Heathrow contributes over a third of the UK’s aviation emissions, some 14 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) every year(1). This is greater than the emissions of Tanzania, Nepal, Mozambique and Uganda combined(2). The Government and the aviation industry want to build a third runway and increase flights on existing runways – increasing flights from 480,000 to 702,000 each year. The 3rd runway would release as much carbon as Kenya’s total carbon emissions every year(3). It’s crazy to be paving the way for large scale increases in greenhouse gases when we should be doing all we can to reduce emissions.

(1)Aviation Environment Federation (2)“UK flights emit same amount of CO2 as the 15 poorest countries’ total CO2 emissions”, World Development Movement press release, 11 October 2007 http://tinyurl.com/6bls26 (3)Flights from Heathrow’s third runway will emit same amount of CO2 as Kenya”, World Development Movement press release, 21 November 2007

The Government wants to double or even treble capacity at UK airports by 2050. Gordon Brown recently suggested that he may commit the UK to an 80% cut in Co2 emissions by 2050(4). Research from the respected Tyndall Centre shows that if the industry is allowed to expand as predicted, aviation alone would destroy any hope of hitting this target(5).

(4)From text of Gordon Brown’s speech at WWF Febuary 2007 (5), Anderson, A Bows, P, Upham (2006) Growth scenarios for EU & UK aviation: contradiction with climate policy, Page 42.

Over a fifth of flights from Heathrow are to destinations within 500 kilometres of the airport - destinations easily reachable by train(6). Train travel is around ten times less damaging to the climate than flying(7). The number one destination from Heathrow is Paris(8). The fourth most popular destination is Manchester - with 32 flights per day between London and the city. Transferring these 100,000 short haul flights from Heathrow to the rail network would take capacity back to 1990 levels, significantly reducing our Co2 emissions and largely negating the need for a third runway.

(6)HACAN, (2006) Short-Haul Flights: Clogging up Heathrow’s Runways. (7)DfT estimate that short haul air craft emit 0.15 kg/CO2 per passenger Km. This multiplied by 2.7 (the IPCC’s best estimate for the impact of radiative forcing) equals 0.405. Dft estimates rail on average emits 0.04 kg/CO2 per passenger Km, approximately 10% of 0.405. (8)HACAN, (2006) Short-Haul Flights: Clogging up Heathrow’s Runways.

Small increases in the efficiency of planes will be overwhelmed by an unrestrained growth in flights. The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution found that the industry’s targets are ‘clearly aspirations rather than projections’(9). There are some basic technological restraints that make major improvements impossible to imagine. However, if the Government caps the total number of flights at current levels, these efficiency gains could have a positive impact. The Government says that it believes the European Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) is the best way to tackle aviation’s climate change impacts. Yet research shows that aviation’s inclusion in the EU ETS will do next to nothing to reduce aviation’s emissions. Even in the toughest ETS scenario envisaged, by 2020 emissions would grow by 83% rather than 86% in a business-as-usual situation.

(9)Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, 29th November 2002. The Environmental Effects of Civil Aircraft in Flight. Special Report

Several recent reports have cast serious doubts over the Government’s economic case for Heathrow expansion. It appears the Government has overestimated the potential benefits of expansion(10); not properly accounted for the costs(11); and that the oil price used in passenger demand projections was unrealistic(12). The Government has also failed to consider the impact on the UK tourism industry which suffers a £17 billion deficit as a result of people not holidaying at home(13).

(10)CE Delft (2008) The Economics of Heathrow Expansion. (11)Alchemy Economics - the UK government's conjuring trick to justify airport expansion", commissioned by WWF, June 08 http://tinyurl.com/5hgjxh (12)Elizabeth A. Stanton and Frank Ackerman, the Stockholm Environment Institute, US Centre (July 2008) Generated User Benefits and the Heathrow Expansion: Understanding Consumer Surplus. (13)“UK tourism deficit hits £17bn”, Business Guardian, Press Association, January 3, 2006

The entire village of Sipson and parts of Harmondsworth would be flattened in order to make way for a third. Around 2000 people would lose their homes. Other communities in Harmondsworth, Harlington and West Drayton will also be affected – places that will suddenly find themselves on the perimeter fence of the biggest airport in the world. These are vibrant settled communities where many people have lived all their lives, a lot of them having worked at the airport.

If the plans go through, thousands of people across London will be affected by increased noise. At least 150,000 people will be under the flight path to the new runway, most of them experiencing aircraft noise for the first time. And the prospect for people living under the existing flight paths is frightening: a plane every 90 seconds virtually throughout the day. Noise has huge negative effects on peoples’ wellbeing, quality of life and has been shown to have a negative impact on children’s education.

The Government says that the proposals won’t lead to increased levels of local air pollution. But levels of nitrous oxide are already breaking EU regulations. The Environment Agency has added its weight to the growing criticism of the proposed expansion of Heathrow airport by saying the government has failed to prove that plans for a third runway will not breach EU rules on air pollution. The agency also warned that the dramatic increase in the number of flights could also increase mortality rates across the South-East(14).

(14)http://tinyurl.com/5muon2

Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information act show that there has been extraordinary collusion between the Government and the British Airports Authority (BAA) who have worked together to fix the figures in order to push through the expansion plans(15).

(15)“Evidence fix led to third runway being approved”, March 9, The Sunday Times http://tinyurl.com/2a83ze

70% of people in the UK are opposed to building bigger airports(16). A huge coalition of groups and individuals are now working together to fight the expansion plans at Heathrow. Opposition has been voiced by a diverse range of people including the Archbishop of Canterbury, David Cameron, MPs in both parties, local councillors, the Mayor of London, Bob Ailing (ex British Airways boss), the co-operative travel company, and a huge range of NGOs including WWF, the National Trust, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the Campaign for Better Transport.

(16)Ipsos Mori poll, October 2007