Heathrow 3rd runway - Who else is outraged?

[esrikandan]

Well...at the risk of sounding contraversial, I for one am for the Third Runway.

Ok, some people will have to move home and/or business.

That's life. This is also happening for the Olympics.

The important things are:

1. It's good for the economy and encourage people to come here and spend their money.
2. It will create loads of employment (which must be a GOOD thing right now).

I live under the flight path, it's been that way for years, and most people who live in and around the area work at the airport (which is why they live in this area). You get used to the noise and it's really not that bad. The smell of aviation fuel is only really noticable within the perimiter road and as for pollution...well I don't know. But I'm sure the queues of traffic on the M4 and M25 every morning generates far more pollution (and it's worth noting that CO2 is not the only pollutant but bizarrely is the only one measured here. Carbon monoxide, soot, there's a nitrogem based one but I can't remember what it's called).

[Two_Sheds]

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.

Nobody is suggesting that we go back to living in caves. People are just saying "enough, already".

If the airlines stop creating artificial demand (with cheap tickets) then perhaps a third runway wouldn't be 'necessary'

As with road building ... more roads do not ease congestion, because traffic increases to fill them up again (unless perhaps they are toll roads).
At some point, we have to say "enough".

Jobs would be created if we improved our rail network, or built more bike lanes, or cleaned up all the litter: things that actually need doing

[willowstar]

I'm for the third runway. I'll probably use it in years to come so it would be completely hypocritical for me to object. I can't stand the assumption that everyone who flies is a bad person who doesn't care for the environment, such a small minded attitude.

[Hilary B]

I'm for the third runway. I'll probably use it in years to come so it would be completely hypocritical for me to object. I can't stand the assumption that everyone who flies is a bad person who doesn't care for the environment, such a small minded attitude.

I haven't read all of this thread, but on another forum it has been pointed out that most of what this 'third runway' is supposed to be ('transit' passengers) for could be better provided at airports elsewhere in the country (can't remember which were suggested). There is NOT good access to Heathrow, and on the RARE occasions when flying is the answer to my needs to get from A to B, I can't AFFORD to use Heathrow (even though it is closest).

If aircraft fuel was taxed to a quarter that on car fuel, silly-cheap flights would end promptly. Those who demand the 'right' to cheap flights so they can holiday abroad, DO NOT care for the environment. I'm not talking about global warming, but about the unavoidable fact that oil is NOT an unlimited supply, and the whole planet would be better off if we thought rather more before using it

[esrikandan]

I can't AFFORD to use Heathrow (even though it is closest).

If aircraft fuel was taxed to a quarter that on car fuel, silly-cheap flights would end promptly. Those who demand the 'right' to cheap flights so they can holiday abroad, DO NOT care for the environment.

Well for one, it is not cheap to fly from Heathrow. I accept that increased taxes on fuel *may* reduce demand, but it would have a far greater effect at the other airports from which the cheaper airlines operate.

On an already overtaxed country, is it really fair to punish the average consumer any more? And in any case, what's wrong with wanting to have a holiday abroad? I think a significant number of people don't take a foreign holiday abroad (by air) every year, and the British climate is hardly great for a decent summer holiday anyway.

[Hilary B]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilary B
I can't AFFORD to use Heathrow (even though it is closest).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilary B
If aircraft fuel was taxed to a quarter that on car fuel, silly-cheap flights would end promptly. Those who demand the 'right' to cheap flights so they can holiday abroad, DO NOT care for the environment.

Well for one, it is not cheap to fly from Heathrow. I accept that increased taxes on fuel *may* reduce demand, but it would have a far greater effect at the other airports from which the cheaper airlines operate.

I know Heathrow isn't cheap. I said so! It isn't just the actual cost of the flight. Nor does the fact that it would affect other airports more make any difference to my argument .

On an already overtaxed country, is it really fair to punish the average consumer any more? And in any case, what's wrong with wanting to have a holiday abroad? I think a significant number of people don't take a foreign holiday abroad (by air) every year, and the British climate is hardly great for a decent summer holiday anyway.

I happen to believe in 'the real cost' being reflected in the price. Just as some of us pay extra for fair-trade food, or free-range eggs, or take the time and trouble to use less 'food miles', so environmentally friendly living is incompatible with these ultra-cheap flights. Folk can live life how they choose, but should admit (to themselves at least) what they are doing. We do enough travelling to and from Spain, but I don't make any pretence of it not having environmental impact (and I don't complain at the price, which is rather more than flying would cost us)

[Hilary B]

Have just looked at the Government petitions page and Heathrow does not appear in either the five newest or most popular petitions.
Mind you I have previously added my name to several petitions and eventually received a carefully reasoned explanation from the government explaining why I was wrong and they are going to go ahead and do whatever it was in any case.

Yeah, I've had a few of those, and I think it is the reason why people are no longer bothering to sign the things (occasionally there is the other reply, the one that says "you have been misinformed, we were always going to do what you ask")

[SlugLobber]

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%.

Quite frankly, PW, you make a lot of assumptions in your posts and I'm starting to find them offensive.

[kernowyon]

Quite frankly, PW, you make a lot of assumptions in your posts and I'm starting to find them offensive.

why is that post offensive - is it just because he disagrees with your point of view???

[SlugLobber]

The assumptions, Kernowyon. Not the disagreement. Sorry if I wasn't clear. Heck, I'll explain myself.

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.

Wrong. I posted because I disagree with entire villages being knocked down for other people's gain. I agree that jobs will be created and the economy *might* benefit (I'm not an expert, just going off what the 'experts' said!).

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.
As pointed out elsewhere, where does it stop? When the UK is a big mass of concrete? I would have been against the M25 too, if I'd been old enough and living in the South East!

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.

This for the record is what I found offensive. I do considerably more than 'recycle a jar or two'. I recycle everything I can and some things not taken by the council I recycle around the home. Nobody on this thread has said that they are against foreign holidays (although I'd question the quality of some of those destinations which are cheap!). Those arguing against the 3rd runway are saying that much of today's travel is unnecessary. Some meetings *are* better face-to-face, but certainly I've been to some that were not. It's physically impossible to have a zero carbon footprint, but there's no point having a huge one 'just because we can'.

Oh, just for the record, in the UK flying accounts for 2% (5% globally) of our pollution, power generation produces 35%. Small steps and all that. Switching off lights, not having the TV on for background noise, lowering thermostats, letting hair dry naturally, drying clothes on the line, not using dishwasher....it all adds up. Being against a 3rd runway doesn't mean that people are FOR everything else deemed 'bad' for the climate, hence my resentment at so many assumptions. For the record, I don't have kids, but when/if I do, I have already made arrangements with friends to take reusable nappies. Sorry if my previous post was too short and 'reactive', but I think it's unfair to label people as jumping on bandwaggons and preaching. We're discussing one issue here, not the entire climate (I don't have the time!!).

[Paul Wagland]

I don't find you offensive pigletwillie!

Is it in with the horse and carts and hair shirts then Paul, how far do you intend us all to "downsize".

Horse and cart, why not? Pleasant, clean, sustainable... maybe not the horsehair shirts though. Anyway, the key word is SUSTAINABLE. Air travel in such high volumes is unsustainable without some miracle new power source.

Surely nobody still believes that unlimited technology is the key to happiness? We are among the most developed of nations, but we have perhaps the lowest quality of life (in terms of actual psychological happiness) in Europe.

Who says we are using 4 times our "share" of global resources...........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.

Total annual global resources divided by total word population = fair annual share per person.

We use three times as much as we should. I'm sure you'd agree it's immoral simply to say 'we got to the wealth before you, so hands off'. We, as a nation, have some growing up to do!

[di]

I still think it's sad that a whole village needs to be wiped out for it's go ahead...I'm totally baffled why these supposedly brainy engineers/designers/architects/polticians & whoever else may be responsible,can't come up with an alternative option?
As for cheap flights...yep the stupidly cheap ones maybe should be done away with...but to get rid of them altogether would in my eyes be ensuring that only the rich get to travel to faraway places...Possibly a too simplistic idea...(but a Simpleton I am!!)...anyway...keep the cheap(ish) flights...then once you've had your cheapy break...passport gets stamped & then for x amount of time any further flights you take you pay some kind of fuel duty on.....Just seems unfair to me that as per usual the poorer of the nation are the ones to get penalised.
Disclaimer....like Sarah,I'm really not particularly clued up on such stuff...so please no shouting!!

[Garyw]

All the more reason to grow your own - not only are you taking something away from global imports and exports (no matter how small) your also activally recycling many thing ...........not necessarily the smug high ground but every little helps eh!

Sustainability - like humanitarian crisis - are words so over used and out of context these days as to have been shown to be worthless ........... sorry these days its all a balancing acting from our prespective but its all about money for the governement - air travel = big taxes for them to waste elsewhere .................

Paul - sadly the world isnt the lefty ideal some folks see it as - if we had a Total annual global resources divided by total word population = fair annual share per person it would mean folks in extreme climates would die - in the north from the cold - in the deserts from lack of water - in africa they'd starve ............aid dependant countries use a hell of a lot of resources - some more than many countries of equivalent size ...........

As for the cheap flights - why not just have a subsidised price set them all at a equivalent costing and let the first class and business passangers play the difference for the working class and average joes who need and deserve their holiday?? I bet you pound to a pinch of pooh the wealthy would ove that idea!! Besides a 1p flight costs you about £60 in taxes ..............mmmmmmmmm wheres that go eh - not off setting co2 from flying Im sure

There are no easy answers to the worlds problems as sadly we are the parasites causing them and we as a species are out of control .......................

[Hilary B]

All the more reason to grow your own - not only are you taking something away from global imports and exports (no matter how small) your also activally recycling many thing ...........not necessarily the smug high ground but every little helps eh!

Sustainability - like humanitarian crisis - are words so over used and out of context these days as to have been shown to be worthless ........... sorry these days its all a balancing acting from our prespective but its all about money for the governement - air travel = big taxes for them to waste elsewhere .................

Paul - sadly the world isnt the lefty ideal some folks see it as - if we had a Total annual global resources divided by total word population = fair annual share per person it would mean folks in extreme climates would die - in the north from the cold - in the deserts from lack of water - in africa they'd starve ............aid dependant countries use a hell of a lot of resources - some more than many countries of equivalent size ...........

As for the cheap flights - why not just have a subsidised price set them all at a equivalent costing and let the first class and business passangers play the difference for the working class and average joes who need and deserve their holiday?? I bet you pound to a pinch of pooh the wealthy would ove that idea!! Besides a 1p flight costs you about £60 in taxes ..............mmmmmmmmm wheres that go eh - not off setting co2 from flying Im sure

There are no easy answers to the worlds problems as sadly we are the parasites causing them and we as a species are out of control .......................

I really don't quite see the argument about 'if it isn't cheap only the rich can have it' errr.... yes, and??? That is what they call a 'fact of life'. If you want expensive things you have to pay for them, and the proper price of air travel is NOT CHEAP! The planet and the future are subsidising cheap flights.
As for the 'fair share' issue, America uses about 5 times its proportionate share, most of Europe about 3 times, and the poorest countries are getting less than half. They are starving in Africa NOW. Perhaps a more urgent problem is that the resources the planet can replace slowly are being used up at 15months-worth per annum (according to a friend of mine who is the sort to read the scientific stuff).

[BrideXIII]

And for those of us who don't have video conferencing facilities? I generally don't have any choice if I get called to a meeting. No actually I do, but not having a job is hardly an option...

you have a computer, msn is a free download, and that can do video conferencing.
sorry, everyone with access to a computer can do it, and name me one business these days that doesn't have access to a computer?

I am not outraged, nor am i surprised, i am very unhappy though.

there is however talk, that the conservatives have outright promised that if they get elected at the next election, the expansion plans will be cancelled outright( as it stands at least), that is a pretty public promise