Morning:
8°c
The issues: economy versus environment
Paul Waugh, Deputy Political Editor11 Nov 2008
●A third runway would add an extra 220,000 flights by 2030 and the Government estimates this would bring the British economy an additional £9 billion. Pro-aviation groups say that without expansion, limited capacity would increase the cost of flights for ordinary families.
●Campaigners say Heathrow will effectively be "full" soon and warn that projections show that the number of international visitors to the UK is set to rise from 32 million to 82 million by 2030. Although the recession will hit trade in the short term, governments should look to the longer term when growth will pick up again.
●In a globalised world, businessmen need to travel more. A third runway would fend off competition from Amsterdam Schiphol for passengers wanting a hub airport for transfers to other destinations. It is also claimed that without new runways, the UK would lose half a million new jobs in the tourism industry that would be generated from meeting demand from overseas visitors.
●Those arguing for a high-speed train link to the North are offering a false choice. Only three per cent of Heathrow flights go to Manchester or Leeds/Bradford.
●New planes are quieter and cleaner. BAA says it will reduce the number of flights at an expanded Heathrow if airlines fail to adopt the new fleets.
●Air freighting some products, such as flowers from Kenya, helps poorer countries while having less impact on the planet. Growing flowers in Kenya in season uses less energy than growing them under heat lamps in Europe in winter.
●Pollution from car travel to Heathrow could be countered by better public transport.
●The greenhouse gases produced by flying are far outweighed by those produced by industry, heating homes and car travel.
Reader views (4)
Its a shame that the oil is going to run out pretty soon and as it becomes scarcer to begin with the price will rise dramatically. Who ends up paying? The customer. So first its expensive then its non-existent. All by 2020. Where did I get that little bit of info? Well you don't honestly believe that there is 12 years of oil left do you? Not at the rate we are currently using it. Even if they open up all these other potential sites the global pollution alone will account for half of all life forms on the planet and the rest will succumb within 50 years. So what is more important to you? Profit today or survival tomorrow?
I'm personally looking forward to the end because so many suckers will fall by the wayside, unable to survive without their Blackberry's and Business class seats. Don't you just love greed?
- Kevin Coleman, United Kingdom, 12/11/2008 18:51
Report abuse
High Speed Rail is NOT a false choice.
HS2 to just past Manchester is enough to win 80% of both Glasgow & Edinburgh air markets (plus the rest of Manchester). That totals 7%.
Another 14% of Heathrow traffic would be transferred to rail if Eurostar/Air France Rail etc ran DIRECT trains from Heathrow past St Pancras to Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Geneva, Paris etc. This could be achieved by just building new bridges at Willesden and using existing express tracks to carry 2 trains/hr - ie 7 million passengers/yr to such destinations within 3-4hrs (enough to take 70-80% of each air market).
So thats 14% as soon as we get Eurostar to Heathrow (for only £300m which could be done by 2012)
and another 7% as soon as HS2 gets just past Manchester.
Thats 21% of Heathrow traffic diverted to rail by 2020.
Enough to not need a 3rd Runway!
- John Jefkins, Croydon, 11/11/2008 15:25
Report abuse
A wonderful unbiased article carefully weighing the pros and cons of a third runway - what utter rubbish! The arguments must be about quality of life, not economics. Total GDP of a country is a very poor proxy for measuring quality of life.
- Zady, london, 11/11/2008 13:11
Report abuse
The treehuggers using false "Facts" want us back in caves.
They of course will be exempt.
- Ayliff Mcnab, Spain, 11/11/2008 12:48
Report abuse
