Afternoon:
9°c
New hint that third Heathrow runway to get 'green' go-ahead
Paul Waugh, Deputy Political Editor27 Nov 2008
A THIRD runway at Heathrow need not breach Britain's new legal target to cut greenhouse gas emissions, Gordon Brown's environmental adviser has hinted.
Lord Turner of Ecchinswell said that if airlines used biofuels or other low-carbon sources aviation could expand while still meeting the plan to reduce emissions by 80 per cent by 2050.
"It's possible for the world to cut greenhouse gases while still not cutting aviation by anything like as much, even increase aviation emissions," he said.
Lord Turner, who chairs Mr Brown's Climate Change Committee as well as the Financial Services Authority, appeared to dispute claims that Heathrow expansion would undermine the UK's fight against climate change. Environment Agency chief Lord Smith of Finsbury has warned that the third runway would push local air and noise pollution to intolerable levels.
Although falling short of an endorsement of the plans, Lord Turner's remarks could give the Government cover for an announcement before Christmas that there can be a third runway and a sixth terminal at Heathrow to cater for hundreds more flights every day.
The Climate Change Committee will publish its first report outlining how the Government will meet its promise on cutting greenhouse gases. The report on Monday will include interim targets for reductions which must be achieved up to 2022.
Green groups fear that the recession will dampen ministers' enthusiasm for the environment as harsh economic realities counter plans to impose new carbon costs.
Following lobbying by the car industry across Europe, the Government yesterday watered down a recommended new car emissions target for 2012, saying it would phase in a target by 2020. But it added that it was also pushing for a lower limit.
The Government's climate change target - formally passed into law last night when the Climate Change Act received royal assent- includes aviation and shipping, though it will not specifically set a target for Heathrow.
Reader views (11)
Adair Turner must be on another planet – one with some hitherto undiscovered continents - if he thinks agrofuels can enable aviation to expand and make 80% emission cuts (Heathrow article, November 27th). According to the Gallagher review, projected global land demand until 2020 for food/feed and surface transport agrofuel targets are 200-500 million hectares (Mha) and 73-276 Mha respectively. Boeing recently said they were planning 30% biofuel mix as a transition to an eventual 100% mix: using similar calculations, 30% agrofuels in aviation at current levels would require 42-140 Mha of land by 2020.
Recent best estimates for available land are 250-390 Mha, considerable amount of this is land is already used and is essential to indigenous peoples and pastoralists. It is vital too for biodiversity. The demands above are not the total ‘bio-economy’ as they ignore other land intense policies for biogas and biomass energy, but they total 316-916 Mha and indicate current policy will take us to a Land Crunch.
Something has to give and it will be planet and people, as these massive land grabs would come with huge greenhouse gas emissions from indirect land use change, much greater than any ‘savings’ from the biofuels, and billions of people in the South will suffer from land eviction and food insecurity.
- Andrew, Norfolk, 28/11/2008 11:03
Report abuse
Lomndoners its time we all took to the streets, our government is controlled by amoral political weevils and our lives are nothing compared toBAA profits it seems - THIS WILL BE LABOURS POLL TAX MOMENT
- Christian Ball, London, UK, 28/11/2008 08:47
Report abuse
Seen it all have we not, The Environmental Health Org says this will lead to 'increased morbidity' so Nu Labour get someone without humanity twho 'chairs Browns own committee' so is a political apointee not a government agency to support tyhis political decision. Lets see how Turner Hoon etc like traffic chaos every single day from the day they attempt to make this happen. I will fight to protect my unborn childs health andmt families saniity - omething this wicked politoicins seem all too willing to sacrifiice.
- Christian Ball, London, UK, 28/11/2008 08:43
Report abuse
Okay, maybe this matters at a national / global level but the real issue is the degradation of the local environment with pollution set to rise to illegal levels and the area around the airport to get it's own congestion charge to compensate. Bio-fuels are not really a long term solution anyway and will only cause more deforrestation and higher food prices as more land is given over to its production.
As for the Tory's, Cameron made it quite clear in his conference speech that he was against a third runway and Theresa Villers has said that they will tear up any plans for expansion even if the Labour government has approved them. But if you can't bring yourself to vote Tory the Lib Dems have been against expansion at Heathrow since the last ice age.
- Rich, London, 28/11/2008 00:00
Report abuse
Readers should know that residents in boroughs around the airport have been tolerant of Heathrow but are on the tipping point with this projected expansion. To start with relaxation of alternate use of runways to continual mixed mode will be very damaging to the worst affected who will lose their anticipated respite from noise at 3pm. Building another Gatwick alongside Heathrow will cause major congestion throughout West London on roads, buses and trains including the Underground.
Its also likely that further increases will be made with night flights, many residents already putting up with arrivals from 4.30am.
This madness must be stopped!
- Robert Darke, Ealing, Middlesex., 27/11/2008 19:29
Report abuse
This runway is going ahead and theres nothing the public can do about it. All this environmental talk is rubbish and is tyring to take the distraction away from the real issue. Im a bit confused to the logic of requiring a third runway when theres a recession on and we can't afford flights anyway. More scope for bringing in more immigrants I suppose. P.S I feel sorry for the people who live in the village set to be bulldozered
- Dean, London, 27/11/2008 13:55
Report abuse
If you cannot come up with cohensive data to counter environment concerns on noise pollution (invent a aircraft that no aircraft manufactucturer will build) or toxic carbon emissions (throw in bio-fuels) : I'm not sure is if its more scary that they treat us like niave children or that they are increasingly becoming Mussolini like in literally bulldozing this through. I suppose 2020 is far enough away for them to distance themslves from reality & the consequences. Like the banking execs who created the the credit crisis !
- Bob, London. UK, 27/11/2008 12:57
Report abuse
Phil, whatever the merits of a third runway, I don't see its approval having any great political consequences. Unless David Cameron comes out and says that he will reverse any approval, most of us will suspect that he would approved it too, but should he make such a commitment, it will be played against him as an attack on jobs and business. In those Labour constituencies near Heathrow, those who work at the airport probably outnumber the anti-airport brigade.
For all the campaigning against it, the location of the new third runway is likely to take aircraft noise and pollution away from my old home (LB Richmond). But, as I've said here before, I still think that any new runway should be at Gatwick.
- Tonyb, Melbourne, Australia, 27/11/2008 11:59
Report abuse
Typical Labour mangling of language and statistics to fit the answer they want. The whole project will keep a few builders and engineers off the dole queue in the short term, but will leave a legacy of noise and sleepless nights for millions in and around London, including Her Majesty.
- Nobby Clark, Perth, Scotland, 27/11/2008 11:51
Report abuse
Anybody know what Lord Turner's knowledge of aircraft jet engines is, present and projected CO2 emissions from engines on the drawing board, present and projected noise footprints, and source of the vast amount of 'bio-fuels' required for so called low carbon airliner operations? I would be interested to know this...
Is there nothing that Brown's Government/BAA will stop at to steam-roller this runway through?
- Jon Kent, Hertford. UK, 27/11/2008 11:45
Report abuse
Approval for the Heathrow third runway will be another nail in Brown's and Labour's political coffin. So, go ahead, Gordon, make my day!
I still haven't seen any statement from Cameron saying that he will reverse any approval by Brown of the third runway. And where's Cameron's statement on where he stands on identity cards? The man tries to play both sides on every issue.
- Phil Jones, London UK, 27/11/2008 10:14
Report abuse
