Climate Change News
Below are news items on climate change – many with relevance to aviation
Bristol Airport expansion allowed by Planning Inspectorate, on appeal – called “devastating” by opponents
The 36-day public inquiry into Bristol Airport’s proposal to expand from 10 to 12 mppa, and add thousands more car parking spaces, took place in September and October 2021. Now the Planning Inspectorate have announced their decision to allow the appeal by the airport against refusal by North Somerset Council. This has been condemned as devastating by opponents and extremely disappointing by local councillors. North Somerset Council leader Don Davies said the decision “flies in the face of local democracy”. His authority had given sound planning grounds for refusing permission in February 2020, and warned that the detrimental effect of the airport expansion of the airport locally - as well as the wider climate impacts - outweighed the narrower benefits, which would be almost entirely the commercial interests of the owners, the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan.. The plan to expand the airport was opposed by thousands of residents, as well as Bristol City Council, Bath and North East Somerset Council and the West of England Combined Authority. Don Davies said the council is seeing if there are any grounds for challenging the PI ruling.
Click here to view full story...
“Airlines must show progress on sustainability to avoid becoming next tobacco industry”
Airlines have an immense problem in trying to convince enough people that they are genuinely trying to reduce their sector's climate impact. Though they are doing a few small things to cut the carbon, those measures are dwarfed by the intention of the sector to keep growing. There is more overall climate impact of more flights, even if each one is a tiny % lower carbon. The sector wants to be seen to be genuinely being "green" (terrible word that has been so abused as to now mean virtually nothing - in the same way as "sustainable"). But they have the problem of many of the measures they may have taken, to be a bit more fuel efficient, have higher load factors, lighter planes, newer planes) have already been taken - not for climate reasons, but for increased profitability. They are not additional measures, aimed at cutting climate impact. And airlines also try to out-do competitors in terms of claiming their flights and fleets are better than those of a competitor. So it is "dog eat dog" and that makes it easier for the public to understand that much of the hype is greenwash. Airlines, after 2 Covid years, fear arguments against more flying like: “Do you want to go through all that again?” and “Was it so bad when you couldn’t fly as many times a year?”
Click here to view full story...
NEF analysis indicates the CO2 from Gatwick expansion could cost taxpayers £8.5 billion up to 2050.
New analysis from the New Economics Foundation has calculated the costs to society of the carbon emissions that airport expansion plans would cause. The "carbon value" used to be a bit over £70 per tonne, but in September 2021 this was increased to £124 per tonne, and it will keep rising. So the figures airports have put forward, for the positive economic impact of their expansion are now entirely out of date. Almost the only carbon costs the aviation industry pays is for carbon through the UK ETS, which only covers flights within the EU. Not flights anywhere else in the world. The Gatwick cost of emissions from departing flights is calculated by NEF to be £9.196 billion, rather than £4.502 billion at the lower, out of date, price - for the period between 2025 – 2050. They put the forecast price paid for traded emissions at £634m. So the proportion of climate cost paid would only be 6.9% which implied cost to wider society and taxpayer at £8.562 billion. That is the cost to society of the climate impact of the higher carbon emissions caused by more Gatwick flights.
Click here to view full story...
Realistic cost of carbon emissions likely to make airport expansion plans unviable
The government's new higher, more realistic, carbon values - putting a cost on carbon emissions from aviation - are likely to make many airport expansion schemes non-viable. The carbon value was increased, in an attempt to move towards "net zero" by 2050. The anticipated economic benefits will be drastically cut, if carbon emissions (and their negative impact on society and the planet) are costed properly. The planning law is currently inadequate and ambiguous, but campaigners hope planning authorities will take greater account of the impact of emissions on the economic case of proposed projects. The New Economics Foundation has found that the economic cases for 6 of the 7 major airport expansion proposals — including London’s Heathrow and Gatwick — use either the old carbon value, or none at all. As yet, planning law in England does not explicitly require carbon values to be used. But the relevant planning authority can demand they are included in applications. If the anticipated outcome of Bristol’s appeal gave a “clear line” on carbon values, it is very likely to inform other airport expansion decisions.
Click here to view full story...
Public to foot £62bn bill for climate damage from airport expansions – which the aviation sector should pay for
Analysis by Alex Chapman, working for the New Economics Foundation (NEF) has found that in allowing airports around the country to expand, the government is letting the aviation industry off the hook for £62bn of damage to the climate. The amount of carbon that airports, and mainly aircraft, emit has a negative impact on the global climate - and thus to society. Governments can put a figure on this cost, for each tonne of emitted carbon. In September 2021 the government increased the carbon value figure from around £70 per tonne to £245 per tonne (central value) for 2021 rising to £378 per tonne by 2050. The new NEF analysis found the aviation industry will only pay for 16% of the emissions clean-up costs (through the UK ETS) of the 8 airport expansions currently moving through UK planning processes (Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted, Luton, Bristol, Southampton, Leeds Bradford and Manston). The higher, more realistic, price for carbon makes these expansion schemes uneconomic, if the carbon is properly paid for. The government does not have a comprehensive mechanism for recouping these costs from the aviation industry.
Click here to view full story...
Liverpool Airport expansion plans to be reviewed, as contrary to council climate aims – Oglet shore reprieved
Liverpool Airport had been hoping to expand by extending its runway by 314 metres, to attract direct transatlantic flights, to try to more than double its passenger numbers. This has been fiercely opposed, especially as it would take land to the south of the airport, where there is the Oglet shore - a natural section of coast, valued by walkers and important for wildlife, including some Red List species. Now Liverpool City councillors have agreed to review policies relating to any future extensions. Councillors from all parties expressed concerns over the proposals to extend the runway. At a full council meeting, they also agreed to consider - after investigating the evidence - selling the council's 10% stake in the airport, as it is incompatible its efforts to fight climate change. The airport put forward the plans before the council declared a climate emergency, in 2018. Campaigners fighting to save the Oglet shore are delighted, as the airport masterplan ear marked it to be covered in concrete for new hangers, maintenance services, cargo facilities and warehouses.
Click here to view full story...
EIB survey finds about 40% of Europeans say they would find flying less one of the easier ways to cut their CO2
The second release of the 2020-2021 European Investment Bank (EIB) climate survey focused on how people intended to fight climate change in 2021, what they were willing to give up to tackle the climate crisis, and how the COVID pandemic affected their travel habits.The data is now at least a year old, so things may have changed. The survey asked respondents how likely they were to do various things to cut their carbon emissions. These were giving up flying, giving up meat, giving up new clothes, giving up video streaming, and giving up having a car. Some 40% of Europeans [not including Brits after Brexit] said they would find it easiest to give up flying (it was 38% of Americans and 43% of Chinese respondents). The % varied between European countries. About 39% of Europeans and 38% of Americans say that giving up their car would be the most difficult option. The survey found that even when travel restrictions related to COVID are lifted, 37% of Chinese people, 22% of Europeans and 22% of Americans said they will avoid flying because of climate change concerns.
Click here to view full story...
CAA to have an Environmental Sustainability Panel, to advise it, from April
The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is creating a new Environmental Sustainability Panel, from April 2022. It will act as an expert 'critical friend' of the organisation and will provide technical advice. The intention is that it will ensure that environmental and "sustainability" interests are properly considered by CAA when it makes decisions. This will be an internal body, not public facing. The CAA is recruiting members for the panel, which will help the CAA to take proper account of the "environmental interests and impacts in its regulatory policy and framework." As the government decided in September 2021 to close the ICCAN (Independent Commission on Civil Aviation Noise) the CAA will have more duties relating to aircraft noise and the impact it has on people overflown. In the vain attempt to reduce the negative environmental impact of air travel, the CAA hopes to "balance" the need to reduce carbon emissions (ie. fuel burn) with the amount of aircraft noise. The panel will follow the model of the CAA's existing Consumer Panel.
Click here to view full story...
Motion to Liverpool City Council says its funding of the airport is not consistent with its climate aims
In a motion to the Labour-led Liverpool City Council, Green member Anna Key said supporting Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LJLA) was not in line with the authority's climate emergency declaration in 2019. For the Liverpool council to keep funding the city's airport is "incompatible" with its effort to fight climate change, and become "carbon neutral" by 2030. The motion will go before a full council meeting on 26 January. Liverpool City Council has a 10% stake in the airport. Anna also called for opposition to LJLA's "potential future expansion" plans. The plans for expansion would mean an increased number of flights, as well as destruction of valuable green space adjacent to the airport. There would also be more passenger and freight road traffic, causing air pollution and carbon emissions. Anna Kay said the council should stop supporting the airport financially. Her motion also calls on the council to get planners to undertake an urgent evidence-based review of all policies relating to green space, environment and green belt. There is a 38 Degrees petition to two councils, to protect the Oglet shore area from airport development.
Click here to view full story...
Leeds Bradford Airport development plans at last to go to public inquiry – date unknown
Leeds Bradford airport Leeds Bradford submitted plans for new terminal building & more passengers (4m to 7m a year) in May 2020. There has been intense opposition to the plan, led by local opposition group, GALBA. In March 2021 the terminal plan was approved by Leeds City Council, but in April 2021 the government issued a direction to the Council, preventing councillors from granting the planning permission without special authorisation. There have been numerous requests for the application to be called in. Now it has been announced by the DLUHC - headed by Michael Gove - that the application will indeed go to a public inquiry - though the date is not yet decided. It is a triumph for the persistent pressure by opponents, managing to achieve this significant delay. The inquiry means the arguments against the expansion will be properly and fully heard. Some of the matters that Mr Gove "particularly wishes to be informed about" included the extent to which the proposed development is consistent with government policies for "protecting green belt land" and "meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change". Airport expansion can only increase carbon emissions.