EU ruling on air pollution compliance is a ‘major blow’ for Heathrow Airport expansion plans
The levels of air pollution in the Heathrow area already routinely breach EU limits (the Air Quality Directive), for nitrogen dioxide, due to the concentration of road traffic in the area – in addition to the aircraft. The UK has tried to avoid a showdown with the EU by agreeing to reduce air pollution levels in line with the EU directive by 2025, but the date has since slipped to ‘post 2030’. The European Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) has now rejected this plan and UK ministers will have to prepare new measures for reducing illegal pollution levels ‘as soon as possible’. The CJEU has given the UK Supreme Court responsibility for enforcing compliance with air quality law. Judges will examine the case next year. The cross-party 2M group of councils opposing a 3rd Heathrow runway say this is a ‘major blow’ for the plans. Heathrow hopes that improvement, over coming years, in road vehicle emissions will solve their problem, but this is outside their control. The 2M groups says the Supreme Court will have to be convinced about the unlikely scenario in which air pollution can be reduced -while Heathrow increases flights, road traffic and freight.”
.
Tweet
EU ruling ‘major blow’ for Heathrow Airport expansion plans
Dec 12, 2014 (Get West London)
By Will Ackermann
The cross-party 2M Group of councils says there is now ‘no way out’ for Heathrow, but the airport says the ruling makes no difference.
Pollution levels at Heathrow are already in breach of EU limits, so will the airport be allowed to expand?
Hopes for expanding Heathrow Airport were said to have been dealt a ‘major blow’ today, after the UK’s Supreme Court assumed responsibility for enforcing EU pollution law.
Nitrogen Dioxide levels at the airport are already in breach of the EU Air Quality Directive, although management blame traffic on the M4.
The government had attempted to avoid a showdown with the EU by agreeing to reduce pollution levels in line with the directive by 2025, but the date has since slipped to ‘post 2030’.
The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) has now rejected this plan and UK ministers will have to prepare new measures for reducing illegal pollution levels ‘as soon as possible’.
The CJEU has given the Supreme Court responsibility for enforcing compliance with air quality law. Judges will examine the case next year.
The cross-party 2M group of councils opposing expansion says this is a ‘major blow’ for the plans.
Hillingdon Council leader Councillor Ray Puddifoot, a spokesman for the group, said: “Before this ruling Heathrow believed it had over a decade to meet the legal pollution limits. Even then the airport was making some highly optimistic assumptions about cleaner aircraft being invented and then rushed into service.
“There is no way out of this for Heathrow. Ministers may have given them an easy ride but now the Supreme Court will have to be convinced pollution will be reduced ‘as soon as possible’ while increasing flights, road traffic and freight.”
Building a third runway would increase the annual number of flights at the airport from 480,000 to 740,000, while the freight operation would double in size, as would the number of people using the airport.
But Heathrow’s management say the ruling will have ‘no impact’ on their plans for expansion.
A spokeswoman said: “We take air quality very seriously and have always said we will only go ahead with Heathrow expansion if we can do so within strict air quality limits.
“Within two kilometres of the airport, the only air quality monitoring site to exceed the EU limit value for NO2 [nitrogen dioxide] is located alongside the M4. The results at that location are largely as a result of road traffic, approximately three quarters of which is not airport-related.
“In the last decade Heathrow has achieved significant reductions in emissions – even though the numbers of people and aircraft using Heathrow have increased. This is due to a number of unique initiatives to reduce local air pollution in Heathrow, including by promoting public transport options by funding the UK’s largest free travel zone, the use of more sustainable vehicle options through our Clean Vehicles Programme, hosting the UK’s first publicly accessible hydrogen refuelling site, and having one of Europe’s largest electric airside vehicle fleets.
“In recognition of its work to improve local air quality, Heathrow Airport has recently won the title of greenest business of the year at the 2014 West London Business Awards.”
http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/local-news/eu-ruling-major-blow-heathrow-8276309
.
.
EU Pollution Ruling Casts Fresh Doubts Over Heathrow Expansion
NO2 levels at Heathrow breach EU Air Quality Directive
10.12.2014 (Putney SW 15)
The cross-party 2M Group of councils is warning the Airports Commission and the Government that Heathrow expansion has become even more difficult after the UK’s Supreme Court was given responsibility to enforce EU pollution law.
Nitrogen Dioxide levels at Heathrow and other pollution hotspots across Greater London are currently in breach of the EU Air Quality Directive although Heathrow management say that road traffic from the M4 is primarily responsible.
The UK Government had attempted to avoid a showdown with the EU by producing a pollution action plan which would achieve legal compliance by 2025. The date has since slipped to ‘post 2030’.
Now this plan has been rejected by the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) and UK ministers will have to prepare new plans to reduce illegal pollution levels “as soon as possible”.
The CJEU handed responsibility to enforce compliance with air quality law to the Supreme Court. Judges will examine the case next year. The case was brought to the CJEU by environmental group Client Earth.
The changing legal framework could pose a problem for Heathrow as it seeks permission to expand its operation.
Sir Howard Davies, head of the Airports Commission, and ministers will now have to review the Heathrow proposals in light of the Supreme Court’s new mandate to ensure Nitrogen Dioxide limits are met “as soon as possible”.
The airport’s application to build a third runway would increase annual flights from 480,000 to 740,000. The freight operation would double in size and the number of people using the airport would also double.
The cross-party 2M Group of councils say there is no way to reconcile a major expansion of Heathrow with an urgent requirement to reduce illegal Nitrogen Dioxide levels. In 2010 the 2M councils successfully overturned the previous Government’s third runway plan in the courts on air quality and environmental grounds. The campaign group believes regulation is now even tighter as a result of this ruling and none of the existing expansion plans can make it through the courts.
Ray Puddifoot, (pictured right) leader of Hillingdon Council and spokesman for 2M, said: “Before this ruling Heathrow believed it had over a decade to meet the legal pollution limits. Even then the airport was making some highly optimistic assumptions about cleaner aircraft being invented and then rushed into service. There is no way out of this for Heathrow. Ministers may have given them an easy ride but now the Supreme Court will have to be convinced pollution will be reduced “as soon as possible” while increasing flights, road traffic and freight.”
Ravi Govindia, leader of Wandsworth Council and spokesman for 2M, said:
“The Government has to come up with a new plan to reduce Heathrow’s illegal pollution levels “as soon as possible”. There is no way ministers can sanction expansion and meet the terms of this ruling. The huge fines taxpayers would face for breaching these Nitrogen Dioxide limits would completely wipe-out any economic benefit the third runway could deliver. Expanding this airport is now a legal and political impossibility.”
However, a spokesman for a Heathrow spokesman advised that ‘Responsible Heathrow’, the airport’s sustainability strategy, including the airport’s pledge to reduce ground-based NOx emissions (aircraft, airside vehicles and airport related traffic) by 5% by 2020. Heathrow has reduced NOx emissions from every source since 2009, for example, from airside vehicles by 28%, and from heating plant by 70%.
The spokesman said: ““Within two km of the airport, the only air quality monitoring site to exceed the EU limit value for NO2 is located alongside the M4. The results at that location are largely as a result of road traffic, approximately three quarters of which is not airport-related.
“In the last decade Heathrow has achieved significant reductions in emissions – even though the numbers of people and aircraft using Heathrow have increased. This is due to a number of unique initiatives to reduce local air pollution in Heathrow, including by promoting public transport options by funding the UK’s largest free travel zone, the use of more sustainable vehicle options through our Clean Vehicles Programme, hosting the UK’s first publicly accessible hydrogen refuelling site, and having one of Europe’s largest electric airside vehicle fleets. In recognition of its work to improve local air quality, Heathrow Airport has recently won the title of greenest business of the year at the 2014 West London Business Awards.
He finished: “Heathrow’s expansion will only go ahead within strict environmental limits on local air quality and with strict mitigation strategies. Heathrow has a policy of full public disclosure of our expansion plans and we are committed to consulting closely with the public, local community, businesses, passengers, airport users and elected representatives to manage our environmental responsibilities.”
December 10, 2014
http://www.putneysw15.com/shared/conhrw240.htm
.
.
ECJ affirms UK’s right to clean air – the Government must act!
By Keith Taylor MEP
19th November 2014 (The Ecologist)
A landmark judgement by the European Court of Justice compels the UK Government to act as soon as possible to reduce air pollution in British cities, writes Keith Taylor – and a good thing too for our health, safety and well-being. But it’s not just the UK that benefits: every EU country must also comply with the ruling.
The UK Government should draw up and implement urgent plans immediately to drastically cut pollution from diesel vehicles and bring itself within the law.
The European Court of Justice delivered a landmark verdict today by ruling in favour of ClientEarth’s case against the UK Government for its failure to tackle air pollution.
This ground-breaking ruling, the first ever on the effect of the EU’s Air Quality Directive, puts the UK Government in “ongoing breach” of UK law.
And it means that the UK Supreme Court will be compelled to take action against the Government, with the threat of huge fines being handed out further down the line if the breach continues.
The ruling has also paved the way for future legal actions to enforce other EU targets on emissions and energy efficiency.
How did the Government get in such a mess?
The EU’s Air Quality Directive sets legal limits on air quality which member states are required to meet within a certain time frame.
Our current government is failing spectacularly to meet these targets: it has drawn up plans which show it will not meet nitrogen dioxide limits until after 2030 – 20 years after the original deadline!
This prompted environmental lawyers at ClientEarth to take our Government to court. This is embarrassing for the Government to say the least – and it’s deeply concerning that it takes an EU Court ruling for them to start taking the issue of air pollution seriously.
ClientEarth got it right when they said: “We have a legal right to breathe clean air. When the government fails in its duty to uphold that, the courts must step in.
“If the government were allowed to stick with current proposals for tackling pollution, a child born today in London, Birmingham or Leeds would have to wait until after their 16th birthday before they can breathe air that meets legal limits.
“ClientEarth does not believe this is acceptable, which is why we have challenged the government through the courts for the past five years to tackle the problem urgently. The longer government is allowed to delay, the more people will die or be made seriously ill by air pollution.”
In their judgment, the panel of European judges said the Government should have planned to secure compliance with the Directive by January 2015 – 15 years earlier than it intended.
Air pollution and disease – the facts
Air pollution, primarily caused by emissions from road vehicles, is the second biggest killer in our country after smoking. According to the Healthy Air campaign, air pollution contributes to around 200,000 early deaths in the UK each year.
Cars, lorries, vans and buses emit large amounts of air pollution directly into the streets where we live and work. With more vehicles on the road than ever, this is creating significant problems. In densely populated areas like London the impacts are exacerbated.
Burning fuels in boilers and power stations is another source of air pollution. Heating boilers, power generation, and industry burning coal, oil, wood, petrol, diesel and natural gas – energy sources which we are very reliant on, are all significant sources of pollution.
I also remain concerned about the impact of aviation on air pollution – particularly with proposals for a new runway at either Heathrow or Gatwick.
Air pollution is an invisible public health crisis. Long term exposure to air pollution is associated with heart and lung disease. Diesel fumes are the main source of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) – a harmful gas linked with heart attacks and asthma and the gas that this court case rests on.
Children can be particularly vulnerable to the impacts. Research has shown that children growing up near motorways can suffer permanently reduced lung capacity. This may also be the case for people living nearby to other high polluting industries such as airports.
Even those who live and work in areas with clean air can have their health affected when they visit a polluted area as short term exposure to air pollution can irritate our airways, causing wheezing and shortness of breath. This is particularly a problem for those with existing respiratory conditions, such as asthma.
What happens next?
The growing problem of air pollution isn’t going to go away. As the Green MEP for South East England, an area widely affected by poor air quality, I believe this issue needs to be tackled at every level of Government, from local councils to Westminster.
For that to happen the Government must wake up to the reality of air pollution. Clean air is one of the fundamental things we need in order to enjoy good health and a good quality of life.
The judgment is also good news for the rest of Europe. As ClientEarth points out, today’s judgment sets a “groundbreaking legal precedent in EU law” – one that will paves the way for other legal challenges across the EU. ClientEarth has promised to “spearhead these efforts to help people defend their right to clean air in court.”
The legal case will return to the UK Supreme Court for a final ruling in 2015, for judges to apply the ECJ’s ruling to the facts in the UK case, following the judges order that
“it is for the national court having jurisdiction, should a case be brought before it, to take, with regard to the national authority, any necessary measure, such as an order in the appropriate terms, so that the authority establishes the plan required by the directive in accordance with the conditions laid down by the latter.”
In other words the UK Supreme Court is required to order the government to draw up a new plan to meet limits in a much shorter timeframe. But the Government should not wait until it is ordered – it should draw up and implement urgent plans immediately to drastically cut pollution from diesel vehicles and bring itself within the law.
In my opinion, dirty diesel-burning HGVs, buses and trains in particular should be a first priority for emissions reductions, with urban buses switching to ‘hybrid’ and purely electric technologies.
There’s also a case for ‘grounding’ all non-essential diesel vehicles at times of high air pollution. And the Green Party believes that London’s plans for an ‘ultra low emission zone’ should be rolled out nationally.
But we must also address the deeper causes – which means investing much more in sustainable transport methods such as cycling and walking, and the shift from cars to public transport to reduce overall traffic levels. The public must also be properly warned of the risks, and how to reduce exposure.
There’s lots to do – and it’s high time for the Government to stop prevaricating, wake up and get on with the job!