General News
Below are links to stories of general interest in relation to aviation and airports.
In 2020 the UK, despite Covid travel restrictions, still had a £7.6 billion tourism deficit
Data from the ONS (the Office for National Statistics) has the numbers of trips - in 2020 - made by British people abroad, and the number of trips made by overseas visitors to the UK. It also has the amount they spent. The difference between the amount overseas visitors spend here, and how much British people spent on their trips abroad - called the tourism deficit. Even though the number of visit, in both directions, was about 73-74% lower than in 2019, and the spending in both directions was about 78% lower than in 2019, there was still a tourism deficit of £7.6 billion. ie. £13.8 minus £6.2 billion. The tourism deficit in 2019 was £33.9 billion, and in 2018 it was £31.5. This indicates how much money is taken out of the country, largely on leisure trips, with the majority by air travel (only a small % due to ferries, Eurostar etc). During Covid, much of the money saved, from not travelling abroad, was spent on home improvements and leisure or holidays spent in the UK.
Click here to view full story...
Speculation that the days of the very cheapest air fares may be ending …?
There is speculation that air fares may rise this year, and the really horrifically low fares, of under £20 per ticket, may be a thing of the past. Airlines are hoping for a huge resurgence in air travel this year. But there have been increases in the price of jet fuel. There are higher costs to pay staff; also higher airport costs and air traffic control costs. Airports and air traffic control want to claw back money they lost when there was little flying. However, if air ticket prices rise by a few %, it is unlikely to have much negative impact on demand, especially when people have the money they did not spend on foreign trips in the past two years.
Click here to view full story...
NEF analysis suggests huge future costs to taxpayer of Southampton airport and its flights
New analysis by the New Economics Foundation (NEF) has calculated the cost to society of the carbon emissions generated by UK aviation, and UK airports. These are the costs of the impacts of an altered climate, on infrastructure, extremes of weather, water and energy etc. NEF has used the new carbon values, set out by the government in September 2021. Instead of costing the societal damage done by 1 tonne of carbon at a bit of £70, the price has been put at between a low of £124 to £240 as a medium price, for 2022. Those numbers rise steeply up to 2050 (prices after that have not been considered). That means most airport expansion schemes, including Southampton's, are likely not to be viable, and the economics need to be re-calculated. For Southampton, NEF says that just looking at the 2021 prices, the carbon cost to society would not be £421 million (2025 - 2050) by more like £921. And of the £921 only £212 million would be paid in traded emissions. That leaves £742 which would be the cost to the taxpayer - as the cost of an expanded Southampton airport, with more flights and more passengers.
Click here to view full story...
Bristol local campaigners feel betrayed by Bristol Airport approval by the Planning Inspectorate
Despite huge opposition to the plans to expand Bristol airport, from a cap of 10 million annual passengers to 12 million, the plan was approved by the Planning Inspectorate on 2nd February, after an appeal by the airport to refusal by North Somerset Council. Residents and campaigners say that this decision flies in the face of the evidence that was presented to the inquiry by climate experts and local residents. It means about 20,000 more annual flights. It also makes a mockery of the planning decision taken locally by North Somerset Council and the expressed opinions of the local MPs and surrounding councils. The voices of some 8,900 people who objected in writing to the proposals and the many thousands more who marched in solidarity against the plans has also been ignored in what is a terrible blow to local democracy and accountability. The expansion would result in hugely more CO2 (at a time of climate crisis), more noise, more car journeys and road congestion. Stephen Clarke from Bristol Airport Action Network (BAAN) said: " It means that the airport and the planning inspectorate have totally ignored the climate crisis we are currently in."
Click here to view full story...
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...
Heathrow’s financial problems deepen, especially if it has 15% less passengers in 2022 than forecast
Heathrow has been allowed, by its regulator the CAA, to increase its passenger charge from £19.36 to £30.19 this year until the summer. After that the CAA will probably rule on charges for the next 5 years. Heathrow wanted a larger increase, to £43 per passenger, and based some of its profit forecasts on that - and is peeved with the CAA for limiting its charges. Heathrow has net debts of £15.4 billion. It says that if its number of passengers in 2022 is more than 15% below its forecast of 45.5 million, it will have financial problems - though “no covenant breaches are forecast in 2022” but that is possible. Its forecast aeronautical revenue for 2022 has been revised down to £2.19 billion, and its underlying earnings down to £1.04 billion. If Heathrow has to breach its covenant terms with its lenders, it becomes a less attractive (aka lucrative) investment, and its credit rating eg. by Standard & Poor’s and Fitch. The airlines using Heathrow are, predictably, deeply opposed to yet higher Heathrow charges.
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...
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.