Latest News
AirportWatch on 
@AirportWatch
Summaries of, and links to, the latest aviation news stories appear below. News is archived into topics
For a daily compilation of UK articles on national and regional transport issues, see Transportinfo.org.uk | For more stories about specific airports see Aviation Environment Federation Transport & Environment Anna Aero TravelMole Press releases from CAA IATA BA Ryanair easyJet Jet2.com For climate change ECEEE news and Guardian Climate and NoAA monthly analysisCheck Hansard for reports on Parliament |
 |
Latest news stories:
About 30 people at Notre-Dame-des-Landes demand their property back (taken 5 years ago to build a new airport)
At Notre-Dame-des-Landes, a new airport is planned to replace the existing Nantes airport. The battle has been going on for years. Now exactly five years after the French state expropriated a large area of land for the airport, there has been no start to the project - there is not even a start date in prospect. Therefore under the French system, as work has not begun, those who have lost ownership of their land (they may still live on it for the time being) can apply to get it back. Around 30 people affected are now submitting the necessary legal papers to get their land, farmland and buildings back, to the court in Saint-Nazaire. These people have not used the money, and they don't want it. They want ownership of their land and property back. The French system did not anticipate, in the law relating to expropriation, that any scheme would have delays for as long as five years.
Click here to view full story...
The challenge of tackling the non-CO2 impacts of aviation – explained by Carbon Brief
In a long, but very informative article, Carbon Brief discusses the problems of the non-CO2 impacts of aircraft emissions. These are from water vapour, aerosols and nitrogen oxides emitted by aircraft at cruise altitudes. Though these impacts may be short lived, they have definite climate forcing effects, though these are complicated, while CO2 has easily understood impacts and lasts in the atmosphere for decades or centuries. The impact of contrails forming cirrus cloud is to slow the radiation of heat back into space, causing more warming. But this effect is greatest at night, when contrails persist, and also in areas where there is colder, damper air. So the impacts are not uniform across the globe. The article discusses possibilities of planes avoiding certain areas where contrails persist, either on a daily basis or with blocks of airspace out of use for particular periods. Or of planes flying less high. Both those options are likely to increase fuel use - and thus CO2 emissions - by planes, and so need to be carefully organised, to avoid having yet more overall climate impact. Even if the ICAO deal requires planes to pay a small amount to "offset" their CO2, they are not required to pay for non-CO2 impacts. With the global aviation industry expected to increase its CO2 emissions by 200%-360% by 2050, the non-CO2 impacts are a very real problem, and one that should not be ignored. Small changes to flight routes are unlikely to make more than a token difference.
Click here to view full story...
DfT invests a further £1.8 million of taxpayer money over 2 years in the Dundee-Stansted route
A new deal to secure the air link between Dundee City Airport and Stansted for another two years has been announced. The UK and Scottish governments and Dundee City Council have agreed a public service obligation (PSO) contract worth almost £3.7m. Loganair will continue to operate the route from 26 March. The service will see two return flights each weekday and one return flight on a Sunday. The UK Government will contribute 50% of the total funds, (ie.about £1,8 million over the two years) with the Scottish government putting in £1.4m and Dundee City Council providing £400,000 of funding. UK Aviation Minister Lord Ahmad announced it, with comments about the importance of connections between Scotland and England for trade and tourism - "helping business and leisure travellers alike". So much of this public money is to assist leisure travel. The UK government funding is through the Regional Air Connectivity Fund, which aims to maintain connectivity between London and smaller regional airports, where routes are at risk of being withdrawn.
Click here to view full story...
Launch of new group “Plane Justice” for those newly affected by Gatwick Route 4 since May 2016
Residents north of Gatwick, from Newdigate through to Salfords, have launched "Plane Justice", a collective of communities which seeks to support (whether through campaigning, communications, discussion, negotiation or legal process) those who are, or would be, newly affected by aircraft in airport ‘catchment areas’. Formed in response to changes made to Gatwick departure Route 4 in May 2016, the founders of Plane Justice have experienced on a personal level the stress, anxiety and sense of hopelessness and financial insecurity that changing flight paths causes to communities. The group describes the current iteration of Route 4 as the "Route to Misery", with a noisy turn and a more southern trajectory after the turn, which overflies more than 7,000 new residents. They want to bring an evidence-based and ethical dimension into decision making about the management of airspace, which in their experience to date of Gatwick and its associated aircraft noise, has been surprisingly lacking. Many people feel there has been a serious injustice in the way areas have been targeted by unacceptable levels of aircraft noise. Plane Justice wants Gatwick's hated "Route 4" to be returned to its pre-2013 “legacy” position, which was flown for decades with negligible complaints.
Click here to view full story...
Indian air travel pays 25% tax, but Delhi now cut tax for domestic flights only to 1%
Unlike the UK, India puts VAT on the price of jet fuel. Sales Tax (levied by the State Governments) averages across India at 25%. But now domestic air travel from Delhi is likely to get cheaper with the Delhi government deciding to cut value added tax on aircraft turbine fuel (ATF) to 1% from the existing rate of 25%. As part of the central government’s connectivity scheme, the Delhi government reduced VAT on ATF by 24% to boost links with smaller airports in its budget for the year 2017-18. Delhi will have cheaper air links especially to the smaller airports to the north west. India is the world's fastest-growing aviation market but most of the air travel is between big cities. Under the regional connectivity scheme, the government will subsidise part of the cost for airlines to operate flights to smaller towns. Jet fuel is one of the biggest costs for airlines, especially for low-cost carriers such as IndiGo Airlines, owned by InterGlobe Aviation, SpiceJet and GoAir. Airline shares rose on the news.
Click here to view full story...
Vegetable oils biofuels should be phased out by 2020 – their CO2 emissions are higher than fossil diesel
The aviation industry has great hopes - unjustifiably - that it will be able to magically locate low carbon "green" fuels in future, that will emit less carbon per litre than fossil jet fuel. Various niche plant oils have been tried, and quietly dropped (the inedible ones that could grow on soils not good enough for human crops are not commercially viable). So far it is not thought that the industry would be so bold as to try to claim use of plant oils like palm oil, rapeseed oil or soya oil could make suitable "sustainable" jet fuels, knowing the bad publicity of burning oils that compete with human food, in jet engines. But plant oils are used in immense amounts as biodiesel for cars and vans, including in Europe. Figures show that this, rather than cutting the overall CO2 emissions (which was the intention by the EU) in practice ends in higher lifecycle emissions than fossil based fuels. On average, biodiesel from virgin vegetable oil leads to around 80% higher CO2 emissions than the fossil diesel. Palm oil has the highest greenhouse gas emissions - about 300% those of fossil diesel - because of deforestation [including habitat and wildlife loss] and peatland drainage needed to set up the plantations, in places like Indonesia. In 2015 46% of all palm oil imported into the EU was burned in vehicles as biodiesel (45% as human or animal food, and 9% burned for electricity or heat.)
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow’s head of property excited about redevelopment opportunities and maximising revenues from airport’s property
Talking to Property Weekly, Heathrow's head of property and facilities, John Arbuckle, is bullish and "excited" about all the property and developments he is looking forward to, with a 3rd runway, He can see "redevelopment opportunities as well as maximising revenues from the airport’s property." The Heathrow investment property portfolio is worth around £2bn, and that will grow when more land is obtained (by compulsory purchase, and by buying up homes that will be too polluted or too noise to live in). Heathrow now has around "1.9m sq ft of buildings, 100 hectares of leased land, more than 200 houses and 807,000 sq ft of warehousing and offices leased from third parties." Heathrow also owns around 1,250 hectares of land around the airport. It is expected that there will be more hotels, for the expanded airport. John Arbuckle, in typically bullish Heathrow fashion, hopes to "put the building blocks in place for a third runway in 2025." He manages to coyly avoid mentioning the destruction of much of Harmondsworth and parts of the Heathrow villages, and compulsory purchase, just talking about the airport "working closely with our local communities" and "being great neighbours to the local community.” Property companies are rubbing their hands with glee at increased demand for commercial office and industrial space near Heathrow.
Click here to view full story...
“Aircraft Noise 3 Villages” says DfT’s Heathrow consultation is ‘flawed’ as Surrey Heath left in the dark
The Aircraft Noise 3 Villages group, that represents residents in Lightwater, Windlesham and Bagshot, is angry that local councils are not doing anything to get the amount of aircraft noise from Heathrow reduced. They want action by Surrey Heath Borough Council (SHBC) and Surrey County Council to tackle the issue of increased aircraft noise. They are also concerned that their areas were excluded from the distribution of 1.5 million leaflets by the DfT, inviting members of the public to a series of public events on the Heathrow National Policy Statement (NPS) consultation. The DfT is holding 20 events in areas affected by Heathrow, but this has not covered many of the places that either already get, or will get, intense levels of plane noise if there was a 3rd runway. Rosalie James, from the Aircraft Noise 3 Villages group, has written to the DfT, Surrey Heath MP, Michael Gove and Surrey County Councillor, Mike Goodman, to say their areas should have had a DfT info event. The absence of DfT events is yet another way in which the NPS consultation is widely regarded as deeply flawed. Even if people can attend a DfT event, they will find no information on future flight paths, though it is known that almost 50% more Heathrow flights, using more concentrated flight paths, would cause severe noise problems for those overflown.
Click here to view full story...
Greg Hands (MP for Chelsea & Fulham) urges DfT to ban Heathrow night flights from 11pm to 6am
Chelsea and Fulham MP (Cons) Greg Hands has urged DfT ministers to impose a ban on all night flights at Heathrow. Greg renewed calls for all planes to be grounded between 11pm and 6am, a period of 7 hours, and says he is frequently woken up at night by noise from aircraft passing over west London. In a letter to Lord Ahmed, the parliamentary under secretary of state for transport, Mr Hands argued that there should be a “comprehensive” ban on night flights at Heathrow. He said the lives of local people are being unfairly disrupted by the noise, and research from international health bodies, including the WHO and the BMJ, highlights the damaging impacts of sustained sleep deprivation on people’s wellbeing. “These Londoners have jobs to do and families to look after, for which they require a good night’s sleep." A ban of flights for a 7 hour night period would “lessen the detrimental impact on hundreds of thousands of Londoners living beneath the flight path”. ... “I find it unacceptable that the convenience, quality of sleep, and the health of millions of residents in London and the wider South East under the flight path is sacrificed for the sake of a few thousand inbound passengers per night".
Click here to view full story...
Aviation biofuels: “Won’t get fooled again” – why they will not solve aviation’s CO2 problems
An analyst with Transport & Environment questions whether biofuels could ever make more than a minute impact on aviation carbon emissions. He says we know from past experience with biofuels for road vehicles that they can actually be worse for the environment than the fossil fuels they replace. Unless biofuels are sourced very carefully indeed, they rise causing drastic changes in land use, including deforestation and peatland drainage. Even if biofuels could be produced on land currently used for agriculture, this means there are indirect land use changes (ILUC) meaning that whatever was previously produced there needs to be produced somewhere else. ie. the result may be cutting down forests to create new land to grow crops. Guarantees are needed to ensure that fuels worse than kerosene are not promoted - in terms of carbon emissions, but also loss of wildlife or violation of human rights. "The aviation sector often hypes up a new technology as the solution to its climate problem, only to admit that it is not feasible or prohibitively expensive. It quickly moves on to another ‘solution’. All this serves to convince policymakers that sustainable aviation is around the corner. Biofuels may be the latest example of this strategy." Aviation biofuels, at a very minimum, must be better on carbon and environmental impact than fuels they replace.
Click here to view full story...
APD rises by only rate of RPI but that does not stop Heathrow and AOA complaining (again …) it should be cut
Air Passenger Duty is just £13 for an adult (over 18) for any return flight to Europe. It is £26 for a return flight inside the UK. It is just £75 for an adult to any destination further away than 2,000 miles, and higher for higher class tickets. Air travel pays no VAT and no fuel duty, and the combined amount per year that these two could bring in amounts to around £8 - 10 billion per year, even after the receipts from APD are taken into account. APD is charged by the Treasury because there is no logical reason why air travel (most of which is discretionary, and much of which is for pleasure) should be untaxed. After cutting the rate of longer haul APD (over 4,000 miles) in April 2915, the tax as just risen by the rate of inflation - RPI. But the airlines complain about it every time there is a budget. Now Heathrow and the Airport Operators Association have complained again, that APD has not been cut. They would like to see air travel almost not taxed at all, to boost the number of passengers -and hence their profits. Heathrow has the DfT falling over itself to promote its 3rd runway. It is a little distasteful for it to be pressing for effectively further subsidy, when its runway would end up costing the taxpayer a huge amount in necessary improvements to surface access, which the airport is unwilling to stump up for. It is indeed a very greedy industry, relentless in its demands.
Click here to view full story...
Runway opponents stage a brief take-over of Maidenhead DfT Heathrow event, filling in info gaps
The Maidenhead DfT information display - pushing the Heathrow 3rd runway - was taken over for its last 20 minutes by an invasion of anti- runway protesters. The DfT events are intended to give information to members of the public who want to know more about the runway plan. Unfortunately the displays are very focused on the alleged benefits of the runway, with very little information on its negative impacts. Generally the DfT staff who man the events are unable to answer questions about negative effects of the runway, in any detail. Campaigners from SHE (Stop Heathrow Expansion) with representatives from around 8 other groups, held a brief session to show up some of the gaps in information that the DfT is giving the public at these (20) sessions. Neil Keveren (SHE) pointed out some of the omitted information (like how little change to night flights is actually proposed, the effect of those whose homes will be compulsorily purchased, the health impacts of air pollution and the cost to the taxpayer of improvements to surface infrastructure). There is no info on any of those in the DfT panels. Others then chipped in with other information that the DfT should be including. The session ended with rousing chants of "No New Runways" and "Theresa May, What would your father say, NO 3rd runway" - and Neil singing, accompanied by his guitar, the song "This is our home, and we will stay. No 3rd runway".
Click here to view full story...
“Heathrow 2.0” glossy report attempts to portray a 3-runway airport as “green” and aiming to be “carbon neutral”…..
Heathrow has regularly produced annual sustainability reports (they do not seem to be on its website any longer). The report from 2014 is here. Now, in an a serious attempt to be seen as a truly "environmentally friendly" airport they have produced a glossy report called "Heathrow 2.0" which endeavours to show that - with 50% more flights, producing nearly 50% more CO2 emissions, is a shining example of environmental leadership for us all. Some ex-environmental campaigners helped Heathrow put the report together. While it is hugely to be welcomed that Heathrow will try to have as low an environmental footprint as possible, within the airport itself - the problem is confusing that with the immense environmental impact the airport has outside its perimeter. The report has nothing much to say on that, other than offsetting schemes of one sort or another. The airport hopes to become "carbon neutral" but that is only by offsetting - effectively buying the emissions reductions of others. Heathrow wants to be seen to be "green" by helping to fund some peat-bog restoration, and buying renewable energy. It aims to do a bit more on preventing illegal trafficking of wildlife through its air freight etc etc et. All laudable stuff. But there is no reason why Heathrow needs to have another runway, in order to do all these good environmental things that it could perfectly well be doing (should be doing) as a 2 runway airport. Check the report for high level greenwash ....
Click here to view full story...
£150m bid race for Luton airport light rail link from station to terminal
Luton Airport has started the bid race for up to £150m worth of construction work for a planned new light railway system. This will be paid for by Luton council. It has appointed Arup to design and press through the mass passenger transport scheme. It would be a 2.1km long guided mass rapid transit system, to run between two purpose-built stations, heading out from Stirling Place, close to Luton Airport Parkway station, to the airport terminal. It will be broken down into two main packages. Work worth up to £115m will include viaducts, embankments, cut and cover works and station platforms. Some of the works will be within the airside sections of the airport. The track, rolling stock and associated systems package will be subject to a separate contract worth up to £35m, to be awarded concurrently. The light rail scheme forms part of a £1.5 billion inward investment programme by Luton council, with a 20-year plan for major transformation of the town. Planning permission is being sought from Luton Borough Council (which conveniently owns the airport) and Central Bedfordshire Council. They hope work could start later in 2017, and it would open in 2021 with the intention of the journey time from Luton to St Pancras being cut to 30 minutes.
Click here to view full story...
Hydrogen unlikely to become fuel for aircraft – it is no magic bullet solution for aviation CO2
Over the past decades many have investigated the possibility of using hydrogen as jet fuel, in the hope of keeping the aviation industry growing without massively increasing carbon emissions. A new paper from the Netherlands is enthusiastic about the use of hydrogen, saying it could be a good fuel as it is light. The professor writes: “It is a defect that kerosene is so irrationally cheap, which triggers much unnecessary air travel. A worldwide tax on kerosene - if at all politically possible - should be something to pursue.” However desirable it might be to fuel planes with hydrogen, the reasons it has been rejected in the past are first that producing hydrogen itself takes a huge amount of energy. Then it must be stored, very cold, in tanks far larger than (maybe 4 times as large) those used now on aircraft, even if stored as slush, not compressed gas. Metal hydride storage is also possible. All the options increase the weight of engines etc, outweighing the fact the hydrogen is lighter than kerosene. There could be challenges to using premixed injection with hydrogen rich fuel, since the reaction rate for hydrogen is faster than for jet fuel - there is a danger of flashback, which would have to be dealt with. The problem with contrails and non-CO2 impacts would be as great as with conventional jet fuel.
Click here to view full story...
New Eurostar service London to Amsterdam soon, and to Frankfurt in maybe 3 years
High-speed trains from London to Frankfurt could be launched in the next 3 years (or may be more) helping the UK maintain links to mainland Europe post-Brexit. German rail operator Deutsche Bahn has announced plans to run direct trains between London St Pancras and Frankfurt as early as 2020. The new service would complete the 400-mile journey through the Channel tunnel in 5 hours. Deutsche Bahn was given permission to build the direct line in 2013, but plans were halted due to a lack of high-speed trains. The trains are still behind schedule, and this is delaying launch of the route. When more trains are delivered, Deutsche Bahn will prioritise routes from Frankfurt to Belgium and northern France, before the UK (which will by then have left the EU). A new chief executive of Deutsche Bahn is to be announced before long, and progress on the London to Frankfurt route may progress once he/she is appointed. In November 2016 it was announced that Eurostar is pressing ahead with plans for direct services between London and Amsterdam, despite a drop in passenger numbers. Eurostar said plans for the new route were “progressing well” and might start by the end of 2017? The new service would provide a rival to airlines transporting 3 million people a year from London to Holland.
Click here to view full story...
EIB lending Schiphol airport €350 million to build a new terminal and new pier
The European Investment Bank (EIB) is the European Union's nonprofit long-term lending institution, that is publicly owned, and whose shareholders are the member states of the EU. It says it uses its financing operations to bring about European integration and social cohesion. The member states set the bank's broad policy goals. It aims to support sound investments which further EU policy goals, and it says one of its objectives is environmental sustainability. Another is developing trans-European Networks of transport and energy, and as such it has funded many airport projects and airport expansions. It approved lending nearly €4 billion for the first phase of the new Terminal 3 at Frankfurt Airport. It is now lending some €175 million to Schiphol Airport, which is the first instalment of a total financing of €350 million for expansion. Schiphol plans to build a new terminal and a new pier, to cope with 15 million more passengers per year. In addition, the airport will relocate and renew other parts of the related infrastructure, such as internal roads and car parks. The EIB says as Schiphol is the "showpiece" of the Netherlands, this is essential. Earlier the EIB lent money to Schiphol to build the 5th runway. The new pier is planned to be completed by the end of 2019. The terminal is planned to open for operations in 2023.
Click here to view full story...
No assurances given by DfT Minister of State, John Hayes, on Heathrow 3rd runway and surface access
Sarah Olney, the LibDem MP for Richmond Park, secured a debate in Westminster Hall on "Heathrow Expansion: Surface Access" on 28th February. Sarah and Ruth Cadbury and Tania Mathias made relevant points about transport, and asked the Minister for replies. John Hayes spoke, but avoided giving any substantive answers to any of the questions. There are serious concerns about the increased number of lorries, for Heathrow freight, that are likely to blight neighbourhoods close to Heathrow if a 3rd runway is built, and this would probably contribute to worse air pollution locally. Heathrow has "pledged" that with a 3rd runway there would be no increase in road trips. (How this could be monitored, let alone enforced, is never stated). It is unclear how there could be a 50% increase in air freight, with no additional road vehicle trips, but Heathrow stresses the allegedly huge benefits to the UK of the additional air freight. John Hayes reply includes waffly non-committal statements like: "It is important to appreciate that, as we move to the point at which Heathrow Airport Ltd lodges its planning application, it will be expected to provide that kind of detailed analysis as part of the planning process." And "It is absolutely right that a plan anticipating changes in freight movements is made and is subject to scrutiny and debate. We will inspect that plan, and the Government will expect the developers at Heathrow to deliver a cogent, well argued, proper assessment of the impact of any changes in the volume or character of freight traffic ...."
Click here to view full story...
Fears that protecting environment in the courts will become prohibitively expensive, as ‘cost cap’ scrapped
New rules came into force today which could dramatically reduce the ability of individuals and non-governmental organisations to bring legal challenges to protect the environment. The government is scrapping automatic "cost caps" which limit the costs of losing a case in England and Wales. We have the current cost caps due to the international Aarhus Convention, which was ratified by the government in 2005. Opponents claim the changes will make it "impossible" to "hold the government to account". The government says people will not be expected to pay above their means, but they could still be virtually bankrupted, if they lose the case, having to sell their house. The normal "loser pays rule" means that successful claimants can claim their legal costs back from the defendant. The caps on costs (started in 2013) if you lose the case currently stand at £5,000 for an individual and £10,000 for an organisation. The change would mean the loser having to pay both their own legal costs, and those of the winner. ClientEarth, Friends of the Earth and the RSPB are challenging the rule change in the courts, arguing those bringing such cases would be exposed to huge and uncertain financial risk. The Aarhus Convention requires legal action to protect the environment not to be "prohibitively expensive". It is particularly a concern due to Brexit.
Click here to view full story...
Progress on green aircraft taxiing solutions is slow – unlikely to make huge improvements in fuel use or NO2?
For several years there have been attempts to cut the amount of aircraft engine noise and CO2 emissions from taxiing. Worldwide perhaps 2.6% or so of total aviation carbon emissions might be from taxiing, and it increases noise close to the airport. Some of the electrical solutions to the problem have come to nothing, and been quietly dropped. eg. a Honeywell/Safran EGTS joint venture that was abandoned last year, and a joint venture involving L-3 and Crane Aerospace, called GreenTaxi, also disappeared. There are two remaining possible systems: WheelTug nose wheel electric drive system and IAI’s TaxiBot semi-robotic pilot-controlled vehicle. IATA is enthusiastic about how these will cut fuel consumption from taxiing in future, and there is a conference on the subject in Singapore in May. The aviation lobby group "Sustainable Aviation" has said Heathrow could eventually, if there was the technology, cut "100,000 tonnes of CO2 per year". That is about 0.5% of its total emissions of some 19MtCO2. WheelTug requires a plant to be modified, and the APU to power two motors on the front wheel. Neither Boeing nor Airbus is supporting the development. The TaxiBot system is further down the certification route since it does not require modification to an aircraft. It lifts and holds the aircraft nose wheel, and then transports the aircraft without using the aircraft’s own engines.
Click here to view full story...
Government needs to provide clarity on possible jobs across the UK created by 3rd runway
When the Government announced Heathrow as its preferred option in October 2016 it downgraded the economic benefits of a 3rd runway substantially. The Airports Commission Final Report assessed the economic benefit to the whole of the UK, over 60 years, might be up to £147 billion (their assessment of need scenario). Heathrow often uses a much higher figure of "up to £211 billion" and omit to say it is for all the UK, over 60 years. In October, the DfT, calculating the possible economic benefits in a different way, thought a more likely figure was £61 billion. This is benefits only. But if the costs are taken off, the benefit falls to something more like £6 billion (£2 - 11 billion or so range). Heathrow, and the DfT, say there will be huge benefits to the regions, and large numbers of future jobs. The figures Heathrow has on its website are based on the £147 billion estimate. These have not been corrected, in the light of the reduced DfT estimate. So what is the actual value of a third runway to the English regions, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland? All that we do know is that it will be considerably less than the promises made by Heathrow to so many MPs and local councillors. The onus is on Heathrow and the DfT to come up with revised estimates of the employment benefits to the regions. So far, it has failed to do so. .
Click here to view full story...
New anti-airport expansion group formed in Hounslow – BASHR3 – after launch of DfT’s NPS consultation on 3rd runway
A new anti-airport expansion group has been set up by residents of Hounslow and Brentford. The group, Brentford and Hounslow Stop Heathrow Expansion (BASHR3), has been launched in the wake of the government's National Policy Statement (NPS) consultation on proposals for a northwest runway at Heathrow. There are serious concerns in the borough about the increased noise, traffic and air pollution - amplified by the recent report by the Commons Environmental Audit Committee, that is highly critical of the government's implausible assurances on these issues. Brentford resident Dave Waller has helped set up the new campaign group as many more lives will be blighted by another flightpath. BASHR3 is urging people to attend the DfT consultation events, and submit their responses. Dave Waller commented on the air pollution issue: "If the third runway goes ahead, it is sure to get worse and we will be forced to move out of the area. Our lives will also be blighted by an increase in noise caused by the new flightpath, which will cut across Brentford." People concerned about Heathrow health impacts are encouraged to join BASHR3. Website and on Twitter at @bashrunway3 The first consultation event for Hounslow residents is February 27th at Hounslow Civic Centre from 11am to 8pm.
Click here to view full story...
Investigation reveals Heathrow airport staff are set targets to get passengers to spend money in shops
The Sun has used an undercover reporter to work as one of Heathrow's Passenger Ambassadors, whose job is to boost retail sales in the terminals. There is a Channel 4 Dispatches programme on this, also showing how airport passengers are getting a raw deal from changing money. In 2016 the airport made a record £612 million in retail income, which is rent from retailers and from car parking charges. This was up 7.7% compared to 2015, while aeronautical income remained unchanged at £1,699 million. Heathrow's retail division now makes up 22% of its revenues - £612 million out of £2,807 million. The 150 Passenger Ambassadors help travellers once they are through security, and are set strict targets about persuading them to visit shops and spend money. These are between £2,500 to £4,000 per day, and the most successful senior ambassadors claim to hit £10,000 per day. They are told: “The majority of the role will involve interacting with passengers, persuading them to shop if they had not planned to, or encouraging them to spend more by talking to them about offers and promotions across the Terminal….The average spend per passenger must go up as a result of your presence on the terminal floor.” The job description says: "A minute should not pass without a conversation with one or more passengers.”
Click here to view full story...
Willie Walsh and aviation insiders think Heathrow hopes of getting planning consent by 2020 are unrealistic
The Times reports that Willie Walsh, head of British Airways’ parent company IAG, (Heathrow’s biggest customer), said that Heathrow's target for its runway plans were over optimistic. He did not think the timetable of getting the support of MPs in the Commons within 12 months and then getting the planning process completed - through all the legal and planning hurdles - in a further 2 years was realistic. Those timings are highly optimistic, but Heathrow is preparing to start work on a 3rd runway in three years from now - in 2020. An airline insider told The Times that DfT officials had privately told industry bosses that planning permission would not be won until 2021. There will be legal challenges, and those could mean the timetable could slip even further. Heathrow wants to get its runway built by 2025, so it could increase the number of flights by 50% by 2030, compared to the number now. Heathrow has said it wants to apply to raise the number of flights from its legal cap now, of 480,000 per year, to 505,000 from 2021 - if it has been granted planning approval for the runway. That might involve one or two fewer flights in the night period, but a loss of some runway alternation during the day - perhaps softening people up for the worse noise, and shorter respite periods, there would be with a 3rd runway.
Click here to view full story...
Environmental Audit Cttee says government should take account of aviation non-CO2 impacts on climate
The Environmental Audit Committee report is highly critical of the government's handling of the issue of carbon emissions created by a 3rd Heathrow runway. The EAC raises the issue of non-CO2 impacts, which is something this government (and the Airports Commission) tries to totally ignore. Atmospheric science is complicated, and the exact extent that non-CO2 impacts from emissions by aircraft high in the atmosphere contribute to warming effects is uncertain. It is estimated to be up to twice the impact of the CO2 alone. The government used to use a multiplier of x1.9, but this was quietly dropped after 2011.The EAC have asked the Secretary of State whether "the DfT's upcoming aviation strategy would examine greenhouse gas emissions other than CO2. He said that non-CO2 emissions would be reduced alongside CO2, but “there is no clear scientific basis to look at other emissions and put those at the heart of our strategy”. The Appraisal of Sustainability says that non-CO2 emissions “are likely to be up to two times the magnitude of the CO2 emissions themselves, but [...] cannot be readily quantified due to the level of scientific uncertainty and therefore have not been assessed”. The EAC says the government should take account of the likely additional climate change impact of some non-CO2. Read the briefing on non-CO2 impacts.
Click here to view full story...
Brussels to start fining planes overflying city at night, but conflict of interest with Flemish areas
Brussels Zaventem airport has started fining planes that overfly the Brussels region if they exceed certain noise limits. The fines will be over the period of 11pm to 7am. The crucial period is 6 to 7am. It is thought that the fines could be around €5,000 - €10,000 per plan for an average plane, but with a range of fines from €1,300 - 62,000. The higher level fines are unlikely. Ryanair calculated its fines might be €6,000. Thomas Cook estimated they would be in the €1,200-2,000 range. If a flight is scheduled to arrive at 06:50 but does not reach the Brussels runway before 07:00 it would avoid the fine, unless it exceeds the daytime noise limits. However, there is - and has been for decades - a conflict of interest between the Flemish (northern) and French speaking parts of the city. The fines are for the French speaking areas, meaning planes will preferentially fly over the Flemish areas, to avoid the charges. Flemish mobility minister Ben Weyts filed an initial conflict complaint at the end of last year, which froze the introduction of the new limits for 60 days. As that term has now expired with no agreement reached, the Flemish Community filed a new complaint. Brussels said it was not ready to observe another 60-day delay and that it would administer fines, though it would not, for the time being, make the airlines pay.
Click here to view full story...
Plans for third runway at Heathrow ‘will blight 47,000 additional homes with dangerous levels of air pollution’
The Daily Mail reports that a 3rd Heathrow runway would expose 47,000 additional homes to dangerous air pollution from NO2 because more vehicles will travel to the airport. The runway would cause a rise in the number of cars, coaches and lorries - raising levels of NO2, that come especially from diesel engines. The Commons Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) says the runway would rise breaching air pollution limits, and that is a key barrier to it being built. The EAC has ‘no confidence’ the Government can meet its target to fix the problem, or that 60% of all new cars would be ultra-low emissions by 2030. Figures from the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders show 1.29 million new diesel cars were registered last year, which was 48% of all new car purchases. EAC Chair, Mary Creagh, said there was no evidence of any “step change” in the Government’s approach that the Committee had called for in their previous report. London Mayor Sadiq Khan has proposed a £3,500 diesel scrappage scheme to pay people to replace their old diesel cars, but this may not be popular. As well as over 47,000 homes likely to be exposed to worse air pollution, due to Heathrow expansion, the air near Wraysbury Reservoir (a SSSI for birds) would also be have illegal air pollution. The Supreme Court has ordered the Government to produce a new air pollution strategy by April, after ruling that its Air Quality Plan is based on ‘optimistic emissions data’.
Click here to view full story...
Council leaders attack ‘dishonest’ Heathrow promotional leaflet, circulated widely by DfT
Conservative town hall leaders have accused the Government of “misleading” up to three million people over the impact of a 3rd Heathrow runway, and a "dishonest approach." The leaders of Wandsworth, Richmond, Hillingdon and Windsor and Maidenhead council tore into the DfT over the “shamelessly one-sided” consultation leaflet sent to around 1.5 million households and businesses (an estimated 3 million people). The leaders say the leaflets fail to include any details of proposed new flight paths, or the extra numbers of flights, or the reduction in "respite" periods that would happen, due to the 3rd runway. There is also no proper information on likely increases in traffic, and therefore in air pollution.The leaflet is instead ecstatic about alleged economic benefits it might bring, and unashamedly bigs up pledges of home price compensation for compulsory purchase, future insulation schemes (over up to 20 years?), and some apprenticeships. The leaders believe the leaflet is intended to mislead, and its dishonest approach is undermining the fragile trust residents have in politics. Areas that are already badly overflown by Heathrow planes, such as Clapham, Lambeth, Pimlico, Marylebone, Westminster, Streatham, Mayfair and Kennington were not included in the consultation exercise. Lord True commented: "The Government need to stop the spin.”
Click here to view full story...
UK Government announces £3.8 m funding for a Londonderry to Stansted (BMI Regional) air route
The UK government has announced £3.8 million (2 years) for a Londonderry to London air route, as the current operator Ryanair will stop operating the route at the end of March. BMI Regional has been chosen as the preferred operator for the route between City of Derry Airport and Stansted, following a competitive tender process by Derry City & Strabane District Council. Flights begin on 2 May 2017, and the government will fund the route over the 2017/18 and 2018/19 financial years. The new service will include two return flights each day, except for Saturdays which will have one flight each way. Lord Admad believed that the 13 weekly flights will "allow business passengers to get to central London and complete a full day’s work before returning home." The UK government maintains regional airport links through the Regional Air Connectivity Fund, which "can be used to protect important regional air connections to London which may otherwise be lost." [As they are unprofitable]. Derry already has a route through the Fund, to Dublin. In December 2015 the DfT announced that 11 successful bidders had been awarded support from the Fund, for routes. The intention is that airlines, with the subsidy, can build up the routes that are not viable so they become profitable in a few years.
Click here to view full story...
Transport Committee announces start of its inquiry into (Heathrow) Airports NPS (24th March deadline for evidence)
When he was Transport Secretary, Patrick McLoughlin told the Transport Select Committee that there would be a 3 month inquiry, by a select committee, into the draft National Policy Statement for a Heathrow runway. He said in February 2015 that the inquiry would take place after the end of the NPS consultation. Now the Transport Select Committee has announced, just 20 days after the publication by the DfT of the draft NPS consultation, the start of their own inquiry into the NPS. They are only taking written evidence until the deadline of 24th March. The committee's website does not say what happens next, if or when witnesses would be called, etc. The Committee says they are interested to hear more about a variety of issues including: "How well the proposal reflects government policy on airports and aviation more generally" ... "The suitability of the Government’s evidence and rationale in support of a north-west runway at Heathrow" ... "How well the proposal takes account of other aspects of the Government's transport strategy." ... "How comprehensive the proposal is in terms of the supporting measures for affected communities" ... "How well the proposal takes account of sustainability and environmental considerations and the adequacy of relevant documentation and information published alongside the draft proposal." And so on.
Click here to view full story...
EAC: “Government must mitigate environmental impact of new Heathrow runway” – current plans do not
The Environmental Audit Committee report on plans for a Heathrow runway show huge failings by the government, on noise, CO2 and air pollution, even after several years of trying to gloss over them. The EAC report warns that proposed safeguards surrounding noise and pollution are inadequate, and just how inadequate the current NPS consultation on the 3rd runway is. The report warns that the proposed ban on night flights between 11pm and 5.30am would, in reality, result in only 4 arrivals being rescheduled each day. At present the airport is limited to about 16 night flights in a 24-hour period, with most scheduled just before 6am, which would not be affected by the new ban. The report criticises ministers for effectively giving Heathrow the green light without “concrete policy proposals” covering the environment. There is no proof that Heathrow could be expanded without an increase in the number of polluting cars being driven to the airport. The runway is likely to increase aviation CO2 by 15% above a previously agreed limit, with no plans for how other sectors of society could compensate with deeper CO2 cuts (or even that they have been advised of the problem). Noise would become worse for many areas, and the independent aviation noise watchdog proposed would be inadequate, with no powers and just an “advisory function”. And much, much more.
Click here to view full story...
New EAC report highly critical of government lack on clarity on aircraft noise targets
The EAC has now published a follow up report to their November 2015 report, after the oral evidence given by Chris Grayling on 30th November. It is highly critical of the government on its assurances on noise targets and its low level of ambition in limiting noise in future. The EAC says: "We are concerned that the Government’s National Policy Statement has provided no further clarity on how predictable respite will be achieved or on the specific timings of a night flight ban." ... "The Government must carry out further work on respite which should form part of the NPS process, alongside plans for a live timetable of respite to be published beginning when the new runway is operational. We welcome the Government’s commitment to a 6.5 hour night flight ban. ... it would appear inconsistent to reject its key recommendation on the precise timing of a night flight ban." ... and ..."The stated goal of “fewer people […] affected by noise from Heathrow by 2030 than are today” shows a lack of ambition. Without Heathrow expansion, local communities would have seen a decrease in aircraft noise as new technology and airspace management techniques were developed." ... and "We are concerned with the inconsistency of the metrics used to measure noise attitudes. The Government has recognised that the level of significant annoyance has reduced and the number effected increased, yet it bases its conclusions on the out of date 57 dB LAeq 16hr contour." And much more.
Click here to view full story...
New EAC report says government must provide clarity about its intentions on Heathrow CO2 emissions
The EAC has now published a follow up report to its November 2015 report, after the oral evidence given by Chris Grayling on 30th November. It is highly critical of the government on its assurances that the runway will meet carbon limits. The EAC says: "The Government claims that Heathrow expansion can be delivered within “the UK’s climate change obligations”. The Government has not set out what it means by “obligations”, let alone how it will meet them. It has not decided whether to accept the Committee on Climate Change’s recommendation on limiting emissions from international aviation. It has not decided on whether to follow the CCC’s advice on offsetting. The Airports Commission told us the appropriate body to make recommendations on managing aviation emissions is the CCC. It would not be a credible position for the Government to claim that it can deliver Heathrow expansion within emissions limits whilst rejecting independent advice as to what those limits should be and how they should be met." ... The EAC says though Chris Grayling said told them the Government had not decided whether it intended to work towards the planning assumption [of limiting UK aviation to 37.5MtCO2 by 2050], when asked if he "had consulted other Ministers or sectors over the higher emissions reductions that they might be required to make if the planning assumption was not met. He said he had not yet done so." And much more ....
Click here to view full story...
New EAC report says government has given no guarantees that air quality targets will be met with Heathrow 3rd runway
The EAC has now published a follow up report to their November 2015 report, after the oral evidence given by Chris Grayling on 30th November. It is highly critical of the government on its assurances that the runway will not increase air pollution. The EAC says the government's air quality analysis is over-optimistic. "The effectiveness of the Government’s new air quality plan will be integral to determining whether Heathrow expansion can be delivered within legal limits. We are concerned that the timing of the draft National Policy Statement consultation means the Government will be unable to carry out a comprehensive re-analysis of the air quality impacts, using the new air quality plan, before the [NPS] consultation process is complete." ... "The Government must publish such an assessment alongside the final NPS, it must work towards a scenario in which all road links affected by expansion have predicted concentrations below the limit value. Whilst the health impact assessment is a step in the right direction, the Government must carry out work to reduce the significant health impacts identified, before construction of the third runway begins." ...."Since the Government intends to withdraw the UK from the EU before April 2019, there is no certainty about what our legally binding air quality limits will be after 2019. We are disappointed that these limits are not clearly laid out in the Draft NPS." And there is much more ....
Click here to view full story...
RHC challenges economic need for night flights at Heathrow, when slots can be provided during the day
The Richmond Heathrow Campaign has submitted a detailed response to the night flights consultation. One particularly interesting point they make is that Heathrow does not actually need flights between 11pm and 6am or even 7am. The airport proposed adding 25,000 more flights per year, if it is given planning consent for a new runway, before the runway is built. That means there can be 25,000 more flights per year - around 68 more per day, or about 4 - 5 per hour more (half take offs and half landings). Heathrow says it is full, but would be able to fit in these extra flights, if it wants to. Therefore, if these slots are possible, some of the flights currently in the night period could be moved into the day period. However, there are concerns that the extra 25,000 flights per year would mean loss or runway alternation, that is seen as vital for those currently overflown by Heathrow approach flight paths. The RHC believes late running flights and increased numbers of flights between 6 and 7am are largely ignored by the consultation and people may wish to comment. For the sake of people's health, the noise disturbance to sleep has to be ended, with no flights before 7am. There needs to be a ban on scheduled and unscheduled night flights starting by 2020, irrespective of any decision on a 3rd runway.
Click here to view full story...
5 arrested for blocking Heathrow tunnel – traffic chaos with tunnel closed 2 hrs 30 mins
Protesters from the Rising Up group caused tailbacks on the M4 heading towards Heathrow airport, in their latest action against plans to build a third runway. A video posted by the group shortly before 8.30am shows a car blocking the Heathrow Tunnel that accesses Terminals 2 and 3. They draped a sign reading ‘No new runways’ over the car, and there was an activist lying next to the vehicle, locked to it, on the road. The Met police said officers attended the scene at 8.25am and arrested two people for obstructing a highway. The police said five people were arrested. Three protesters were locked to one of the vehicles and two were drivers of two cars. The tunnel was closed for over two hours, and the M4 spur road was also temporarily closed, while police worked with Heathrow Airport staff to remove the people locked to the third car. A contra-flow was put in place in the outbound tunnel to facilitate the movement of traffic around the blocked tunnel. There were delays in surrounding roads. Transport for London said just after 11am the tunnel re-opened. The protest follows a flashmob the group held at Heathrow on the weekend. The DfT opened its 4 month consultation on the 3rd runway on 2nd February. The degree of bias, and absence of balance or information on negative impacts of the expansion, in the consultation, has angered many people.
Click here to view full story...
With Dublin airport (state-owned) 2nd runway work to start, a 3rd terminal (privately owned) to be considered
A new review of airport capacity will look at the potential of establishing a third, privately-operated, terminal at Dublin Airport, according to the Minister for Transport. A forthcoming review, in the next few weeks, will examine the longer-term capacity needs of Ireland's 3 State airports will include an option for a 3rd terminal. However, the chief executive of DAA, the State-owned company that owns Dublin and Cork airports, said the idea of an independent terminal was theoretical, costly and inflexible. It had been tried in only two major airports in Europe and North America, and had failed and been reversed at both. The DAA said the delivery of the new 2nd parallel runway and other infrastructure to support growth at Dublin airport should be a priority as a third terminal was a long way down the line. The industry is hoping the number of passengers would double in the next 20 years, and this could be helped by Brexit. However, Brexit could cause problems with the liberalisation of the air transport market - so Ireland wants the market to remain fully liberalised and deregulated. Opponents of the runway (and terminal) say there is no consideration of carbon emissions, and much of the public see the airport's expansion as a "no brainer."
Click here to view full story...
Air pollution from PM2.5 particulates implicated in increasing risk of premature births
Reducing air pollution from the tiny particles, PM2.5 may help to prevent 2.7 million premature births per year worldwide, according to a study published in Environment International. These particles come from sources such as diesel powered vehicles, fires and other sources. Worldwide about 10% of births are classed as preterm, and for these babies there can be significant short and long-term health implications - depending on how early the baby was born. Problems associated with prematurity are the top cause of death among children under 5 years old, and has also been associated with learning and developmental disabilities as well as an increased risk of psychiatric disorders. The number of premature births caused by this air pollution in the UK per year might be as much as 4,500. The worst problems are in south and south east Asia, including India and China. The study considered that about 18% of all pre-term births were associated with the particulate pollution in 2010. Other factors linked to pre-term birth are maternal age (young and old), multiple pregnancy (twins etc.), social and personal/lifestyle factors such as poverty, maternal education, prenatal care, physical activity, diet, and alcohol and drug consumption.
Click here to view full story...
Beaconsfield MP Dominic Grieve says constituents should respond to NPS consultation, as parts of borough negatively impacted
Beaconsfield MP Dominic Grieve has written in the local Bucks paper to advise his constituents of respond to the DfT consultation on the Heathrow NPS. He says that because of the proximity of the airport, communities in the constituency will be directly affected by the proposals. He toes the government line about the runway being [allegedly] good for the UK economy and the Buckinghamshire economy, with more local jobs. But communities like the Richings Park area around Iver will face direct, adverse environmental impact from noise. Burnham has also been pinpointed as an area likely to have increased aircraft noise. He also mentions concerns about air pollution because limits "have been exceeded at the current levels of activity, prior to the expansion which is proposed." There is a DfT public consultation event on Saturday, March 11th in Gerrards Cross. Dominic Grieve says residents will be able to go through the consultation documents (not that easy a job) and make their own minds up. Deadline for responses is 25th May 2017. In October 2016 he said there were problems with vehicle movements, and air pollution, and quality of life of residents is being adversely affected in an unacceptable fashion. He said "the government and developers must demonstrate that they can address these issues fully."
Click here to view full story...
Opponents in Austria delighted by court decision to ban Vienna 3rd runway due to CO2, but airport may appeal
Austria's Federal Administrative Court has blocked Vienna airport's plans for a 3rd runway because of the extra greenhouse gas emissions it would have caused, and unacceptable loss of agricultural land. The airport and its allies are furious and have sworn to break this ruling. Legally they should not be able to because ordinary appeal was excluded. They must overcome the very high hurdles of an extraordinary appeal, but opponents fear they will try to get this. The appeal would have to make transparent what is at stake: is Austria going to take climate change seriously or not? In the UK we have the same problem, but our courts are clearly not mandated in the same way in relation to climate change (air quality is separate). Calculations show the 3rd runway, with its traffic projections, would have been by far the most polluting project in terms of GHG-emissions, and would have destroyed several hundred hectares of agricultural land - needed to grow food. Some of the Austrian media are taking the line that such a decision is not to be made by the court but by politicians, and that the Austrian economy should be more important than the climate. So the airport and Vienna city (20% shareholder of the Vienna airport stock corporation) want to appeal. Opponents are worried.
Click here to view full story...
Richmond criticises the 1.5 million DfT leaflets promoting 3rd runway as inadequate on noise problems
Lord True, the leader of Richmond Council, has complained (as have thousands of other people) that the information being put out in the DfT consultation on the Heathrow NPS is inadequate. He said: "The leaflet that was sent out last week it propaganda in its finest. And, the more we read into the full consultation material the more concerned we are at the Government’s selective presentation of the third runway’s impacts. They should be proactively informing flight path communities about major changes like the loss of daytime respite periods but that’s not been their approach. In the next few weeks there will be a number of resident consultation events, coordinated by the Department of Transport. I urge all concerned people to go and have their say and let the government know if they are not giving the information we need.” The DfT is not making it clear that areas like Richmond would be overflown for around 75% of the day, rather than around 50% of the time now. The leaflet makes no mention of noise, other than a carefully worded offer of 6.5 hours with no SCHEDULED flights at night. It is not made easy for members of the public to find data on noise changes, with a 3rd runway. There will be no details of flight paths for several years - so the whole NPS consultation is being done, deliberately by the DfT, in the absence of noise information needed by residents.
Click here to view full story...
Ice block (presumably off plane approaching Heathrow) damages roof just west of Windsor
There have been a number of incidents, at many airports, of lumps of ice falling off planes overhead, coming in to land. Ice can form naturally on aircraft flying at high altitudes, and this can break away and fall off when the plane comes down through warmer air. There is another recent incident of this, to someone under the approach path into Heathrow, just west of Windsor. On 10th February (some time between 7 am and 8.30am) some ice crashed through the roof of a house in Oakley Green Road near Windsor. The owners of the house were not hurt, though there is substantial damage to the roof. This is another incident where it is fortunate the ice fell onto a roof, and not onto people. Such a large object falling onto someone would kill or seriously injure them. Builders secured the property before the weekend and repairs were set to begin the next week. The CAA says this sort of incident is "‘relatively rare" and the CAA website says: “As the safety regulator for UK civil aviation, the CAA requires UK aircraft operators to minimise the risk of ice falls by performing regular maintenance to prevent leaks and take prompt corrective action if a defect is found. The CAA is unable to investigate the potential origin of an ice fall, but does record reports of this nature."
Click here to view full story...
Critique of 11 claims by DfT, in its 1.5 million pro-Heathrow runway leaflets, for NPS consultation
The DfT has sent out 1.5 million leaflets to households in areas not too far from Heathrow. The leaflets make no attempt whatsoever of balance, and are merely advertising the runway plans and promoting them. Many of the claims are misleading, or so abbreviated as to be unclear. Below there is a critique of the claims, point by point, and links to evidence backing up the criticisms. If anyone has received a leaflet, and wonders about the facts, this webpage may give some useful information. Just a few examples of the dubious statements in the leaflet: the figure of £61 billion economic benefit is given, leaving out the proviso that this is over 60 years. There is much made of the generosity of the compensation to be given for compulsory purchase, but in reality anything much below 125% would be derisory, and way below world standards. The claim about six and a half hours of no scheduled night flights omits to mention how many flights, scheduled before 11pm, often take off almost to midnight. And though there may be 6 more domestic links from Heathrow, these are likely to be unprofitable and may not last for long. The loss of long haul routes from other UK airports, due to a larger Heathrow, is conveniently ignored.
Click here to view full story...
DfT hold 20 consultation events in areas near Heathrow, plus 13 around the UK promoting Heathrow 3rd runway
The DfT is holding a large number of consultation events in the coming two months, both in areas affected by Heathrow, and after that, across the UK. The first event locally was on 13th February and the final one is 20th April in London. The DfT backs the runway, and so the information given out is very much in support of the runway. The DfT has sent out 1.5 million leaflets about the consultations, with simplified text backing the runway (and ignoring any negative impacts) - which look like Heathrow's own PR about their expansion plans. The events locally are from 11am to 8pm on weekdays (10 - 5pm on Saturdays). People have to register to attend events outside London. Due to the very short notice between the announcement of the NPS consultation (2nd February) and the first event on 13th February, it is difficult for local campaigners against the runway to attend all of them. The DfT has paid staff to man them all. People are encouraged to attend the events, and ask the DfT staff questions. Some suggested questions are shown below. People are also advised not to make their responses in the consultation events, but do them in a considered manner, from home, when they have had time to assess all the information, both for and against the 3rd runway.
Click here to view full story...
Rise in complaints in St Albans district about Luton plane noise – residents are angry
Three campaign groups, representing St Albans, Harpenden and wider-Hertfordshire have banded together to call upon local politicians to do more on the problem of increasing aircraft noise, than merely call for a review or consultation on the problem. Campaigners from the alliance of HarpendenSky, Save our Skies (SoS) and Herts-based LADACAN say St Albans is at risk of ‘turning into Heathrow’ unless the rise in noise pollution is stopped. Luton had more passengers than ever in 2016, at about 14.5 million. But there was also a 150% increase in complaints about noise. Residents in Hertfordshire want Bedfordshire, which owns the airport, to suffer more of its noise. Luton airport is owned by Luton council, and people in Hertfordshire say as Bedfordshire gets the profit, they should take more of the pain. Planes are getting bigger, heavier and noisier, and are flying even earlier in the morning and later at night. There is more noise affecting Flamstead, Redbourn, Harpenden, St Albans, and on to Sandridge and Stevenage. People overflown by increasingly narrow flight paths want politicians to do something and challenge the airport. However, politicians are always nervous of saying anything that might do perceived damage to economic growth, such as demand a ban on night flights.
Click here to view full story...
Tax experts criticise lack of detail in Scottish Government’s plan for new Air Departure Tax (ADT)
The Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) is calling for independent analysis into the impact of cutting and axing Air Passenger Duty (APD) in Scotland. The CIOT says there is not enough detail about plans to replace APD with Air Departure Tax (ADT) from April 2018 and says a special report could “strengthen” the rationale behind the change. APD earned Scotland £275 million in 2015-16 and the CIOT, a trade body representing tax professionals, says the Scottish Government’s Air Departure Tax Bill is short on information about proposed rates, bands and exemptions for the replacement. There are also no fiscal forecasts on how halving duty from next April or eventual abolition will be achieved. First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has said the change will benefit families and other holidaymakers who “may well welcome a reduction in the cost” of going abroad. They may therefore go abroad more often, spending money they would otherwise have spent in Scotland. Moira Kelly of CIOT said: “There is a case to be made for using this legislation to outline who will pay what, when they will pay it and who will be exempt .... In the absence of information such as this, it is very difficult to say with any degree of certainty what benefits, if any, this change will make.”
Click here to view full story...
Flight paths of Heathrow 3rd runway travel over, and parallel to, M4. Safety and distraction issue?
The planned north-west runway at Heathrow, that the UK government is very keen to push through, runs close to the M4 motorway. This is a very busy stretch of road, with much of the traffic associated with Heathrow, in one way or another. The arrival flight path from the east, onto the 3rd runway, would run over parts of it, and very close to other parts, for some distance close to the airport. This is where the planes are at their lowest and most noisy. Currently along the boundary roads of the airport there are barriers, to prevent drivers seeing the planes - at ground level - and being distracted. However, with planes flying low overhead or parallel to the road for some distance, no barriers would be able to obscure the view.possible. It is not clear whether any consideration has been given by the DfT to the problem of driver distraction (or even driver nervousness) to have planes quite so low, flying parallel and in view. There are around 130,000 vehicles per day on that stretch of the M4 - meaning over 6,000 per hour - it is a very busy section of road, and due to become yet busier with a new runway. No other major airport has busy motorway with approximately the same alignment as the flight path - there is something comparable for one Tokyo runway. Will the government take into account the safety problems of this motorway / flight path clash?
Click here to view full story...
Particulate emissions from electric cars as bad as conventional – due to more tyre and brake wear
While electric vehicles are a welcome technology, enabling a cut in local air pollution from diesel and petrol cars and vans, (as long as the electricity they use has been sustainably produced) they are not wholly a "silver bullet" solution. A new study shows that much of the particulate air pollution in cities comes from from vehicle tyres and brakes, and road surface wear and resuspension of road dust. There is a positive relationship between vehicle weight and these non-exhaust emissions - the heavier the vehicle, the more wear on tyres and brakes. As electric vehicles tend to be around a quarter heavier, for the equivalent size, than their conventional equivalent internal combustion engine counterparts they produce more of this pollution. Therefore electric vehicle PM emissions - overall - are comparable to those of conventional vehicles. The study found that these non-exhaust sources account for around 90% of PM10 and 85% of PM2.5 from traffic. They conclude: "Future policy should consequently focus on setting standards for non-exhaust emissions and encouraging weight reduction of all vehicles to significantly reduce PM emissions from traffic." Heathrow is pinning its hopes for cutting air pollution on more use of electric vehicles.
Click here to view full story...
“Virtual ecotourism” means people do not have to fly to see endangered wildlife
Many of us would love to go to exotic destinations and see wildlife. It will never be quite as good a glimpse as the remarkable programmes on wildlife on TV, where film makers can take months to get the shots. Ecotourism is beneficial to some areas, from money it brings in to the local economy, and demonstrating to local people that there is more commercial value in keeping wildlife alive than in killing it. However, it has its downsides, and even when ecotourism done sensitively it has drawbacks. These include the high carbon footprint, from flights; wildlife disturbance, potential for disease introduction, and development of roads and infrastructure which have a detrimental effect on wildlife. Also many people are unable to afford the high price of ecotourism, or are too old, young, or otherwise unable, or unwilling, to travel. Virtual Ecotourism (vEcotourism) can contribute to overcoming these problems by providing a way to experience a conservation site virtually, using many on-line technologies combined with a live, on-location tour guide. The Virtual Ecotourism website offers a number of "tours" which are 360 degree panoramas, from where the actual tourists go, showing what they see. This is a positive development meaning people do not have to fly across the world, just to see rare populations of animals.
Click here to view full story...
Court in Austria blocks 3rd runway at Vienna airport, as climate harm outweighs a few more jobs
A court in Austria has ruled that Vienna Schwechat Airport cannot be expanded with a 3rd runway, on climate change grounds. It said the increased greenhouse gas emissions for Austria would cause harm and climate protection is more important than creating other jobs. The court said the ability of the airport to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases by its own measures were not sufficient, and emissions would rise too much. It also said it was important to conserve valuable arable land for future generations to provide food supplies. The airport will appeal. It is using the same false arguments that the DfT and Heathrow are using here - that building a 3rd runway would (allegedly) reduce the amount of carbon emissions and noise because they claim (against common logic) that "fuel consumption and the noise are reduced, because the waiting times of the aircraft would be avoided at peak times." The airport hopes the runway would bring more tourists into Austria to spend their money, and would be needed by 2025. The airport had 22.8 million passengers in 2015. It is a mystery how such a low number of passengers could require 3 runways, when there is barely enough to fill one, let alone two, runway.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow airport workers might get financial payout to encourage those with diesel cars to scrap them, to cut NO2
It is rumoured that workers at Heathrow may be offered around £2,000 each, to replace their diesel cars with less polluting electric or petrol models, to try to overcome the problem of NO2 air pollution. Staff at Heathrow are estimated to drive around 27,000 diesel vehicles. Detailed proposals are still being worked up, with talks due to take place with airlines, retailers, cargo operators and other airport employers. Discussions are understood to have taken place about the possibility of a pilot diesel scrappage scheme, by the DfT, in various areas of the UK with the worst pollution (perhaps Heathrow is one) before a nationwide rollout. An earlier Government scrappage scheme to get older, more polluting vehicles off the roads involved motorists being offered £2,000. Half of this came from the government, and half from the motor industry which benefited from more new car sales. Heathrow wants the M4 out to the M25 to be included in the Low Emission Zone to clamp down on polluting lorries and vans. It hopes that by cutting this pollution (much of which is from vehicle trips associated with Heathrow) it can be allowed a 3rd runway, keeping air pollution just within legal levels. Meanwhile, the EC is expected to soon take the next step in legal action against Britain for failing to cut illegal NO2 levels.
Click here to view full story...
Pope: CO₂ compensation for air travel is hypocrisy
Pope Francis has denounced the CO₂ compensation for air travel as hypocritical. He said: "The planes pollute the atmosphere, but with a fraction of the sum of the ticket price trees are planted to compensate for the damage inflicted." If this logic were extended, one day it would come to a point where armaments companies set up hospitals for those children who fell victim to their bombs. "This is hypocrisy." He said this was one of the greatest ethical problems of today's capitalism, that industries were producing waste and then trying to conceal it or treat it to make it invisible. He demanded an economic system that would not only reduce the number of victims, but also require no sacrifices or offsets at all. He was speaking to about 1000 entrepreneurs from around the world who are committed to the social economy. With offset schemes for air travel, passengers can transfer money to so-called compensation agencies. The amount of the sum is generally determined by the distance, consumption and seating class. The agencies then invest the money in climate protection projects in developing countries. Critics see in this practice a modern form of indulgences, which leads to increased flights.
Click here to view full story...
GACC welcomes the proposal in the DfT airspace consultation to give more consideration to problems of narrow routes
GACC has welcomed the Government decision to allow flight paths to be dispersed instead of concentrated on a single track. GACC said the policy of concentrated flight paths, which was introduced in 2012 based on the use of aircraft “Satnavs”, has caused great distress and misery to those people unfortunate to be underneath. For the past four years GACC, along with many local protest groups, has urged the Government to permit fair dispersal. The new policy is included in a new consultation on UK Airspace Policy, which states: “We propose that decisions on how aircraft noise is best distributed should be informed by local circumstances and consideration of different options. Consideration should include the pros and cons of concentrating traffic on single routes, which normally reduce the number of people overflown, versus the use of multiple routes which can provide greater relief or respite from noise.” Dispersal – spreading aircraft across the sky – would be best according to GACC, and respite – one route on Mondays and a different route on Tuesdays, for example - would be second best. Overall, however, GACC finds the consultation paper disappointing. There is a forecast for a 50% increase in the number of aircraft in the sky but no target for a reduction in noise and no action to reduce noise.
Click here to view full story...
AEF comments on DfT airspace “modernisation” consultation: it provides little future noise reduction
The DfT has a consultation on managment and modernisation of UK airspace. It ends on 25th May. The Aviation Environment Federation (AEF) has now had the chance to read it in detail. AEF comments that though proposed new powers - in a very limited way - for the Secretary of State to "call in" plans for some planned flight are welcome, there is little ele to give real benefits to people overflown. On proposals for more consultation and engagement etc, the AEF says: "Improvements to the process in terms of transparency and communication won’t tackle the underlying need to reduce noise." They comment: "...the introduction of quieter aircraft and a reduction in stacking ... will only have a marginal impact given the likely increase in the number of aircraft." And the SoNA study (2014) now published shows people are more annoyed by aircraft noise than they were in the past, despite technological improvements. That means noise must be taken seriously. On the plans to set up an Independent Commission on Civil Aviation Noise (ICCAN) AEF says while this will provide advice, verify noise data etc, with "no requirement to deliver a noise reduction strategy, and without enforcement powers, or the teeth to make binding recommendations, the Commission’s effectiveness may be limited." Anyone affected by aircraft noise should read the whole AEF comment.
Click here to view full story...
CAA publishes SoNA study, showing high levels of annoyance from aircraft noise well below 57dB
On 2nd February the CAA published a report on a survey about attitudes to aircraft noise, done in 2014. It is called SoNA (Survey of Noise Attitudes). This follows the ANASE study done several years earlier, that was shelved by government, as its methodology was questioned, and it showed high levels of annoyance in response to plane noise. The SoNA study findings are that some adverse effects of plane noise annoyance can be seen to occur down to 51dB LAeq 16hr. The conventional level of averaged noise considered a problem is 57 dB LAeq, and noise is measured on a logarithmic scale. The SoNA report also found sensitivity to aircraft noise has increased, with the same percentage of people being highly annoyed at 54dB LAeq 16hr in SoNA as there was at 57dB LAeq 16hr in the ANIS study that was done in 1985. This gives further evidence to the demand that the government no longer uses the 57dB LAeq metric as its main noise measure. The debate continues about the merits of averaged noise over 16 hours in summer, with metrics measuring the number of plane noise events in a given time. The study says "there is insufficient evidence to link chronic health outcomes with event-based noise metrics, and SoNA 2014 found these performed less well than LAeq 16hr as a predictor of annoyance." But the findings may show "it may be appropriate to use N65 as supplementary measure for daytime noise..."
Click here to view full story...
Are GPS jamming incidents a growing problem for aviation?
In recent years, the number of reports filed by pilots to NASA’s aviation safety reporting system regarding incidents of GPS signal loss or disruption for private and commercial aircraft have increased. It is not yet clear how big a problem this is, or might be. Over the last decade, aircraft have been increasingly using Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) technology, as more operators use PBN (Performance Based Navigation). The problem is if the signal used by GPS satellites gets jammed either deliberately by a military exercise or maliciously by a person with ill-intent or even inadvertently by something like a lorry driver trying to scramble the signals of his employer’s GPS-based vehicle-tracking technology. There have been a number of incidents, including commercial airliners, and these involve either a total loss of signal or — more alarmingly — misreporting the aircraft’s position, for no apparent reason. Small jammers can easily be bought online. In the UK it is illegal to use one, but legal to buy one. Much of the jamming is harmless, but with a lot accidental low-level jamming, it "could interfere with GPS systems.” In the US, the FAA is very aware of the vulnerabilities of GPS, and "actions are being taken to address them proactively."
Click here to view full story...
Government allows ending of Cranford Agreement, so Heathrow planes can take off to the east from north runway
On 2nd February, later in the day after the announcements on the NPS and the airspace consultation, the DfT added news that the government has agreed to end the Cranford Agreement. This would have been a major announcement in itself, but craftily buried with the other news. The Cranford Agreement was an undertaking, set up about 60 years ago, that planes taking off towards the east would only use the southern runway, not the northern runway. This protects people in Cranford from appalling noise. The ending of the agreement means less noise from arrivals (when the airport is on easterlies - about 30% of the year) from the west - so places like Windsor, Datchet, Colnbrook and Poyle - under the northern runway approach path - could have half as many arrivals per day (around 330 rather than 630). But areas like Old Windsor, Wraysbury and Stanwell Moor could see the number of arrivals on easterlies from 26 to 328 a day (on the southern runway). For take offs, areas south west of the southern runway will see fewer planes, but areas north east of the northern runway will have more planes. It is likely some people in the very noisiest areas might be able to get some insulation from Heathrow, but not a lot. There are also implications for the distribution of air pollution from the planes. A condition of the planning permission gives Heathrow three years to enact the new infrastructure to implement the changes.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow villages set for destruction get no consultation event from DfT
Residents, community representatives and local MP John McDonnell are outraged that the public consultation on the DfT's draft National Policy Statement on expanding Heathrow does not have a public exhibition event in any of the Heathrow Villages. The villages face the prospect of being demolished to make way for the runway. Though 20 local events are planned by the DfT, in areas not far from Heathrow and affected by it, the nearest one to the Heathrow villages is in West Drayton, not easy to reach by public transport from many of the villages. Previous public consultations on Heathrow expansion have always included exhibition events for those who would lose their homes. Local MP John McDonnell commented: “Quite frankly the Government are having a laugh by not holding a consultation event in the Heathrow villages. My constituents face losing their homes, schools, community centre and village life if this runway goes ahead." ...“I will be organising a further series of public meetings across the constituency over the coming weeks to ensure that local people and community organisations are fully informed and are able to fully participate in the Governments consultation process. I am confident that yet again we will defeat these disastrous proposals.”
Click here to view full story...
Irish Finance Minister raises prospect of reintroducing air travel tax, as industry is under-taxed
Minister for Finance Michael Noonan has said the air travel industry may be considered to be under-taxed and the ability to apply the tax should remain in order to raise revenue. He has said the some form of air travel tax should be reintroduced, as air travel pays no VAT and no fuel duty. There is currently in Ireland a report by the National Civil Aviation Development Forum, that is recommending that Air Passenger Duty (APD) is formally abolished. APD was reduced in Ireland from €3 per passenger to zero in 2014. It had been €2 for short haul trips and €10 for long haul trips until 2010, and then a flat rate €3 for all trips from 2010 to 2014. Mr Noonan strongly rejected the proposal to remove APD, insisting the levy - at just €3 has no impact on the aviation industry, or passenger demand. He said the tax was a “useful tool for raising revenue and paying for externalities associated with air tax such as emissions, noise pollution, etc”. APD was only cut due to very heavy lobbying by the aviation industry. There is now aviation development forum in Ireland, set up since the Brexit vote. It comprises senior representatives in Irish aviation, is chaired by the Department of Transport, and aims to help the aviation industry to grow.
Click here to view full story...
European aviation CO2: there should be no free ride for the aviation sector – Peter Liese
Peter Liese, who has been the rapporteur on aviation carbon legislation in the European Commission, has commented that the aviation sector should be doing more to cut carbon. He said the proposal by the European Commission to at least keep intra-European flights in the ETS is a basis for negotiations but the sector should contribute as much to emission reductions as other industries do. He said the Parliament will continue to exert pressure for ambitious climate protection measures in intercontinental flights. He welcomed the proposal to have a reducing cap on the carbon of intra-European flights, as this imposed the same linear reduction factor to aviation as for other industries. "The previous treatment was unfair to other sectors, like the steel industry, where many people are worried about their jobs. How can you tell a steelworker that his company has to meet high climate protection requirements, while other economic sectors do practically nothing?” However, the deal planned by ICAO “is by no means ambitious.” He proposes that the EU "should continue to exempt intercontinental flights until 2021, but then reinstate them if the ICAO rules are not clear. We should also include flights to countries which, like Russia, refuse to join the ICAO agreement.” Trump and Putin should not dictate what we do in Europe.
Click here to view full story...
EU to continue with only intra-EU flights in the ETS, and all long haul excluded – at least for several years
The European Commission has published its proposal for aviation in the EU ETS, covering both the remainder of the 3rd trading period and the 4th trading period (that was left out of last year's proposal). This says that flights to and from Europe will remain excluded from ETS, this time indefinitely. But flights within Europe remain in the ETS, and from 2021 onwards they'll be subject to a declining cap (until now this cap was static). That is welcome, as it is the means by which emissions are reduced. However, this hugely diminished version of aviation inclusion in the ETS has meant, since 2013, excluding flights to and from Europe, which represent about 75% of the sector’s CO2. The Commission will review things in a few years to see how ICAO's global market based measure [offsetting] is getting on. The review might even decide to apply ETS to all flights, or it could abolish aviation ETS entirely. Commenting on the EC proposal, Bill Hemmings from Transport & Environment (T&E) said: “The Commission has chosen to again suspend the only effective measure to regulate aviation emissions, all for a voluntary deal which is years from coming into operation and which may never actually reduce the climate impact of flying. By letting aviation off the hook again, other sectors will now have to do more on cutting their climate emissions even while air travel demand soars.”
Click here to view full story...
How will people who would ultimately be – newly – intensely overflown by new Heathrow flight paths know they need to make their voice heard?
There is a considerable problem with the DfT consultations on the National Policy Statement on Heathrow, and their Airspace modernisation consultation. If there is a 3rd Heathrow runway, tens or hundreds of thousands of people - who are not currently overflown - would be. They would also be likely to be overflown intensively - as the intention of the airspace management industry is to use narrow routes, and have planes directed down these accurately. That means the same people would get plane after plane overhead, often most of the day, perhaps on most days or on many days per year. However, many of these people have no idea yet that this threat may await them. They will neither be aware there is a consultation to which they should respond, nor of the severity of the noise burden to which they may be subjected. No flight path details are yet known, and probably will not be know for another couple of years. There is a considerable risk (as at Frankfurt with their 4th runway) that people could find themselves, once a runway opens, with a level of noise they had been warned of, and for which they were not prepared. The DfT is sending out 1.5 million leaflets for its NPS consultation. But how will the relevant households know that this might be a matter of real significance for them in the future? Unless people are fully informed, with proper information, the consultation is not adequate.
Click here to view full story...
Wandsworth Council raises concerns about absence of flight path details for Heathrow runway
The DfT published its draft National Policy Statement (NPS) on a Heathrow 3rd runway on 2nd February. This was announced alongside a consultation on "modernising" airspace, to use it more intensively, so more flights can be accommodated. There is no detail in the NPS of flight paths for an expanded Heathrow, and it was confirmed at the Heathrow Community Noise Forum that there would be no details of flight paths until the end of the airport's Development Consent Order process - several years away. For tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people living within perhaps 30 miles of Heathrow, the flight path details are vital - otherwise they have no idea how they will be affected by noise. Wandsworth councillors have expressed concern about the secrecy. Ravi Govindia, leader of Wandsworth Council, said: "What millions of Londoners want to know above anything else is whether the new flight paths will go over their homes, schools or communities. There is no justification for keeping this vital information a secret. The Government seems to be consulting on the benefits of expanding this airport but not the drawbacks. This renders the whole exercise meaningless. This is more like marketing than consultation and the transport secretary is damaging already fragile trust in politics."
Click here to view full story...
Government starts consultation on UK Airspace Policy, to manage increasing use of airspace
Alongside the draft NPS, the Government is publishing separate proposals to "modernise" the way UK airspace is managed. This consultation; “UK Airspace Policy: A framework for balanced decisions on the design and use of airspace” is (quote): ..."seeking views on how aircraft noise is managed effectively while updating airspace policies. Proposals will look at how the number of aircraft entering and leaving our airspace can be managed effectively – using the latest technology to make airspace more efficient, reducing the need for stacking and making journeys faster and more environmentally friendly." They will also include draft guidance on how noise impacts should be assessed and used to inform decisions on airspace. The consultation also includes proposals on the role of an Independent Commission on Civil Aviation Noise, which we will establish. The Commission would build relationships between industry and communities and ensure an even fairer process for making changes to the use of airspace and flight paths." Cynics might enjoy the craft in the wording: "... more environmentally friendly" and "even fairer". If only. The government is aware that the current policy of trying to "minimise the number significantly affected by aircraft noise" does not work, with P-RAV technology, and highly concentrated narrow routes. That has not proved to be"fair" at all.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow NPS – summary of the main (probably) insuperable obstacles the runway faces
The government hopes to get a 3rd Heathrow runway approved, but it realises there are a large number of massive obstacles. The purpose of the NPS (National Policy Statement) consultation is to attempt to persuade the country, and particularly the MPs who must ultimately vote on it, that these obstacles can be successfully overcome. At present, there are no apparent solutions to many of the problems. Below are some very brief outlines of what some of the insuperable hurdles are - and why the government is a very long way from resolving the difficulties. The issues listed here are the three main environmental issues - noise, carbon emissions, and air pollution. The economics is complicated, but there is a note on that too. When Chris Grayling makes bland PR statements about the runway, or the papers regurgitate undigested blurb from the DfT, it may be useful to remember how very thin some of these statement are, and how far the government would have to go, in order to find even partial solutions.
Click here to view full story...
Government publishes draft Airports National Policy Statement consultation, to pave the way for Heathrow runway
The government has announced the start of the DfT's consultation on the draft “Airports National Policy Statement: new runway capacity and infrastructure at airports in the South East of England”. It is the necessary first stage in the process of getting consent for a Heathrow 3rd runway. The consultation will last for 16 weeks, and end on 25th May. The text associated with the draft NPS says little new, that we had not heard before. It is rich in statements like: "..proposals show this Government is not only making the big decisions but getting on with delivering them" and "...will ensure Britain seizes the opportunity to forge a new role in the world after Brexit ...." No real practical, enforceable constraints appear to be placed upon Heathrow, other than it will have to put in place "measures to mitigate the impacts of noise including legally binding noise targets, periods of predictable respite and a ban of six and a half hours on scheduled [note, scheduled only] night flights" ... and "implementing measures to deliver on its commitments of no increase in airport related road traffic..." And that: "Planning consent will only be granted if the new runway can be delivered within existing air quality limits and climate change obligations." The only noise body offered is the "Independent Commission on Civil Aviation Noise" - ie. a Commission, with no powers, not an Authority with powers.
Click here to view full story...
GACC response to night flights consultation: “Ban all night flights by 2030, and cut the noise at night”
GACC (Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign) has produced its response to the DfT's night flights consultation. The response has been put together after discussion with GACC's committee members, so that others who want to submit a reply can make use of it, if they wish. Some of the points are copied below, but there is more detail with references in the full response which anyone interested is advised to read. Some of the points made by GACC are that the claims of the economic benefits of night flights at Gatwick are flimsy and not substantiated; there should be a thorough analysis within the next 2 years of the balance between the economic benefits and the health impacts/widespread disturbance of night flights, leading to a reduction in both the number of flights and noise quotas; there should not be an increase in the number of night flights in winter; GACC supports the reduction in noise quotas to match (and go below) existing usage, encouraging purchase by airlines of less noisy planes; many GACC members feel strongly that there should be a total ban on all night flights; GACC agrees with Stop Stansted Expansion that government should announce that night flights will be phased out by 2030; GACC strongly supports the suggestion that the noise quotas may be reduced by 5% a year so as to be 20% lower by 2022.
Click here to view full story...
Consultation by Transport Committee on “modernisation” of airspace, especially to add a new runway
Government consultations on the Heathrow National Policy Statement and airspace change start on 2nd February. In addition there is an inquiry by the Commons Transport Committee, on management and "modernisation" of airspace. What modernisation means is more narrow flight paths, intensively used, in order to free up airspace so more planes can be accommodated. The south east of England is already (perhaps equal to the area round New York) the most intensely used area of airspace in the world. To fit in another fully used Heathrow runway, space must be found to deal with the extra planes. It is considered as given that expanding air travel is good, and whatever is needed to do this must happen. The effect for those on the ground is likely to mean more narrow flight paths, with high levels of traffic down each. That means potentially very high noise levels for those affected, often for most of each day, on most days. The Committee say without "modernisation" the economy suffers, due to flight delays and business is lost. This ignores the fact that about 70% of Heathrow is leisure passengers. The excuse is also made that fuel is saved by aircraft, in taking the shortest route - which is good, but this cost saving to the airline should be balanced by the social cost of the added plane noise. The Transport Committee consultation ends on 31st March.
Click here to view full story...
Some local air pollution so bad that new homes may have to be airtight, to keep dirty air out
There is speculation that a new government white paper on housing, due to be published soon, is considering making it compulsory for new homes in areas of poor air quality to be fitted with whole-house ventilation systems. That would mean airtight doors and sealed windows to protect families from smog and pollution in the air outside. (The government refuted the claim adding that it could not disclose what was in the White Paper.) Local authorities would be required to make airtight homes a condition when granting planning permission to a development in an air quality management area. There are about 700 such zones - including near Heathrow. Local authorities already have powers to order a developer to incorporate a whole-house ventilation system in a housing development in such an area but this is not compulsory at present. Simon Birkett, of Clean Air in London, said: "...we either build houses in polluted areas and dump people in them and wait 15 or so years, or we put in measures to help. That’s the choice.” Much air pollution actually comes from within the home, from activities such as burning candles, use of aerosols and cleaning products. The impact on mental well-being of living in a sealed home, unable to open windows, is not known.
Click here to view full story...
About 1,200 people pack Frankfurt airport Terminal 1 for the 200th Monday protest against noise
At least 1,200 noise protesters gathered at Terminal 1 of Frankfurt airport on 30th January for the 200th of their Monday protests. These have been going on, most Monday evenings, since the 4th runway opened in October 2011. Thousands of people living around the airport find the noise burden to which they are subjected intolerable. One problem was that there was no proper information about flight paths before the runway opened, and the imposition of the noise took many by surprise. On most Mondays at least 300 people attend. Some Mondays there are more. Their demands are that there must be a night flight ban between 10pm and 6am. The noise ceiling should not only be on the paper, but a noticeable reduction in noise. They would like to see the runway closed, but that is not likely to happen. Campaigners say the airport had been built for 40 years, but none of the growth forecasts so far had been fulfilled, and it is now taking low-cost carriers to fill the capacity. They say all trips of under 1,000 kilometres should be made by train, not by air. They say they want an aviation industry that is environmentally responsible, and without subsidies. One speaker at the 200th rally described the current noise as a "terror against the people of the region". Resistance will continue.
Click here to view full story...
Noise groups consider night flights consultation inadequate, as it fails to balance society costs against economic benefits
Campaigners against unacceptable levels of aircraft noise believe the current night flights consultation is unacceptable, because it prioritises the economic benefits of night flights over the costs to society of noise at night. The groups say people responding to the consultation should point out that the government’s role as regulator is to assess carefully the benefits and costs of night flights and strike an appropriate balance. Setting an objective of “maintaining the existing benefits of night flights” precludes such an assessment: the Government cannot start its options appraisal process by assuming what the answer should be, they say. The groups acknowledge that some of the Government’s proposals are helpful, such as the inclusion of currently exempt aircraft in the limits, and the potential reduction in the total amount of noise that can be generated at night. They believe the Government should implement its proposals for a two-year period only, and commit to carrying out a full assessment of the costs and benefits of night flights in that period. In the longer term the groups believe night flights should be eliminated entirely, as they may be at Heathrow, recognising the increasing evidence that they can have serious health consequences for people overflown. Some advice on how to respond to the consultation – more to follow soon.
Click here to view full story...
Court rules that legal challenge by 4 councils cannot be heard until final Heathrow NPS published
Four councils that a negatively affected by Heathrow, plus Greenpeace and a local resident, applied for a legal challenge against the DfT because of its plans for a Heathrow 3rd runway. The case has now been struck out, at the High Court, by Mr Justice Cranston, on the grounds that the court had no jurisdiction to hear the claim, because of the provision in the Planning Act 2008 which said that proceedings may only be brought in a six-week period that followed once the NPS was adopted, or if later, published. The claim is "precluded" until the NPS is published, and that might be the end of 2017 or early 2018. The court can then consider the challenge. The legal claim is because there was a failure by government to consult residents before going back on promises made repeatedly that a 3rd runway would not be built. John Sauven (Greenpeace) said: 'Today's ruling was about the timing of our legal challenge, not its merit. It doesn't change the fact that ministers have no solution to the huge air and noise pollution problems caused by a third runway." Ravi Govindia (Wandsworth) said "The country is now going to waste more time developing a scheme that will never pass a simple legal test on air quality. Nothing is going to change between now and 2018 to make this scheme any less polluting."
Click here to view full story...
Brexit and Trump mean ‘dangerous new phase’ for Airbus in the UK – future unclear?
Airbus has warned of a “dangerous new phase” as it faces the twin threat of Brexit and the policies of the Trump administration. Airbus's chief operating officer and president of commercial aircraft,Tom Williams, told MPs on the Treasury select committee that it would be “pretty scary” if Airbus were no longer able to operate a successful UK business with the ability to seamlessly move goods and people around the EU. Airbus employs about 15,000 people in the UK and makes wings at its factory in Broughton, north Wales. It would be likely that Airbus's main rival, Boeing based north of Seattle, would want to take advantage of the situation. Trump's policies of putting America first would not hesitate to help Boeing, to the disadvantage of Airbus. With Brexit looming, the British part of Airbus may be affected - and this may in due course influence or put at risk decisions to invest in the UK over the longer term. In the next few years, Airbus might be looking at its longer term product policy, and next investments, and might be unwilling to commit to the UK. MPs also heard that multinational car manufacturers were already putting off investment plans in the UK while there is so much Brexit uncertainty.
Click here to view full story...
CAGNE listens to residents of West Sussex and Surrey and joins the call for a night ban at Gatwick
The long awaited Department for Transport (DfT) night flight consultation was finally released on 12th January. It is intended the new regime will last for 5 years, and there will be no cut in the number of night flights in this time. There will be minimal, and theoretical, cuts in the quota count (a scoring system based on how noisy planes are). Commenting on the consultation, Sally Pavey, Chair of CAGNE said the deadline for comment of 28th February leaves too little time for residents to respond. The consultation continues to ignore the impact night flights have on people's health. The government should, instead of just looking at economic benefits (largely to airlines) consider the health implications of high levels of noise at night, not allowing enough quiet hours for healthy sleep. Ideally CAGNE, along with other groups, would like to see the consultation halted, and revised to contain measures to genuinely reduce the burden of night flight noise. Instead, the consultation proposes allowing many more flights in the night period, in winter, at Gatwick. Gatwick already has the most night flights. In summer 2016, Heathrow had 2,949 (3,250 allowed), Gatwick had 11,303 (11,200 allowed) and Stansted 7,370 (7,000 allowed). This number of night flights is "simply unacceptable to residents around Gatwick.” They should be phased out, not increased.
Click here to view full story...
In the 4 councils’ legal challenge, lawyers say Government plan for Heathrow runway is ‘unlawful’ because people believed repeated promises
Four Conservative councils affected by Heathrow (with Greenpeace, and a local resident) are bringing a legal challenge against the government, because of the plans for a third runway. They say the plan is “unlawful” because locals bought houses and sent children to schools due to repeated Tory promises it would not happen. The councils argue that their residents had a “legitimate” expectation” the project would not be approved, due to assurances received. They have identified 19 “broken promises” made by David Cameron, Theresa May and other political figures saying the 3rd runway would be scrapped. One is by Theresa May in 2009, telling her constituents she will fight the 3rd runway. The lawyers, Harrison Grant, say such promises are not in law to be treated as mere "empty gestures" but legally significant promises. People had, reasonably enough, believed them. There was a hearing at the High Court on 19th and 20th January, and a ruling may be given this coming week. This will decide whether the councils can bring forward their judicial review claims. The DfT has tried to get the case thrown out or delayed till after there is a parliamentary vote on the National Policy Statement on Heathrow - probably around the end of this year.
Click here to view full story...
Government facing legal action by Client Earth over progress failure towards carbon targets
Lawyers from Client Earth say ministers have been in breach of legal requirements to come up with a plan to make major cuts to the UK’s fossil fuel emissions. The Government is facing legal action due to its failure to come up with a plan to adequately cut UK CO2 emissions, to meet the UK’s international commitments on climate change. Britain has agreed to cut emissions by 57% by 2032. However it is currently nowhere near meeting that goal, and it is likely to miss the target by 100 million tonnes of CO2 [out of around 1,700 MtCO2] . The UK's Emissions Reduction Plan should have been ready at the end of 2016, but this was first put off until February and then again to the end of March. It now seems even the March date is in doubt, though it is thought the climate minister, Nick Hurd, is keen to get it done. The delay is by officials at BEIS and other departments, including Transport. Client Earth has said if the Plan is not published by end of March, they could go to court. Barry Gardiner, Shadow climate minster, believes neither the officials nor the minister know when the Plan will be produced, or how to meet the targets. One of the difficult sectors is transport emissions. [The fact the government is trying to get a Heathrow runway through, with no strategy on aviation CO2, is presumably part of their difficulties].
Click here to view full story...
Government likely to ignore climate advice by CCC, turning just to carbon trading, to try to push Heathrow runway through
Chris Grayling and the government plan to ignore the assessment of the government’s own independent climate advisers, the Committee on Climate Change, on how to manage the CO2 emissions from a 3 runway Heathrow. The Environmental Audit Committee wrote to Grayling on 19th December, asking how he planned to square the CO2 emissions and the CCC advice with DfT plans. His response shows there is no way it can be done, and building the 3rd runway means not meeting the UK aviation cap - recommended by the CCC - of 37.5MtCO2 by 2050, meaning about 60% passenger growth above 2005 level. Grayling says ministers “have not taken a view on whether to accept the CCC’s planning assumption,” ie. rejecting the advice. He goes on to note that “a future global carbon market would allow emissions reductions to be made where they are most efficient across the global economy”. Then he says “measures are available” even if the aviation sector grows by more than 60%. This goes against the CCC’s own calculation that these levels of growth would mean "all other sectors will have to prepare for correspondingly higher emissions reductions in 2050.” Grayling hopes carbon trading will cut emissions - but in reality there are no effective carbon trading mechanisms that would do this well enough.
Click here to view full story...
Lobby group Airlines UK publishes report with its hopes of reducing aviation CO2
The problem of UK aviation carbon emissions is a very real one, for which the UK has no real solution. The lobbying body for the airline industry, Airlines UK, has produced a report, with the intention of persuading the government etc that it can keep carbon emissions low, while growing the numbers of planes, and a passengers, fast and for years to come. They pin their hopes on slight changes to airspace management, making routes a few miles shorter; also newer models of planes that burn slightly less fuel per passenger kilometre; higher load factors - and the inevitable white elephant of "sustainable" biofuels. The report looked at the emissions from 2006 to 2014, which covered the recession. It also covered the period of high fuel prices, when airlines had a huge incentive on cost to achieve higher load factors. Intense competition keeps load factors up. But these gains are the "low hanging fruit" of carbon savings, and once used up, will not persist into continuous savings. If number of flights and passengers increase, once the effects airspace changes, load factor improvements and new planes have worked through, carbon emissions from aviation will continue to rise. See the comment by AEF. A short term stabilisation is welcome, but it would be ill-advised to presume this will continue for long. Ultimately the only "solution" will be off-setting, from other sectors (and/or unlikely biofuels).
Click here to view full story...
Text of speech by Chris Grayling to Airlines UK expressing total support for aviation growth for decades
Chris Grayling gave a speech to Airlines UK (used to be called BATA), giving the industry his strongest support for its growth. Some of his comments: (on Brexit) "... positive expression of our desire as a country to raise our ambitions and look beyond the EU. To strengthen our position as a global country. With the global connections and gateways to make that possible." ... "We already have the largest aviation network in Europe. Direct services to over 370 destinations abroad. ... (bit on routes added) ... And demand for flights continues to grow. ... though we’re awaiting the final figures, the signs are that 2016 will break [the 2015] record once more. ... Over the next 20 years, the industry estimates a doubling of the world’s aircraft fleet. That’s another 33,000 aircraft – quieter, cleaner, more efficient aircraft that can actually deliver a fall in carbon emissions. ( sic ! ) ... And as the world increasingly embraces aviation in the coming decades, in return, aviation will increasingly drive the globalisation of trade and commerce. .... We are currently working on our new aviation strategy. It’s a long-term framework covering airports, safety, security, competitiveness, consumers, regulation and capacity. [Note, no mention of environment at all !] ...It’s part of our plan to build on the momentum of the Heathrow decision - so the whole of Britain can benefit from new aviation capacity." ... and so on ...
Click here to view full story...
While BA passengers may travel to the airport by public transport, bags can go on ahead – by van
Heathrow has a problem with the number of car journeys associated with the airport, the emissions of NO2 etc from these trips, and the added road congestion. It is keen to state how there will be no more vehicles on the roads with a 3rd runway than with two, though this appears implausible - the numbers just do not stack up. British Airways has a service that they call AirPortr, by which passengers can check in their luggage from their home, and then have it delivered by a van (diesel?) to the airport for them to collect at their convenience. It is all very handy for the passenger, but it is absolutely not helping Heathrow to cut the number of vehicle journeys, even if one vehicle carries a good number of cases. AirPortr sells it scheme saying, having had your bags checked and sealed for security etc: "You’re now free to make the most of your time before you fly, either head to work without the evil glares on the tube or enjoy the day sight seeing without dragging your bags around historic monuments. Or simply avoid the balancing act of managing multiple bags and small children en route." The government and Heathrow hope that even with a new runway and 50% more passengers, there would be no more road vehicles than now – and by around 2031 about 55% of passengers would use public transport. In 2012 only about 41% of Heathrow passengers travelled to or from the airport on public transport.
Click here to view full story...