Tonight:
5°c
Expansion would put Londoners' health at risk, says GLA report
Pippa Crerar, City Hall Editor12 Jan 2009
A NEW study into the impact of a third runway at Heathrow has found it would put the health of thousands of Londoners seriously at risk, the Standard has learned.
The aviation report, commissioned by Boris Johnson, also said expansion of the airport would blight the lives of communities living under the flightpath.
The Mayor has pledged £15,000 for legal action against the Government if it gives the go-ahead to expansion.
He has urged ministers to consider building an airport in the Thames Estuary instead, although the idea has been disowned by his own party.
The internal GLA report, a draft of which has been seen by the Standard, criticised the Government for playing down the likely impact of the runway.
It concluded the airport was already in breach of European Union air quality targets. The study also found that Heathrow would breach noise pollution limits with up to 50 per cent more flights over London, that nearby roads faced jams and local communities would lose housing and public facilities.
A spokesman for Mr Johnson said: "A third runway would not only have a devastating impact on the quality of life of thousands of Londoners but also have serious environmental implications for the capital.
"The Mayor is anxious to ensure that the concerns of Londoners whose environment would be affected by a further expansion of Heathrow are fully addressed and is strongly opposed to building of the third runway."
Mr Johnson is holding a People's Question Time on the future of Heathrow next week in Hillingdon and has invited the airport's owner BAA and government ministers.
The chapter in the Mayor's Aviation and Airport Policy Review on the health impact of expansion on thousands of Londoners claimed Heathrow "already exceeds the health-based EU air quality limit values". These state the annual mean level of nitrogen dioxide must not exceed 40 microgrammes per cubic metre in residential areas. The rise in flights from 480,000 to 702,000 a year would produce even more nitrogen dioxide emissions by the time the EU targets come into force next year.
"The area around Heathrow already has some of the poorest air quality in London," the study said. "It is unlikely that the area will meet the NO2 air quality limit by 2010 when the Government will then be in breach of its duties and will face financial penalties."
It added: "The proposed expansion places London's health at risk, a situation that has not been adequately considered." The air pollution would be made even worse by the increased traffic on surrounding roads. Expansion would also lead to a loss of at least 700 properties, 100 listed buildings, a school and about 255 hectares of greenbelt land.
Reader views (6)
Let's face it, in respect of having a third runway at Heathrow, Crash Gordon and his muppets simply don't care about the health of Londoners! After all, there is no PROFIT in it for them! Furthermore, who has ever heard of ex-Cabinet Ministers getting directorships, chairmanships or plum consultantcy jobs when they leave office from "healthy average members of the public"? Go figure!
The way forward from an environmental standpoint is to tax airline fuel at the same rate as for petrol for road vehicles. Job done!
- Fraser, Telford Park, 13/01/2009 00:52
Report abuse
Nice to see the GLA coming out strongly about air quality. Now, here's an idea, how about raising the congestion charge for the most polluting vehicles? £25 is a nice round figure. I wonder why no one thought of that one before.
After that, we could look at replacing diesel buses with electric trams along corridors like, ooh, Uxbridge Road or Peckham to Camden. Then we could make cycle and pedestrian-friendly improvements to London's gyratory systems, such as Parliament Square and Elephant and Castle and increase investment in the London Cycle Network.
What do you think, Boris?
- Tom, London, UK, 12/01/2009 20:12
Report abuse
Who cares, I'm baling out and moving away from this country, enough is more than enough.
- Dennis, Taplow. U.K., 12/01/2009 16:03
Report abuse
So if you fly from Heathrow you are contributing to the ill health of other humans. Its obvious really we need to ensure that any companies that fly from Heathrow are named and shamed that way we can all see how business is nor even remorely Green. The way to defeat El Gordo our unelevted dictator is to embarrass the companies who would fly from Heathrow - so lets get a charter together and ask companies to sign a charter that puts humans at the heart of this - lets ask BA and Virgin and American etc to agree that only when noise levels are with World Health Organisation levels and when NOX levels are below EU guidelines will they ask for more - what do you all say?
- Christian Ball, London, UK, 12/01/2009 13:43
Report abuse
Ah but Bean Brown says it is right for the country!
- Steveo, Islington, London, 12/01/2009 11:30
Report abuse
And still our Stalinist state "government" pushes it through. Extraordinary how un-democratic this country has become and how the Nu Labor minority keeps on ruling the majority no-sayers.
- Georgie, London NW1, 12/01/2009 11:21
Report abuse
