Heathrow case undermined
economic and environmental case for expanding Heathrow airport.
at Heathrow, arguing that emissions targets could be met and that the expansion
was economically indispensable.
widely respected for their objectivity, casts doubt on some of the government’s
key assumptions. These range from the availability of new "green jumbos" to optimistic
forecasts of the growth of air travel.
report – published just last week – cautions that "aircraft designs do not at
the moment incorporate many of the features highlighted by the secretary of state",
and that "for the foreseeable future, kerosene will remain the only viable option
[for fuelling aircraft]."
assertion that pollution at Heathrow (which is already in breach of emissions
targets) can be cut to meet EU targets as early as 2015, when the airport hopes
to open the new runway.
be some time before more environmentally friendly commercial aircraft are in widespread
impartial analysis of topical subjects.
and impartial work of the Commons library has exposed the weakness of Labour’s
aren’t even in the pipeline."
up to £8.2 billion worth of benefits to the economy, saying it "does not account
for various factors" that could slash its value to £1.5 billion or less.
forecasts of demand. It says new aircraft emissions taxes and a higher oil price
in 2030 "would . . . reduce the benefits of expansion".
schemes, and points out: "The investment required for [Heathrow] expansion might
be spent on a new airport in the Thames estuary, or high-speed rail."
4 FEBRUARY 2009
Sustainable Development Commission
2M Group of local authorities
Mayor of London
Greater London Assembly
….the list goes on
and now the HoC Library …..