Heathrow Airport - plans for expansion: ongoing discussion, merged posts

[whole diary]

[grahame]

I think it is necessary that there are checks and balances with the government system. If the courts question something parliament can legislate to make adjustments they see fit.

News this morning https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51665682 might cause the government to reconsider its decision not to appeal the Heathrow case. Can railways schemes also fall foul of this?

The general understanding, I believe, is that rail is much 'cleaner' per person moved that road or air. However, there are some campaigners who take the view that new rail schemes too should be discouraged. The requirement of the courts is that the impact is looked at and taken into account, which it seems has not demonstrably happened on the 3rd runway.  Could mean another round of paperwork for Portishead!

I do question one thing in the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) article ...

Aviation is a notoriously polluting sector, but the debate about cars is less clear-cut.

The government hopes technical innovation in the shape of electric and hydrogen cars will allow current or even increased levels of mobility to be carbon-free by 2050.

Its critics doubt the clean car revolution will happen fast enough to prevent emissions breaching climate laws.

They also warn about the environmental impact of the mining and manufacturing needed to make battery cars, and of the unavoidable particulate pollution generated by tyres and brakes.

Silly question - regenerative braking - does that not remove the majority of particulates that would come from friction brakes, which I accept my be needed for the come-to-rest phase.  Friction brakes to stop a vehicle moving once it is at rest would be a holding exercise, and particulate-free, right?

[broadgage]

Yes, regenerative braking does significantly reduce the particulates emitted from tyre and brake pad wear.
This also increases the life of tyres and brake pads, not only saving money on replacements but also reducing the pollution from manufacturing replacements.
Regenerative braking also reduces electricity consumption, and therefore reduces the pollution from power stations.
Electricity from the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) grid is far less polluting than petrol, but does still produce some carbon dioxide and other pollutants, reducing consumption is therefore desirable.

[TaplowGreen]

Interesting news............

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55322340

[broadgage]

Bad news IMO^▸ (in my opinion), If we are serious about the climate we need to fly a LOT less, not be expanding facilities so as to permit of more flying.
It also sets a worrying precedent as this ruling shows that promises and undertakings are worthless as they can later be overturned by the courts.

[4064ReadingAbbey]

Bad news IMO^▸ (in my opinion), If we are serious about the climate we need to fly a LOT less, not be expanding facilities so as to permit of more flying.

Who 'we'?

It also sets a worrying precedent as this ruling shows that promises and undertakings are worthless as they can later be overturned by the courts.

The courts interpret the law, they do not make policy.

I would suggest that those who make the promises and undertakings make sure that what they are stating is compliant with the law in the first place.

[TonyK]

Heathrow's 3rd runway has lost support of late, and may be postponed for another decade or so. That seems to be the practical effect of the current thinking, as outlined in New Civil Engineer.

[size=14pt[/size]Gatwick expansion backed over Heathrow third runway
12 FEB, 2021 BY ROB HORGAN

The London Plan – drawn up by Sadiq Khan and approved by Communities secretary Robert Jenrick – includes no provision for Heathrow Airport Ltd’s plans for a third runway.

In fact, the plan mention’s the mayor’s “strong objection” to Heathrow expansion plans on a number of occasions.

This is despite advice from the Planning Inspectorate that the London Plan “should be modified to include the new northwest runway scheme at Heathrow.”

Instead, the London Plan supports expansions at Gatwick as well as at Stansted, London City, Luton and Southend airports.

(Continues at source)

Time to start all over again, unless the Government puts its foot down. This could help Bristol in its airport expansion plan, and the people of the villages scheduled for conversion to airfield might be able to breathe slightly more easily (in the metaphorical sense) for a few years until this rears its head again - if the plan is given the nod by the government. The Gatwick plan will upset fewer people than the Heathrow one did, and lawyers are cheaper round those parts.

[Surrey 455]

Heathrow's 3rd runway has lost support of late, and may be postponed for another decade or so. That seems to be the practical effect of the current thinking, as outlined in New Civil Engineer.

Gatwick expansion backed over Heathrow third runway
12 FEB, 2021 BY ROB HORGAN

The London Plan – drawn up by Sadiq Khan and approved by Communities secretary Robert Jenrick – includes no provision for Heathrow Airport Ltd’s plans for a third runway.

In fact, the plan mention’s the mayor’s “strong objection” to Heathrow expansion plans on a number of occasions.

This is despite advice from the Planning Inspectorate that the London Plan “should be modified to include the new northwest runway scheme at Heathrow.”

Instead, the London Plan supports expansions at Gatwick as well as at Stansted, London City, Luton and Southend airports.

(Continues at source)

Time to start all over again, unless the Government puts its foot down. This could help Bristol in its airport expansion plan, and the people of the villages scheduled for conversion to airfield might be able to breathe slightly more easily (in the metaphorical sense) for a few years until this rears its head again - if the plan is given the nod by the government. The Gatwick plan will upset fewer people than the Heathrow one did, and lawyers are cheaper round those parts.

Perhaps the plan is to use HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) to get to a new larger hub at Birmingham International.

HS2 suggests a journey time of 38 minutes from London (Source - HS2) compared with a journey time of 49 mins (average)  London to Gatwick. (Source - Trainline)

Boris could potentially support this because it's not Heathrow, and being Central England it's closer to his new voters in the North.

[TonyK]

Perhaps the plan is to use HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) to get to a new larger hub at Birmingham International.

HS2 suggests a journey time of 38 minutes from London (Source - HS2) compared with a journey time of 49 mins (average)  London to Gatwick. (Source - Trainline)

Boris could potentially support this because it's not Heathrow, and being Central England it's closer to his new voters in the North.

If it isn't, it will be when Boris has read this!

He may choose to keep it slightly more local though. One of the previous iterations of the expansion plan had greater use of Gatwick's second runway. 08L/26R is shorter than its neighbour as the aerodrome chart shows., but at 2564 metres is long enough for practically anything to land, and all but the biggest long haul to take off. Bristol Airport for comparison is 2011 metres in length. The two runways are a lot closer together than Heathrow's pair, but with allowance for wake turbulence, both could be used simultaneously to great effect, with landings on  one and take-offs from the other. The money that was to have been spent on moving the M4 and M25 slightly to the right could instead be used to upgrade the railway to Gatwick, to give it a true express service.

London City has the capacity for more flights than it was operating when Covid started. Operators could be tempted to use that for additional internal flights if a market reappears in due course. Stansted, like Bristol, had begun a process to get permission to expand, which will look a lot more attractive to government with Heathrow frozen in time. One of the arguments used against those plans was that with Heathrow having a third runway, there will be no need for expansion at the regional airports.

What does this promise for the future? A busier Gatwick, first and foremost, which won't please everyone but won't upset as many people as a third runway at LHR would, and could mean fringe benefits in terms of improvements to the railway to the airport and south coast. Bristol Airport can go to the Planning Inquiry with renewed optimism, knowing that even if the planning inspector supports the irrational decision of north somerset parish council, the Secretary of State will be likely to allow the expansion unless the Green Party is in power by then. Stansted will also get the nod, and Birmingham might get bigger too. The Prime Minister will go to the hustings in 2025 and tell his constituents that he fought long and hard to stop the third runway, and has saved them all from it. Even if it happened in spite of, rather than because of, him, they will still carry him shoulder high back to Downing Street, hailing him as the greenest Prime Minister who ever graced Parliament. Britain will settle into a new golden age of aviation, with more and more new exciting destinations becoming available from enlarged regional airports.

Then, a couple of years later, plans will be published for a third runway at Heathrow, needed because of the massive increase in air traffic resulting from the rejection of the previous plans...

[TaplowGreen]

Looks like it's back on again.....

https://www.itv.com/news/2025-01-21/reeves-to-back-third-runway-at-heathrow-in-battle-to-grow-economy

[Bob_Blakey]

Collective Cabinet Responsibility? I should imagine Ed Miliband choked on his bacon sandwich when he heard about this.

[GBM]

Cue Boris laying down in front of the diggers!

[broadgage]

Climate emergency ?

[TaplowGreen]

Climate emergency ?

"Trumped" (forgive the pun!) by economic concerns.

[anthony215]

The only one I can actually see happen is Gatwick plan to expand . Airlines should I stwad of all wanting to.use Heathrow make use of spare capacity at londons other airports

[Electric train]

I think they will approve LHR expansion, mainly because the taxpayer will not have much in the way of spend, most will be private sector.