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:
Anticipated 6 month delay on runway decision means uncertainty for councils as well as residents
It seems the government will postpone a decision on a runway, because of the serious environmental problems that a Heathrow runway presents. A Gatwick runway would pose very similar environmental issues, of carbon emissions, noise and air pollution - as well as surface access, cost, and local impacts of all sorts. It is likely the government will delay a decision till after the London Mayoral elections in May 2016. This means thousands of people are left in limbo, with the uncertainty dragging on. It also means local authorities are left with uncertainty, on issues such as housing targets in local plans and investment in infrastructure. Councils are having to produce their local plans, anticipating needs for housing and employment for many years ahead. A Gatwick runway is expected to require an additional 45,000 houses and a road network able to take an extra 100,000 vehicles per year. The Director of CPRE Sussex said: “A final decision to rule out airport expansion in the South East should be made and it should be communicated soon.” Then there could be some planning certainty. CPRE Sussex says airport expansion in the south-east risks major long-term environmental and health damage. A Gatwick runway would radically change the face of West Sussex.
Click here to view full story...
Government likely to delay any runway announcement till well after Mayoral election in May 2016
The BBC reports that "senior sources very close to the process" have said that the decision by the government on whether to build a new runway at Heathrow or Gatwick is going to be delayed for at least six months. That means after the Mayoral elections in London, in early May - and would make it less difficult and awkward for the government, with Zac Goldsmith (vehemently against a Heathrow runway) standing as Tory candidate. The source said the government needs to have more "confidence building" about the environmental impact of a new runway at Heathrow. That is largely about local air quality, but also noise and carbon emissions. The BBC believes that means yet another review, and it does not rule out a runway at Gatwick. Both Heathrow and Gatwick are going to have to come up with convincing proposals, over coming months, about how they will deal with the environmental problems. They are not going to find it easy. The BBC says government also wants to get more money out of the "chosen" airport, for local compensation schemes. It is expected that the runway decision will be taken by the Economic and Domestic Cabinet sub-committee,which Cameron chairs, on Thursday 10th, the prime minister chairs. The outcome is likely to be announced on the same day (probably in Parliament by Patrick McLouglin?
Click here to view full story...
Papers trying to pre-empt government announcement on runway this week or next week – speculation ….
The Telegraph says that David Cameron could face resignations from senior Conservatives, if he give government support for a Heathrow 3rd runway. The opposition by Boris Johnson is well known, but Justine Greening (International Development Secretary, and a previous Transport Minister) is deeply hostile to the plan because of the likely increase in aircraft noise for her constituents in Putney. However, the Telegraph says Ms Greening declined to rule out quitting the Cabinet if Heathrow was given the green light. She said: “I think that’s jumping the gun and let’s wait and see what the sub-committee comes out with, but frankly I will make sure that I continue to represent my constituents’ concern on this.” Zac Goldsmith, the Tories’ London Mayoral candidate, has promised to stand down if Heathrow is given the green light, triggering a by-election in his Richmond Park London constituency. Boris Johnson said: “The third runway is a sham and a delusion and it will never happen." The Telegraph says 30 MPs, led by Liam Fox, have written to David Cameron saying they want a Heathrow runway. Their view has been influenced by a flimsy little paper (no date, no author, almost no references) produced by consultants, Quod, for Heathrow - implying huge benefits for the regions.
Click here to view full story...
Stansted airport slowly starting to make up passenger losses from 8 years ago, wants raised passenger cap + another runway
The owners of Stansted Airport, MAG, are continuing to say they will be wanting a new runway in the next 10 years or so. The numbers of passengers using Stansted fell every year between a peak in 2007 of 23.7 million passengers, to a low of 17.5 million in 2012, and almost 20 million in 2014. The number of flights was about 192,000 in 2007 and only about 163,000 in 2014. So the current growth is just starting to catch up, and get back to the numbers 8 years ago. However, Stansted is using the current increase in passengers to say it will be needing to increase the planning cap on the number of passengers (currently 35 million per year) as was suggested in the Airports Commission's interim report. It will start to consult locally about doing this. Stansted hopes to get more passengers, if it could have improved rail connections to London, for as long as Heathrow and Gatwick are full - unless one gets a new runway. Stansted says it could handle another 7 million passengers per year with its current infrastructure. It did not submit a proposal to the Airports Commission for a runway scheme, so it was not considered. But now it wants another runway, in addition to one at Gatwick or Heathrow - ignoring the uncomfortable fact that even the Commission said only one new runway could be added within the UK aviation carbon cap (even one runway would mean UK aviation exceeding its annual 37.5MtCO2 cap).
Click here to view full story...
Times reports “Village activists dig in for war over Heathrow’s third runway”
The Times reports on the environmental activists who have embedded themselves in the villages around Heathrow, determined to conduct a continuing campaign of civil disobedience against a 3rd runway. They are working with the local communities that face either demolition of 783 homes, or having to move if their homes become impossible to live in - due to the impact of the airport. The campaigners are equally opposed to the high CO2 emissions that a new runway would generate, making the UK's efforts to meet carbon targets almost impossible to achieve. While there have been protests, like a runway incursion and blocking a Heathrow road tunnel, it is likely there will be more - this could last for years. Around 20 activists have been living in the Grow Heathrow community for 5 years, and others are moving into the area with a number in Sipson. An “adopt a resident” scheme run by the direct action group Plane Stupid has helped local people to work with dedicated activists and will be used again. The threat of evictions is very cruel. Neil Keveren, a local activist and builder, determined to fight a runway: "There are elderly people here who live happy, independent lives because they are supported by the community — if the village is destroyed then they will struggle to survive the upheaval.”
Click here to view full story...
No 3rd Runway Protest Advan tours areas of London and the Home Counties
An Advan, with a "No third runway" message plastered on its side, will be touring a range of areas, in London and in the Home Counties, that will be affected if there was to be a new runway. In some areas it is being met by local residents, or councillors or MPs. The van will be inaction for three days, Thursday 3rd, Friday 4th and Saturday 5th December. A coalition of groups has come together to sponsor the van. On Friday a car playing aircraft noise, illustrating how it would be like under a flight path, will follow the van along the route of the 3rd runway arrival flight path across London. All the local groups along the Advan's route, and many others, know a 3rd runway would mean intense plane noise and being under a flight path for the first time. They are working together to put out a strong message that they will fight any new runway, tooth and nail. The Government is expected to decide before Christmas whether it is minded to give the green light to a third runway at Heathrow or a second runway at Gatwick.
Click here to view full story...
Anti Gatwick expansion campaigners send Christmas cards to Cameron, Corbyn + senior ministers
Campaigners from CAGNE (Communities Against Gatwick Noise and Emissions) against a 2nd Gatwick runway have sent Christmas cards to Prime Minister, David Cameron, Jeremy Corbyn MP, leader of the Labour Party, and other senior government ministers. The cards ask ‘Will it be a Happy Christmas for the residents of Sussex, Surrey and Kent?’ as the government announcement about a runway decision is expected before Christmas. Residents from Surrey, as well as Crawley, Warnham, Rusper, and other parts of West Sussex, all gathered at the Warnham village post box to mark the sending of the Christmas cards. Sally Pavey, chair of CAGNE said: “The message in the cards explain why Gatwick should not be expanded and provides them with a copy of the residents' film, "What does a second runway at Gatwick mean to you?" so that they can hear, direct from residents, how Gatwick expansion would obliterate what are successful counties at present. Gatwick brings least into the UK economy but will cost local taxpayers billions, and destroy what are currently attractive rural areas of Sussex, Surrey and Kent.” On 27th November there was a meeting in Horsham, with the Gatwick Arrivals Review team.
Click here to view full story...
Cross party committee of MPs recommends Government should not give go ahead on Heathrow expansion
The Environmental Audit Committee said the Government should not to give a runway at Heathrow the go ahead unless it is ready to make a ‘step change’ in its approach to environmental mitigation. Cait Hewitt, Deputy Director of the AEF (Aviation Environment Federation) commented that the EAC report "highlights the sheer scale of the measures that would be needed to prevent a third runway becoming an environmental disaster ... AEF has repeatedly highlighted the need for Government to demonstrate how it will close the policy gap in relation to aviation emissions, and we welcome the EAC’s emphasis on the inadequacy of existing policies for tackling climate change objectives ... We believe that the challenges of addressing the environmental impacts of a new runway at either Heathrow or Gatwick cannot, in reality, be overcome.” The EAC said that Government would need to demonstrate “a high degree of certainty that their own policies are robust enough to deliver the mitigations required” before giving approval for the expansion. On CO2 the EAC said the industry's efforts are “highly unlikely” to achieve the target for aviation emissions and that there is a need for additional Government policies including some form of demand management.
Click here to view full story...
The conditions recommended by the EAC apply at Gatwick, as well as at Heathrow
The Environmental Audit Committee proposed a series of environmental conditions (noise, CO2 and air pollution) that the government should impose on a 3rd runway at Heathrow. They also said Heathrow should pay for necessary additional surface access infrastructure. GACC has pointed out that very similar conditions would have to apply for a 2nd Gatwick runway. On Noise, the condition that Heathrow should be less noisy with three runways than with two would absolutely rule out a new Gatwick runway, as it would affect three times as many people as it would with one runway. There would also need to be a ban on night flights. The carbon emissions over future decades from flights using a 2nd Gatwick runway would be very similar to those from a 3rd Heathrow runway, so the same condition would apply. ie. that "the CCC’s advice on aviation in relation to the 5th carbon budget, introducing an effective policy framework to bring aviation emissions to 2005 levels by 2050 no later than autumn 2016….” On air pollution, although a new Gatwick runway might not breach EU limits it would adversely affect more houses than one at Heathrow. And on paying for surface transport, the airport should pay for all necessary transport upgrades, assessed when the airport is two- thirds full, not merely when it is just one-third full.
Click here to view full story...
Environmental Audit Committee says Government must ensure a 3-runway Heathrow is genuinely no noisier than with 2 runways
The Environmental Audit Committee report looked at noise, as one of the issues that need to be revolved, if the Government wants to approve a Heathrow runway. The EAC says the current metrics that average noise are inadequate. They do not account for peak noise events, and may "ignore a swathe of people who are overflown infrequently but loudly." "These metrics need to be measured against international standards such as WHO recommendations and inform a change in Government policy on aviation noise." A new Independent Aviation Noise Authority will "need a more up to date understanding of people’s attitudes to noise if it is to be credible. One of the first tasks of such a body should be to undertake a survey of people’s attitudes to aviation noise." The EAC says the government has to show "whether an expanded Heathrow would be noisier or less noisy than a two runway Heathrow at the same point in time." On night flights the EAC says: "The Government should publish a plan, including a series of binding milestones, to deliver the proposed ban as part of any announcement to proceed with expansion at Heathrow..." And even if there is no 3rd runway, an Independent Aviation Noise Authority and a Community Engagement Board should be set up, to address the rock-bottom level of trust local people have in the airport.
Click here to view full story...
Environmental Audit Committee says Government must ensure legal air pollution limits can be met and maintained
The Environmental Audit Committee report on a Heathrow runway, says in relation to air pollution: "Before the Government makes its decision, it should make its own assessment of the likely costs of preventing an adverse impact on health from expansion at Heathrow and publish it." Also that the government should not consider a new runway merely if air quality could be worse elsewhere in London than in the Heathrow area. The government will need to demonstrate that legal air pollution limits can be met and maintained "even when the expanded airport is operating at full capacity. Heathrow’s existing air quality strategy should also be revised to meet the new targets. Failing this, Heathrow should not be allowed to expand." As for not using the new runway if air quality is too poor: "The Government should not approve expansion at Heathrow until it has developed a robust framework for delivery and accountability. This should have binding, real-world milestones and balance the need for investor certainty with assurances that a successor Government cannot set the conditions aside if they become inconvenient." In distinguishing pollution from the airport, or from other sources: "The Government must establish clearly delineated responsibilities for meeting air quality limits before deciding to go ahead with the scheme" to avoid future legal and commercial risks.
Click here to view full story...
Environmental Audit Committee says Government must act by 2016 to ensure aviation carbon cap is met
The Environmental Audit Committee report says the Airports Commission said the CCC (Committee on Climate Change) was the expert in this area, not it. Therefore the EAC says: "The Government cannot credibly rely on the Commission’s analysis as evidence that Heathrow expansion can be delivered within the limits set by the 2008 Act .....We recommend that the Government give the CCC the opportunity to comment on the Commission’s forecasting of aviation emissions and the feasibility of its possible carbon policy scenarios. The Government should act on any recommendations they make. ... Before making any decision on Heathrow expansion, the Government should publish an assessment of the likely impact on the aviation industry – particularly regional airports – and wider economy of measures to mitigate the likely level of additional emissions from Heathrow. ...any Government decision on airport expansion should be accompanied by a package of measures to demonstrate a commitment to bringing emissions from international aviation within the economy-wide target set by the 2008 Act. They should also, as a minimum, commit to accepting the CCC’s advice on aviation in relation to the 5th carbon budget, introducing an effective policy framework to bring aviation emissions to 2005 levels by 2050 no later than autumn 2016...."
Click here to view full story...
Environmental Audit Committee says Heathrow must fund the infrastructure improvements necessary
One of the conditions that the Airports Commission suggested should imposed on a Heathrow runway was that the airport should pay most of the cost of the additional surface transport infrastructure. Heathrow has repeatedly said it is not willing to pay more than about £1 billion, though the costs are estimated by Transport for London to be £15 - 20 billion. The Environmental Audit Committee report says: "Before the Government decides to go ahead with Heathrow expansion it should set out its assessment of what would be required in terms of infrastructure improvements, agreed responsibilities for funding and milestones for completion. This should be part of a wider transport strategy for West London to minimise the risk of unintended consequences. The Government must make a binding commitment that Heathrow will fund the infrastructure improvements necessary to accommodate an expanded Heathrow." The government has said it will not pay, with Richard Goodwill stating in October that: “.... the Government has been clear that it expects the scheme promoter to meet the costs of any surface access proposals that are required as a direct result of airport expansion and from which they will directly benefit.”
Click here to view full story...
Environmental Audit Committee says government should not permit Heathrow runway without strict conditions
The EAC report's conclusions say: "The Government should not approve Heathrow expansion until Heathrow Ltd. can demonstrate that it accepts and will comply with the Airports Commission conditions, including a night flight ban, that it is committed to covering the costs of surface transport improvements; that it is possible to reconcile Heathrow expansion with legal air pollution limits, and that an expanded Heathrow would be less noisy than a two runway Heathrow. In each case - climate change, air quality and noise - it needs to set out concrete proposals for mitigation alongside clear responsibilities and milestones against which performance can be measured. It should report regularly to Parliament, through this Committee and others, on progress. The Government should not avoid or defer these issues. To do so would increase the risks of the project: delay through legal challenge, unquantifiable costs resulting from unclear responsibilities, economic risks through constraint of other sectors to meet increased aviation emissions and longterm costs to public health from the impact of air pollution and noise."
Click here to view full story...
Report from Policy Exchange shows how poor air quality is in much of London, and near Heathrow
A new report by the Policy Exchange, called "Up in the Air" looks at London's air pollution, and shows that over 12% of London’s area was in breach of NO2 limits in 2010, with the most affected areas being Central London, the area around Heathrow airport, and other major transport routes. The report says: "Aviation currently makes up 7% of total NOx emissions in Greater London, but this could increase to 14% by 2025. Aviation emissions are forecast to increase due to a growth in air [craft] movements, whilst at the same time emissions from other sectors are decreasing .....Importantly, this does not yet factor in the impact of possible airport expansion around London." It says if there was a 3rd Heathrow runway the number of passengers would rise steeply. Their analysis only goes to 2025 but for there to be another runway, and for air quality not to deteriorate "... the acceptability of Heathrow expansion in air quality terms rests not only on the extent to which air quality impacts at Heathrow can be mitigated, but also on the level of progress on air pollution in the rest of London. If pollution levels are brought within legal limits across the rest of London, then this could undermine the case for Heathrow expansion on air quality grounds."
Click here to view full story...
50,000 take part London Climate March – with a highly visible “No Runway” bloc
On the day before the start of the COP21 climate talks in Paris, there were some 2,500 climate marches and events around the world. Unfortunately, the Paris authorities did not allow a march, due to security concerns. However, in London about 50,000 people braved gales and rain as they marched through London to Whitehall to demand that world leaders take urgent action. It was the biggest demonstration of its kind the UK has ever seen. There was a determined aviation bloc - marching with the "No 3rd Runway" fabric plane. Braving gusts of wind of around 40mph, those opposing a Heathrow runway put in a highly visible presence, even if the chants of "No Ifs. No Buts. No 3rd Runway" sometimes got drowned out by the Hari Krishna music system in the same part of the march. Caroline Lucas briefly helped carry the "No New Runways" banner, and so did John McDonnell. Addressing the crowds alongside a host of other speakers, Jeremy Corbyn said: "The issues facing the world in Paris this week are pollution, climate change, inequality, environmental refugees, war refugees and resources wars. If we are to make a real difference in Paris, all these issues have got to be thought about and addressed." International aviation and shipping are not getting proper carbon emissions reduction targets in the Paris negotiations.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow not willing to accept a ban on night flights, saying it constrains links to regional airports
John Holland-Kaye is hugely confident that he will get a new runway, saying he was now “80%” sure that David Cameron’s decision would be for Heathrow. The Airports Commission suggested a condition that there would be a complete ban on flights between 11.30pm and 6am due to the unacceptable noise of night flights.Mr Holland-Kaye says night flights were not something to “throw away lightly”. Heathrow currently is allowed 5,800 night flights per year, meaning an average of 16 arriving each morning, typically between 4.30am and 6am. British Airways wants to keep night flights, and is Heathrow's largest airline. Last week Mr Holland-Kaye said shifting night flights to later slots would damage connections to the rest of the UK. “If I talk to regional airports, they all want to see early morning arrivals into Heathrow. They want a flight that comes in from their airport before 8 o’clock in the morning so people can do a full day’s work, can do business in London or can connect to the first wave of long-haul flights going out. You are very quickly going to use up all of the first two hours of the morning if we have a curfew before 6 o’clock, particularly as we then have to move the 16 flights. That really constrains the ability of UK regions to get the benefits from an expanded hub. So it is not something we should throw away lightly." Heathrow's links to regional airport would actually fall, with a 3rd runway, according to the Airports Commission. .
Click here to view full story...
Meeting of Cabinet’s runway sub-committee expected to decide on Tuesday which to back
The Sunday Times reports that there will be a meeting on 1st December of the Cabinet sub-committee (the Economic Affairs (Airports) Sub-Committee) working to push through a new runway. David Cameron will then consider the decision of the sub-committee before is it considered by the full Cabinet. An announcement will be made next week, or the week after. The Times believes the sub-committee backs a Heathrow runway. There are 10 members of the sub-committee, and it does not include any of the vociferous opponents of Heathrow, such as Boris Johnson, Justine Greening or Theresa Villiers - or even Philip Hammond or Theresa May. It is likely that Zac Goldsmith would resign as MP for Richmond Park, requiring a by-election. There will be fury - especially in the Heathrow Villages and those living near Heathrow - that Cameron had gone back on his word. He specifically promised at the 2010 election that: "No Ifs. No Buts. No 3rd Runway." Going back on a promise is bad enough, but people believed him, and made life-decisions about their homes etc on the strength of it. They have been betrayed, and this betrayal could be Cameron's legacy. The Conservative Party also said in May 2010 that there would be no new runways at Gatwick or Stansted. That was just as much a promise as no Heathrow runway.
Click here to view full story...
Despair in East London as CAA approves new concentrated flight paths – there may be a legal challenge
Many residents in East London are in despair following the CAA announcement that it will allow London City Airport to concentrate its flight paths. Campaign group HACAN East is considering legal action against the CAA. Departure routes will be concentrated over places like Bow, parts of Leyton, Leytonstone, Wanstead, Dagenham and parts of Havering. Areas of South London will also experience more concentrated routes. The decision follows uproar at the lack of consultation on the proposals last year. City Airport just put a technical document on its website and informed the Consultative Committee. It was left to HACAN East to hold public meetings in the areas which would be affected. The airport argued it only had to carry out a minimal consultation. Local people, backed by many local authorities, MPs and members of the GLA, said that a full consultation should have been carried out as some areas would get 30% more planes than now. The CAA was inundated with letters calling for a fresh consultation, but the new announcement means it has ruled this out. For those who barely had planes over them in recent years, facing living under a concentrated flight path indefinitely is a miserable prospect. The CAA is not fit for purpose, and being funded largely by the airlines, it should not make these decisions.
Click here to view full story...
“The Elephants in the Room” at the Paris talks: international aviation & shipping
Transport & Environment (T&E), a Brussels NGO, is calling on countries participating in COP21 to insist that the UN organisations responsible for international aviation and shipping set realistic reduction targets consistent with 2°C objective and adopt measures to implement them. Though these two sectors are crucial to our global economy, they must grow in a way that does not come at the expense of the planet. Aviation is responsible for almost 5% of all global warming and its emissions are predicted to grow by up to 300% in 2050. Such a growth rate would make the target of keeping the global temperature increase to under 2°C almost impossible to achieve. Further ambition is required, including cooperation between the UNFCCC and the ICAO. T&E have put together a briefing debunking the myths about the carbon emissions of aviation (and of shipping). Well worth reading. The industry claims that “aviation accounts for 2% of global emissions”; it claims “aviation is delivering increased efficiency gains”; that “thousands of flights already with alternative fuel, more expected”. It claims the industry "has a target of Carbon Neutral Growth from 2020”; and that it should not be a source of climate finance. Each in turn refuted by T&E.
Click here to view full story...
Committee on Climate Change says additional policies are needed to keep UK aviation CO2 below 37.5MtCO2 cap
The Committee on Climate Change has produced its advice on the level of the 5th carbon budget, covering the period 2028-2032. The CCC states: "While UK demand for international aviation is likely to grow considerably, emissions must be limited. Previous analysis by the Committee concluded that, based on the available evidence, aviation should plan for its emissions in 2050 to be no higher than those in 2005. That requires strong efficiency improvements to balance demand growth of about 60%." And ..." International aviation emissions should not formally be included in carbon budgets at this stage, though carbon budgets should continue to be set on track to a 2050 target inclusive of these emissions. We will provide further advice following the ICAO negotiations in 2016, and recommend that Government revisit inclusion at that point." (The CO2 emissions from shipping will be included in the 5th carbon budget.) UK aviation CO2 emissions are currently set to overshoot the 37.5MtCO2 level even without any new runways and to be higher still if a runway is added at either Heathrow or Gatwick. The CCC says in a scenario where emissions are not capped and only low ‘carbon abatement’ options (such as technology improvements) are available, aviation emissions could be as high as 51.9 Mt by 2050, underlining the need for policy action to address the gap.
Click here to view full story...
Gatwick Express: Passengers in danger of missing flights as airport train service is halved
Gatwick is keen on saying how it would be “road & rail ready” for a 2nd runway by 2021, and that everyone will have easier and faster journeys, with no more congestion - even with more than twice as many passengers as today. And that sort of thing. However, its train links are a very real problem. Now Simon Calder says there will be cuts to trains between London and Gatwick in the off-peak period, at first for a trial period. There are 13,000 fewer seats per day, as 38 Gatwick Express services per day are being cancelled, meaning passengers will have to wait up to 30 minutes, rather than 15 minutes. "The latest cunning plan for dealing with rising passenger numbers on the London-Brighton line: halve the number of Gatwick Express trains, and delay some other services." Some of the surviving trains will make additional stops, adding to journey times. Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) is telling passengers: “The aim of the changes is to help reduce congestion on the network, so that a more reliable service can be provided.” But the lower number of trains will lead to more over-crowding. With the fast trains from London to Brighton having to have an extended stop at Gatwick, they will be delayed by 5 minutes. Passengers prefer the direct London-Gatwick line, the Gatwick Express, rather than trains going to or from Brighton.
Click here to view full story...
CAA approves so-called “environmentally friendly” changes to Stansted Airport take-offs
The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has approved changes to ensure aircraft departing from Stansted to the south-east will climb higher sooner – slightly reducing fuel burn and CO2 emissions. This is part of major airspace changes approved by the CAA, as part of the FAS (Future Airspace Strategy) which is set to modernise UK airspace by 2020. The Stansted plans, which are included in the LAMP (London Airspace Management Programme) phase 1A, were submitted to the CAA by NATS, and followed a public consultation between October 2013 and January 2014. The FAS is the UK part of the wider European changes, under SESAR (Single European Sky), which hopes to improve airspace infrastructure to make its management more efficient, reduce fuel burn. It would also, by faster climbs and continuous descent approaches, slightly reduce the amount of aircraft noise for those over-flown. The aim, however, is it maximise use of airspace, enable more planes to fly in the same airspace, and save the airline industry time and therefore money. The Stansted route change approved is for more departures to go via Clacton to a point off the north-east corner of Kent (over the sea).
Click here to view full story...
CAA approve various airspace changes, but review of the airspace change process is under way
The CAA has the ultimate ability to approve changes to airspace and flight paths. There is a long process through which proposed changes have to go, including development of the proposal, the preparation of the public consultation, collating and analysing the responses, modifying the airspace design if necessary, providing feedback to consultees, decision by the CAA, implementation of the change, and then operational review a year after its introduction. There is currently a review under way, by the aviation consultancy, Helios, of the CAA's process for changing use of airspace. It is looking at strengths/weaknesses in the process, possible improvements, including better transparency and accountability. Before any reform of the airspace change process is implemented, the CAA will hold a public consultation - expected before spring 2016. Meanwhile, the CAA has approved some airspace changes, covering eastern and southern England. They say these "will enable aircraft to fly more efficiently, help reduce the number of low-level flights and reduce the environmental impact of aviation." The aim is to save money/fuel for airlines, and thus reduce CO2 emissions. The intention is also, where possible, to slightly reduce noise exposure.
Click here to view full story...
3 arrests after Plane Stupid block Heathrow tunnel for 3 hours using a van + activists locked onto it
The main road entrance tunnel to Heathrow's Terminals 1 and 2 was blocked by climate change activists from Plane Stupid, for about 3 hours, from 7.40 this morning. Three activists parked a vehicle across both lanes of the entrance tunnel and locked themselves to it, unfurling a banner quoting David Cameron's election promise in 2010: “No Ifs, No Buts: No Third Runway”. Five people were arrested, and the tunnel was finally cleared. Some travellers may have been delayed or could have missed flights. Local resident Neil Keveren, a builder from Harmondsworth, whose house would be bulldozed for the 3rd runway, was fined after blocking the same tunnel with his van for half an hour on 2nd July, the day after the Airports Commission announcement. Neil said: “No one wants to do this. They feel they have to. People feel they have no choice. After we campaigned for years, David Cameron was elected promising 'no ifs, no buts: no third runway'. .... We have tried every other option. We have been forced to be disobedient just to be heard. To save our homes and our planet.” There is already airport capacity for families taking a couple of trips per year, or wealthy foreign visitors to the UK, but a new runway would be for the most wealthy to take multiple leisure trips each year. Plane Stupid apologised for causing inconvenience, but believe the strong arguments against a Heathrow runway must be heard.
Click here to view full story...
Chancellor says there will be a £300 million “Transport Development Fund” for “transformative transport infrastructure projects”?
The Autumn Statement and Spending Review, by the Chancellor did not have anything to say about Air Passenger Duty, so fortunately it has not been cut again. Due to the amalgamation of the distance bands, from 1st April 2015, so any trip of over 2,000 pays the same amount of APD - and the removal of APD for children (those under 12 from May 2015, and those under 16 from May 2016) the receipts to the Treasury from APD are lower than anticipated several years ago. The forecast receipts from APD in 2018/19 are now £.0.8 billion lower than forecast in the Autumn Statement in 2013. There is no mention of a new runway in the Autumn Statement, and no money set aside for road or rail work associated with it. However, "The Spending Review and Autumn Statement provides £300 million over the next 5 years for a new Transport Development Fund, for the next generation of transport infrastructure projects. This could include providing development funding for projects such as Crossrail 2 and proposals emerging from the Northern Transport Strategy, following advice from the NIC at Budget 2016. [NIC is the National Infrastructure Commission, under Lord Adonis. It is in theory not looking at airport-related issues]. The DfT will have a 37% cut in its operating budget, though the aviation section is thought to have a 30% increase for runway delivery.
Click here to view full story...
Gatwick continues to make around 1/3 of its income from retail + car parking
Gatwick airport had slightly more passengers this year (+5.7%) than 2014, though the additional number of flights is small (+2.6%). The Moodie Report says in the 6 months March to September 2015, Gatwick had 3.5 million passengers (+4.7% year-on-year), and it had a +5.2% rise in revenues to £411.8 million. This resulted in a +6.8% rise in EBITDA to £241.0 million and a pre-tax profit of £135.2 million on a consolidated basis. Gatwick's aeronautical revenues (income from flying, mainly landing charges) rose by 5.1% to £228.9 million, due to a 4.7% increase in departing passengers. Gatwick's retail income rose +1.4% to £85.5 million but, importantly, net income per passenger decreased by -3.0% to £3.60 due to “challenging trading” in the duty free and tax free category. Income from duty free and tax free declined by -2.5% period-on-period. On food & drinks Gatwick made +2% more per passenger than the year before. Car parking income rose +7.4% to £47.7 million and net income per passenger for car parking increased +11.9% to £1.60. So Gatwick makes 56.6% of its income from aeronautical revenues [it as 53.5% in 2013/14]; it makes 20.8% of its income from retail; it makes 11.6% from car parking, and about 11% from "other." Like Heathrow, Gatwick would struggle without the car parking and the shopping, which made up about 32% of its income.
Click here to view full story...
Scottish (environmentally damaging) salmon, farmed by non-British company, are main Heathrow air freight export by weight
An article in the Telegraph takes at face value the blurb put out by Heathrow on its air freight exports. As Heathrow and its backers never ever mention imports, people may be led to believe there are only exports and no imports going through Heathrow. The reality is very different. Heathrow's figures show the total tonnage of exports in 2014 was 345,575 tonnes, out of the total of 1,501,906 tonnes. That is 23%. The other 77% by weight was imports. The value of exports via Heathrow in 2014 was £48 billion, out of a total for air freight of £101 billion. So the value of exports was 47.5%. Never mentioned by Heathrow. The Telegraph focuses on the exports of Scottish salmon by Heathrow. It is deeply odd, not to mention highly unsustainable, that Scottish fish are not exported from Scottish airports - and why they are flown to London, for their onward journey. It is also ironic because Scottish farmed salmon not only cause serious problems for the few remaining wild salmon, but also for the waters where the farms are located. And the farms are largely owned by foreign companies, so not British at all. The largest grower is the massive Marine Harvest Scotland, based in Norway. So Norwegian company damages Scottish environment, to ship fish by air to London, and then across the world. And Heathrow wants another runway so it can do more of this sort of thing. Weird world ...
Click here to view full story...
BA pilot’s eye damaged by ‘military’ laser shone into cockpit at Heathrow – plus many less serious attacks
A British Airways pilot has reportedly been left with significant damage to his eyesight after a “military-strength” laser was shone into the cockpit of his plane landing at Heathrow, in what appears to be the most serious laser attack to date in the UK. The pilot suffered a burned retina in his right eye and has not worked since, according to the head of BALPA. The incident has escalated concerns over the problem of laser attacks, as this was a military weaponry type laser. BALPA claims that 50% of pilots has been in a plane targeted with lasers in the last 12 months. The risk to safety of a pilot having his vision disturbed by a laser, while coming in to land, is obvious. Many incidents appear to have come from a particular block of flats in Glasgow. Lasers have become easy to buy on the internet, and though those usually available are not strong enough to cause eye damage, they cause distraction. "When it comes into the flight deck, it bounces around the walls of the cockpit” and with the effects intensified as light is dispersed by the cockpit windows. Now military strength lasers can be obtained on the black market. There are around 4 - 5 laser attacks on planes every day in the UK, with 400 this year. The highest number of laser incidents in the UK are at Heathrow, though other airports have a higher frequency per number of planes. There have been 3,700 incidents in the USA this year.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow never mentions imports, only exports – but imports larger by tonnage and by value than exports
Heathrow is very fond of saying how vital its air freight is to the UK economy. It is also always very keen to stress how important it is for the UK's exports. Strangely, it never mentions imports (which are not so good for the UK economy). A detailed document by the DfT in 2009 set out the figures for UK air freight exports and imports. Newer data is not readily available. The 2007 figures (by HMRC) showed that the tonnage of UK exports by air freight was 414 thousand tonnes. And the tonnage of imports was 1,663 tonnes. That means, in terms of just weight, the imports were 4 times larger. The 2007 figures show that the value of UK exports by air freight was about £31.1 billion. And the value of imports was £51.1 billion. That means the value of the exports was only 61% of the value of the imports. Presuming that the proportions are roughly the same now as in 2007, that implies that much more of the air freight - both by tonnage and by value - is imports than exports. Strange then that in any document put out by Heathrow, or any of its supporters, imports and their value are never mentioned. It was as if they barely existed. This is comparable to the way in which the benefits of inbound tourism are stressed repeatedly - but rarely the greater numbers of outbound Brits taking their holiday cash to spend abroad. Odd, isn't it?
Click here to view full story...
French economist suggests high tax on premium air travel, to raise climate adaptation finance
How to tax the people who emit the most carbon is a tricky matter. A French economist, Thomas Piketty, has suggested a high tax on premium air travel. He says: "A €180 levy on business class tickets and €20 on economy class would raise the estimated €150 billion a year needed for climate adaptation." It could be a proxy for privilege. It “might be easier to implement but less well targeted at top emitters” than other options. That is one proposal to address global inequalities between high-polluting individuals and the victims of climate change. A tax on air tickets to finance development programs already exists in some countries. Piketty suggests we need to increase its level and generalise it. Across the world, about 10% of people are responsible for 45% of global CO2 emissions, and increasingly some of the high emitters are a privileged elite in emerging economies. The rich in these countries now emit more carbon than working class Europeans. Meanwhile, there is a persistent shortage of finance for climate adaptation, and the OECD said just 16% of climate finance in 2013/14 went to adaptation. In the UK, a "frequent flyer" levy has been proposed, so anyone's first flight is tax free, but the tax shoots up with each successive flight. The reduced demand for air travel would make an additional runway unnecessary.
Click here to view full story...
Willie Walsh tells AOA conference Heathrow’s runway is too expensive, and at that price, would fail
The Airport Operators Association is holding a two day conference on the runway issue, and Willie Walsh (CEO of IAG) was its key speaker. He said Heathrow should not get a 3rd runway, if the Airport Commission's calculation of the cost of building it is correct. He said: "The Commission got its figures wrong – they are over-inflated. If that is the cost [of a new runway], it won't be a successful project." He described the assumption that airlines would pay for the new runway through increases in fares as "outrageous". British Airways is by far the biggest airline at Heathrow, with 55% of the slots. He said of the Commission's report: " ... I have concerns about the level of cost associated with the main recommendation and the expectation that the industry can afford to pay for Heathrow's expansion." He does not believe the cost is justified, and "If the cost of using an expanded airport significantly exceeds the costs of competitor airports, people won't use it." It was not realistic for airlines: "You have to see it in terms of return on capital. ....Either the figures are inflated or you are building inefficient infrastructure. I do not endorse the findings. I definitely don't support the costs of building a runway. If those costs are real, we should not build it." On the cost of £8 billion to build a 6th terminal he commented: "How many chandeliers can you have in an airport terminal?
Click here to view full story...
AEF considers DEFRA’s updated air quality plan is insufficient to address Heathrow’s pollution challenge
Air pollution around Heathrow has been in breach of legal limits for many years and could prove a significant barrier to a 3rd runway. At the time of the Airports Commission’s recommendation this summer, the Government’s modelling indicated that breaches of the NO2 limit in London would continue until and perhaps beyond 2030. Under the Commission’s plan a new Heathrow runway could be operational by 2025, and would be likely to further worsen air quality in the Heathrow area. AEF reports that Defra has now published an updated air quality ‘plan’, in response to the Supreme Court ruling in April that the Government’s strategy would fail to achieve EU legal limits in the ‘shortest time possible’ and must be improved. Under the revised plan, NO2 would be within legal limits by 2025 throughout London. But the improvements compared with the earlier plan appear to relate almost entirely to new, more optimistic assumptions being made about emissions from diesel vehicles rather than to any new policies or strategies at a national level. The only significant new proposal relates to the formation of Clean Air Zones in order to restrict high emissions vehicles. The AEF does not consider that the measures can deal adequately with air pollution around Heathrow, with a new runway.
Click here to view full story...
COP21: 200 bikes and 5 tractors from Notre-Dame-des-Landes (planned airport site) set off for the Paris climate talks
A convoy of 200 bicycles and five tractors has left Notre-Dame-des-Landes (Loire-Atlantique) going to Paris for the COP21 talks, to demand the abandonment of the proposed new Nantes airport. The protesters, most wearing yellow vests proclaiming "No Airport" straddled their bikes in mid morning for a "tracto-vélo" that should arrive in Paris on November 28, two days before the opening of the international climate conference. They will "denounce the blatant hypocrisy between the will of the government to fight against global warming and the destruction of more than 1,600 hectares of farmland and wetlands in order to build a new airport." During the week the convoy entitled "Cap sur la COP" will make the trip in stages of 40-70 km, and its stop in various towns and cities, to stay with local supporters and hold meetings and discussions with their many local support committees, that oppose the planned new airport. After the terrorist attacks in Paris, the organisers had been unsure about proceeding, but say they will not confront the police in any way, and are just attending in order to put across their message. The convoy plans to meet up with other convoys outside Paris before the COP. Though the convoy is mainly cyclists, there will be some vehicles to transport people who can not make a long journey by bike, and for logistics.
Click here to view full story...
Air cargo tonnage at Heathrow falling recently, and only 1.76% higher in 2014 than in 2010
Heathrow airport is keen to stress that it deals with more air freight than any other UK airport, and imply that without its air cargo exports (ignoring the imports) the economy of the UK would flounder. However, in recent years, the volume of Heathrow air cargo has been pretty much static. There was 1.76% more air cargo (tonnes) in 2014 than in 2010. In September 2010 Heathrow handled 123,680 tonnes, and in September 2015 it handled 119.092 tonnes. In October 2010 it handled 138,301 tonnes and 132,575 tonnes in October 2015. Tonnage has been down compared to 2014 every month since May. Earlier in November, John Holland-Kaye said: “Cargo is essential for UK PLC and Heathrow is its global freight connector, with 26% of all UK goods by value going through the airport." In early November Heathrow announced £180m investment in inprove air cargo facilities and double the volume passing through Heathrow. The aspiration is that faster more efficient cargo movements will encourage airlines to increase freight capacity, boosting the UK’s global export competitiveness. And imports ?? Holland-Kays says this will "support British businesses to keep the economy moving, connecting exporters to the world and helping the government reach its £1 trillion export target by 2020.” Air cargo has been declining at Frankfurt too.
Click here to view full story...
“No 3rd Runway” flashmob at Heathrow Terminal 2
Around 60 protesters staged a flashmob in Heathrow's Terminal 2, expressing their opposition to plans for a 3rd runway. With red "No 3rd runway" T-shirts and chanting "No ifs, no buts, no third runway!" There are already hugely more people affected by disturbing levels of plane noise at Heathrow than at any other airport in Europe. People who suffer from plane noise do not want more of it, and those who get some periods of "respite" during the day do not want to see this decrease. If there was a new runway there would be around 250,000 more flights per year using Heathrow - making a 50% increase compared with the existing number now. The level of noise, the new areas affected, and the hundreds of thousands more people to be newly affected would make the addition of a new runway unacceptable. And that is not to mention the increase in air pollution, the road congestion, the rail congestion, the huge cost to the taxpayer over many years. There is also the not inconsiderable matter of the demolition of 780 homes, making their occupants homeless. For all these reasons, a large number of groups and organisations from a wide area oppose the runway. People at the flashmob came from Hammersmith, Ealing, Chiswick, the Heathrow villages, and areas west of Heathrow affected by flight paths. They are adamant that protest at a runway will not go away.
Click here to view full story...
Sadiq Khan backs Gatwick runway (+ London City Airport expansion) knowing he’d have no chance of being Mayor backing Heathrow
Labour mayoral candidate Sadiq Khan (MP for Tooting) had decided he will back a 2nd Gatwick runway, knowing he would have no chance of being elected mayor if he did anything other than oppose a Heathrow runway. He has done a publicity stunt, charm offensive, visit to Gatwick, being given the celebrity treatment. His view is to prevent the noise, air pollution, congestion etc problems caused by expanding Heathrow, and instead make "Heathrow better, not bigger”. Previously he backed a Heathrow runway, until realising he could not maintain that line and have any chance of being London Mayor. He has also recently said he would consider allowing the expansion of London City Airport if he took over at City Hall. Boris had blocked expansion earlier this year, on noise grounds. The London City scheme, if approved, would increase the number of flights from 70,000 to 111,000 per year, doubling the annual number of passengers by 2023, as well as extending the terminal and building a parallel taxiing lane. He said London City Airport was "a special case because of its size and economic impact." Bearing in mind his support for Gatwick, he appeared oblivious of the irony of this statement: "I think what you can’t do is play politics with decisions about people’s jobs and business."
Click here to view full story...
Though Gatwick number of passengers is up 5.7% this year on 2014, the number of flights only up by 2.6%
Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign (GACC) says that use of larger planes, and with fewer empty seats, explained how Gatwick has a record-breaking 40 million passengers per year. Gatwick has been expanding its passenger numbers as fast as possible, in its bid to get another runway. The Airports Commission estimated, based on past trends, that it would not reach 40 million passengers per year for many more years. But Gatwick has not increased the number of air transport movements (flights) by much. While the number of passengers link in the 12 months to October 2015 is 5.7% higher than the previous 12 months, the number of flights was only 2.6% more. GACC said it is the number of landings and take-offs (air transport movements - ATMs)which create a need for a new runway, not just the number of passengers. The load factor (how full the plane is) is higher, with the figure is October 2015 being 85.3% compared to 82.2% in October 2012 or 81.7% in October 2013. GACC chairman Brendon Sewill said: “At this rate of growth Gatwick and Stansted and Luton won’t be full for at least fifty years!” In fact, Gatwick had more flights in 2007 than in 2014. There were about 256,000 ATMs in 2008, 259,000 in 2007 and 255,000 in 2014. The average number of seats per plane was about 180 in 2014 and about 174 in 2013. The average number of passengers per plane was about 151 in 2014 and about 145 in 2013.
Click here to view full story...
University of Nevada researchers look to gumweed as military aviation biofuel feedstock
On the trail of finding biofuels that could genuinely be called "sustainable", researchers at a project at the University of Reno, in Nevada, have come up with curly top Gumweed - which is Grindelia squarrosa. The plant grows naturally in arid areas in Nevada, and along the sides of freeways. It can tolerate low levels of water, though it does need water - the university says it needs only one fifth as much as alfalfa. The university is growing a trial crop using minimal water and fertilizer resources. After growing and harvesting the gumweed, it went through biomass processing where it was broken down to liquid that smells like tar. The hope is that the plant would not compete with land or resources for growing food or animal feed. The university claims it can "produce up to 122 gallons per acre on a biennial basis on the semi-arid lands of Nevada." The US military is interested - they are the largest fuel consumer in the United States. The US navy is interested in using it as jet fuel. "The project received $500,000 in grant funding from the United States Department of Agriculture and has the potential to supply up to 20% of fuel demand for the military." The project hopes if "even 10% of sagebrush-covered lands in Nevada are used to grow gumweed for aviation biofuels, 400 to 600 million gallons per year of jet biofuels could be produced." If the price of oil rises enough.
Click here to view full story...
Garuda to move its Gatwick flights to Heathrow; Vietnam Airlines did the same in January
Garuda Indonesia is joining the ranks of those airlines that started life at Gatwick before defecting to Heathrow. According to CAPA, Garuda will start using its new Heathrow slots in March 2016, but there is no information on how it got the valuable Heathrow slots. Slots at Heathrow are, in theory, hard to get hold of. Garuda used to fly from Gatwick many years ago before suspending services (owing to safety restrictions, due to its bad record). It only returned to Gatwick a couple of years ago. Instead of more ambitious plans, Garuda will eventually just have direct flights to Jakarta from both London and Amsterdam. The runway at Jakarta has to be strengthened for heavy long haul planes. Currently, Garuda serves Gatwick as a "tag" to its Jakarta-Amsterdam flights. Airlines like Garuda are being out-competed by middle eastern Gulf airline rivals. Earlier in 2015 Vietnam Airlines announced it would be leaving Gatwick to launch a direct service from Heathrow instead, from March 31st 2015. This will be using Dreamliner 787s. John Holland-Kaye is, of course, pleased. It is reported that due to the shortage of Heathrow slots, the agreement between Heathrow and Vietnam Airlines took 7 years to complete, and "there are currently 30 airlines waiting for slots." Earlier long haul airlines to fail from Gatwick were Hong Kong Airlines, Air Asia X, Korean Air and US Airways.
Click here to view full story...
Group of Heathrow Community Noise Forum members express concerns about the airport’s treatment of the Forum
The Heathrow Community Noise Forum was set up earlier this year, by Heathrow, in an attempt to improve "engagement" with people affected by the airport's noise. It aims to build trust, provide information, improve understanding of Heathrow's operations, and seek communities' input. The first phase of its work has been to employ consultants to verify how accurate Webtrak is, and to see whether flight paths now are much different to before the "trials" in 2014. However, there has been some dissatisfaction from many of those attending that the Forum has not been working adequately. Eight of the groups that attend presented a statement to the meeting on 5th November, declaring their concerns. One particular matter raised was that Heathrow appears to have taken advantage of the Forum, without the consent of participants, in pressing its case for a 3rd runway. The airport has cited the existence of the Forum as evidence that it can be relied upon to engage with neighbouring communities. There have been instances where HAL has opted to publish its interpretation of analysis in the public domain, without consulting the Forum beforehand, leading some to question whether the HCNF is being used to benefit HAL's commercial ambitions. The statement requires 4 changes to how the HCNF is conducted, without which "the community groups will need to consider the value of the CNF as a mechanism to achieve their objectives".
Click here to view full story...
New group (RAGE) in Elmbridge, to oppose Heathrow noise and expansion, want MP Dominic Raab to “come off the fence”
A new community group has been formed in Elmbridge. RAGE (Residents Action Group Elmbridge) is opposing changed Heathrow flight paths & a 3rd Heathrow runway, believing there is quite enough noise pollution and air pollution already, from the airport. Elmbridge is affected by Heathrow flights. RAGE campaigners have demanded that their MP (Dominic Raab, Conservative - Esher and Walton) and Elmbridge Council take a stance on the issue - as a government decision on a new runway is anticipated before Christmas. Neither has reached an official view on a Heathrow runway. Dominic Raab is sitting on the fence, and not committing to oppose a Heathrow runway, presumably not keen to fall out with Tory leaders. He has said he is "scrutinising the Davies Report carefully, including testing the economic and environmental assumptions." Mr Raab appears to be hoping there could, magically, be less noise for Elmbridge with a 3rd runway than currently. "I want to check the facts and evidence very carefully before coming to a firm view...." RAGE were shocked that Elmbridge Council had only just formed a task force on the issue. RAGE spokeswoman Katy Glassborow said Heathrow expansion would bring more noise and pollution, and Dominic Raab should find out what local people think and work to prevent the negative impacts on his constituents.
Click here to view full story...
Large variation found in airlines’ CO2 emissions due to engine efficiency and proportion of premium passengers
A study by the ICCT (the International Council on Clean Transportation) in the USA has done a survey on the emissions per passenger of various airlines. The numbers depend not only on the fuel efficiency of the plane and its engines, or how high the load factor, but the proportion of first class and premium class passengers. Airlines with all economy class have higher fuel efficiency than those will premium passengers. The ICCT said that overall airlines like British Airways, Lutfhansa, United Airlines, Virgin Atlantic and American Airlines, had higher emissions per passenger kilometre than Norwegian. ICCT said atypical passenger on Norwegian Air Shuttle travelled 40km per litre of fuel (113 mpg), but about 27km (76 mpg) on BA and Lufthansa, with older planes like Boeing 747s. First-class and business passengers accounted for a disproportionate amount of the pollution, being responsible for 14% of available seat kilometres flown on transatlantic routes, but they accounted for around 33% of total CO2 emissions. Air Berlin, KLM and Aer Lingus averaged 36km per litre of fuel, somewhere in the middle of the range. There is a 25% difference between the best and the worst airlines for fuel consumption per passenger kilometre.
Click here to view full story...
Robert Goodwill on flight path noise problems: “we must think about this carefully”
Changes to Gatwick flight paths, using satellite precision-area navigation (PR-Nav) technology, have meant an increase of noise for those under flight paths that are now narrower, or those under new routes. This has led to a huge number of noise complaints, as well as anger and upset for those affected. Reigate MP, Crispin Blunt leads the Gatwick Co-ordination Group of MPs in Parliament, opposed to the changed flight paths and to plans for a 2nd runway. Crispin has been trying to ascertain, from Aviation Minister, Robert Goodwill, that the new technology would be used in a way that allowed aircraft to be spread out as widely as possible, rather than being concentrated. In a recent letter to Robert Goodwill, Crispin asked for stronger policy guidance from the Government to ensure "noise ghettos" are not created, by reducing aircraft concentration, maximising dispersal and by permitting multiple arrival and departure routes to give respite to communities affected. In his response, Mr Goodwill said "it is extremely important that we listen to the concerns of communities on these matters", before giving an assurance that the Government will consider the issues raised and the need for appropriate guidance to achieve "solutions which are locally suitable when airspace changes must be made". He said "we must think about this carefully."
Click here to view full story...
Stewart Wingate says Gatwick won’t give up on its 2nd runway – whatever the government says
Stewart Wingate says Gatwick will continue to push for a 2nd runway even if Heathrow gets Government backing for a runway, when (if?) the announcement is made in December. The Prime Minister has said there will be a formal response to the Airports Commission’s findings by the end of the year, though it may be by George Osborne or Patrick McLoughlin, to save Cameron having to admit his "no ifs, no buts, no 3rd runway" promise. Gatwick has spent the past four months attempting to pick holes in Sir Howard Davies' work, trying - not very successfully - convince the Government to back Gatwick instead of Heathrow. Stewart Wingate has said he thinks a Heathrow runway is undeliverable, and he will not lose his appetite to get his runway. "This is going to be a multi-year event.” He refuses to rule out legal action to block Heathrow expansion if it gets government backing. Gatwick has already examined the legality of the air quality issue, but Wingate adds: “I think there’d be other people in the queue well ahead of us” who would challenge the Government in the courts. Wingate also insists that he will “absolutely not” resign if the Government supports Heathrow, because he believes Heathrow will ultimately be refused on environmental grounds. He continues to deny the environmental problems of a Gatwick runway, which are nearly as bad as one at Heathrow.
Click here to view full story...
Intellectual Property Office says Heathrow Hub runway plan is not infringing an existing patent
Heathrow Hub, dreamt up by former British Airways pilot Jock Lowe, is the plan to extend the Heathrow northern runway, to the east. It is one of the 3 runway plans short listed by the Airports Commission. Heathrow Hub is backed by Ian Hannam, a former JP Morgan Cazenove banker. They hope to sell their scheme to Heathrow airport, potentially for tens of millions of pounds. Heathrow Hub submitted a patent application in October 2012, but British regulators alerted it to an existing patent. A retired American airline captain, Daniel Gellert, says the Hub infringes a patent first lodged in America in 2008. Gellert’s “safe runway aircraft arrival and departure system using split runway design” was granted a European patent in October 2011. He said he hopes to “negotiate an agreement” with Heathrow Hub if its plan is chosen. Heathrow Hub has sought a declaration of non-infringement. They say a ruling from the Intellectual Property Office has stated that Heathrow Hub’s proposal would not infringe Mr Gellert’s patent. Separately Heathrow Hub has received commitments of additional financial backing from a consortium of City investors in recent days. The government is understood to have had discussions with all three of the short listed plans, on the deliverability and possible mitigations of their schemes. Some form of government announcement is expected before Christmas.
Click here to view full story...
Critical analysis of the Airports Commission economic figures, by an Economics Professor, sent to Cabinet Members
An economics professor has assessed the claims by the Airports Commission, of huge benefits to the UK from a Heathrow runway - and found them to be very dubious indeed. He has written to members of the Cabinet, to express his concerns. Professor Len Skerratt (Brunel) believes the Commission has presumed unreliable indirect benefits to the UK national economy. He says there would not be an economic case for the 3rd runway without the supposed indirect benefits to the national economy. These wider economic benefits are said by the Commission to amount to some £131-£147 billion, between 0.65% and 0.75% of GDP by 2050. However, these predictions are not believable. There are only small predicted direct benefits, which could be as low as £11.8 billion (carbon traded model) or just £1.4 billion (carbon capped at the level suggested by the CCC). As the Commission’s own expert economic advisors (Mackie and Pearce) point out these appraisals rely on assumptions which are excessively optimistic. The Commission has gone to great lengths to quantify all the uncertain benefits, particularly the wider and often intangible economic and social benefits. Yet scant attention has been given to the certain tangible and intangible costs of serious damage to health, and quality of life in the very long term, and also the productivity loss, delays and annoyance caused by ten years of construction.
Click here to view full story...
Sally Pavey’s comment on the CAA’s Gatwick PIR – it ‘ignored’ human cost of changed flight paths
Responding to the publication of the PIR (Post Implementation Review of Gatwick flight path changes since 2013, Sally Pavey (Chair of CAGNE) commented that it was "extremely disappointing". It concluded that only the departure route taking off to the west, and heading north, had to change. Local group, Plane Wrong, welcomed that admission, but are dismayed by the CAA’s conclusion that the easterly departure route does not need to be changed. The PIR said a route towards the south-coast and another heading east were acceptable but should be reviewed by Gatwick; the remaining six routes did not need to change. Sally said the PIR now needed to be reviewed by the Aviation Minister, Robert Goodwill: “For a Government, in this day and age, to implement and subject residents to such an airspace concentrated system without any research into the noise readings or emissions from concentrated routes is beyond belief.” She added: “The noise shadow is far grater from a concentrated route than a dispersed route. It’s like having a country lane next to your home, which might see a few cars throughout the day and night, and changing it to the M1 overnight. The noise is relentless. Until the aviation industry recognise that concentrated routes create noise shadows these reports are pointless as they serve only the aviation industry and not the taxpayers.” The report offers little for people affected in West Sussex.
Click here to view full story...
Canadian Transport Minister Marc Garneau confirms no expansion, and no jets, at Toronto lakeside airport
Billy Bishop waterfront airport is a small airport in Toronto, on the lake edge close to central Toronto. It has a small number of passengers and its one runway is only about 1,200 metres. For several years there have been plans to expand the airport, extend its runway, and get jets instead of the turboprops at present. These plans have been strenuously opposed by people who did not want the much loved water front to have loud planes only perhaps 600 feet overhead. There is already a large airport, Pearson, outside Toronto. Now the local group, "NOJets .O" are delighted that the new Transport Minister Marc Garneau has confirmed that the expansion will not go ahead. The minister’s clarification means the expansion proposal has been stopped, and the threat of jets over the city's water front has been removed. This is a credit to the two and a half years of very active campaigning by Toronto citizens, wanting to preserve the quality of their area, and the public amenity of the lakeside. The decision is seen as a blow to Porter Airlines Inc. expansion plans and a potential aircraft order topping $2-billion for Bombardier Inc.
Click here to view full story...
TfL confirms extent to which Airports Commission underestimated Heathrow runway impact on surface access
On 10th November, the GLA Transport Committee had a session looking at the implications for surface access - road, rail and Tube - if there was a 3rd Heathrow runway. There was a presentation by Richard De Cani (Transport for London's Managing Director - Planning). The meeting was described as a "well mannered mugging" of the Airports Commission's (AC) analysis of the situation. The AC did not assess the impact of a fully utilised 3rd runway, with 148 mppa; instead they only looked at the situation in 2030 with 125mppa. That might mean 70,000 more trips per day than estimated by the AC.They also did not take into account how recent employment forecasts will increase demand even further, or increased vehicles needed for expanded air freight capacity. TfL estimates it would cost between £15 and £20 billion to improve the transport infrastructure needed to get all passengers to and from Heathrow, with a 3rd runway. Unless this is spent, the road congestion and the rail congestion even by 2030 would be "some of the worst that we currently see in London." It would "impact quite significantly on the whole performance of the transport network across west and south west London.” If there was a congestion charge, the impact on public transport would be even higher (perhaps 90,000 more trips per day than estimated by the AC).
Click here to view full story...
Gatwick hopes a YouGov poll of Londoners (not local people) favouring its runway over Heathrow, will help its case
Gatwick airport is hoping to persuade people that there is support for its runway. It has commissioned (yet another) YouGov poll, in the attempt to show people want a Gatwick runway. As there is a high level of opposition in areas near and around Gatwick, the poll had to be of Londoners - who would not get any adverse environmental impacts of a Gatwick runway themselves. The details of the poll have not been publicised, but it was of 1,072 Londoners - details of where they were located not published, nor is the interview script. Several London councils have been supportive of Gatwick for a long time, fearing the noise impact on their residents if there was a Heathrow runway - and knowing the opposition within their boroughs. They hope some of their residents might get jobs at Gatwick. The backing of Southwark, Wandsworth, Kingston and Croydon for Gatwick has been public for a long time. It is hardly surprising, if Londoners are asked about aircraft noise, that they would say the negative impact on quality of life for local residents (meaning noise and pollution?) would be lower at Gatwick than at Heathrow. They also say there would be more regeneration benefits at Gatwick - but the area has minimal unemployment. Yet another example of a dubious survey, being "spun" for even more dubious reasons.
Click here to view full story...
Jeremy Corbyn reported as saying we should “look at the under-used capacity” of other airports
During a visit to a pre-school in Crawley, Jeremy Corbyn was reported as implying a 2nd runway at Gatwick would be better than a 3rd runway at Heathrow. He is known to oppose a Heathrow runway, due to inadequate air pollution controls. He is quoted as saying: “Gatwick already has spare capacity at the moment and does have facility to expand beyond 2019...“Gatwick is a possibility but I also think we should look at the under-used capacity all around the South and the South East so there’s also a question of expanding flights in Stansted and even Southampton and further afield in Birmingham.” The recent briefing produced for the AEF states: "The South East accounts for one third of the UK population but its airports handle nearly two-thirds of UK air travel. The Airports Commission argues that a new runway would be good for everyone. But in fact its own modelling suggests that traffic at regional airports would fall on average if a new runway was built at either Heathrow or Gatwick compared to a ‘no new runways’ scenario. Due to the limit of - at the maximum - 60% increase in air passengers, recommended by the Committee on Climate Change, it would make no sense to build a new runway if it simply redistributed traffic around the UK and increased congestion in the South East."
Click here to view full story...
The CAA’s disappointing PIR finally published, showing only one Gatwick route to be slightly changed
Since autumn 2013 there have been changes to flight paths for Gatwick airport, given provisional approval by the CAA. Routes have been altered, and flight paths have been more concentrated. This has been done without consultation of affected communities. The CAA has done a PIR (Post Implementation Review) that ended in January. It has finally, after delays, published its findings. These are regarded as very disappointing, as almost no concessions have been made and though hundreds of complaints were sent in, there are few changes to routes. GACC says: "In a 198 page report they devote only 2 pages to the possibility of dispersal – spreading the aircraft over a wider area – and to the possibility of respite – giving people a break from constant noise. And then reject both. We will now need to take the case to the Government and indeed will raise this when we meet the Minister for Aviation, Robert Goodwill MP ...on 18 November." The more concentrated noise has caused great distress for the people unlucky enough to live directly under the flight paths. The only change to a route is one which takes off to the west, and flies over Holmwood, Brockham and Reigate - Gatwick will be consulting on a revised route in the next few months. People are angry that the CAA, yet again, ignores input from the public.
Click here to view full story...
More people living near airports in the US suffer intense noise from NextGen narrow flight paths
The Wall Street Journal has reported on the noise problems that people are experiencing at many US airports, due to NextGen - with concentrated flight paths. There are slight reductions in time and fuel burn for planes, but at the cost of hugely more intense noise suffered by those unlucky to live below. Communities say they weren’t fully warned about the new flight paths, and now neighbourhoods that never had much airport noise are getting bombarded. Opposition groups across the USA are blitzing airports with hundreds of thousands of noise complaints and a few lawsuits to stop the changes. Many people, who had no flights over them, have found their peace shattered, with no consultation about the fate that was due to befall them. A key example is at Phoenix, where until September 18th 2014, planes taking off to the west turned north about 9 miles after take-off - but now they all turn after about 3 miles. Planes are below 2,000 feet, and at that height, the noise from the big ones is enough to scare people. It is especially unfair on those who bought their homes in places away from flight paths, only to find the flight paths moved. Communities say the FAA bungled implementation of the new routes, thinking only of what’s good for airlines and their passengers and not for people on the ground. They want environmental impact assessments.
Click here to view full story...
Cabinet said to be ‘falling behind’ on Heathrow expansion decision (as runway sub-committee struggles)
The Standard reports that insiders (in the Cabinet?) say the Cabinet sub-Committee is having a very difficult time deciding what to do about a runway, and the schedule is slipping. It is not likely to be announced by the Autumn Statement by George Osborne on 25th November. The meetings of the Economic Affairs (Airports) Sub-Committee are secretive and Cabinet will not reveal even their dates. However, the Standard has been told that last week an “informal” gathering of its members was briefed by Sir Howard Davies, and that David Cameron and George Osborne also had updates separately from Sir Howard. "Other ministers at the gathering raised questions but none of them were seen to pose an insurmountable challenge to another runway in west London." Some sort of announcement still should be made before the Commons rises on 17th December. A second official meeting of the Cabinet sub-committee is understood to be due in the next week or two, so the DfT officials can present their analysis of the Airport Commission’s final report. It is understood that the full Cabinet would be able to discuss the sub-Committee's decision, and this could happen in December. The Standard says: "Few Cabinet ministers are expected to defy Mr Osborne and block a 3rd runway."
Click here to view full story...
Simon Jenkins comment: Don’t buy the idea that Heathrow expansion is ‘good for the nation’
Simon Jenkins was on great form when he wrote a comment piece in the Evening Standard, on the subject of Heathrow and its expansion hopes. Well worth reading, in full. It is so full of wise words, telling analysis and crushing put-downs that summarising it is impossible. But here are a few quotes: "Heathrow was only allowed to grow because gutless ministers dared not stand up to the airlines lobby." ..."Heathrow is primarily for leisure travel, and that travel is overwhelmingly outbound. A new Heathrow runway is an aid to the foreign tourist industry..."..."Of course it would generate economic activity and jobs. So does all infrastructure. So would a heliport in Hyde Park. But it has nothing to do with “British exports”. Precisely the opposite." ..."We should have no truck with the archaic “predict and provide” line of the Davies report. Just because more people want an airport does not mean a runway must be built. .... Demand is not God." ... "Air travel is overwhelmingly leisure travel, a modern luxury that needs no subsidy nor deserves planning privilege." ... " a bigger Heathrow should be unthinkable. It should concentrate on business travel. Above all, the decision should be decided on a proper plan, not the Davies report’s attempt to reconcile competing lobbyists." .... "We just need to keep calm and remember, they are in it for the money. All else is hogwash."
Click here to view full story...
Already 236 people are claiming compensation from Farnborough airport, for decreased house value
In 2010 Farnborough airport expanded their West One Apron from from 19,800 square metres to 32,600 square metres, providing facilities for a greater number of aircraft. Residents in the area say the value of their house has been decreased due to noise and other physical factors. The Lands Tribunal recently ruled that residents whose property values had decreased due to the expansion of Farnborough airport could pursue a compensation claim against the airport's operators. Hugh James is the law firm representing the claimants, which is currently 236 people (at the 9th November). Neil Stockdale, head of environmental law at Hugh James commented: "TAG Farnborough Airport has developed a huge operation widely regarded as Europe's leading business aviation centre and my clients feel the impact on them hasn't been taken into account and that's what they're pursuing these claims....It doesn't take much for each claim to be worth £ X, you multiply that by the number of properties affected and you would expect many hundreds of thousands if not millions of ££s in compensation." Residents have until 28 May 2017 to claim, but cases will need to be prepared for lodging with the Tribunal. That takes time so people should get their claims in sooner rather than later.
Click here to view full story...
2 ft diameter metal diffuser fell from plane near Chicago onto a water park (nobody hurt)
In July 2014, a 2 ft diameter piece of metal fell from a plane overhead, into the pool of a popular water park. Luckily it was early, before the water park opened. The metal piece came off an ExpressJet Embraer 145 XR taking off from Chicago O'Hare for Arkansas. Unknown to the pilots, the bolts on a piece of exterior equipment called a diffuser or a mixer were not securely fastened. The diffuser bounced off a play structure and plunging into an unoccupied children's splash pool. Nobody was hurt. The diffuser, a round, wavy steel piece, mixes hot air from the engine exhaust system with air pulled in by the fans. Weighing from 5 to 10 pounds, the part was attached with 8 bolts. However, the bolts were probably not secured properly. Investigations led to more findings of loose mixers and caused ExpressJet to step up inspections, and experts say these incidents are "extremely rare." The jet had been inspected in June 26, 2014, but the check didn't include the mixer. Neither engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce nor ExpressJet had any comment. List of some other items that have fallen from aircraft here.
Click here to view full story...
Edinburgh TUTUR flight path trial ended 2 months early – but residents say changes persist
In June Edinburgh airport started a trial of a new, concentrated take off flight path (TUTUR), designed to enable the airport to deal with more planes per hour, and therefore make more money and raise the airport's value. Due to the utter noise misery the trial produced and the huge volume of complaints, it was ended two months early - on 28th October, not 24th December. However, as has been the pattern at other airports, people overflown say the route has not returned to how it was before the trial. Campaigner Helena Paul from local group SEAT (Stop Edinburgh Airport Trial) said: “Despite assurances that the TUTUR trial has ended, the noise disturbance has not stopped. In fact, many residents are reporting a serious increase in the levels of noise from flights compared to before the trial started. ... It’s perfectly clear to many thousands of us that there’s been a significant change in the pattern of use of the skies above our heads, to the severe detriment of many communities living beneath.” Helena has asked for data gathered during the trail period to be released, so that questions can be answered. They want to show definitively and precisely what happened pre-trial, and what is happening now.
Click here to view full story...
Energy Secretary Amber Rudd admits misleading Parliament about missing 25% green energy undershoot
A letter from Energy Secretary Amber Rudd leaked to The Ecologist shows that she misled Parliament by promising the UK was 'on course' to deliver on its renewable energy targets (15% of final energy consumption from renewables by 2020) - when in fact there is a delivery shortfall in 2020 of almost 25%. Her plan to fill the gap relies on more biofuels, buying in green power and 'credits' from abroad - everything but wind and solar. She says: "The trajectory currently leads to a shortfall against the target in 2020 of around 50 TWh or 3.5% points in our internal central forecasts (which are not public). Publicly we are clear that the UK continues to make progress to meet the target." However, she has told the House of Commons that the UK is still meeting renewables targets. This puts the UK at risk of legal action taken in the UK, and fines imposed by the European Court of Justice. There could be a full Parliamentary investigation. She also has a problem with hoping that by 2020 biofuels will make up 10% of transport fuels, due to conflicts of deforestation and conflict with land for agriculture. [If the UK is not able to meet its carbon targets, in its carbon budgets, it is not possible for aviation to increase its annual CO2 emissions above 37.5MtCO2. Failure of other sectors to make cuts put the weak aviation target in question.]
Click here to view full story...
Treasury, DEFRA, DfT and DCLG departments agree to meet George Osborne’s 8% per year cuts target
Four government departments have provisionally agreed deep spending cuts of 8% per year for the next 4 years. They are the Treasury, the DfT, DEFRA and DCLG. They have agreed to cuts in a spending review intent on slashing £20 billion from the cost of government. Capital spending is not covered by these cuts. George Osborne has said that controlling £4 trillion of government spending over the next 5 years is essential to guarantee the UK's national and economic security. Osborne hopes that with these 4 departments agreeing to cuts, he can put pressure on ministers who are still resisting his demands for cuts in their departments, before his spending review on 25th November. The Home Office and the Foreign Office are not making cuts. With spending on health, international development, schools and education are protected, budgets in other departments are particularly vulnerable. Having reached a provisional settlement with the Treasury, Patrick McLoughlin, (Transport), Liz Truss, (Environment), and Greg Clark (Communities), will be allowed to join the government’s public expenditure committee as it imposes cuts on other departments. [There's certainly no public money available to pay for extra roads etc needed in association with a new runway - or bail out a failed scheme ....] It is worrying for the environment, for Defra (and later DECC).
Click here to view full story...
British Airways, in evidence to Transport Cttee, says that Heathrow runway is “unfinanceable” and a “white elephant”
British Airways has made its strongest attack yet on plans for a new Heathrow runway, saying its proposals are “unfinanceable” and a “white elephant”. The comments are in written evidence to the Commons Transport Select Cttee, dated 12th October, in its submission to its inquiry into surface access on October 27th. BA repeats its view that the cost of transport infrastructure for the runway scheme should not be funded by airlines and their customers. BA is the biggest airline (51%) at Heathrow. It says - dangerously - that because of the alleged "up to £147 billion" of benefits of a runway to the UK, new road and rail link for the airport should, like standalone transport schemes like M4 widening, be paid for by taxpayers. [That " up to £147 billion" benefit figure is highly dubious, and the Airports Commission's own expert economic advisors, Mackie and Pearce, warned that it includes double counting and should be treated with caution.] While avoiding any specific opposition in principle to expanding Heathrow, BA is not willing to pay - but it says the runway plan is is unaffordable and unfinanceable, and called into question the economic benefits. There has been speculation if Willie Walsh is just "browbeating aimed at cowing the CAA into lower charges” rather than stopping a Heathrow runway.
Click here to view full story...
Survey by SellingUp/Populus shows the serious impact of plane noise on attitudes of house buyers
The website guide on selling property, "Selling Up.com" had a survey done by Populus, into the impact of various negative features on the likelihood of getting an easy house sale. They looked at a range of things, like low energy efficiency, lack of storage space, poor mobile phone signal etc. They also looked at the impact of noisy neighbours and of noise from aeroplanes. The issues most likely to put off a buyer, so they would not proceed with a house purchase, were noisy neighbours and plane noise. The survey found for noisy neighbours, that 70% would not proceed with the sale when they know of the problem, and 17% would ask for a reduction in price. For plane noise, 41% would not proceed with the sale, and 34% would ask for money off, (including 23% who would ask for a "substantial amount or many thousands of £s off the price). The impact on the value of homes that are over-flown is a serious issue. Sellers are required to let a potential buyer know if they have a problem with noise. With the ambition of the industry to concentrate and narrow flight paths, meaning serious noise impacts for those below, this is a real concern - especially when there is no proper consultation about flight path changes, no legal redress and no compensation. (Compensation or double glazing is of no use if you want to enjoy a quiet garden)
Click here to view full story...
10 MPs and council leaders write to PM to warn over air quality problems of Heathrow 3rd runway
Opponents of a Heathrow 3rd runway have written to David Cameron, asking him to block it on the grounds of “illegal” air pollution. Ten MPs have signed the letter, including Tim Farron, (leader of the Liberal Democrats and staunch opponent of Heathrow), London mayoral candidate Zac Goldsmith, and the representatives of Twickenham (Tania Mathias), Windsor (Adam Afriye), Hammersmith (Andy Slaughter), Harrow East (Bob Blackman), Carshalton and Wallington (Tom Brake), and Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury). Poor air quality is a huge cause of public concern, particularly in London, with increasing awareness of the impact of NO2 and particulate matter on health. Air pollution is a make or break issue for Heathrow, already often in breach of air quality limits. In the letter, the MPs said: “Air quality is a huge cause of public concern, particularly in London, and this has only been exacerbated by the recent revelations regarding VW emissions tests.” They say that failing to meet European Union air pollution rules could mean that “large financial penalties” are imposed on Britain “which would ultimately have huge implications for the UK taxpayer”. Heathrow has various optimistic - somewhat unrealistic - claims about how air pollution limits could be met, even with more air freight and 50% more flights.
Click here to view full story...
Telegraph reports Whitehall sources saying Cameron ‘preparing to drop opposition to Heathrow 3rd runway’
The Telegraph reports (Whitehall sources say) that David Cameron is believed to have decided it would not be too politically damaging to back a Heathrow runway. David Cameron personally pledged in 2009 that there would be no Heathrow runway (No ifs, No buts) but soon changed his mind. The government insists it will make an announcement on the next phase of the runway process before Christmas, but how firmly it will be backing one runway option is not yet clear. It may be Osborne who takes control over the issue, keen to be seen as building infrastructure..There is then to be a new public consultation on this in early 2016. David Cameron apparently hopes - as was always the intention of setting up the Commission, during the coalition government - that the Commission's recommendation would remove responsibility for the decision from himself. It would cover him from blame for breaking a pledge, and make that "politically acceptable." The problem is that the Airports Commission has produced vast reams of material in its reports. Few - including few politicians - have read much of it. Its recommendation is not in fact reflected in the details of the reports. The economic benefit of "up to £147 billion over 60 years" to the UK economy may really be as little as £1.4 billion. The regional airports would suffer, as would UK carbon targets. The noise and air pollution issues are not resolved, as the Commission's work shows.
Click here to view full story...
Number affected by Gatwick night flights up 15% last year – 12,850 in the larger 48 dB Leq contour
The CAA has released figures showing 12,850 people were adversely affected by Gatwick night flights, a 15% increase from the previous year. The increase comes despite the fact the airport has changed the way it counts complaints, with multiple issues raised by the same person on the same day now counted as a single incidence. Campaigners say the dramatic increase in complaints is proof a 2nd runway should not be allowed. A review of the changed arrivals flight paths, by Bo Redeborn, is due to be completed around the end of 2015. People are very stressed by noise from night flights, adversely affecting their sleep and their health. Gatwick made an even worse than usual comment. A Gatwick Airport spokesman said: “Gatwick recognises that aircraft noise has an impact on people living near the airport and will continue to do everything possible to minimise its effects.....The increase in people affected has been influenced by an increase in aircraft movements, a change in the fleet mix from planes with propellers to small jets, and an increase in population due to Gatwick’s immigration centre being included in the numbers.” (sic) On Sunday 1st November, CAGNE released a short film highlighting the plight of residents, businesses and communities beneath Gatwick concentrated flight paths.
Click here to view full story...
Beijing Capital Airlines hopes to get permission for direct flights between Birmingham and Hangzhou
Beijing Capital Airlines has requested rights to introduce weekly services at Birmingham from Beijing, and also the first direct link to the UK from the Hangzhou, the capital and largest city of Zhejiang Province in Eastern China. The airline wants this from 2016, according to the CAAC. The airline entered the long-haul market in September this year having introduced a first Airbus A330 into its fleet. The aircraft, a former Garuda Indonesia A330-200, has been used on weekly flights from Beijing and Hangzhou to Copenhagen. Its debut in the UK would see it replicate this Copenhagen operation at Birmingham with weekly flights from both Beijing and Hangzhou from April 2016. The Beijing route has been served in the past two summer schedules by China Southern Airlines and Hainan Airlines, but Hangzhou will be a new market not just for Birmingham, but the UK. KLM currently is the only airline with a direct link from Europe, at Schiphol, to Hangzhou. Beijing Capital Airlines has only held informal discussions with Birmingham airport’s management and no agreement has yet been reached should it get the green light from Chinese authorities. More should be know later this month. If Birmingham gets China flights, that is one less reason why a south east runway is needed for "vital business connectivity" to China.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow plans to double its volume of air freight, necessitating more trips by diesel powered HGVs and goods vehicles
Heathrow plans to double its air freight volumes in its aspiration to become one of the leading airports for cargo in Europe. CEO John Holland-Kaye announced at the British Chambers of Commerce that Heathrow will invest £180 million in the project and has its blueprint ready. Investment will be made to enhance air to air transit by building a facility on the airport for faster handling of transit cargo that arrives by air and is due to fly out again by air, reducing the times. The improvements to air freight is meant to be "essential for the growth and success of the UK economy." (Where have we heard that before?) There will need to be a new truck parking facility for over 100 vehicles, with waiting arenas for drivers. There will be a special pharmaceutical storage area to move temperature-sensitive medicines and provide better infrastructure for faster freight movement. Holland-Kaye wants the UK "reach its £1 trillion export target by 2020." Heathrow dealt with 1.50 million metric tonnes of cargo in 2014. This can only increase the number of HGVs in the Heathrow area. HGVs are all powered by diesel, not petrol - with its attendant higher NO2 emissions. Meanwhile Mr Holland-Kaye was at the EAC saying there would be no extra car journeys to/from Heathrow with a 3rd runway.
Click here to view full story...
New inter-departmental ministerial “Clean Growth” committee to be set up, on air pollution
The FT reports that David Cameron has set up a new inter-departmental ministerial committee to look at air pollution issues. Oliver Letwin will chair cross-party meetings of the “Clean Growth” committee. Its remit will include vehicle emissions, climate change and green energy. This activity has been sparked by the VW scandal of "defeat" devices in cars, designed to give artificially low NO2 readings when cars are tested. There are fears of losses for the car industry if the problem is not contained. People have known for years that the theoretical figures for fuel efficiency of cars were artificially good, and that is now also shown to be deliberately influenced. The DfT is known to have been aware of the problems with NO2 emissions from diesel cars since October 2014, but done nothing. As well as Oliver Letwin, others on the Committee will be Sajid Javid, business secretary; Liz Truss, environment secretary; Amber Rudd, energy secretary; and transport secretary Patrick McLoughlin. The FT says it is not clear if the Committee would deal with air pollution from a potential Heathrow 3rd runway. Stephen Joseph, of Campaign for Better Transport, hoped the committee would mean the government would take air pollution more seriously and develop an effective cross-Whitehall strategy.
Click here to view full story...
Richmond campaign shows Heathrow runway would lead to 50% of the new capacity used for international transfers
The Richmond Heathrow Campaign has produced a very useful set of carefully argued briefings and aspects of a 3rd Heathrow runway (noise, CO2, air quality etc). These can be found here. There is now an updated briefing on economics. It makes several vital points showing how the Airports Commission’s conclusion and recommendation for a Heathrow runway is not supported by its own evidence. The RHC points out that the Commission's own "strategic fit" document shows that with a new Heathrow runway, there would be an extra 22 million international-to-international (I to I) transfer passengers using Heathrow per year (about 30 million in 2050 rather than about 8 million then if there was no runway). The additional 22 million passengers would take up over 50% of the new runway capacity, and would provide little or no economic benefit to the UK. They do not pay APD. Transfer passengers do not leave the air-side at Heathrow. They contribute to the airline and airport profits and their value is said to add connectivity by providing minimum aircraft loads for otherwise unviable routes and by adding to route frequency. Support for thin (i.e. low demand/frequency) destinations is a main justification for the Commission recommending a Heathrow runway. But 95% of Heathrow’s I-to-I transfers support higher frequencies to already popular destinations rather than otherwise economically unviable thin destinations.
Click here to view full story...
On day of appearance before the EAC, Heathrow “pledges” a (dubious) “triple lock” on air pollution
Heathrow knows it has a problem with the high levels of NO2 pollution (and actually also particulates) in its surrounding area, and these regularly already breach EU limits. Appearing in front of the Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) on 4th November, John Holland-Kaye and Matt Gorman attempted to convince the MPs that Heathrow could solve the problems and add a new runway without local air pollution getting worse. Mr Holland-Kaye repeated his intention that there would be a pledge by Heathrow for a "triple lock” on air quality under plans for a third runway. He wants people to believe that there would be (sic) no more car journeys to Heathrow with 3 runways than with 2. People would almost all travel to Heathrow on public transport, and likewise almost all staff at the airport. Heathrow would have options “ready” if needed to cut traffic flows and emissions, such as a congestion charge. And also more flights would only be allowed on the 3rd runway, if it was clear "the airport’s contribution would not delay compliance with EU air quality limits." Challenged by the EAC there was the usual unconfirmed spin about jobs and growth, and no convincing evidence that NO2 air pollution could be reduced with a new runway. The Airports Commission appears to have misunderstood the EU air quality directives, implying a runway would be permissible as long as air pollution was worse somewhere else in London.
Click here to view full story...
John Holland-Kaye again will not commit to no Heathrow night flights (11.30pm to 6am) at EAC hearing
When the Airports Commission final report was published on 1st July, one of the conditions of a 3rd Heathrow was that there should be no night flights. The report stated: "Following construction of a third runway at the airport there should be a ban on all scheduled night flights in the period 11:30pm to 6:00am" and "the additional capacity from a third runway would enable airlines to re-time very early morning arrivals." Already by its statement on 6th July, Heathrow was trying to cast doubt on the conditions, with John Holland-Kaye saying: "I’m sure there is a package in there that we can agree with our local communities, with the airlines and with Government." Asked directly again, at the Environmental Audit Committee session on 4th November, if Heathrow would accept no night flights, he said Heathrow "we are not in a position to do that yet." It had not yet accepted a ban on night flights, and the airport was "confident we will be able to find a way forward" in discussions with airlines and government, and it could “significantly reduce” night flights. Mr Holland-Kaye instead talked of the alleged economic benefit to the UK of flights between 4.30 and 6am. He was asked by Committee members whether the government should agree to a Heathrow runway, (perhaps by December) before Heathrow firmly committed to the no night flights condition. Mr Holland-Kaye could not give an answer.
Click here to view full story...
Labour divided as 30 northern Labour MPs back Heathrow expansion, believing it would help their regions
Nearly 30 northern Labour MPs have signed a letter backing a 3rd Heathrow. The letter to Lillian Greenwood, shadow transport secretary, was signed by members of the PLP Northern Group. They include senior figures such as Chi Onwurah, Kevan Jones, and Nick Brown. This may be an indication of the Labour party’s divisions over the issue. Key to David Cameron’s calculations will be whether he can win enough backing in Parliament for Heathrow expansion, given that it is opposed by several of his senior colleagues including Zac Goldsmith, Boris Johnson and Justine Greening. Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell are against a Heathrow runway, but it is not clear if Mr Corbyn would order Labour’s 232 MPs to vote against it. If as many as 26 Labour MPs from one region are in favour of the Heathrow runway it suggests that Mr Corbyn and Mr McDonnell’s views are not shared by all the rest of the party. The PLP Northern Group hope the regions would benefit from a Heathrow runway, and (like everyone else other than a few with the time and abilities to understand it all) have not read the Airports Commission's papers in detail - showing negative implications for regional airports from a new runway. A rather flimsy paper by "Quod", setting out predictions of growth and jobs for the regions, is the basis of hopes by regional MPs.
Click here to view full story...
John Holland-Kaye and Sir Howard Davies give evidence to the Environmental Audit Committee
The Environmental Audit Committee is holding an inquiry into the implications for Government commitments on carbon emissions, air quality and noise should the Airport Commission's recommendation of a 3rd runway at Heathrow Airport be adopted. It is holding its second evidence session, hearing from John Holland-Kaye and Matt Gorman, of Heathrow - and Sir Howard Davies and Phil Graham, from the (now closed) Airports Commission. They will be asked questions on noise, air pollution and CO2. The Airports Commission, in their final report on 1st July and in supporting documents, gave unsatisfactory answers on all these. There are no details of flight paths from a new runway, with no information on which areas would be newly overflown. There is no certainty that levels of NO2 around the airport, already sometimes over EU legal limits, would not rise with a 50% increase in the size of the airport, and massive increase in road traffic. There is no satisfactory answer on how the UK could meet its aviation carbon target, while building a new runway. Heathrow has put forward various ideas on how it might slightly reduce its noise and NO2 impacts, many speculative (eg. marginally less noisy planes). The airport is not keen on ceasing night flights (11pm to 6am) though that was one of the Commission's suggested conditions for a runway.
Click here to view full story...
Planned airport at Notre-Dame-des-Landes deemed one of Europe’s “Grands Projets Inutiles et Imposés”
While the authorities in Loire Atlantique are hoping to start work on the new Nantes airport, to be built over good farmland and wetland at Notre-Dame-des-Landes, (NDDL)opponents say this is premature. While the French Prime Minister, Manual Valls, is keen for work to get started, the main opposition group to the airport plan - ACIPA - say President François Hollande has recently confirmed that the legal challenges should be allowed to run their course. There are still some procedures to go through. Opponents produced a huge beach art protest - writing in the sand: " Pour le climat, pas d'aeroport a Notre-Dame-des-Landes." ACIPA points out that when the airport and its backers say they will be "resuming" work on the site, they never in fact started. ACIPA also points out that the tendering for work contract is also a PR thing, as various administrative permits must first be obtained. The new NDDL airport is being considered as one of a class of Grands Projets Inutiles et Imposés - big unnecessary imposed projects - along with HS2 in the UK, a new high-speed Lyon-Turin line, gold mining using cyanide in Romania, and a high speed rail line in the Basque Country. A people's tribunal in Turin will look at all these cases to reach a joint decision that will have ethical, moral, political value, in the broadest sense.
Click here to view full story...
New 5 minute film, by CAGNE, highlights concerns of residents about a 2nd Gatwick runway
Residents of areas around Gatwick launched a five-minute video, called ‘What does a new runway at Gatwick mean to you?" It was put together by Communities Against Gatwick Noise and Emissions (CAGNE), through Sally Pavey. The film shows reasons why some of the many people, including business owners as well as residents, affected by Gatwick are opposed to a 2nd runway. Some of the issues expressed in the film include the effect of a 2nd runway on traffic congestion near the airport (and further afield), the potential loss of business premises, the need for more social infrastructure to deal with extra employees at and around the airport, and the growth in the numbers of people affected by aircraft noise. CAGNE and groups largely experiencing noise from Gatwick departures to the west and working with groups troubled by Gatwick arrivals to the east of the airport. All are opposed to the recent increase in the concentration of flight paths, causing intense noise nuisance for thousands. There are also concerns about impaired sleep for some communities, due to noise continuing at night. Recent CAA data show an 15% increase in the number experiencing night noise in 2014, within the 48 dB contour.
Click here to view full story...
Willie Walsh keen to get 2nd Dublin runway, which has planning consent
Planning permission for a new east-west runway, 1.6 kilometres to the north and parallel to the existing main runway at Dublin airport was granted in 2007 and remains valid till 2017. However a new planning application may have to be lodged because the original permission contained 31 restrictive conditions including a requirement that no flights operate from the 2nd runway between 11pm and 7am. The airport's busiest time is the hour between 6am and 7am so airlines say a ban before flights taking off then is "impractical." The runway cost has been estimated at €300m. The likelihood of it being built is considered higher now after the IAG takeover of Aer Lingus which includes plans to use Dublin airport to feed traffic from Europe to North America. IAG's CEO Willie Walsh wants the runway, saying (predictably) Dublin airport is currently at full capacity during peak hours, leading to "congestion and delays". Mr Walsh says he was open to an agreement with Ryanair that would see it feed passengers to the Aer Lingus long-haul network, and an agreement could be reached by summer 2016. The Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) is re-examining its proposals for a second runway as passenger numbers have risen to more than 21 million in 2014 and it expects a rise of 15% this year.
Click here to view full story...
Work on the new Nantes airport at Notre-Dame-des-Landes might start by early next year
In 2008 plans to build a new airport for Nantes, 20 miles north of the city at Notre-Dame-des-Landes, were approved. The plan is to move the airport from its current site to the south of the city, Nantes Atlantique Airport, and build over farmland and wetlands, that are rich in wildlife and have good agriculture. The new "Aéroport du Grand Ouest" is intended to be a "gateway to western France" with up to 9 million passengers per year by 2050. For that tiny number, it wants two runways. It has been bitterly opposed for years, and while it was originally to open in 2014, work may now eventually start soon. Opponents have done everything they could to stop it, including huge occupations of parts of the site, scuffles with the authorities that sometimes turned unpleasant, a hunger strike, and recourse to legal challenges on European law. Finally it seems all legal avenues have been exhausted. The Prefecture of the Loire-Atlantic announced in effect that work on the airport will start, and a call for tenders has been launched. Compensation will have to be paid to those having their land expropriated, and environmental mitigation will have to be done - including protection of water voles. There are still people (zadistes) occupying shacks on part of the site, and they would have to be removed. Opponents do not believe any work can start yet. They say the airport is not needed, it is not consistent with climate targets, and the damage to farmland and habitats cannot be justified. .
Click here to view full story...
George Osborne launches National Infrastructure Commission, under Andrew Adonis, so UK can “think big again”
George Osborne has launched his national infrastructure commission. He said infrastructure investment would be at the heart of November’s spending review and the new independent body would think “dispassionately and independently” about Britain’s infrastructure needs. Andrew Adonis will chair the commission, which will oversee £100 billion of infrastructure spending by 2020. Osborne says the failure of successive governments to invest in infrastructure has meant that the British people have longer commutes, higher energy bills and can’t afford to be home-owners. Osborne himself has overseen a 5.4% fall in infrastructure investment since he took office in 2010. He wants this government to be thinking "long term" and he wants new railway lines, new broadband installed (and perhaps a new runway). Other members of the commission include Michael Heseltine, Prof Tim Besley, Sir John Armitt, and Bridget Rosewell, The commission will have the initial priorities of examining connections between the big northern cities, London’s transport system and energy infrastructure. It will produce a report at the beginning of each parliament with recommendations for spending on infrastructure projects, though politicians will have the final say. In the spending review, Osborne will probably announce a suite of asset sales which the Treasury expects to raise billions of pounds to be ploughed back into projects.
Click here to view full story...
Patrick McLoughlin insists government has not yet decided on runway options, despite Osborne rumours
It is still thought likely that the government will make some sort of announcement on whether it backs a runway at Heathrow or Gatwick, by the end of the year. Whether that will come before Christmas Eve is anyone's guess. The Times reported that George Osborne may be convinced by the Airports Commission report and is therefore ready to rule out Gatwick, considering it is "Heathrow or nothing." But Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin has said that the Government may reject the recommendation of the Commission's report, that Heathrow should be expanded. He said the report had just given 3 “options” with a “preferred option”, rather than a ruling with much weight. "...we are looking at the options that it gave us. We are doing the work that is required to see how those three options stack up." He argued the Government would have to see if some of the report's recommendations were "actually doable", and that though the work of the Commission would make a decision on expansion easier, questions still remained. An ally of the Chancellor told the Times: “George doesn’t have a settled view on this. He just wants to see a runway built somewhere as soon as possible once all the proper processes are concluded.”
Click here to view full story...