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:
Doubtful logic of imprisoning the Heathrow 13: “The Flight of Reason in the Face of Airport Expansion”
The Heathrow 13, who occupied the far eastern end of Heathrow's northern runway in July, were found guilty by Judge Deborah Wright, at Willesden Magistrates court on 25th January. They will be sentenced on 24th February,and may receive up to the maximum of 3 months in prison. Many believe that the dangers we, and our descendants, face from climate change are so severe that effective action to cut CO2 emissions needs to be taken, fast. A blog in support of the Heathrow 13, and the necessity for rapid action on emissions, says though they caused some expense to the airport - the costs of not acting to curb global CO2 will be massively larger. "This raises an interesting point regarding cost and consequences that doesn't take into account the great looming elephant in the room that is climate change..... In reality there is no bigger crime against our planet than climate change, and no greater injustice than the death and suffering it continues to bring.... The British legal system has it wrong here .... We need to ensure that our governments enforce emissions limits, and that they prioritise health and planetary welfare over perceived profit. Climate change should form a significant part of the dialogue when costs and consequences are assessed." As the "Heathrow 13 said after the verdict, they're 'in it for the long haul.' In terms of the planet, so are we all."
Click here to view full story...
EasyJet CEO says UK should stay in the EU for low fares and airline benefits
easyJet will campaign for Britain to stay in the European Union, with its chief executive telling consumers that membership encourages low cost travel between European cities. easyJet 's CEO, Carolyn McCall, said the EU was good for its business and its customers. "We will do everything we can to make sure that consumers understand that they are far better off within the EU when it comes to connectivity and low fares," she said. Ms McCall is part of the pro-European lobby group, "Britain Stronger in Europe", headed by former Marks & Spencer chief executive Stuart Rose. EasyJet would not be shy about its support. easyJet operates over 600 routes, most of which are in the EU. Ms McCall said: "We think it would be very difficult for our government to negotiate with 27 other member states to get the flying rights that we have today within the EU." EasyJet has detailed contingency plans in place for if the UK votes to leave the EU, but they are not making these public. Ryanair has also urged Britain to stay in the EU. Though several large British businesses favour staying in the EU, often due to the benefits of tariff-less trade, many smaller firms feel the EU imposes what they argue are costly regulations.
Click here to view full story...
The Heathrow 13 threatened with jail sentences stand on the right side of history
Leo Murray, who was a co-founder and former activist with Plane Stupid, has written about the Heathrow 13, who now face jail sentences. Leo says: "The past teaches us that epic struggles against powerful interests cannot be won without some people putting their freedom on the line." The Judge said they should expect time in prison "primarily because of the ‘astronomical cost’ of the protest for the airport’s owners."...."But what this judge did not factor in is the cost to the rest of us that increasing aviation emissions pose." ...Rising pollution from air travel is a very real and dangerous problem that nobody with power wants to solve.... aviation is the only sector of the British economy that is not expected to make any contribution to national CO2 emissions reductions" .... If a new runway is built "we will have no hope of meeting our legally binding carbon targets. ....When democratic legislative processes have failed, it falls to ordinary citizens to act to protect the public interest ....history teaches us that epic struggles against powerful vested interests cannot be won without some people being prepared to do much, much more [than most] - including putting their freedom on the line.... The Heathrow 13 are just such people. History will judge them kindly .The Heathrow 13 will be Britain’s first ever climate prisoners. But as the long as the state continues to fail so abysmally in its duty of care, they won’t be the last."
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow 13 – the justification for their action, and reaction to the verdicts
Guilty verdicts have been handed down against 13 climate activists protesting against the expansion of Heathrow airport in the UK. The Heathrow 13 were on trial for climate change direct action civil disobedience occupying a runway of Heathrow in July 2015. The legal defence of the Heathrow 13 was based on the law of necessity in directly preventing emissions which contribute to climate change and significant numbers of deaths arising from climate and pollution impacts from civil aviation. Judge Deborah Wright told the defendants to prepare for the likelihood of an unusually harsh sentence on February 24th, and possibly to expect 3 months in prison. Heathrow expansion is the big test of the UK government’s seriousness about climate change, particularly in the wake of the December 2015 UN Paris agreement, hoping to limit global temperature rise to below 2 degrees Celsius and aspire to only 1.5 degrees. Heathrow represents 48% of UK emissions from aviation and is already "the airport with the highest CO2 contribution in the world in terms of combined international and domestic flights” This puts Heathrow expansion at odds with the UK Government’s commitment to avoiding a ‘well below’ 2’C target. Below are a selection of comments on the verdict on the Heathrow 13 and their belief that their action was necessary.
Click here to view full story...
Uber scrap flat rate fares to London airports, but residents report problems with residential parking by drivers
Uber has announced it will stop offering flat rate fares to customers travelling to Heathrow and Gatwick Airport. Uber used to offer a series of set fares for trips to the London airports, so customers know what to expect when going on their holidays and leisure trips. Uber fares to Heathrow from west London would start at £30, while passengers from south east London could get to Gatwick for £50. Now the fares will be calculated on the time and distance, as they are for other Uber journeys. Customers can see from the phone app how much their trip will cost. Uber also announced that airport pick-ups will incur an additional surcharge, to cover minimum parking costs. However, there are a number of reports indicating that Uber cars are upsetting residents in areas near Heathrow, as large numbers park (for free) in residential roads, for hours, waiting for calls to pick up passengers. Waiting in streets with no facilities mean drivers have been reported urinating in gardens, or defecating near their cars. There have been complaints of groups of drivers appearing to be a threatening presence, being rude to residents, sleeping in their cars, and playing music into the night, while they wait. Uber and Heathrow are meant to be trying to sort out the problems. Problems are also reported in the Stansted area.
Click here to view full story...
Court in Nantes permits the evictions of 11 families, in 2 months, for proposed new airport
The High Court of Nantes decided on Monday 25th January, to permit the evictions of the long-term inhabitants and opponents of the airport project at Notre-Dame-des-Landes, Loire-Atlantique. A period of two months was given to the eleven families occupying houses, including four farms. The time limit does not apply to farm buildings or livestock, as they farmers have made it clear it is not possible to move a farm in two months. The legal judgement said the "the legal conditions for the eviction applications were deemed met in all cases." The lawyers for the project's opponents had considered the expulsions were "not consistent with the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights". The company trying to build the new airport, AGO, had hoped to negotiate with the land owners to find an amicable settlement, but eleven families refused. It had been feared that there would be punitive fines, each day, for the families if they did not move out, but the magistrate said this was not justified as it would be "disproportionate for families who have only modest means." Opponents say this eviction decision will now force the government to act. The state will have to forcibly remove people, after 26th March, from an area wider than the ZAD (zone à défendre). The attempts at forced evictions in 2012 ended in violent scenes.
Click here to view full story...
“Heathrow13” climate protesters found guilty of aggravated trespass – sentencing 24th February, for possibly prison
Thirteen members of the Plane Stupid campaign group who occupied the eastern end of Heathrow's northern runway on 13th July 2015 have been found guilty of aggravated trespass and entering a security-restricted area of an aerodrome. They have been told it is almost inevitable they will face a prison term. Their defence had been that their actions were intended to prevent death or serous illness to people. However, district judge Deborah Wright (who sat alone) said the cost of the disruption at Heathrow was “absolutely astronomical”. Those convicted were clapped and cheered as they left the court. They have been bailed to appear for sentencing on 24 February. A statement released by the #Heathrow13 following their convictions read: “Today’s judgement demonstrates that the legal system does not yet recognise that climate defence is not an offence. We took action because we saw that it was sorely needed. When the democratic, legislative and processes have failed, it takes the actions of ordinary people to change them.” They say instead of the government taking action to cut carbon emissions, it is intending to spend millions making the problem bigger, if another runway is allowed. Though the judge recognised “They are all principled people” she considered what the protesters did was “symbolic and designed to make a point, not to save lives”.
Click here to view full story...
Europe falls behind US in new plans to tackle CO2 emissions from planes
The aviation industry is growing so fast that, on current trends, it could make up 22% of global emissions by 2050, according to a European Parliament study. However, Europe’s proposals for a landmark international fuel efficiency standard for aircraft would save considerably less carbon emissions than those put forward by the US. The US plan could cut emissions by 37.5%, and the EU proposal by 33%. The 4.5% gap is equal to 350 million tonnes of CO2, worldwide, per year - which is slightly more than Spain emits every year. The standard could mark a turning point for efforts to regulate fast-growing CO2 emissions from aircraft, which are not covered by December’s much-hailed Paris climate agreement. The standard would only apply to planes produced after 2020, meaning the planes currently being used - or ordered now - would not be included. Both the US and the EU proposals are going to ICAO, for consideration, next month. ICAO is looking at two approaches to reducing the rate of increase of aviation emissions; a market-based mechanism - MBM - (meaning trading, so airlines have to pay for their CO2); and improving the fuel efficiency of engines and aircraft. ICAO will be working on these this year, with the full council meeting in September, for a possible approval of an MBM in 2017.
Click here to view full story...
Dad of one of the #Heathrow13 sets out eloquently why we should be grateful for the climate warning they tried to give
The #Heathrow13 - the activists from "Plane Stupid" who carried out a protest on Heathrow's northern runway in July 2015 - were in court on 18th January, and the Judge's verdict was given on Monday 25th January. All were found guilty. Tim, the father of one of the activists, Rebecca Sanderson, has written about why (despite his earlier career working for an oil company) he is proud of what his daughter did, why he applauds their action, and why we should be grateful that they have tried to warn us about the climate dangers we face. Tim comments: "I am appalled by the apparently complete disconnect between what we know and what we do. .... There is now an overwhelming consensus that growth in carbon emissions could spell climatic disaster for our planet. Everyone apparently knows this ..... the general public, assiduously switch off mobile phone chargers and avoid over-filling the kettle. And then we feel so virtuous and pleased with ourselves that we book a flight to New Zealand, and wipe out all our emissions savings before we have even reached cruising altitude." .... Tim makes the analogy of the "Railway Children" in which they trespass on the railway line waving a red flag, to prevent an accident. "The Heathrow Plane Stupid protesters have tried again to warn us. They have stepped onto the runway, and they have waved their red flags. They have trespassed, and we should be grateful to them."
Click here to view full story...
Survey for National Infrastructure Commissions shows airports a very low priority for spending
A recent survey, done for the new National Infrastructure Commission, shows that aviation was not regarded as a high investment priority for the UK. The survey, by Copper Consultancy in June 2015, asked 2,000 adults in the UK their views on infrastructure. The highest priorities for investment were given as 43% for renewable energy; 39% for housebuilding and 32% for energy from waste. Then railways (31%), flood defences (30%) and major roads (30%). However, figures were nuclear power projects (19%), airports (8%) and coal and gas power stations (8%). When asked what would increase confidence in the infrastructure sector, respondents said community engagement (41%), consultation (30%), and leadership from politicians (25%) and technical experts (24%). The survey says its "focus groups demonstrated that the public is very positive about the state of the country’s..... airports. In contrast, they are much less positive towards other types of infrastructure, including flood defences and the railways". 36% regarded airports as highly rated. 49% believed there were not enough safeguards to protect the country's countryside and natural habitats, with only 6% saying there were too many safeguards for their protection. 58% believed the balance of power is too much in favour of developers' plans over the wishes of communities, and 6% said the opposite.
Click here to view full story...
Surrey County Council’s £3bn funding shortfall for new homes infrastructure – even before extra demand from a new runway
The Airports Commission expected that a 3rd Heathrow runway might require over 70,000 new homes to be built. The figure at Gatwick might be over 18,000. Other estimates put the figure higher - up to 45,000 at Gatwick. The estimate for the number of new schools required is 56, for Heathrow. The cost of the additional infrastructure, not only surface transport, has been glossed over. Meanwhile, the local authorities are very concerned about the cost of paying for roads, rail links, and schools - not to mention the medical facilities, water, sewage, other utilities etc etc. for current housing demand - let alone the extra runway-generated demand. Surrey County Council (SCC) has assessed housing need and local plans over the next 15 years, and revealed a gap in funding for roads, public transport, school places, flood defences and other infrastructure. Only considering schemes currently planned to deliver more housing, SCC says it cannot fund the around £3 billion shortfall. It will need assistance from central government. Their report will be discussed at a meeting on 26th January. It cannot ask Surrey residents to fund "something that is completely out of the reach of the council taxpayer." How will the councils fund the massive infrastructure costs of a new runway, on top of all this?
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow try to dress up the damage its runway would do to Colne Valley park as a huge bonus
Finding that a runway decision by the government is probably still months away, Heathrow is scraping around to find some bits of PR it can use to promote its runway plans. The planned runway would cut into the Colne Valley Regional Park, taking out a chunk of it. The park is already seriously affected by Heathrow, being just to the west of it. In 2013 Colne Valley said the runway would wipe out parts of the park. It would hit Colnbrook hardest, and see Lakeside Education Centre lost along with nearly all of the Green Belt north of the by-pass to Sutton Lane. Colnbrook West and Orlitts Lake would be filled in, while the Colne Brook would be culverted or diverted along with three other rivers locally. And so on. But Heathrow is now proud to produce its plans for a lovely new park, with a lot of new improvements - but these would ONLY be made if it gets its runway. Not otherwise - other than the £5,000 it gives each year. Nothing in the carefully written "doublespeak" from Heathrow, describing the park, reveals just how much damage the runway would in fact do to the park. The board of the Colne Valley Park CIC (Community Interest Company) remain "opposed to the building of the third runway due to the detrimental impact this will have upon the Regional Park." If the runway is allowed, they will have to work with Heathrow to ensure the rest of the park continues to benefit wildlife, and local communities.
Click here to view full story...
New European airline association – Airlines for Europe (A4E) – formed to lobby for the industry across Europe
Modelled on "Airlines for America" (A4A) which lobbies/advocates Congress and the Administration on behalf of its member airlines, a similar lobbying alliance has been set up and launched in Europe. It calls itself "Airlines for Europe" (A4E) it so far has Europe’s 5 largest airline groups – Air France KLM, easyJet, IAG, Lufthansa Group, and Ryanair as members, and expects to expand. It wants to "represent the interests of its members when dealing with the EU institutions, international organisations and national governments on European aviation issues." What that means is that it wants to lobby against anything that does not increase competitiveness, lower air fares, or increase airline profits. The particularly want to fight "large scale airport monopolies, high charges, taxation and inefficiencies characterise the aviation supply chain." In particular they want lower costs at airports; lower costs of air traffic control provision, through completion of the Single European Sky; regulation to prevent air traffic control strikes; use of new technology to make efficiency savings; and using SESAR funding to drive compliance with the Single Sky framework; and they want the removal of what they call "unreasonable taxes" on air travel. All this is justified by predictions of economic benefits and ever more jobs .....
Click here to view full story...
Block of ice from a passing plane crashes through roof of home in Twyford
An elderly couple, in Twyford, Berkshire (under a Heathrow flight path) had the unpleasant experience of a block of ice, which appeared to have fallen from a passing plane, crash through their roof. The two foot long block cracked the ceiling. Luckily it hit the roof in a different part of the house from where the couple were. They said they were lucky not to have been injured. There have been many other incidents over the years of blocks of ice falling - associated with frozen water from aircraft lavatories. Had the ice block fallen onto the road, it could have hit a car or a passer-by. Had it fallen onto a busy road like a motorway, it could have caused a serious accident. The elderly couple had to be assisted by their son in sorting out insurance, and getting the roof repaired. As the insurance company was slow, being a Sunday morning, the local fire brigade helped to patch up the damage and confirm the water and electricity supplies to their house were undamaged. Water (from a lavatory?) from the ice block was dripping through the (now sagging) damaged ceiling. The couple have kept a sample of water, so it can be tested, to identify if it is from a lavatory. Other reports of earlier incidents of items falling from planes can be seen here.
Click here to view full story...
Patrick McLoughlin hints that EU referendum could delay runway decision, even beyond this summer
One of the many omissions by the Airports Commission, in its analysis of whether a runway should be built, and its recommendation, is the impact of the UK leaving the EU. It was not considered. Clearly, if the UK did leave Europe after a referendum, there would be complicated economic impacts - which would take years to work through. Now the Secretary of State for Transport, Patrick McLoughlin, speaking in an interview on LBC, has said there could indeed be a delay in the government making a decision due to the referendum and the uncertainty about that. Asked when there would be a decision, he replied: "I hope later this year. We have said we would hope to move some way by the summer of this year." And he went on: "There’s lots of other things which are going on in the political spectrum - if there’s a referendum this summer, and the like. But I would hope by the summer of this year we will be able to make progress." There is no mention at all of the issue in the Airports Commission's final report in July 2015 nor in the many supporting documents, nor in its interim report, in December 2013. David Cameron has said the EU referendum will happen by the end of 2017. It may happen as early as June or July 2016.
Click here to view full story...
First 2 days of the trial of Plane Stupid’s #Heathrow13 for their runway incursion in July
The trial of the #Heathrow13 is taking place at Willesden Magistrates Court, in front of Judge Wright. The 13 activists are charged with Aggravated Trespass and entering a security restricted area, with the prosecution by the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service). On the first day, evidence was given by two witnesses from Heathrow airport, on the extent to which the airport was disrupted by the protest, and the 20 flights that were cancelled. Two of the protesters gave evidence in the afternoon. On the second day, seven further witnesses gave evidence. The Judge has said she does not need other expert witnesses to appear - Sian Berry and John McDonnell had offered to give evidence. On the 3rd day, proceedings finished early, after lunch. It is likely that closing statements will be heard at 10am Monday 25th January, and the Judge's verdict will not be before 2pm on Monday at Willesden Magistrates court. Plane Stupid have produced summaries of what the defendants said, while being questioned, and some of the arguments they made. All were very certain of the necessity for carbon emissions to be reduced, in order to prevent increasing risk of death and serious illness for people across the world, especially those in the Global South. All were very certain that actions, such as theirs, were reasonable and proportionate in order to cut CO2 emissions.
Click here to view full story...
Green Party argue that site of London City Airport should become a multi-use development, for homes and businesses
The idea of closing London City Airport and using the huge amount of land it takes up for more intensive, and useful, purposes is not new. A report was produced in April 2014 by NEF, setting out very persuasive reasons why this is not a crazy idea. Now Sian Berry, the Green Party Mayoral Candidate, has again suggested this. The plan she proposes is for the site, which is currently up for sale, into a new quarter for homes, businesses and innovative industries. The Greens propose a consortium with City Hall, councils, business and academia to buy the airport. They are urging potential purchasers to look seriously at the compelling business case for changing the use of the site. The land taken up by the airport, and land around it which is in the Public Safety Zone (for crash risk) and so cannot be used, could create far more economic activity, and far more jobs. This might amount to some 16,000 more jobs than the airport provides and add an additional £400 million to the UK’s economy. The land is in a key geographical location, and would be easy to link to transport networks. It could create thousands of new homes within easy reach of central London, helping to ease the housing crisis. As a writer from Estates Gazette says: "London is crying out for more big sites like this where mixed-use schemes can be built." The site is wasted as a small airport - especially when Crossrail makes the trip from the Docklands area to Heathrow easy and fast.
Click here to view full story...
Supportive protest outside start of Plane Stupid’s #Heathrow13 trial for Heathrow incursion in July
The trial of the 13 members of Plane Stupid, who broke into Heathrow airport on 13th July, started at Willesden Magistrates Court on 18th. They are charged with Aggravated Trespass and entering a security restricted area. Their protest caused the cancellation of some 25 flights, which saved an estimated 250 tonnes of CO2. In doing so, they argue that helped to save lives in the Global South, by making a small cut in the emissions that fuel climate chaos. All 13 are pleading not guilty, and say their action was reasonable and justified in the climate context. They say "Climate defence is not an offence!" The judge hearing the case, by herself, is Judge Wright. The prosecution has been brought by the CPS. There was a large gathering outside the court, for the start of the trial, with many groups expressing their solidarity. This started with a short statement by the #Heathrow13 on their defence, before they entered the court to repeated chants of “No ifs, No Buts, No new runways!” Judge Wright declared that the fact that aviation fuel is linked to climate change is indisputable. The judge is looking at two issues: 1. Did the 13 genuinely believe their actions were necessary to prevent death or serious illness? And 2. Whether objectively their actions were reasonable and proportionate in order to prevent death or serious illness.
Click here to view full story...
People living with Edinburgh airport plane noise adamant that changes to routes persist
The new campaign group, Stop Edinburgh Airspace Trial (SEAT), was set up last year in response to the suddenly increased noise from the TUTUR trial that started in June 2015 over some areas. They say Edinburgh Airport is planning to impose a “new airspace regime” on the area surrounding it – effectively a secret flight path. The purpose of TUTUR was to see if the airport could increase capacity by cutting the departure interval between flights from two minutes to one. However, people living beneath it have attacked the airport’s lack of transparency. Helena Paul, from SEAT said Edinburgh Airport failed to adequately communicate about the TUTUR experiment with communities." She also said there were concerns that data from airport-positioned noise monitors would “not adequately reflect the disturbance on the ground”. The trial was stopped 2 months early after nearly 8,000 complaints. Yet SEAT members say they are still hearing about new problems with noise being experience by residents across West Lothian and into Fife. There are complaints that planes are more frequent, lower and louder. But the airport says: “Aircraft have been flying in and out of Edinburgh Airport on the same routes for 40 years; they are not flying any lower or louder than they did in the past." This a now familiar pattern - residents and airports not agreeing. The airport will publicise the results of the trial later this month.
Click here to view full story...
A thousand opponents of new Notre-Dame-des-Landes airport protest outside evictions court hearing
Backers of proposed airport at Nantes want the eviction of farmers from the site. More than 1,000 protesters gathered outside the court in Nantes where the hearing - that could evict the last 11 families living on the proposed airport - was heard. Aéroport du Grand Ouest (AGO), a subsidiary of Vinci Airports, is requesting crippling fines of up to €1,000 per person per day against farmers who are refusing to move, as well as the seizure of farm properties and animals. Around 300 environmental protesters are currently camped out around the site in a long-standing protest that last weekend mobilised 20,000 people for “Operation Escargot”, an action blocking traffic on regional roads, including the Loire bridge. One Nantes resident facing expulsion, Sylvain Fresnau, a 54-year-old farmer with three children, said he did not believe that evictions would be possible due to the strength of local feeling. He said: “We don’t need another airport in Nantes. We already have 145 airports in this country". Conservation lawyers say the new court action violates a commitment made by President François Hollande that there would be no more evictions until legal avenues had been fully exhausted. He has not kept his promise, and the case has become symbolic for French environmentalists. The judgement in the evictions case is not expected before 25 January.
Click here to view full story...
Estimated 20,000 protesters from across France demonstrate massive opposition to proposed Nantes airport
Organisers of the massive peaceful protest on the 9th January, against the proposed new Nantes airport at Notre-Dame-des-Landes estimated there were 20,000 people at the demonstration. The aim was to show the massive opposition there is to the airport, and especially to the forced eviction of the 11 families and 4 farmers from land on the planned construction site. At the protest, traffic was halted on the Nantes ring road, using dozens of tractors and blocking access to the city’s airport, Nantes Atlantique. Protesters say that the €580 million project is not necessary,will be detrimental to the environment and is a wasteful use of government funds.The battle against this development has been going on for 15 years, and has become a focal issue across France, against unnecessary high carbon projects that damage the environment or uproot people. There are over 100 support committees in places across France. The airport would require the loss of valuable marshy habitat, home to important wildlife, and good agricultural land. Some agricultural organizations threatened to maintain an indefinite blockade of one of the main river crossings, the Chevire Bridge over the Loire. Clashes between protesters and the authorities in 2012 resulted in a temporary halt to construction. The last major protest resulted in clashes with police in February 2014. There was a legal hearing in Nantes about the evictions on Tuesday 13th January - with again a huge crowd outside - the outcome is expected to be known on 25th January.
Click here to view full story...
Continuing anger in Chicago about large number of night flights over new areas, due to new runway
Changes to Chicago O'Hare flight paths were made from October 2013 when flight were shifted to being mainly over suburbs north and south of the airport to mostly areas east and west of it. The airport has 8 runways, and is slowly closing the diagonal ones and opening new east-west ones to accommodate more flights. There are numerous night flights - perhaps as many as 19 between 11.30pm and 6am on one night. People whose sleep is repeatedly interrupted by plane noise are angry and criticised the Chicago Aviation Commissioner for her failure to stop and listen to the complaints from affected communities. She does at least attend noise commission meetings, but has left every meeting before the public comment section. People feel this is indicative of how the citizens of Chicago have been treated and ignored. The Aviation Commission is looking at proposals to spread night noise, by rotating O’Hare runways used at night on a regular basis and using less populated flight corridors. However, city consultants have made clear that the current number of flights from 6 -7am and from 10 -11pm demand more runways than voluntary "fly-quiet" rules require. Therefore, they say different fly-quiet rules should be established for those hours.
Click here to view full story...
Caroline Pidgeon: “No, London doesn’t need another runway – and the only people who’d benefit own airports”
Caroline Pidgeon is the Liberal Democrat candidate for mayor of London. Writing in City Metric, she explains why there is no need for a new runway, and recommends people read the short paper by AEF, "The Great British Runway Myth – Why there is no need for any new runway in the south east" which clearly sets out the arguments. A key fact is that while the number of UK air passengers has grown by 32% since 2000, the number of actual flights has grown by just 0.6% due to use of larger planes, and getting higher load factors. At Gatwick, 12% of runway slots are not being used; Stansted and Luton have over 40% of slots not used, so there is no shortage of London runway capacity. Caroline says: "In the whole aviation debate, it is strange that the views of ordinary passengers in the rest of the UK are rarely given a fair hearing" .... but we "need to improve train links to Stansted, to ensure that this airport is able to make proper use of its spare capacity." ... "Heathrow Airports Holdings quite understandably wants to create a dominant position in the UK, ideally at the expense of other airports. More landing rights means more profits for them. The closer to a monopoly on international flights they have, the happier they are. But the idea that this company speaks up on behalf of “UK Plc”, or the needs of passengers across the UK, is a joke."
Click here to view full story...
AEF report finds UK’s out-of-date aircraft noise policies putting the health of over one million people at risk
A new report by the AEF has identified that the Government’s aircraft noise policies are risking the health of over one million people and an urgent policy rethink is needed ahead of runway decisions in 2016. Aircraft noise is associated with increased risk of increased blood pressure, and higher risk of heart attack, heart disease and stroke. Health is also detrimentally affected through sleep disturbance and annoyance. Aircraft noise impedes the memory and learning ability of school children. The UK's aircraft noise policy has not been updated in line with this mounting evidence base, with some noise policies based on studies dating back to the early 1980s. The Government’s lack of response to emerging evidence on noise may be costing the UK £540 million each year.The noise problem is particularly acute at Heathrow, including many affected schools, but there are serious problems at many other airports too. The health burden is not just experienced close to airports, with high levels of noise miles from the runway. The current policy on flight paths does not consider the impact of sudden changes, or the health impacts of newly affected communities. The report calls for the Government to act now to reduce the health burden from aircraft noise. Long-term noise targets are needed to protect health, and all noise policies should be reviewed in the light of these targets. A new runway should only be permitted if the noise burdens are reduced.
Click here to view full story...
Site of possible 172 acre business park near Horley, on flood plain, over 2ft deep in water
Plans were announced in October for a huge, 172 acre, business park to be built just south of Horley. Reigate and Banstead Borough Council agreed in principle to use compulsory purchase orders (CPOs) for a business park on the land off Balcombe Road. There is a lively local opposition group. Now a local teacher, Joanna Barnett, has posted a video of herself standing in 2 feet of water, and then in a small rowing boat, on the flooded land. The land regularly floods, being part of a flood plain, helping to protect Horley. The teacher asks where that water would go, if the are is covered in concrete and tarmac. There are serious concerns that building in a necessary flood plain would make flooding in surrounding areas worse. The water can only drain away slowly into the Burstow Stream and the Gatwick stream, ultimately ending up in the river Mole. Mrs Barnett asks: "Why do you think its OK to spend public money, £540,000, preparing this land for the business park? That is our money and it should not be spent trying to pave over a flood plain." More than 3,200 people have now signed a petition railing against plans to create the huge business park. The local group,"Keep Horley Green" are campaigning against the development, which is on land categorised as a public open space. A consultation is due in 2016.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow passengers up 2.2% last year compared to 2014; ATMs up 0.3%; air cargo down 0.2%
Nearly 75 million passengers travelled through Heathrow in 2015, an increase of 2.2% on 2014 and the airport’s highest ever number of annual passengers.The number of flights (air transport movements) was up 0.3% on 2014. The number of seats per aircraft increased by 2.1% to 209, and passengers per aircraft rose to 1.9% to 160. But the average load factor remained constant at 76.5%. (For 2013, Heathrow said its average load factor was 76.4%, and average number of passengers per aircraft was 154.8). At the end of 2015, over 20 daily A380 departures and arrivals were operated by eight airlines "Heathrow continued to play a leading role in helping Britain’s exports reach global markets, with the UK’s largest port by value recording cargo volumes of 1.5 million metric tonnes for the year." That is Heathrow's way of saying the cargo tonnage fell by 0.2% in 2015 compared with 2014. Heathrow says "emerging markets continued to be a driver of traffic growth at Heathrow", with passenger volumes up 8% to Latin America and 6% to the Middle East. They also say passenger volumes during 2015 were up 14% to China. That's confusing, as the increase in passengers to the "Asia/Pacific" area, which includes China, only rose by 0.3% for the year. Heathrow itself admits it has terminal capacity for 90 million passengers, so at 75 million, it is not "full". The Airports Commission said that would not happen till 2030.
Click here to view full story...
Anger at disgraceful failure of the CAA or London City Airport to consult properly on flight path changes
In a blog about the disgraceful failure of London City Airport and the CAA to consult properly on changes to flight paths, John Stewart explains just how unjust this is. The CAA allowed London City Airport to concentrate all its flight paths without any meaningful consultation with residents. In effect, the changes will mean the creation of noise ghettos, from 4th February 2016. The approximately 70% of the time, when the wind is westerly, Bow, Leyton, Leytonstone, etc will get all the departures from the airport, and Thamesmead will get arrivals. The 30% of the time with easterly winds, departures will go over Barking Riverside, Dagenham and Hornchurch, and arrivals will go over Sidcup, New Eltham, etc. Most of these communities have not been informed about the changes, or the noise to which they will be subjected to. In 2014 London City carried out the most minimalist of consultations and said the changes were not significant. Before Christmas, the CAA agreed with City Airport that the change was not significant. Hacan East believes the changes are very significant. The recent report by Helios seriously criticised the CAA for its inadequate consultations. Hacan East says the CAA has let people affected by London City Airport down badly, and there has been injustice. "As Thomas Jefferson might have said, “When injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty.” "
Click here to view full story...
Judge in Phoenix, Arizona, orders mediation between FAA and City in flight path dispute
In June, the City of Phoenix, Arizona, sued the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) over flight path changes – part of NextGen – that have led to aircraft noise that has been plaguing parts of the city and historic neighbourhoods. The noise problem started in September 2014 when the FAA implemented the new flight paths. There were suddenly thousands of noise complaints, with anger at the noise and its impacts on health and quality of life, and impact on house prices. The City authorities said the FAA didn't properly study how the change would impact residents. The City has tried to resolve the issues with the FAA, but without success. Now a judge has ordered that the FAA and City of Phoenix try and work out an agreement in mediation, which might avoid a lengthy legal battle. Many residents would like to see flight paths reverting to how they were before August 2014, but that may be unlikely. However the mediation is not binding, which means without an agreement, the issue could head back to court.
Click here to view full story...
Sunday Times reports how Heathrow has paid its owners dividends of £2.1 billion since 2012 – but just £24 million in Corporation Tax
The Sunday Times reports that Heathrow has paid its owners back £2.1 billion in dividends, starting in 2012. But it has only paid a total of £24 million in corporation tax since 2006, with that payment being last year. Heathrow's owners are rewarded whenever the value of the airport increases. If new airport infrastructure is built, the passengers pay for it through the £20 cost on their ticket (and other spending), and the owners benefit.. The CAA calculates how much is spent on investment, and allows Heathrow’s investors to earn a return on the total. The more Heathrow spends, the more its backers can earn. If Heathrow was to spend £17.6 billion on its expansion, the value of the airport would be considered to have increased that much. Due to the huge debts Heathrow has (£12.5 billion out of the £16 billion Ferrovial paid in 2006) the airport's banks prevented dividends to owners, until 2012. They got £240 million in 2012, which has risen to £2.1 billion. Some of the proceeds of the sale of Gatwick, Edinburgh etc has been used for dividends. The Sunday Times says: ..."with a debt-to-assets ratio of about 85% is one of the most heavily indebted airports in the world." Heathrow will have to recoup the money by high passenger charges, years before the runway is built and open, as otherwise Heathrow's massive investors are not prepared to take the financial risk. Heathrow is no longer a company quoted on the stock exchange, but that could happen in future.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow hopes putting in electric car charging points will make it seem more “green”
The New Year has barely begun, and Heathrow is off on (...yet another ...) 8 months or so of it PR and spin, hoping to persuade those who matter to approve a 3rd runway. So it has put out a woolly statement about various very minor measures it is taking to slightly limit its environmental damage. John Holland-Kaye said: “2015 saw us commit to a series of action plans that will make us a better neighbour, by reducing noise, emissions and traffic." How? They have installed 135 charging stations for electric vehicles. No matter that most of the UK's electricity is not produced from renewable sources. And some of their vehicles are (sic) "zero emission" cars - if such a thing was possible. Perhaps realising that is not terribly impressive, John H-K says “But we know that we need to do more, and in the coming months will set out even more ambitious plans that will make an expanded Heathrow the most environmentally responsible hub airport in the world.” Yes? Heathrow have a few suggestions for other improvements, none making a big difference. Such as: measures to encourage staff to car share to work, or even cycle; phasing out noisier "Chapter 3" aircraft; by March its Air Quality Strategy for 2020 and its Action Plan will be published; and there will be a new App providing real-time public transport and traffic information for passengers. And updated "blueprints" on progress....
Click here to view full story...
Solar farm built by Stobart at Southend airport – another allowed close to Bournemouth airport
A new 2.5 megawatt ‘Solar Photovoltaic Array’ has been built by Stobart Developments on 3.2 hectares of unused grassland at the north of the Southend airport site. The airport hopes around 20% of its annual electricity requirement will now be generated by the panels. There will be over 9,500 panels, "mounted on 3 metre high steel frames supported on approximately 2600 piles across 37 rows. The layout of the panels has been specially designed to prevent reflective glare affecting approaching aircraft and the air traffic control tower." There had previously been concerns about glare from the panels affecting pilots. There is now also to be a solar farm under Bournemouth Airport's flight path, about 720 metres to the west of the airport. It has been approved by planners at East Dorset District Council. Questions were initially raised over air passengers' safety when the proposals were revealed, due to the glare and reflection on sunny days. The airport had objected to it, due to solar glare, saying "the effect on operations is pronounced and severe throughout the year, making aircraft operations unsafe if the development was to go ahead." However, their complaints were then conditionally withdrawn after a "glint and glare" study was done.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow again promoting its “sticking plaster” solution of adobe huts for school noise problem
Last April, keen to persuade politicians that a 3rd Heathrow runway should be allowed, the airport said it was installing noise insulation at the 42 schools and other community buildings (31 in Hounslow) where it promised in 2005 to carry out the work. It has taken 10 years so far. Heathrow said in April 2015 that a total of 10 schools would have adobe structures in their playgrounds by the end of the year. They now say 7 are done with 7 more in the pipeline. The domes are meant to provide a quieter place in the playground, where the aircraft noise of about 87 decibels outside (Hounslow Heath infant school) is cut to 70 decibels. Bearing in mind that average speech is around 60 decibels, and a teacher needs to be able to project their voice at least 10 decibels over background noise, that is still not good. There are concerns that the adobe structures don't solve the noise problems for schools under Heathrow flight paths. The issue for young children is that they need to play together, and hear each other while playing. That is not easy with a plane nearly over head every minute. The educational disadvantages of schools affected by aircraft noise are now sufficiently well researched; considerable evidence exists to show that it can mean young children suffer impaired performance.
Click here to view full story...
Protests and mobilisations on Saturday 9th January against evictions for planned Nantes airport at NDDL
On Saturday 9th January, there will again be huge mobilisations of people against the planned new Nantes airport at Notre-Dame-des-Landes, in western France. Not only will there be gatherings at NDDL itself, and in Nantes but the many support committees in other places across France will plan mobilisations too. These included a bike convoy and a protest on foot in Paris, where people will be singing and dancing and giving out literature. The protest is because the authorities plan to carry out compulsory evictions on the 11 families and 4 farms in the ZAD (the zone à défendre), which are due to start in January. They are in the area where Vinci, the company planning to build the airport, want to start work. There is to be a court hearing on 13th January to request their removal, with a fine of € 200 to € 1,000 / day / person and the seizure and sequestration of property and farm animals. People who are passionate that the airport should not be built are not prepared to see these evictions. The government had agreed they would not happen until all legal remedies had been fully exhausted - and they have not. The airport opponents believe it would make better environmental and economic sense to improve the existing Nantes airport, rather than ruin valuable natural habitats and destroy productive farmland. They want a proper independent study done.
Click here to view full story...
Sadiq Khan’s environmental concerns mean rightly opposing Heathrow runway – but vanish in relation to Gatwick
Labour Mayoral candidate, Sadiq Khan, backed a runway at Heathrow until June 2015, when he came out against it, partly realising the air quality problems had an unacceptably bad impact on Londoners. Due to the extent of Heathrow opposition, he realised he would not be elected if he backed a Heathrow runway. Sadiq has made various statements about how he is concerned the environment and wants to be" the greenest mayor London’s ever had.” He also has plans to "put radical environment improvements ‘front and centre’" in his campaign, plant 2 million tree, and implement a major extension of the “ultra-low emissions zone” – which bans the most polluting vehicles. All that is great. But his care for the environment runs out when it comes to Gatwick. He backs a 2nd runway there, and is trying to persuade the Labour party to do so too. Appreciating just how unpopular airport expansion is at Heathrow, largely due to the extensive negative impacts over a wide area, Sadiq appears keen to dump that sort of misery on those who are not able to vote against him - living outside London. He appears to have been taken in by Gatwick's PR and charm offensive, believing there would be thousands of jobs for people in Croydon and his constituency, Tooting. A combination of nimbyism and self-interest. He also backs expansion of London City Airport.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow 3rd runway to provide a good range of destinations purely for exotic leisure travel
Heathrow has been trying to persuade politicians, business leaders, and the world at large that it needs a new runway in order to boost the UK economy, because of all the business flights and vital business "connectivity" connections. Quietly, in the Airports Commission's Final Report, released on 1st July 2015, the importance of the business and economic benefits were down-played, and more emphasis was put on the desirability of more - and cheaper - leisure flights, how more holidays improved people's sense of well-being etc. Page 70 said: "Leisure flights have a high social value. Empirical analysis focused on passengers travelling on holiday or to visit friends and family has shown how the access to leisure travel affects mental health and well-being." And now it emerges that many of the alleged "new" destinations that Heathrow might be able to fly to, with a 3rd runway, are unashamedly purely for exotic holidays. Some of the airports mentioned are Kilimanjaro, making it easier for trekkers and people of safari; Quito, making it easier to get to this UNESCO World Heritage site city; Memphis, where tourists can easily visit Elvis' former home, Graceland; Salt Lake City, for easy access to the ski areas; and Thiruvananthapuram (Kerala), for the best beaches. So all the devastation and the immense environmental and social impact of a new runway is so rich tourists can have slightly easier trips on their holidays.
Click here to view full story...
“Gatwick Obviously NOT” given permission to take their JR of the CAA to the Appeal Court
The group, "Gatwick Obviously NOT" (GON) has received the welcome news that their appeal to be allowed to make a Judicial Review (JR) against the CAA has been successful. They have now won Permission to go to a Full Hearing in the Appeal Court. In March 2015, Martin Baraud, the Chair of GON, served a JR upon the CAA, with Gatwick Airport Ltd and the Secretary of State for Transport as an ‘Interested Party’. The “Ground of Claim” is that there has indeed been a change in the use of airspace and that the CAA should first have consulted on such change before it was put into effect by GAL and NATS. In August, they were refused permission to proceed with the JR. Taking advice from their QC, John Steel, they appealed. GON say the judge, Mr Justice Haddon-Cave, while refusing the Permission, added a postscript, seeming to suggest that there may be an issue about the need for consultation for ‘seismic’ events (such as the flight path changes introduced without notice) that is more a matter for the law-makers, not the lawyers. Now GON are pleased that the Judge The Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Burnett has stated that the case - very significantly - must be held in the Appeal Court rather than the High Court. This is in order to "'obtain an authoritative ruling on the meaning of relevant provisions, which govern similar arrangements at airports other than Gatwick".
Click here to view full story...
2,000 small “No 3rd runway” planes planted near Parliament (one for each plane per day)
A large group of Heathrow anti-runway campaigners gathered near Parliament, in Victoria Gardens, to plant rows of small black planes, each with the message "No 3rd Runway." The number planted - 2,000 - is the number of aircraft that would used Heathrow per day, with a fully used 3rd runway. That is a total of 730,000 flights per year, up from the total cap at present of 480,000 per year. Heathrow says it could be 740,000 flights .... The event, timed to coincide with the first day Parliament resumes this year, was to highlight the fact that 2016 will be a grim year for residents if a 3rd runway is given the go-ahead. Of the 2,000 planes, about 500 were planted by HACAN; about 400 by CHATR (the group in Chiswick); about 300 by Friends of the Earth; and about 800 by SHE - Stop Heathrow Expansion - to symbolise that around 800 homes would be demolished for the runway. After the government delayed its decision on a runway, expected in December, until some time in summer 2016, or shortly after the summer, the anguish and uncertainty for all those facing the threat of a new runway continue. There are yet more stressful and worrying months ahead - but the campaign against the Heathrow 3rd runway is in fighting form, and ever more determined.
Click here to view full story...
Gatwick sets up a “Noiselab” website, so people can see more about its plane noise
Gatwick airport realises the increased impact of the noise from its planes is causing considerable upset, anger and opposition. As part of its PR offensive, to try to persuade people that it is going everything possible to minimise noise and take people's complaints ("concerns" in Gatwick language) seriously, it has launched a website called "Noiselab" as a noise monitoring tool. The aim is to allow people to look at the noise close to various monitors and see how much is from aircraft, how many flights etc. It does not appear that many of these noise monitors are new. The noise level readings at the various monitoring points are only given as averaged LAeq values over a 16-hour day and a 8-hour night. This averaging process destroys the usefulness of this tool as a measure of noise annoyance, especially under flight paths. What people hear is the noise level (LAmax) of each aircraft. The “fly-over” average also reduces the actual noise nuisance, and there is no measure of background noise levels (LA90) against which each aircraft noise event is clearly heard. However the network of monitors should be welcomed because they could be put to proper use, for example if LAmax measurements were taken and the N70 metric [this means the number of noise events noisier than 70dB] was used and the “fly-over” value was given as a Sound Exposure Level (SEL).
Click here to view full story...
Essays on why we travel, what we get out of it – travel as epic adventure or religious experience …
The growing obsession with travel is apparently induced by very cheap air fares, growing affluence, ever rising expectations, an increasing sense that hypermobility across the globe is an entitlement - on top of an emptiness and dissatisfaction with what everyday life has to offer. In a series of essays, an anthropologist looks at some of the reasons for our globe-trotting, why we do it, and what we get out of it. He considers travel as epic adventure, and how we seek challenges, in our rather mundane lives, over-influenced by health & safety; how we want to substitute novelty for normality; to reverse our daily routines, and abandon the comfort of familiarity. And the quest for ourselves. In looking at travel as a religious experience, he considers the rite of passage of much gap year travel..." some 25,000 visit Thailand, Australia and New Zealand ...there is ritual talk: “where are you going?”; “where have you been?”; “did you ‘do’ this monument/trek/natural wonder?”; etc. Drink, drugs and digital photos, sun, sea and social networks ... Upon their return from the wilderness, our young vagrants are transformed (or reformed) into worldly-wise Westerners, new sovereign citizens of a global era. (Theirs is the Earth and everything that’s in it!) ... Indeed, for many in the West today, overseas travel has come to fill the void vacated by ‘real’ religions, providing meaning, purpose, awe and wonder, as well as a sense of belonging."
Click here to view full story...
Is travel now the ultimate “must-have” possession, used to define who we think we are?
David Jobanputra is an anthropologist and film maker, who has given much thought to why we travel so much. He has looked at travel largely as something rich westerners do, in more exotic lands. But he also asks about travel in the way it has now become a serious consumer product, and one through which we try to define ourselves - sophisticated, trendy, caring, bold, discerning etc. "We choose a personal brand identity to which we aspire and the travel industry supplies us with the right product to match." ..."Consumption is our lifejacket. It is also our straitjacket." ..."We buy status, power, a sense of inclusion. We even buy our adventures. In the age of consumerism, everything is commoditised ... including tourism....Transnational travel makes culture a commodity. When the ethic of consumption is extended to new people and places, everything comes with a price. Visit to the palace - $12; mountain trek - $35; traditional dance performance - $8; sense of self-worth - priceless. Today’s holiday brochures boast bargains like an Argos catalogue; instead of homeware and cheap electronics, we find tigers, temples and tribal villages. All are commodities, just the same. We buy these things for the same reason we buy any other non-essential product: to look better, feel better or else appear better."
Click here to view full story...
John Redwood losing patience with inadequate responses on aircraft noise from John Holland-Kaye
John Redwood, the MP for Wokingham, has been in correspondence with Heathrow's CEO John Holland-Kaye, about the considerable increase in aircraft noise that his constituents have been subjected to since mid 2014. Mr Holland-Kaye has replied, setting out a long list of possible improvements to how much noise Heathrow flights might produce. John Redwood replied: "The changes that NATS made, without consultation, in June 2014 to the Compton Gate have resulted in incessant noise over the Wokingham area due to the concentration of flights over one area, rather than their dispersal. The various mitigating effects that you have described to me over the past months appear good in theory but they are having no effect on reducing the noise level above our houses. I have no wish to engage in a continuous dialogue or await some new consultation. What I and my constituents wish to see is a return to the pre-June 2014 dispersal and Gate policies. It is difficult to see why Wokingham would wish to support an expansion of the airport if this matter cannot be put right promptly." So, roll on the consultation by the CAA this year, and then the other by the DfT, on aircraft noise and airspace change.
Click here to view full story...
Richard Branson wants to fuel his expensive joy-riding “Virgin Galactic” on biofuels ….
Richard Branson is still planning is "Virgin Galactic" so some very rich travellers can be whisked up to edge of space, experience weightless for a short time, and then fly back down again. Some very expensive joy-riding. And now he is hoping that his passengers won't have to have any qualms of conscience about the carbon emissions generated by their (pointless) trip. So he is hoping to fuel his planes with biofuel. Quite which biofuel he does not say - probably because there is no fuel that would actually be properly sustainable. If there was such a fuel, it would have to not compete with other crops for land, water or fertiliser; it would have to not compete for space with wildlife and natural habitats; and it would have to have only minimal impacts on aspects of the environment, such as soil structure. If such a fuel could magically be found (there is no far no such crop in prospect) there is no obvious reason why it should be used to ferry the very rich off on a "bragging-rights" trip - it could be better used for land based vehicles, such as fire engines or ambulances etc. Branson is still hoping to form a base for Virgin Galactic in the UK. He tries to defend his space plans, saying they could eventually lead to a new form of intercontinental travel for the masses via space.
Click here to view full story...
Linlithgow MSP sends her own 42-page report on impact of Edinburgh flight path trial to CAA
The "Tutur" flight path trial at Edinburgh airport created a storm of protest, from those finding themselves under a new, narrow flight path for the first time. The trial had to be stopped two months early, in October, because of the opposition. Now Fiona Hyslop, the MSP for Linlithgow, which was partly overflown in the trial, has herself surveyed 2,000 residents in West Lothian to find out their views. She has sent her 42-page report to the CAA. Ms Hyslop said the reason for her report was that residents had been kept in the dark about the potential for a new Edinburgh flight path and although the CAA "will receive a report from Edinburgh Airport stating that the complaints they received have originated from a small number of residents who have repeatedly complained, Edinburgh Airport did not proactively contact each individual resident as I have." Of the 2,000 surveyed, she found that 1,220 respondents felt that noise created by planes overhead was intrusive or disturbing while they were in their house with the windows shut. 760 of those surveyed found that there had been either no change, that the noise was barely noticeable or that it was tolerable. In two areas, the number saying they had been adversely affected were 71% and 60%. These results give a much fuller picture of the noise impact than "simply stating the results from two temporary noise monitors as Edinburgh Airport propose to do.”
Click here to view full story...
Gatwick objects to new hospice due to increase in ‘bird strike risk hazard’ – as within 13 km radius of airport
Under guidance from the DfT, airports have to be statutory consultees for any planning application within a radius of 13 km of the airport, that might have an impact on it, for a variety of reasons. One of these is the risk of bird strike, and so new developments that might attract birds are opposed. Now Gatwick Airport has objected to plans for a new hospice and homes in Pease Pottage [south of Crawley, and about 6km south of Gatwick airport] due to an increase in ‘bird strike risk hazard’. St Catherine’s Hospice would provide a 48-bed care facility, and there would also be up to 600 new homes, cafe, a community building, retail units, and a new primary school. The current hospice has only 18 beds, and is not able to cater for the number of people needing palliative support in the area nor has sufficient family areas. Gatwick says the areas of open water in the application would attract birds large enough to endanger planes, including feral geese, duck, grey heron and cormorants - especially if the public feed them. Gatwick also fear the mown grassland would provide a grazing habitat for birds. Gatwick wants minimal water. Airports keep their grassed areas as unappealing to bird life as possible. Gatwick set out, for the Airports Commission, what it would do to "control and where possible reduce bird hazard."
Click here to view full story...
Letter to Bo Redeborn – re. Gatwick flight path review: “Don’t let us down”
People living in areas around Penshurst, Crowborough, Tunbridge Wells, Bidborough etc began to suffer from far worse Gatwick noise from early 2014. Changes had been made to Gatwick arrivals flight paths, without consultation. There is now an independent review being undertaken, of the changes. It is being done by Bo Redeborn and Graham Lake, and will be published on 28th January. It is hoped that this will not be a whitewash. A resident from a village in West Kent has written to Bo Redeborn, expressing very clearly the necessity of the review being genuinely independent, and avoiding the ambiguities, evasions and half-truths that have plagued the whole flight path change situation from its start. The writer says: "Until or unless you are able to tell us precisely what changed, why it changed, who proposed it and who authorised it then to all intents and purposes this really is 'vectoring choices'. If this is not PBN, if this is not SESAR, if this is not government directed policy, then this really is caused by a bunch of ATCs [Air Traffic Controllers] making arbitrary decisions to send planes down pig trails. So it can, and should, be restored 'overnight' as confirmed by Charles Kirwan-Taylor." He concludes: "Mr Redeborn, an awful lot of people are depending upon you to repair their shattered lives; don't let us down." See the whole letter ....
Click here to view full story...
Lilian Greenwood displays the confused thinking of Labour in its enthusiasm for a runway
The Labour party remains in a mess on what to do on runways. They have a position of stating that "Labour will study the government’s proposals carefully, alongside any additional material that is commissioned, and we will respond on the basis of our four tests for aviation expansion. These are: 1.That robust and convincing evidence was produced that the Commission’s recommendations would provide sufficient capacity. 2. That the UK’s legal climate change obligations could still be met. 3. That local noise and environmental impacts can be managed and minimised. 4. That the benefits of any expansion were not confined to London and the South East." But, though Lilian Greenwood, the Shadow Transport Secretary herself bought up a bit of Airplot in 2009 to prevent a Heathrow runway, she now says: "There is no doubt ... that we need a new runway." And "Aviation expansion is a matter of national significance and, having committed to addressing the problem head on, David Cameron faces a loss of credibility if he ducks the issue now. The UK needs additional capacity, but the prospect of any expansion is now in doubt." But Labour itself says the runway has to meet the 4 conditions. And in reality that is not possible. So Labour's position?
Click here to view full story...
Suffolk ex-councillor: why not use RAF Mildenhall in Suffolk instead of Heathrow?
An ex-councillor from Suffolk, Judy Terry, writing in Conservative Home, puts forward the idea of using the redundant RAF base at Mildenhall, in Suffolk as a new airport. It is a charmingly bonkers idea - but logically no more bonkers than adding a runway at Heathrow or Gatwick. Judy is aware of the negative impacts a new Heathrow runway would have on surrounding residents, and is unconvinced that greatly increasing Heathrow air freight is a great plan, due to road congestion and diesel pollution. She says deferring the decision on a runway makes sense, as "a lot has changed since Howard Davies started his airport review three years ago, and we don’t understand why other options were dismissed." So, a “new solution” could be putting soon-to-be-redundant airfields in the regions to use as airports. "In the last year, the USAF announced that it will be leaving the RAF’s wartime bomber base in Mildenhall, Suffolk, by 2022." This will cause job losses and negative impacts on the local economy, so Judy believes Mildenhall should be considered "if only the Heathrow expansion advocates would open their minds to a viable alternative." "With the support of the local MP, Matt Hancock, the local council has just received a £230,000 grant to review the future, one option being an international airport, subject to the RAF’s future plans."
Click here to view full story...
Sunday Times reports that Heathrow wants to recoup its Crossrail costs by extra charges for passengers
The Crossrail link to Heathrow is due to open by the end of 2019, and it is expected that this will cut the travel time from Liverpool Street station to Heathrow from 55 minutes to 34 minutes. Heathrow built and paid for a 5.3 mile long stretch of line linking its terminals with the main line to Paddington station. But the Sunday Times reports that now Heathrow wants to recoup the cost of building this stretch of line, which was completed almost 20 years ago, from users of Crossrail. The DfT estimates that meeting Heathrow’s claim could add over £40m on to the annual cost of running Crossrail. The DfT believes Heathrow should not get this money back. If Heathrow gets its way, rail passengers would have to pay inflated prices to travel to Heathrow. Transport for London (TfL), which will oversee Crossrail, will have to decide whether to claw back the cost through ticket prices on the line, or spread it across the whole of London’s transport network. Heathrow says it paid over £1 billion for the tracks, trains and depots, and to get this back, it wants a fee of £597, plus a maintenance charge of £138, to be paid by Crossrail every time one of its trains uses the line. Heathrow also owns Heathrow Express, Britain’s most expensive train service (£26.50 from Paddington to Heathrow). The decision on any financial deal will be in the hands of the Office of Rail and Road (ORR).
Click here to view full story...
Activists who blocked Heathrow tunnel plead not guilty – further hearing some time in 2016
On 23rd December, there was a brief court hearing for the 3 activists who blocked a main Heathrow entrance tunnel on 26th November. The hearing was at Uxbridge Magistrates Court, and they pleaded not guilty. Another hearing will therefore be arranged in 2016. Many supporters of the activists attended the hearing and gathered outside the court beforehand. After the court hearing, a large group Heathrow-3rd-Runway-opponents including many local residents who face destruction of their homes and communities if a runway is built, met outside the Magistrates court. Wearing Santa hats, they sang a few Christmas carols and jingles (with two or three accompanying policemen) before dispersing. The next court date for Plane Stupid airport activists will be Monday 18 January 2016 at 9am at Willesden Magistrates' Court, when the 13 activists who occupied Heathrow Airport in July 2015 have their trial -due to last 6 days. All 13 activists are asserting their right to defend the climate and the communities negatively impacted by Heathrow, and are pleading not guilty. Plane Stupid invites people who sympathise with the actions taken by the activists, and want to support them in court, to come along. They say: "Bring cake and banners, or just yourselves!"
Click here to view full story...
Richard Heinberg post COP21: “we may have to write off aviation as anything but a specialty transport mode”
After COP21, Richard Heinberg has had a long, hard look at how humanity can reduce consumption of fossil fuels and achieve the carbon reductions needed before 2050. He only touches on aviation, but his message is very clear: Looking at shipping: "One way or another, global trade will have to shrink." On aviation: "There is no good drop-in substitute for aviation fuels; we may have to write off aviation as anything but a specialty transport mode. Planes running on hydrogen or biofuels are an expensive possibility, as are dirigibles filled with (non-renewable) helium, any of which could help us maintain vestiges of air travel." One recommendation: "Where key uses of fossil fuels are especially hard to substitute (aviation fuel, for example), argue for work-arounds (such as rail) or for the managed, gradual scaling down of those uses." And "It will likely require a global authority to determine how to direct the use of the world’s remaining burnable fossil fuels—whether toward the further growth of conventional manufacturing and transportation, or toward the build-out of renewable energy-based generation and consumption infrastructure. Only such an authority could globally prioritize and coordinate sectoral shifts...."
Click here to view full story...
“Plane Wrong” critical of CAA’s PIR decision to permit new easterly take-off route to continue
The CAA published its long-awaited Post Implementation Review report in early November. Gatwick is required by the CAA to change one westerly departure route (Route 4) that affects people in many villages to the South of Dorking and across to Reigate and Redhill. This has to revert back to being within the NPR (noise preferential route) as before. Local group, Plane Wrong, set up in response to the noise problems caused, says it welcomes the decision and wants this to be implemented rapidly so that residents do not have to suffer the noise for another summer. Plane Wrong is, however, dismayed at the CAA decision in respect of Route 3, which is not to be changed despite the fact that many more people are significantly affected by the change. This appears to have been entirely ignored. Plane Wrong has considerable doubts about some of the methodologies employed by the CAA to reach both these decisions. On the change to Route 4, Plane Wrong says the changes should be completed quickly, though the CAA has to test the change in simulators for Boeing and Airbus. They do not yet know when this work will take place. There is also a 2 month period that has to elapse after that, and there is no indication yet of when this will end
Click here to view full story...
Sunday Times reports “BA cancels flights to tighten grip on privileged Heathrow position” by slot use
The Sunday Times reports that British Airways has admitted it plays the system at Heathrow by “tactically cancelling” flights so it can hang on to lucrative landing slots without needing to fly more planes. BA has about 50% of Heathrow's take-off and landing slots, and it could have 53% by next summer. It has done successive deals to obtain more slots, such as its 2012 takeover of BMI, and getting 11 pairs of slots following the closure of Virgin Atlantic’s Little Red service to regional airports, and the collapse of Russian carrier Transaero. Most of these slots had been mandated for use on UK routes, as part of a European competition ruling on the BMI takeover.But BA can now use them as it wants, after the failure of the two rival airlines. In the rules that govern how landing slots are used, airlines have to use them 80% of the time or lose them to another airline. Airlines that owns lots, which can be valued up to £40 million, are not keen to lose them. BA is using "tactical cancellations" across their network, so they can keep the 80% rule,without much overall increase in capacity. BA cancelled a daily Heathrow flight to New York, and some short-haul routes and will launch new routes, mainly to leisure destinations in Europe. While BA’s tactics are within the rules, they raise questions about whether Heathrow’s runway capacity is being used effectively.
Click here to view full story...
DEFRA produces plan to improve air quality – Client Earth regards it as inadequate
A ruling by the Supreme Court in April 2015 required the government to produce a comprehensive plan to meet air pollution limits by December. The government has now produced this. The intention is that it has to include low emission zones, congestion charging and other economic incentives. It is thought that due to the failure to meet European limits of harmful NOx gases, which are mostly caused by diesel traffic, there are up to 9,500 premature deaths each year in London alone. Under the government's plan, "Clean Air Zones" will be introduced - by 2020 - in areas of Birmingham, Leeds, Nottingham, Derby and Southampton where pollution is most serious. However, though vehicles like old buses, taxis, coaches and lorries have to pay a charge to enter these zones - private passenger cars will not be charged. Also newer vehicles that meet the latest emission standards will not need to pay. Client Earth, the lawyers who brought the legal case against the UK government, for breaching the EU's Air Quality Directive, said the plan falls far short of the action necessary to comply with the Supreme Court ruling, and they will make a legal challenge to force the government to take faster action to achieve legal pollution limits. "As soon as possible," or by 2020, is not soon enough.
Click here to view full story...
Gatwick re-hashes its plans to add runway capacity in 4 phases, rather than all at the start
Gatwick are hoping they can get some advantage over Heathrow, by making much of their plans to develop the extra runway capacity in phases - not building all the ancillary infrastructure at the start. This in fact has been their plan for a long time - it is nothing new. The Airports Commission assessed it in 2014. Gatwick may not be able to secure the necessary funding to build everything at once, and only be able to pay for it over many decades. Gatwick hope to build the runway and basic third terminal in the first phase, costing about £3 billion, by 2025. This would increase capacity to about 63 million passengers, from a maximum now of 45 million. The 2nd and 3rd phases would expand the terminal, build new aircraft gates and fully divert the A23 around the airport. The 4th phase would be the completion of the terminal and piers, while finishing off taxiways for passenger jets by 2040. The aim would be to add more as passenger numbers build up. The Airports Commission always saw the numbers of passengers rising only slowly at Gatwick, and taking a long time to double (not even taking account of the higher costs to pay for the runway etc, that would be passed to passengers, reducing demand).That does indicate that there is no great pent up demand for a huge number more flights. Let alone business flights to emerging economies.
Click here to view full story...
Government delays decision … Sally Pavey sets out why Gatwick expansion must NEVER happen
Responding to the news that the government will delay a decision on a new south east runway, till at least some time in summer 2016, Sally Pavey (Chair of CAGNE) set out many of the key reasons why a Gatwick runway should never be allowed. People opposed to a Gatwick runway are concerned about the politics of the Tory party, David Cameron, and Zac Goldsmith's bid to be London Mayor - making a choice of Gatwick for a runway, for very doubtful reasons. The impact of aircraft noise at Gatwick is severe - as illustrated by the number of noise complaints (over 29,000 in 2014) - with flights at night, every night. The Airports Commission's figures show the likely economic benefit to the UK from a Gatwick runway is not high, and being almost entirely low cost leisure flights, Gatwick contributes disproportionately to the tourism deficit - increasing the amount of money Brits spent abroad, rather than in the UK. The impact of the housing and increased urbanisation that Gatwick would cause would be huge, across many boroughs, putting severe pressure on all infrastructure. A 2-runway Gatwick would be the same size as Heathrow, but with one railway line that can’t be expanded, and a new line is ruled out. The only motorway, the M23, would be full before Gatwick's runway was finished ...and more ... read Sally's article ...
Click here to view full story...
Shipping, like aviation, slow and reluctant to agree any measures to limit global CO2 emissions
The international climate agreement in Paris still puts additional pressure on shipping to change, despite its exclusion from the text (with aviation). The Paris agreement should be signed by countries early in 2016 - it covers actions to cut carbon emissions, from 2020 onwards. Global shipping is a huge emitter of carbon, and is growing. Lloyds List says new ships being ordered now will have to meet design requirements and all ship operators need to be aware of the ship energy efficiency management plan. The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) is tasked with - eventually finding some mechanism to limit carbon emissions from the sector. It has been ineffective so far. Mention of work by the IMO was dropped from draft versions of the Paris agreement. In due course, some form of emissions trading system might be introduced. The EU aready has its pending requirements for all ships to report CO2 emissions on voyages to, from or between European ports — the so-called MRV rules, meaning monitoring, reporting and verification of annual CO2 emissions. The first year of results will have been collated by 2020. European NGO, T&E wants shipping to be part of the European ETS. Lobby groups have been appalled at the slow pace of the IMO in coming up with strong measures to curb CO2.
Click here to view full story...
IATA expects global airline profits to rise by 5.1% in 2016 (and CO2 to rise by 4.6%) cf. 2015
IATA, which represents some 260 airlines and 83% of global air traffic, expects profits in the industry to rise by 5.1% to $36.3 billion in 2016 - up from $33 billion in 2015. This growth is attributed to dropping oil prices and a greater demand for travel. IATA expects about 3.78 billion air passengers in 2016, travelling over 54,000 routes. There were about 3.54 billion air passengers in 2015. It says: "Air travel is accelerating, with growth of 6.9% expected next year, the best since 2010, well above the 5.5% trend of the past 20 years." They say air passengers spend 1% of world GDP on air transport, and air transport costs have been halved over the past 20 years. They say load factors forecast to fall a little (around as capacity rises, with yet more planes being added. However, IATA is happy to say the carbon emissions per ATK (available tonne kilometres) will be 1.8% lower. However, as they expect around 7% growth, the net effect is much higher carbon emissions. The estimated increase in the use of jet fuel is about 4.2% higher this year than in 2014, and is expected to rise by 4.6% in 2016, compared to 2015. IATA says the carbon emissions from the global aviation industry were 739 million tonnes in 2014; 771 million tonnes in 2015; and 806 million tonnes in 2016. North America may generate over half of the global industry's profit in 2016 ($19.4 billion), while European airlines could increase in profits from $5.8 billion in 2015 to $8.5 billion in 2016.
Click here to view full story...
ICAO “welcomes the COP21 agreement” which excludes any measures to regulate aviation CO2
The Paris COP21 climate talks produced an agreement, but without any mention of the carbon emissions from international aviation and shipping. The weak paragraph just saying Parties might "pursue the limitation or reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, working through ICAO, with a view to agreeing concrete measures addressing these emissions...." was removed. A press release from ICAO (the International Civil Aviation Organization) says how delighted it is at the outcome of the COP21, and how now: “Every State and every global industrial sector must now redouble their efforts toward achieving substantial progress on emissions reduction if the COP21 legacy is to be achieved, and the civil aviation community is no exception.” Somehow the exclusion of aviation from the Paris agreement is interpreted by ICAO as “a vote of confidence in the progress ICAO and the aviation community have achieved thus far." That is a pretty incredible statement, bearing in mind ICAO's record of utterly dismal failure to produce any worthwhile progress over some 18 years. ICAO is meant to be working on developing a "market based measure" (MBM) for global aviation by September 2016. Expectations for how likely this is, or how effective it will be, are very low.
Click here to view full story...
Environment MEPs rebuff member states on plans to weaken testing of diesel vehicle emissions
On 28th October, the European Commission (EC) came to an agreement on weakening the emissions testing standards for diesel vehicles. This has been done in order to protect the European car industry, but put at risk the health of European citizens. Instead of tougher tests of how much NO2 vehicles actually produce in real world driving, the Commission proposed that "real-world" driving emissions (RDE) tests should become operational starting next year, but would only take full effect after a two-year phase-in for new vehicles from 2017. The limit is set to sink again in 2019. On 14th December the European Parliament's Environment Committee voted to reject the EC proposal, and member states. A resolution drafted by the environment committee MEPs to object to the proposal was passed with 40 votes in favour, 9 objections and 13 abstentions. Following yesterday's vote, Dutch MEP Bas Eickhout (Greens), spokesperson of the Parliament's Environment Committee, called the outcome an “important step towards overturning the outrageous decision by EU governments. ...This test, as it stands, would essentially overwrite EU limits on pollutants from cars." The European Parliament will vote on the resolution in the week of 18-21 January. Environment ministers will discuss the October agreement on diesel emissions on 16th December.
Click here to view full story...
Ministers should publish details of flight paths for new Heathrow or Gatwick runway
One of the glaring omissions from the Airports Commission's report and its areas of research was to establish the flight paths for the three short listed options. As the noise impact is an absolutely critical factor in the opposition to a new runway, information on these routes is key. But because UK airspace is being re-designed at present, there is no certainty even about the existing flight paths several years ahead, let alone new ones. It would be unavoidable that tens or hundreds of new people would be overflown for the first time by planes using a new runway. So far, these people are entirely unaware of the problems they would face. Ruth Cadbury asked Patrick McLoughlin about this on 14th December: "Will he force Heathrow airport to declare where the flight paths will be, particularly the approach paths..." Sadiq Khan said Londoners had been “kept in the dark for too long” on the runway decision, and detailed flight paths should be published for a Heathrow 3rd runway to show which communities would be blighted by more noise. The same are needed for areas affected by Gatwick, especially as it has far more night flights than Heathrow. Zac Goldsmith has already published indicative routes for Heathrow, but these are just speculative at present.
Click here to view full story...
Patrick McLoughlin makes bland statement to Parliament about runway decision delay
Patrick McLoughlin, Secretary of State for Transport, made an oral statement in the House of Commons on the government's announcement that it is delaying a decision on a new runway. It is carefully worded, to give nothing away and be entirely non-committal. He was asked various questions by MPs after it, and his answers also give nothing away - and barely answer the questions. Some MPs wanted to know if Gatwick was now being considered. Henry Smith (MP for Crawley) asked whether, if the government decides on a Gatwick runway, he could have a "guarantee that the significant investment that will be required in housing, highways, the rail network and healthcare and all other public services will be forthcoming?" Mr McLoughlin: There are already significant commitments with regard to Gatwick; improving the infrastructure for Gatwick is already taking place and further such schemes will be coming on board over the next few years. It is vital that we get the surface access to our airports correct. That is something we are dealing with over a period of time. My hon. Friend asks whether there would be other consequences if the decision should go towards Gatwick. That will be the case for any option we choose, and of course we want to look at those options and see which ones we would want to take forward." ie. more vague waffle
Click here to view full story...
Zac Goldsmith: Heathrow as a hub is not the answer – better competition between London airports is
Zac Goldsmith is unarguably an important part of whatever decision the government makes on whether to build a runway. Writing in the Standard on 14th December, Zac said "London’s prosperity depends on it being connected to the world — particularly those emerging markets where new business and jobs will come from. That is not best achieved by creating a monopoly on one edge of our city. We need competition and choice....The irony is that even if Heathrow is expanded, it will not provide the additional capacity we need. Figures produced by the Airports Commission itself show that new activity at an expanded Heathrow would be at the expense of competing airports .. [it] would suck in flights from across the South-East and undermine competition not only at Gatwick and Stansted but as far afield as Manchester and Birmingham too." And " hubs will likely soon cease to exist. The new generation of aircraft can travel point to point for longer, and at a fraction of the cost" so a massive airport like a 3 runway Heathrow will not be needed. "The priority is competition and, if and when there is need for additional capacity, for that reason it would need to be at either Stansted or Gatwick, whichever can offer the best value for money without compromising carbon, noise and air-quality limits."
Click here to view full story...
Prof David Metz: “The solution to London’s airport capacity crisis? Do nothing”
David Metz is an Honorary professor of transport studies at UCL. He has written a sensible assessment of what should be done with the alleged "crisis" of London's airport capacity. He says for "road travel, “predict and provide” has been largely abandoned by developed economies. These days the favoured approach is called “managing demand”. This method works on the basis that attempting to meet an ever-growing demand is impractical..." "what would happen if we didn’t build another runway at all? For air travel, the answer lies within the market. Three–quarters of passengers are on leisure trips..."... "The case for more airport capacity to support inbound tourism is weak. While London’s hospitality, entertainment and retail sectors would welcome more visitors, Britain has a negative balance of trade in tourism: that is, British people abroad spend a lot more each year than overseas visitors to the UK."..."If we decided not to build a further runway at Heathrow, the market would respond to this capacity constraint by accommodating the most valuable passengers through price increases."..."The growth of business travel would displace leisure travel, both within aircraft on existing routes and between routes, where time is traded against money."... "Managing the demand for air travel though market mechanisms is a viable alternative to building more airport capacity"
Click here to view full story...
International aviation and shipping omitted from Paris agreement – despite their huge CO2 emissions
The Paris talks ended with an agreement, which is regarded by many as encouraging and setting the ground for positive progress in coming years. Others regard the agreement as being weak, setting no dates or targets - and having no actual promises of action by participating governments. International aviation and shipping were omitted altogether from the final 31 page text. As the two sectors account for around 8% of global CO2 emissions, their exclusion is significant. Without proper regulation, or targets for cuts in their emissions, estimates suggest aviation and shipping could account for as much as one-third of global emissions by 2050 as demand for air travel increases, and as emissions from other sectors such as energy generation are curbed. Green Party MP Caroline Lucas said it was “crucial” that emissions from shipping and aviation were included in the final text. “Leaving these two highly polluting sectors out of the agreement will call into questions the robustness of any emissions targets.” Some of the strongest criticism has come from renowned climate scientist James Hansen: "It’s just worthless words. There is no action, just promises. ...As long as fossil fuels appear to be the cheapest fuels out there, they will be continued to be burned.”
Click here to view full story...
Simon Jenkins: Never mind a third runway – what Heathrow needs is managed decline
In a brilliantly written comment piece in the Guardian, Simon Jenkins sets out some timely thoughts on the matter of a new runway. People should read the whole article - it is so well written. Simon says: "If more capacity were vital, the market would have spoken.".... "Never take a fact from a lobbyist. Heathrow runways have nothing to do with “vital British business”. The idea that spending a staggering £18bn on one runway is economically essential is ludicrous. The economy has far more need of better roads to ports, more commuter trains or cheaper electricity.... A full 80% of London’s airport capacity serves one industry: foreign leisure travel. That industry is, overwhelmingly, Britons going abroad, and is thus negative to the balance of payments. Business export travel is a trivial part of the sum. If this whole argument were really about something “essential”, Heathrow would cancel its 20% of domestic flights and discontinue all tourist destinations. If more capacity were really so vital, then the market would have spoken." ..."The days of deciding on infrastructure through “predict and provide” should be over." ..."Heathrow should be phased out or – like City airport – confined to predominantly business destinations. Air travel should be discouraged not encouraged, and airlines dispersed closer to their markets across Britain
Click here to view full story...
Predictable arrogant shouting from business lobby – they want their runway, no matter what its impacts are
The media have been unimpressive in their coverage of the statement by the government that they are not making a runway location decision this year. They have almost entirely focused on the demands of the business lobby. While the government decision is in large part to avoid political difficulties, of Zac Goldsmith being Tory London Mayoral candidate - there are very real environmental and other problems with either runway location. The Airports Commission did a very incomplete job in its recommendation. It left key areas such as carbon emissions, local air pollution and noise impacts for the government to sort out. It largely neglected health impacts, or costs to the taxpayer, or long term social and economic costs to areas near the "chosen" airport. It was therefore inevitable that a vast amount of additional work would need to be done, before any government could - responsibly and prudently - make a runway decision. Due to the flaws in the Commission's recommendation, the government is aware it will face forceful legal challenges, especially on air pollution. The Environmental Audit Committee set out the extra conditions the government needs to fulfil before making any decision. By contrast the business lobby just things shouting loudly and aggressively that they want a runway, and they want it now, (regardless of its adverse effects) will win them the day. Stunningly arrogant, and without any apparent analysis of the actual facts. But the media seem to love it.
Click here to view full story...
Willie Walsh threatens to move BA to develop base in Dublin or Madrid to avoid paying for “gold plated” runway plans
Willie Walsh, CEO of British Airways' parent company, IAG, has said BA might give up on Heathrow and move overseas, if Heathrow got a new "gold plated" runway and doubled its charges to airlines. He said BA could “develop our business” in Dublin or Madrid rather than pay for the expansion of Heathrow. The current landing charge of about £40 for a return trip would increase to at least £80 with the runway. That might deter passengers. “We won’t pay for it and we most certainly won’t pre-fund the construction of any new infrastructure.” Mr Walsh said that the £17.6 billion plan to expand Heathrow represented an attempt by a “monopoly airport” to build “gold-plated facilities and fleece its airlines and their customers”. Only about 1% of the estimated cost is for the runway itself. He indicated that Heathrow remained his preferred option for a runway, but not if it cost of £17.6 billion." ...“Heathrow is not IAG’s only hub. We can develop our business via Madrid, which has spare capacity, and Dublin, where there are plans for a cost-effective and efficient second runway." Patrick McLoughlin, the transport secretary, was studiously neutral, saying that Gatwick and Heathrow both remained runway options. Mr Walsh also opposes a runway at Gatwick, as “no one would move there while Heathrow remains open."
Click here to view full story...
Government’s Heathrow indecision met with opprobrium from group of Gatwick area MPs
Speaking as Chair of the Gatwick Coordination Group of MPs (all eight MPs in the areas affected by Gatwick), Crispin Blunt MP lambasted the Government’s indecision over its response to the Airports Commission recommendation for a new runway at Heathrow Airport. Crispin said: “This is a disgraceful vacillation by the Government. They will richly deserve the opprobrium to be poured all over this shocking non-decision."....“We were promised a decision by the end of the year. Recently we were promised a direction. What we have is neither decision, nor direction, but political cowardice, weakness and prevarication." ... “We will fight tooth and nail any attempts to resurrect Gatwick, whose flawed and costly proposal was left dead and buried by the Airports Commission. It is not the easier option. It would not survive the scrutiny of Parliament and the courts. Gatwick would deliver half the economic benefit, has wretched rail and road transport connections, and would fail to provide the hub airport which the UK needs.”
Click here to view full story...
Long awaited Government statement on runways – decision will be delayed till summer 2016 – more work needed
After a meeting of the Cabinet Airports Sub-Committee, a statement was finally put out by Patrick Mcloughlin, the Secretary of State for Transport, at 7pm. It said that the government confirms it supports the building of a new runway in the south east, to add capacity by 2030 (earlier airports claimed they could have a runway built by 2025). The decision on location is "subject to further consideration on environmental impacts and the best possible mitigation measures." All three short listed schemes will continue to be considered - so Gatwick is still included. "The government will undertake a package of further work and we anticipate that it will conclude over the summer." On air pollution and carbon emissions "The government faces a complex and challenging decision on delivering this capacity." More work is needed on NO2. "The government expects the airports to put forward ambitious solutions. ...The mechanism for delivering planning consents for airport expansion will be an ‘Airports national policy statement’ (NPS), following which a scheme promoter would need to apply for a development consent order."... “At the first opportunity I will make a statement to the House to make clear our plans.”
Click here to view full story...
Comment by TAG on government runway statement: disappointed 3rd Heathrow runway hasn’t been ruled out, once and for all.
Responding to the Secretary of State for Transport's statement that the government has delayed its decision on future airport capacity, Paul McGuinness, spokesman for Teddington Action Group (TAG) said: "We're very disappointed that a third Heathrow runway hasn't been ruled out, once and for all. Heathrow is crammed between two immovable motorways, and expansion means building over the M25 and villages. It's already the UK's largest noise polluter and, even now, breaches air quality pollution targets. It's situated in the middle of one of the UK's most populated residential areas and it's implausible that 250,000 extra plane movements won't increase noise and pollution and make yet more dangerous the already full skies over our capital city. It's simply in the wrong place to be growing what is already Europe's busiest airport. The economic case has been found to be overstated, and Heathrow are refusing to accept environmental protections such as night flight bans and are refusing to rule out a fourth runway. We shouldn't forget that the current proposal for the north west runway has been designed to occupy sufficient space to allow for the building of a fourth runway..... We believe that Heathrow expansion was only recommended because Sir Howard Davies was predisposed towards Heathrow...."
Click here to view full story...
Comment by GACC on government runway statement: Gatwick is not an easy option, especially on surface access
GACC (the Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign) has responded to the news that the government is postponing its runway decision for at least 6 months - and therefore leaving Gatwick as a possible location. GACC is not surprised that the Government has delayed the decision, because Gatwick is not an easy option - there are substantial environmental problems at Gatwick as well as at Heathrow - for which no solution has been found. At Gatwick these include aggravating the north-south divide; 50,000 people would be affected by worse air quality; there would be a need for a new town the size of Crawley; three times as many people as at present would be affected by severe levels of aircraft noise; and the road and rail system could not cope, when the airport approached full capacity. A key issue that has no far been neglected by government, or the Commission, is the real cost of the road and rail infrastructure work that would be required for a 2nd Gatwick runway. The M23 and M25 would need major widening, the M23 would need to be extended into London, several new A roads would need to be built east and west of Gatwick, and the Brighton main rail line would need extensive work – all of which could be just as costly as anything needed at Heathrow. The reality is that the annual number of Gatwick flights is now only 5% higher than it was in 2000.
Click here to view full story...
Comments by Zac Goldsmith and Boris Johnson on the government runway statement
Zac said he was "absolutely delighted" that the Government has acknowledged that the airports decision cannot be made without further environmental tests - "after much campaigning, the Government has heard the arguments, seen sense and taken this course of action." ..."We know that any airport expansion must meet our legally binding carbon, noise and air quality limits". ..."The choice has always been between an outdated model which would lead to higher costs and less choice, or investing in a network of well connected and competing airports." Boris said: "Time to jettison the 3rd runway, chuck it overboard... it ain't gonna happen". He said many will think a 3rd runway at Heathrow is "pathetically unambitious"...."A lot of people will see this as just more fudge-erama to push a decision beyond the Mayoral elections." He said Heathrow expansion has been "officially grounded" despite airport officials putting a "superhuman effort into bouncing the Government into a quick decision in their favour"...."The wheels are falling off the Heathrow fuselage" and Heathrow will realise that "due to the environmental impacts, the legal obstacles and the cost to the public purse, this bird will never fly." He still has hopes for the Thames estuary ...
Click here to view full story...
Comment by Heathrow on government runway statement: it has “full confidence” in its runway plan “within environmental limits”
Heathrow responded to the announcement that the government will postpone a runway decision till summer with a typical example of its PR-speak: "...it has full confidence in its new expansion plan and pledged to work with Government to deliver Britain the hub capacity it needs within tough environmental limits." There is a page full of Heathrow's usual claims about economic benefits, jobs, "linking the regions to global growth" and the same stuff that has been trotted out again and again. This is one of the statements, as full of holes as a Swiss cheese: "The Commission confirmed that expanding Heathrow would have the biggest economic benefits for the UK and can be done while reducing noise for local communities and within EU air quality limits." Really not a brilliantly persuasive response. It is copied below, with a few links to the actual facts and figures, other than Heathrow spin. Another gem to appreciate (avoiding mention of economic benefit at its most exaggerated, and over 60 YEARS, and jobs by 2050): the runway will "result in up to £211bn of economic growth, 180,000 jobs and 10,000 apprenticeships spread across the whole of Britain." Seems government has not been taken in by this stuff ....
Click here to view full story...
Comment by AEF on government runway statement: continued support for a new runway premature without environmental safeguards
Commenting on the government announcement that the government confirms its support for building a new runway, but it will be delayed, the Aviation Environment Federation said a decision in support of expansion is premature without knowing whether important environmental questions can be answered. "Heathrow is one of the biggest sources of CO2 emissions in the UK and people living around the airport are already subject to aircraft noise and pollution levels that impair their health. Yet the Airports Commission failed to show, in two years of work, how a new runway could be compatible with key Government commitments on air pollution and climate change." With key environmental challenges remaining, the Government should not commit to a new runway until and unless environmental questions relating to noise, air quality and climate can be answered. “The challenges of addressing the environmental impacts of a new runway at either Heathrow or Gatwick are no less significant than they were when the Coalition Government ruled out expansion for environmental reasons in 2010. The current Government should do the same.”
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow Express, owned by Heathrow, told by ASA to drop its untrue claim it runs every 15 minutes
The Advertising Standards Authority has criticised the claim by Heathrow Express that it runs a service every 15 minutes. A customer had complained that the frequency drops to once every 30 minutes late in the day. Heathrow Express is operated by the Heathrow Express Operating Company, a wholly owned subsidiary of Heathrow Airport Holdings. Heathrow Express admitted the ongoing Crossrail engineering works were affecting the service, meaning that three trains in each direction were cancelled after 10pm from Monday to Thursday, leading to a half-hourly service during this time. This was only 2.2% of the total number of trains. However, the ASA said consumers would understand "every 15 minutes" to mean that a Heathrow Express service would be available every 15 minutes throughout the whole day, between 5am to midnight. "We therefore considered that information regarding the hours of operation and the regular reduction in service should have been made clear to consumers as part of the claim itself."The ASA told Heathrow Express not to repeat the claim "every 15 minutes". Research published last year suggested that the Heathrow Express was the most expensive airport rail journey in Europe, with flights to Spain available for less.
Click here to view full story...
The exclusion of international aviation & shipping CO2 from Paris COP21 deal makes 2°C limit close to impossible
The Paris climate agreement text has now dropped mention of international aviation and shipping. The weak statement that has been removed only said that parties might "pursue the limitation or reduction of greenhouse gas emissions" through ICAO "with a view to agreeing concrete measures addressing these emissions, including developing procedures for incorporating emissions from international aviation and marine bunker fuels into low-emission development strategies." Even that has gone, so there is no ambition for CO2 regulation. Transport & Environment (T&E) says this has fatally undermined the prospects of keeping global warming below 2°C. The CO2 emissions of these two sectors amount to about 8% of emissions globally. In recent years their emissions have grown twice as fast as the those of the global economy – an 80% rise in CO2 output from aviation and shipping between 1990 and 2010, versus 40% growth in CO2 emissions from global economic activity – and they are projected to grow by up to 270% in 2050. They could be 39% of global CO2 emissions by 2050 if left unregulated. After 18 years of being supposed to come up with measures to tackle aviation emissions, ICAO has done almost nothing - and little is expected of it.
Click here to view full story...
Report by independent consultants, Helios, highly critical of CAA over its airspace change process
Helios, a management and technology consultancy, was contracted by the CAA to undertake an independent review of its airspace change (AC) decision-making process. Its report presents the results of the review together with Helios' recommendations for a revised AC process. There have been a huge number of complaints in the last few years about how the CAA deals with airspace change, and the inadequate way in which it communicates with the public. Helios is highly critical of the way the CAA has conducted consultations about flight paths at airports across the UK, saying there has been a lack of transparency. Helios also says there is a problem in the CAA being both judge and jury. The report comes just ten days after the CAA announced that it would allow London City Airport to concentrate its flight paths. That decision was severely criticized by campaign group HACAN East, which complained about the lack of proper consultation - most people did not know they would be getting concentrated plane noise in future. The CAA refused to re-consult. The Helios report has called for an Oversight Committee to be set up to allow people to challenge the CAA’s decisions on flights paths.
Click here to view full story...
Airports Commission not only downplayed crash risk of new runway, but got the word “crash” removed from report title
Many people are very concerned about the safety implications of adding another runway, especially at Heathrow, where hundreds of thousands of people are over flown. It has now been shown that though the Airports Commission (AC) did have a study done by the Health & Safety Laboratory (HSL), in May 2015, it downplayed its findings. The Standard says that confidential documents and emails it obtained showed the AC, which backed a third runway, got the title of an independent study on aircraft crashes changed to remove the word “crash”. Unsurprisingly and obviously, adding another 50% more planes at Heathrow, or 100% more at Gatwick would increase the risk of a crash. The Standard says the AC rejected “risk maps” showing the increased likelihood of an aircraft crash around London airports if expansion went ahead. Instead the AC's Final Report said “ the changes to the background crash rate are minimal, regardless of whether or not expansion takes place at the airports.” It failed to mention the HSL conclusions that the likelihood of a crash on take-off or landing increased by up to 60% with a 3-runway Heathrow and doubled under one scenario with a 2-runway Gatwick. Daniel Moylan said the cover-up was "truly shocking." People living under approach routes (higher risk than take-offs) should know their risks. The future flight paths are not yet know, so those living under them are unaware of the risk. The dangers of drones, laser beams and terrorism are not included - nor the risk to those on the ground.
Click here to view full story...
Open letter by ACIPA to François Hollande asking for forced evictions at NDDL to be stopped
At Notre-Dame-des-Landes (NDDL), where a new airport for Nantes is planned, there are due to be forced evictions of those who remain on the land, after a tribunal hearing on 10th December. At the moment 11 families and four farms located in the area of the airport wants to build. The protest group at NDDL have now written to the President of the Republic François Hollande, to ask him to prevent these expulsions. The expulsion order is by AGO (Aéroports du Grand Ouest, a subsidiary of Vinci) on behalf of the state. ACIPA says that therefore, the responsibility lies with the President. There was a month long hunger strike in May 2012, and to end that, an assurance was given that there would not be evictions. That was updated in 2014. ACIPA say the families believed the assurances by government, and they have therefore not made arrangements to leave. The families and the farmers face all their property and livestock being put into receivership if they will not leave. The government made successive promises that all legal remedies would be pursued to exhaustion, and appeals are still pending. ACIPA asks how the President will keep the trust of potential voters, if he does not keep his word. ACIPA want a meeting with the President, the waiving of expulsion orders, and a proper investigation into options to improve the existing Nantes airport
Click here to view full story...
EU launches aviation strategy – the Aviation Package – to protect EU airlines from “unfair” competition
European airlines are concerned about the impact that the rise of Gulf airlines is having on their business, and the rise of Asia as a major air traffic hub. The legacy airlines are also suffering from the growth of low cost airlines. Now the European Commission is considering new measures to tackle what it sees as unfair competition from non-EU airlines as "The Aviation Package"unveiled in early December, designed to boost the competitiveness of Europe's aviation sector. The EC wants to have talks on air transport agreements with a number of countries including China, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Qatar. Some European airlines believe Gulf airlines get unfair state subsidies. Some of the issues on which the Package wants change are airports' capacity constraints, and charges. Business lobby group Business Europe wants faster implementation of the "Single European Sky" to cut costs and fuel burn through reducing extra miles flown by inefficient air traffic management. The EU will also look at ownership of EU airlines, which is capped at 49%, but there is less clarity on what constitutes effective control. It will also "actively" pursue the relaxation of the rules on the basis of reciprocity through bilateral aviation and trade agreements.
Click here to view full story...