Heathrow 3rd runway - Who else is outraged?

[Two_Sheds]

I dont think it should go ahead either. What the goverment wants the goverment gets, doesnt matter what the people who elected them think..

That should be "what big business wants, big business gets"

[pigletwillie]

It makes me smile, all the posts about stopping people flying, yet I suspect most of the same people either drive, have / have had kids and used disposable nappies, eat imported food, use gas central heating et al et al, all of which is more polluting every week than your share of co2 emmissions on a plane flight.

Flying is not evil, longer flights produce less co2 per person per kilometre than most cars do on the school run. Air New Zealand has even started flying planes on biofuel from recycled materialsas part of a trial.

Most of us have flown to far flung places and done the tourist thing, now try telling your kids that they cant do that, that travel has gone back to the 1800's and they are stuck where they live.

I personally think the whole airport should be moved to the Thames estuary, but we shall see.

Now, if you really want to help cut pollution, cast your mind to the Drax coal fired powerstation which on its own is Britains biggest single pollutor, or fight to stop the building of the new coal fired station at Kingsnorth, Together both will produce over 30 million tonnes of co2 per annum yet I hear not a squeak about them.

[Two_Sheds]

I don't think the expansion is actually going to happen.They say it will take years for the planning process

There was an anonymous caller from "the inside" on radio the other day, saying the contracts were all already being signed. It's done & dusted, and has been for some time

[Two_Sheds]

I'm not particulary bothered as for the pollution, I can't stop people flying...I don't travel by plane, and it's very unlikely I ever will, so it's not me who's driving the need

You don't use any goods that are flown in then? Chinese goods, Israeli food, Kenyan beans, Australian wine?

I just had a chat to Mr Sheds and he said that people need to fly. I said not everyone needs to, they just do it because it is cheap. People do not need to fly to Prague for a stag weekend, although it is arguably nicer than Blackpool.
My SiL does not need to fly to Europe from Asia every month to go shopping, but she does because she can afford to. Her husband doesn't actually need to fly all over Asia, he does it because he likes flying business class (free), and getting free hotels, and going to the best restaurants (on the company).

As with car travel, there are now too many unnecessary, avoidable journeys happening by air. If the real cost (pollution, congestion etc) was reflected in the price of the ticket, demand would fall.

[Two_Sheds]

Flying is not evil, longer flights produce less co2 per person per kilometre than most cars do on the school run.

This may be true, but how do you get to the airport? How do all the staff get to work? By car, mostly. So extra flights = extra car journeys too.

What scares me (and I don't live near a motorway or an airport yet) is where will it end? There is insatiable demand for cheap travel. Do we give in to it, and let it grow unabated, until half the UK is under concrete and nobody can sleep for the noise?

[bluemoon]

I recall as a child going to a "party", actually it was more like a wake, that was being thrown for a couple and their children who were about to emigrate to Australia (this would have been around 1964 or 65). It was pretty much taken for granted that once they left no one would ever see them again - this included their close family. Letters to them took six weeks and phone calls were so expensive that they were limited to the "Happy Christmas" or "I'm sorry to tell you that uncle George is dead" type. I doubt that, in the end, they were completely cut off from their family as air travel boomed soon afterwards, and this is a good thing. What is silly is that my brother jumped on a plane to Melbourne a couple of years ago to go and watch a cricket match (that was being televised anyway). I don't think anyone wants to ban air travel, I just think we ought to be thinking of ways to curb its use. As for pigletwillies list of naughty things we do to release CO2, the only thing I'm guilty of is having kids (but minus the disposable nappies). The only electrical appliance I have that is not necessary is the computer - and that's a 'green' one and uses the same power as a 40 watt bulb - (no T.V., microwave, dishwasher, tumble dryer). And my life is far more fulfilled than it was when I expected to be 'entertained' continually. We also produce most of our own food and buy what we can't produce locally. I don't expect everyone to live like this I just wish people would think things through and occasionally make a decision based upon the impact it will have rather than just upon their own desires.

[kernowyon]

this really has opened a can of worms hasn't it? my view is that it is going to happen a new runway will be built regardless and I would rather see it built where there is already a huge blot on the landscape (heathrow) than in a new location.

no-one had mentioned the new rail links being proposed - surely a train from Brum to London in 45 mins is a good thing? wouldn't that also reduce car miles if this became an attractive alternative?

as for the impact of an expanding Heathrow, this is the biggest employer in this area, most villages etc around the airport rely on the airport, i lived in Ashford/Stanwell for a while and in my estate 75% of the houses there had one or more people who worked at the airport, new houses were being built to accomodate an expanding workforce with terminal five being built, and yes more jobs will be created by a new runway and terminal building but if the airport didn't expand and lost it's hub status with flights diverted to france and germany the whole area and the tens of thousands that work here now or work for a business that has it's HQ in the area because of the airport would be able to live in peace without a plane flying over their houses but would not have a job and have probably have to move anyway.

[jacob marley]

If it any help where i live on top of big hill over looking bham airport there was a big hoohar about 5 year's ago because they wanted to build a second runway at Bham .
Any way that is all cancelled now and they are going to extend the runway that they all ready so thing's may not be final at Heathrow all depend's how far the money stretch's that Mr Brown is promising for all the motorway project's that have been announced this week....jacob

[miffy]

I don't think i have the right to criticise anyone for what they do or don't do to be greener. We make the effort to do what we can do, recycle, reuse,don't over use our car.
There is no simple solution to this, every little change people make will make a difference, we can't feign ignorance now, global warming is a fact as gardeners we can see the impact first hand in our own gardens. I wish everyone felt the same way i do about conservation, pollution etc but they don't, i am just glad people are trying in whatever way they can to make a difference however small as these all add up. The fact that you are all trying to grow your own veg means you are cutting down on food miles and working with the environment which is fab. No easy solution to this one, whatever happens someone will loose out.

[pigletwillie]

Nearly every person (thanks Sarzwix) who has posted on this thread has done so because they think, pressume or assume to know that Heathrow is going to be bad.

Yes, carbon pollution will rise in the UK, but if we did nothing the flights would just be flown from say Leeds Bradford to Schipol instead of Heathrow. The pollution increase will still be there.

Yes some houses will be knocked down, so were some when they built the M25, The Olympic site in Stratford and a thousand other infrastructure projects in the country. Its not good to lose your home such things do happen.

Yes, people get to airports by car as I am sure you did Two sheds when you flew to Singapore but hopefully the high speed train service will offset at least some of that.

Still no one seems bothered about Drax or Kingsnorth coal powered power stations which are far worse environment wise, all they are doing is jumping on a bandwagon with their I am holyer than though attitudes cos they recycle a jar or two and dont fly very often. We can all claim the moral high ground and preach of the wicked ways of those actually enjoy a foreign holiday and fly. You can do so to me when your carbon footprint is zero.

Oh, just for the record, in the UK flying accounts for 2% (5% globally) of our pollution, power generation produces 35%.

[SarzWix]

Every person who has posted on this thread has done so because they think, pressume or assume to know that Heathrow is going to be bad.

That's not true PW, Kernowyon, just up there ^_^ isn't down on the idea.
And I freely admit to not being well enough informed to judge one way or the other. I don't fly anywhere because we can't afford to, not because of some "holier than thou" attitude!!
I do think it's very sad that a whole village has to be wiped out for it though. It makes me sad to think of whole villages under water in the bottom of reservoirs too

For me, I'd like to see some proof that the government has properly looked into the alternatives - expanding the other airports, or building a new one in a better place.

And I am hugely grateful that we don't have to live in the flightpath of any of them - the Leeds/Bradford flights, and the RAF training which goes on above us is quite enough for me.

Chill pill big fella, tis all only words innit?

[Paul Wagland]

Oh, just for the record, in the UK flying accounts for 2% (5% globally) of our pollution, power generation produces 35%.

According to the government, air travel accounts for 6.3% of UK carbon emissions. And it's not a straight comparison either - CO2 emitted high in the atmosphere has at least double the greenhouse effect that the same gasses emitted at sea level have.

Anyway, it doesn't matter if this is 2% or a theoretical 12.6% of our emissions, this really misses the point. We do not need to fly all over the place on stag dos, school trips and budget holidays. Business trips may be, on the whole, a worthwhile reason, but there are still loads of unnecessary 'jollies' going on.

We in the UK use more than our share of global resources (three or four times our share in fact). It's up to us to get back into line, and it's up to the government to help us. Building a new runway is hugely counter-productive.

Air travel may not be quite the most evil industry, but it is a very high profile luxury, so no wonder it takes the flak.

[pigletwillie]

Is it in with the horse and carts and hair shirts then Paul, how far do you intend us all to "downsize". Shall we go back to candles and bin electricity, back to open fires and lose the central heating. Mostly we dont NEED cars but most of us have them, we dont NEED central heating but its nice, we dont need chocolate or South African Cab Sav but, hey, we moved out of caves several millenia ago.

Who says we are using 4 times our "share" of global resources, we are an advanced, industrial nation, We may use more resource than Burkina Faso but would argue we use more than our "share". I would totally agree that we use more than we need to and can crop that back drastically, we waste lots and have little regard for tommorow.

Your welcome to holiday in Blackpool, I too take a couple of long weekends in the Uk, but rest assured, as and when I want too, I will be flying somewhere hot and sweaty and raising a glass to Sir Frank Whittle.

Oh, as an aside, two google searches can use as much electricty as boiling a kettle. Scarey how much unseen energy we all use.

Revealed: the environmental impact of Google searches - Times Online

[SarzWix]

I don't pretend to understand it, but it seems to me that within our foreseeable future, the problem will be how to fuel the aircraft at all, unless they're using bio-fuels! And we've all read about the problems of producing food versus fuel. So we probably will be reverting to horse & cart, and renewable power sources like solar/wind/hydro and wood-burning stoves!
I daresay that £10.00 flights will be in history books. Whether they will be blamed for the depletion of natural resources is something we don't know yet. But I would imagine that runways all over the country will be standing derelict, or being built over, if the oil runs out.

Peak oil - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oil depletion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Disclaimer I admit to not fully understanding this subject, and I know that Wiki isn't going to tell me everything I need to know, so please don't shout at me

[LizyDrippin]

You don't use any goods that are flown in then? Chinese goods, Israeli food, Kenyan beans, Australian wine?


As with car travel, there are now too many unnecessary, avoidable journeys happening by air. If the real cost (pollution, congestion etc) was reflected in the price of the ticket, demand would fall.

I've always tried not to use foreign goods. and that includes food. Over the years that has become more and more difficult as we've lost more and more of our industries and manufacturing.


I think air fares etc should reflect the true cost of the flight, It wouldn't bother me if it cost thousands to fly, if they put my local bus fare up though that would annoy me