General News
Below are links to stories of general interest in relation to aviation and airports.
Future oil supply, production, price, non-conventional supplies, transport use – what might the future hold?
The debate over whether or not we have reached "peak oil" continues. If peak oil is taken to be the highest rate of extraction of conventional crude oil, that may already have happened. Though total global consumption of oil is rising, part of this is now from non-conventional sources. In 2011 some 89 million barrels of oil and liquid fuels were consumed per day worldwide (nearly 32 billion barrels a year). The IEA says: "Our analysis suggests there are ample physical oil and liquid fuel resources for the foreseeable future." Forecasts of global oil use suggest slower growth in the total amount of liquid fuels available. BP says: "Oil and other liquids remain the slowest growing fuel in our outlook, with demand up by just 0.8% p.a., reaching 104 Mb/d by 2030". The IEA says: " Although liquid fuels—mostly petroleum-based—remain the largest source of energy, the liquids share of world marketed energy consumption falls from 34% in 2010 to 28% in 2040, as projected high world oil prices lead many energy users to switch away from liquid fuels when feasible." The price of oil is expected to rise. IEA says: "With prices expected to increase in the long term, the world oil price in real 2011 dollars reaches $106 per barrel in 2020 and $163 per barrel in 2040 in the IEO2013 Reference case." Many fear the high oil price will mean economies will thus face prolonging global economic recession. A high oil price will necessitate cuts in demand, which in turn may maintain a longer undulating oil production plateau. The transport sector used 55% of the world's total liquid fuels in 2010.
Click here to view full story...
Committee on Climate Change to report in July 2014 on climate implications of Davies runway proposals
The Committee on Climate Change (CCC) has announced it will report to parliament in July 2014 on the impact of the Airports Commission's plans on the UK's climate commitments. The Commission's report referred to the previous recommendations of the CCC, but was opaque on how those targets could be met, if expansion is permitted. The Commission said aviation CO2 emissions could be kept at 2005 levels by 2050 if passenger demand growth is kept to 67% by 2050. [The earlier CCC advice in 2009 was maximum 60% passenger growth over 2005 level by 2050]. The CCC's David Kennedy said: "The expansion of Heathrow by one runway would stay within the 60% limit, depending on the extent of demand growth at other locations." But a second runway probably would not. The Commission itself suggested that to meet the CO2 targets, the carbon price would have to rise to £600 per tonne of CO2 by 2050, as opposed to the current price of £3 per tonne, if runway capacity was totally unconstrained. The cost of flights would have to rise substantially. The CCC said that the cost of long-haul flights would need to rise by up to £200 to curtail demand and stay within the UK's carbon emissions targets. "The higher the level of aviation emissions, the deeper the emissions cuts required in other sectors to meet the economy-wide targets".
Click here to view full story...
Council backs Luton airport expansion but it needs Sec of State Eric Pickles’ authorisation
Luton Airport’s expansion bid to fly over eight million more passengers a year has been given the green light by its owner, Luton borough council. It was agreed to by just six members of the council’s 11-strong development control committee at the rescheduled meeting, which ended after eight hours. The scheme includes nearly doubling passenger throughput to 18 million people a year, which could mean 45,000 extra flights per year. It involves extending terminal and car park buildings, constructing a new parallel taxiway and extending aircraft parking aprons. However the approval must now be communicated to the Secretary of State for Local Government Eric Pickles. On November 18th Luton council received a direction, under the Town and Country Planning Management Order 2010 not to grant permission without specific authorisation from him. This direction was issued to enable him to consider whether he should direct that the application be referred to him, under Section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Councillors at the meeting heard objections from residents and councillors from St Albans, Harpenden, Stevenage, Luton, Hitchin and Flamstead. People are very concerned the expansion would bring an unacceptable increase in noise and air pollution. The airport is proposing 60% more planes and many very late in the evening and very early in the morning.
Click here to view full story...
How well did the Airports Commission’s interim report do on the AEF’s 3 environmental & social tests?
The Aviation Environment Federation has set out three tests, to apply to the Airports Commission's Interim Report, published on 17th December 2013. These are on climate: "Does the Commission demonstrate a pathway to meet our national climate change target in a one or two new runways scenario using realistic assumptions?". On quality of life: "Does the Airports Commission only short-list options that will not worsen the quality of life for communities around airports?" and on Social Cost Benefit Analysis: "In light of extensive challenges to the assumptions of economic benefits of expansion and recommendations by a well known economic consultancy firm, does the Airports Commission commit to carrying out a Social Cost Benefit Analysis of each of the short-listed proposals over the course of 2014?" They have had a quick, initial look at the Interim Report, and set out areas on each of these where there is evidence of "positive steps" and areas of "missed opportunities". On climate AEF regret that there is uncertainty on international agreements, and that non-CO2 impacts of aviation may need to be taken into account in the future - but are not yet. On quality of life, AEF regrets that noise, air quality and local impacts have not yet been satisfactorily addressed. AEF say a clear and transparent social cost benefit analysis of each of short-listed options is needed as part of the Commission's appraisal in 2014.
Click here to view full story...
Why the Commission’s ‘green light’ for a new runway could still turn out to be a ‘red light’
James Lees, from the Aviation Environment Federation, writing in the Huffington Post, says that while recent days have seen the 3 major parties edge towards a potential about-face on the desirability of a new runway for the south east, the underlying reasons for their opposition to it back in 2010 have not changed. In 2010 David Cameron famously promised "no ifs, no buts, no third runway" at Heathrow; Nick Clegg warned a 3rd runway would be a "disaster", and Ed Miliband threatened to resign from Cabinet over the issue. The reason that politicians came out against a new runway in 2010, reversing a decision in favour of new runways at Heathrow and Stansted, wasn't for a lack of perceived need but down to the power of local opposition. This came from the impact of aircraft noise, its associated health impacts - and also local air pollution and air quality limits. The Airports Commission has so far only paid lip service to the importance of community opposition, mainly addressing only the issues of demand and capacity. The interim report provided no more than vague reassurances to the affected communities. Without satisfactory reassurances from the Commission, communities will look to politicians to provide these. The Airports Commission has failed for now to achieve its purpose to take the politics out of the airports issue. The Interim Report has just re-opened the political debate.
Click here to view full story...
Fears Ifield would be swallowed up if Gatwick builds second runway
With the Airports Commission having made a southern runway at Gatwick one of their options, the people of the villages of Ifield and Langley Green are very concerned about the impact of a very busy full length runway, merely a few hundred metres away. The Ifield Village Association has expressed fears that a runway would destroy Ifield as a pleasant place, and convert it into an area beset by noise and acting just as a service area for an enlarged airport. A 2nd Gatwick runway could lead to there being aircraft flying across the northern tip of Ifield village every few minutes for much of the day. Ifield is already disturbed every few minutes by aircraft climbing out of Gatwick Airport about a mile to the north. If the runway brings huge development and many new jobs, that would mean bringing in workers from other areas - from the UK and from Europe - who would require up to 40,000 new houses. "Crawley already has a housing crisis, new houses would be built on open country in neighbouring authorities. Ifield village could be absorbed into massive new housing estates and lose its access to open country."
Click here to view full story...
It’s ‘Like being on death row’: residents facing devastating impact of Heathrow runway plans
Residents of a historic village that could be obliterated under today’s proposals to expand Heathrow said the plans would have a “devastating” impact on their lives. Some 1,500 buildings would be lost in Harmondsworth and neighbouring Longworth by a north west Heathrow runway - one of the options short-listed by the Airports Commission. People fear the prospect of being as little compensation as the airport can get away with. Residents and business owners in Harmondsworth urged the Government to speed up their decision-making - comparing the impact to “being on death row”. Parts of Harmondsworth are over 1,000 years old and the village contains the Tithe Barn and St Mary’s Church, both places of heritage value. The vicar of St Mary’s Church said: “We lost one-third of our congregation due to the uncertainty over the runway. We used to have 45 on a regular Sunday; it’s come down to 25 or 30, half of whom come from outside the village.” Geraldine Nicholson, who lives in West Drayton just 100m away from one of the proposed runways, said it is not just the villages that would be affected, and 10,000 homes north of the M4 would suffer too - there would be very negative social, as well as environmental, impacts.
Click here to view full story...
Closing stretch of M25 for years, to build new Heathrow runway, is ‘unthinkable’ and a ‘non-starter’
Both locations for a new Heathrow runway, suggested by the Airports Commission, involve building a runway over a particularly wide and busy section of the M25. As the map below shows. The Standard reports that the UK's main motoring organisations are united in horror at the prospect of closing this stretch of the M25 for up to 5 years to build a runway. The plans would mean the six-lane motorway having to be sunk into a tunnel for at least a half-a-mile south of junction 14. In its runway submission to the Commission in July, Heathrow just said the M4/M25 motorway junction requires “major reconfiguration” but did not add further detail. A spokesman for the AA said: “If you thought the protests from residents was bad just wait for the howls from motorists if this goes ahead. They are already stuck in daily traffic jams on this stretch of the M25 and the prospect of something on this scale doesn’t bear thinking about. For the millions of drivers who use the M25 regularly this is a non-starter. The M25 is the artery on which millions of commuters and businesses rely. Any suggestion of large-scale disruption there will cause major backlash.” Another said: "A five year closure borders on the unthinkable. It’s a hugely busy section of motorway where are they going to put all the vehicles?”
Click here to view full story...
Stansted campaigners heave a huge sigh of relief – but it’s not over yet ….
Stop Stansted Expansion (SSE) has expressed huge relief that Stansted has not been short-listed by the Airports Commission as a potential location for an additional runway or runways to meet future aviation demand in the South East. SSE Chairman Peter Sanders said: “This is exactly the outcome that the entire SSE team has been working so hard to achieve all year.... The environmental consequences of even one extra runway would have been catastrophic and there has never been a viable business case for any extra runways at Stansted.” Stansted is currently operating at less than half of its potential capacity. In addition, it has no long haul flights and it primarily caters for outbound leisure travel by UK residents rather than the business market, and low-cost carriers Ryanair and easyJet account for over 90% of its passengers. Unfortunately, the Airports Commission has not completely ruled out an extra runway at Stansted. They have said that its final report in 2015 it will consider whether a 2nd Stansted runway might be a plausible option in the 2040s. “It will therefore be another 2 years before we can even think of letting our guard down."
Click here to view full story...
Environmental groups question feasibility of new runway, in the face of climate, noise and air quality constraints
In response to the Airports Commission's interim report, announcing that a new runway at either Heathrow, or Gatwick (distant possibility of estuary - but unlikely), some of the main environmental NGOs have commented. The AEF says "The Commission’s report reaches a conclusion on the need for a new runway before it has undertaken a comprehensive environmental and social analysis that could still rule out all the options on the table. Building a new runway will not be possible within our national climate targets unless the Government is willing to limit growth at all the other airports in the UK". "The report gives no reassurance on how huge local constraints on air quality and noise will be met." Friends of the Earth commented: “If our airports are allowed to expand, other sectors of the economy will have to make even bigger carbon cuts to enable the UK to play its part in tackling climate change. The south east doesn’t need aviation expansion - London has more flights to the world’s business centres than its European competitors.” The RSPB says further airport expansion will undermine efforts to reduce our climate impact in the UK, “Emissions from aircraft are one of the fastest increasing sources of greenhouse gases. The impacts of climate change on wildlife in the UK and abroad are already being felt with seabirds struggling to find food as sea temperatures increase." And there are more comments.