This website is no longer actively maintained

For up-to-date information on the campaigns it represents please visit:

No Airport Expansion! is a campaign group that aims to provide a rallying point for the many local groups campaigning against airport expansion projects throughout the UK.

Visit No Airport Expansion! website

General News

Below are links to stories of general interest in relation to aviation and airports.

 

Stansted will hold 3 “community feedback” events on its plans to rise annual passenger number to 43m

Stansted Airport is to host three community feedback events, about its revised proposals for future growth over the next decade. There was an earlier consultation in July about growth plans. The 3 events will provide people with a further opportunity to raise questions about how Stansted intends to grow, the impacts of that growth, and how it could make best use of its existing capacity. Currently Stansted has a planning cap on the annual number of passengers, of 35 million. It initially proposed this being raised to 44.5 million (just under the 10 million rise, that would require it to be dealt with an Nationally Significant Infrastructure project, but a different process) and has now reduced this to 43 million. Stansted claims this could be achieved without increasing the number of aircraft movements (= flights) that are currently permitted to operate each year or the size of the airport’s approved noise ‘footprint’.  A key issue for local people who would be affected by the expansion is noise, and just how much that would get, if an extra 8 million passengers per year were permitted. That would require planes being fuller, and also larger planes - which inevitably are noisier than smaller ones, even with new technologies to reduce noise.  Stansted will next submit the final planning application to Uttlesford District Council in early 2018.

Click here to view full story...

Airports NPS (Heathrow runway) – new inquiry launched by Parliament’s Transport Committee

The Transport Committee is to carry out an inquiry into the DfT's  revised proposal for an Airports National Policy Statement (NPS) - tabled by the Government on 24 October. The DfT consultation is to end on 19th December, after just 8 weeks.  The NPS must receive Parliamentary approval before Heathrow Airport can submit a development consent application to the Planning Inspectorate, which then makes a recommendation to the Secretary of State on whether planning consent should be granted. The Transport Committee (Chair is Lilian Greenwood) will run this second inquiry, as the work of the previous committee was cut short by the general election in June.  Some members of the committee have changed since before the election - and the previous Chair was Louise Ellman. This inquiry will specifically look at, and want submissions on, "whether the DfT's revised passenger demand forecasts and air quality assessments have been satisfactorily completed and are represented accurately in the final version of the NPS and Appraisal of Sustainability" - and on "whether any other changes to the NPS based on clarity intention and/or Government policy since February 2017 are suitable." The deadline for submissions to the Transport committee is Thursday 30 November 2017.

Click here to view full story...

Insensitive Ad by “Back Heathrow” outside Sipson business (that 3rd runway would destroy) now removed

Heathrow lobby group, "Back Heathrow" were forced to remove an advert after it was placed outside a local business which would be destroyed if a 3rd runway were ever built. The advertisement, which appeared on Friday 27 October, proclaimed the number jobs that would be created if the airport was expanded – a highly controversial figure which even new evidence by the DfT is wildly over-estimated. [The DfT said in October 2016 that the 77,000 figure was wrong, and they recalculated the number of local jobs using a more plausible method. The number they came up with is up to 37,700 jobs. However, they continue to use the phrase "up to 77,000", which could be considered to be highly misleading.   See link ] The poster was placed right outside the local hairdressing salon, "Hair by Jackie". Ironically this business, like everything else in that part of Sipson, would be destroyed (Jackie would also lose her homes, as well as her business) if Heathrow was allowed to expand. So much for the jobs claims. Local campaign Stop Heathrow Expansion (SHE) believe the placing of the ad, at best, demonstrated a lack of understanding on the part of "Back Heathrow", or else total disregard for the community and small business owners.

Click here to view full story...

MPs on BBC “Sunday Politics” on huge Heathrow uncertainties – including on economic benefit

Zac Goldsmith, speaking on the BBC's 'Sunday Politics': “A lot has changed since the Airports Commission produced its report and that, don’t forget, was the bedrock of the government’s decision and the reason supposedly why the government made the decision that it made. But most of the assumptions made in that report have been undermined since by data on passenger numbers, on economic benefits and most of all, on pollution.” and  “In the free vote we could have had up to 60 MPs voting against Heathrow expansion. That’s the number that’s normally used and I think it’s right. In the circumstances where it requires an active rebellion, the numbers would be fewer. I can’t tell you what the number would be but I can tell you that there are people right the way through the party, from the back-benches to the heart of government, who will vote against Heathrow expansion.”  And Theresa Villiers said:  “At the heart of that private at private finance is passengers in the future but also the cost of the surface access is phenomenal. I mean, TfL estimates vary between £10 and 15 billion and there is no suggestion that those private backers are going to meet those costs, so this is a hugely expensive project and one that will create significant economic damage.”

Click here to view full story...

Airports’ climate programme relies on offsets excluded under EU laws – CORSIA must exclude “dodgy” offsets

Transport & Environment has found that airports are relying on offsets excluded under EU climate laws to help achieve their voluntary target of "carbon neutrality." Airports’ efforts to reduce their CO2 emissions are welcome, but not worth much if the offset project types being used are highly unlikely to deliver promised emission reductions  - and don't qualify for the EU’s emissions trading system (EU ETS). The claims of carbon neutrality therefore cannot be credibly maintained without serious reforms to this programme. Many of the offset types being used (cheap) were long ago ruled inadmissible by the EU due to concerns over their environmental integrity.  Airports are not required to publicly disclose which offsets they purchase. Athens airport relied on wind farm offsets originating in China – offsets which are unlikely to deliver additional emissions reductions (a necessary criterion) and are banned from the EU ETS. Andrew Murphy said: “Flawed programmes such as this are giving a green light to airport expansion and the resulting surge in aircraft emissions." The ICAO CORSIA programme will approve its offset rules later in November. These must exclude aviation use of the dodgy offset projects. 

Click here to view full story...

Supersonic, super-rich (1% of the 1%), super-polluting: the next generation of business jets

Hundreds of supersonic jets could be flying businesspeople over Europe within ten years, but documents show the EU is preparing to cede oversight of their huge CO2 emissions. This CO2 must be regulated. Concorde, the world’s last commercial supersonic aircraft, generated x3  more noise, NOx and CO2 than today’s subsonic planes and contributed x5  more to global warming, due to the high altitudes at which it released its emissions. No CO2 regulations, either international or European, have so far been put in place for the next generation of supersonic aircraft, which ICAO expects to begin certifying by as early as 2020. The first planes could come to market by 2025, and new company Aerion making these jets hopes there is a market for about 600 supersonic business jets. One analyst called this market “the 1% of the 1%” of business travellers who can afford it.  It is likely that these jets would be twice – or even more – carbon intensive than a modern subsonic aircraft. The current lack of standards for supersonic jets is creating “a chicken and egg situation”, according to Tim Johnson, the director of the AEF.  Planes before proper standards are agreed, or proper standards first....

Click here to view full story...

HACAN East presents London City Airport with a 30th Birthday cake – it’s time for it to clean up its act

Campaigners at local group HACAN East want London City airport to stop growing, cap the number of annual flights & end concentrated flight paths, to protect residents from the noise and the pollution. Today was London City Airport's 30th birthday. Campaigners - dressed up as bakers -  presented the airport will a beautiful cake. They say that now it is 30 years old, it should CLEAN UP ITS ACT. The campaign wants London City to be a better neighbour - the airport is in a totally inappropriate location, surrounded by such densely populated areas that are home to so many people. The airport should NOT be allowed to grow further, as it affects too many people.  There is a moving film, with people affected by the airport speaking out. One lady says:  "We have lived in our house in Mottingham, SE 9, for over 35 years, Then last year without any consultation or warning we suddenly found we had low flying, noisy planes coming over our house from early morning till late at nights. These flights are devastating to me.  I sometimes hate living in my house and I want to move. But the thought of moving away from family and friends at this stage in our life is just too hard to do." A sad reflection on how aviation impacts people's lives.

Click here to view full story...

DfT publishes another 8 week consultation on the Heathrow NPS, showing further weaknesses

As stated in September, the Government has now published a second part of its consultation on the "Airports NPS", on building a 3rd Heathrow runway. The 8 week consultation ends on 19th December. This consultation contains updated air passenger forecasts which were not produced for the earlier NPS consultation (which ended in May). It also looks at air pollution issues, which were not covered properly before, and also noise. This consultation comes exactly one year since the Government announced it favoured a 3rd Heathrow runway.  The DfT is very aware of the problem Heathrow has with air pollution saying the runway means "there remains, however, a risk that the options could delay or worsen compliance with limit values, albeit decreasing over time."  Since the report by the Airports Commission, in July 2015, the arguments it put forward for the 3rd Heathrow runway have been seriously undermined - on economics, air pollution, carbon emission, noise, cost to the taxpayer etc. Yet Government tries to push on with it.  Zac Goldsmith, MP for Richmond Park, commented: “It is as if our politicians have been collectively hypnotised, but sooner or later reality will click and the project will be shelved once again.”

Click here to view full story...

Lancet Commission prompts critical Heathrow air pollution question

With the Lancet Commission on Pollution and Health reporting that air pollution is responsible for 8% of all deaths in the UK (50,000 annually, and an increase of 25% on previous estimates), the poor air quality surrounding Heathrow has again been cast into focus. Importantly, it is not just the existence of pollutants, but the proximity of their source to populations that damages health.  Heathrow, which sits within the UK's most densely populated residential region, not only has the highest level of aircraft emissions. It is close to the M3, M4 and M25 (motorways, much of whose traffic services the airport), and regularly fails to meet Air Quality legal limits for NO2.  Meanwhile there is growing evidence that London exceeds WHO recommended limits for Particulate Matter, thought to be responsible for 45% of air pollution related deaths. Studies have identified higher risks of stroke, respiratory and cardiovascular disease (for both hospital admissions and mortality) in areas close to Heathrow. Paul McGuinness, Chair of the No 3rd Runway Coalition said: "This report highlights yet again one of the many reasons why expanding Heathrow can't happen. Its proximity to people. There could be no worse place to concentrate yet more pollution."

Click here to view full story...

Newcastle Airport’s part owner (49%), Australian AMP Capital, buys Leeds Bradford Airport

The Australian investment group which owns almost half of Newcastle Airport has bought another airport in the North, Leeds Bradford.  AMP Capital, which took a 49% stake in Newcastle Airport in 2012 (51% is owned by 7 local authorities in Tyne and Wear, Northumberland and County Durham), has bought Leeds Bradford outright - after buying it from European investment group Bridgepoint.  AMP Capital say the airport offers a “highly attractive investment and a great fit for its global infrastructure platform”.  It is likely that a competition probe could take place on the deal, with one company potentially having a major stake in two Northern airports whose target markets have some crossover. Though theoretically serving a larger population area, Leeds Bradford is currently smaller than Newcastle Airport, with many people in Yorkshire choosing to fly instead from Manchester. Newcastle recorded 4.8m passengers in 2016 compared to Leeds Bradford’s 3.6m.

Click here to view full story...