise pollution from the airport.

John Stewart, chair of the Heathrow Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise (Hacan), a campaign group that opposes Heathrow expansion, said: “The committee is saying in no uncertain terms that both the government and Heathrow airport have got to up their game big time if they are to have any chance of getting a third runway. They have got to prove they can deliver on noise, climate and air pollution, not just say they can.”

The Greenpeace UK executive director, John Sauven, said: “There’s a litany of questions about the environmental impacts of a third runway that the government has been fudging. MPs are absolutely right to demand clear answers. Ministers have produced no evidence that Heathrow expansion is compatible with bringing down illegal levels of air pollution or meeting our climate targets.”

The Department for Transport has yet to comment.

The report was published in the first week of public events in the government’s four-month consultation on the planned third runway at Heathrow. MPs will vote on the plan in the winter.
Local councils have accused the government of misleading the public in leaflets issued to thousands of households. They warn that the “rushed and imbalanced” consultation does not provide them with information on the negative effects of Heathrow expansion – particularly as flight paths that will affect particular communities have yet to be agreed.

Richmond, Hillingdon, Wandsworth and Windsor and Maidenhead councils have sent information leaflets highlighting the expected impact on pollution, health, traffic and noise, as well as costs to taxpayers. The councils say an extra 108 schools would become severely impacted by aircraft noise and that there would an additional 25m road journeys to the airport.

The Commons transport select committee announced on Wednesday that it would hold an inquiry into the national policy statement on airports, the policy paper that sets out the government’s plans to back the third runway, with MPs examining the suitability of the evidence and rationale for the decision, and the effectiveness of the public consultation.
A Department for Transport spokesman said:“We take our air quality commitments extremely seriously and have been very clear that the new runway will not get the go-ahead unless air quality requirements can be met.

“Our draft airports national policy statement sets out a world-class package of compensation and mitigation measures to support local communities and limit the environmental impact of airport expansion. We are currently carrying out a full consultation, and want to hear everyone’s views.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/23/heathrow-third-runway-mps-say-government-watering-down-pollution-limits

.

The Times

Heathrow flight ban dismissed as a sham

23 Feb 2017,

By Graeme Paton (Transport Correspondent, The Times)

A proposed ban on night flights into Britain’s biggest airport is a sham because it will only require the rescheduling of four planes a day, according to MPs. In a report published today, a committee warns that a proposed crackdown on noise at an expanded Heathrow risks being an “afterthought”.

MPs accuse the government of using out-of-date measurements of noise impacts, failing to guarantee quiet periods for residents under the flight path and watering down plans for an independent aviation noise watchdog.

.

Full Times article at  http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/heathrow-flight-ban-dismissed-as-a-sham-f2kk9ppkk