General News
Below are links to stories of general interest in relation to aviation and airports.
Is the Solena / British Airways plan for jetfuel from London domestic waste greenwash?
Damian Carrington, of the Guardian, discusses the potential benefits of the plant in East London that is to be built by 2015 by Solena, to turn London's household waste into jet fuel. It will also produce some electricity. British Airways is pushing ahead with a plant that aims to turn half a million tonnes of Londoner's household rubbish into 50,000 tonnes a year of jet fuel. Damian says: " I'll let you decide if this is greenwash or not: here's some of the details." BA's Jonathan Counsel says "We accept we are a significant source of emissions, and growing," he says. "Taking action is about earning our right to grow." Boeing says the industry wants to get 1% biofuel into the global jet fuel supply by 2015, which equates to 600m US gallons a year. And more if it can. Why should this household waste go to aviation fuel, rather than energy for other uses?
Click here to view full story...
Durham Tees Valley airport lobby to get Public Service Obligation route to London
Phil Wilson, the Labour MP for Sedgefield, will table an amendment to legislation currently before MPs to require airlines to maintain routes if investment and jobs depend on it. He wants to revive air links to London from regional airports such as struggling Durham Tees Valley. The idea will also be put to Aviation Minister Theresa Villiers when a delegation, led by Mr Wilson, meets her on April 24, to discuss the Durham Tees Valley Airport problems. He wants the committee considering the Civil Aviation Bill to examine the possibility of a clause, which would require an obligation to continue to fly because of the impact on the Tees Valley of withdrawing flights to London.
Click here to view full story...
Frankfurt night flights between 11pm and 5am to be banned
The Frankfurt campaigners have won a partial night flight ban at Frankfurt in the teeth of opposition from the airlines and the regional government. The local government had allowed 17 flights per night between 11pm and 5am. The High Court has now ruledt ht there is a ban on all flights between 11pm and 5am. The number of hours of the ban is similar to the one that operates, in theory, at Heathrow (11.30 – 4.30) but it is a significant achievement for the campaigners. There can still be a total of 133 flights over the full period of 10pm to 6am - so during the periods of 10 - 11pm and 5 - 6am. The campaigners at Frankfurt say: "This Frankfurt decision will encourage you all at Paris, London and Amsterdam, but as well at Madrid, Barcelona and other airports of Europe. Frankfurt will be the first big Hub having a night flight restrictions!"
Click here to view full story...
Munich now Europe’s 6th busiest airport, overtaking Rome; decision on 3rd runway to be made in June
Munich airport is Lufthansa's 2nd largest base in Germany after Frankfurt. A third runway has been proposed for the airport and last week, a variety of supporters from across the political and business spectrum got together to promote the benefits of an additional runway. A decision is due in June as to whether the airport can proceed with its plans. Campaigners are getting organised to oppose the planned building of a new 3rd runway at Munich. The case for a new runway there is weak because the existing runways are nowhere near capacity, most of the flights from Munich are domestic so could transfer to rail, and there is very low unemployment in the area.
Click here to view full story...
New York: Jamaica Bay residents oppose plans for JFK airport to expand
Last year, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey did a study on how to expand capacity at its airports amid warnings the region could lose billions of dollars in economic opportunity in the coming decade if travelers fly somewhere else. This sounds so like London and Heathrow …… New York Port Authority study projected […]
Click here to view full story...
Toronto, Canada: Landowners who fought Pickering airport plan mark 40 years
Recently hundreds gathered in the ghost town of Brougham, near Toronto, to celebrate their 40-year fight with the federal government. The group "Land Over Landings" is the latest iteration of the grassroots organization that captured the nation’s attention in 1972 with wild stunts and savvy backroom political dealings. Forty years ago, government announced plans for a new airport in north Pickering to relieve pressure on Malton airport, now known as Toronto Pearson International. That meant expropriating 7,530 hectares nd booting out 2,000 residents. A group of homeowners calling themselves "People or Planes" fought the plans, and though the land is now empty and unoccupied, the blocked the new airport. There are now plans again to perhaps build a runway, and opposition is building again.
Click here to view full story...
Time to change Heathrow runway policy, says Tim Yeo
Tim Yeo, who is a former Conservative environment minister in John Major's government, is calling on the government to drop its opposition to a 3rd Heathrow runway. Tim Yeo is now chairman of the parliamentary energy and climate change committee, said the inclusion of aviaiton into the EU ETS meant it would not lead to an increase in emissions. Mr Yeo thinks it is more practical to build a 3rd runway at Heathrow, rather than an estuary airport - which is in the wrong place, and for which the costs are unquantifiable. Yeo backs the line that Britain must have a "world class transport infrastructure" if it was to be "a world class economy in the 21st Century".
Click here to view full story...
Sir Richard Branson’s £5bn Heathrow offer rejected
Branson had made a publicity-grabbing comment to the aviation-loving Telegraph that he would give the UK government £5 billion if they went ahead with a third Heathrow runway. The DfT has said "the Government was committed to developing a new aviation policy framework that would examine all the options with the 'exception of a third runway at Heathrow.' " The Telegraph takes the opportunity of publicising the weak, flimsy report put out today by the World Travel and Tourism Council, with unsubstantiated claims about job gains and economic benefit from removing APD.
Click here to view full story...
Aviation industry pressure on government to cut APD. Again.
The World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) has commissioned a report by Oxford Economics, to put pressure on the government, before the Budget on 21st March, to cut Air Passenger Duty (APD). APD is the tax on air travel that the UK charges, because air travel pays no VAT and pays no fuel duty. The WTTC report makes out that huge numbers of UK jobs would be lost because of the tax and huge numbers of jobs ..... based on deviously contorted logic. The government is expected to collect £2.8 billion in extra tax from air travellers over the next 12 months.The Treasury appears unmoved, and has commented that "unlike some other European countries, the UK does not levy VAT on domestic flights and aviation fuel is not taxed. The aviation industry will also benefit from the cut in corporation tax.'
Click here to view full story...
Under-taxed Aviation Industry wants to pay even less tax! It wants APD removed!
A report due out tomorrow will claim that Air Passenger Duty (APD) is hurting the economy. But it fails to address the reason for the tax. The report from Oxford Economics, and commissioned by the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC), will claim that removing APD would result in an additional 91,000 British jobs being created and £4.2 billion added to the economy in 12 months. AirportWatch Chair John Stewart condemned the report “as a little more than a self-interested attempt by the aviation industry to pay its full share of taxation. It pays no tax on it fuel and is zero-rated for VAT”. The aviation industry is actually under taxed. Not over taxed. In 2010/2011 the exemption from fuel tax and VAT was worth more than £11 billion to the airlines. After deducting APD revenues of around £2.5 billion in 2012 after the rise this coming April, the net benefit is around £8.5 billion – equivalent to a subsidy to the airlines of about £360 per household. John Stewart said“The Government has rightly ignored the special pleading of the aviation industry to pay even less tax. There is no indication that this latest report from the industry’s favourite consultant will change the Government’s mind.”