HEATHROW’S THIRD RUNWAY HOME INSULATION COSTS COULD SOAR TO ALMOST £2bn
Heathrow may need to fork out nearly £2 billion on insulation of properties if a 3rd runway goes ahead.
Last year Heathrow announced that it was putting aside £700 million to insulate 160,000 homes if the Government gives a new runway the green light. But research by campaign group HACAN, which opposes a third runway, suggests the figure could be much higher if the insulation is done properly
In consultation with UK Soundproofing Ltd of West Sussex and Tudor Windows of London, HACAN has revealed that the average semi detached house will cost about £11,800 to totally insulate a property against noise. The total coast of full insulation of 160,000 homes would be £1.8 billion.
HACAN chair John Stewart said, “Heathrow are offering to insulate many more properties than they do today. Our supporters welcome this but only if their homes will be fully insulated. The cost of doing that would run into billions.”
Stewart added, “Admittedly, our estimates are based on costs for an individual home and there would be discounts if an order was placed, but it will still cost substantially more than the £700m originally put forward.”
Four local authorities – Richmond, Wandsworth, Hillingdon and the Windsor and Maidenhead – are threatening to take the Government to court unless it drops plans for a 3rd runway at Heathrow.
In a letter to the Government its solicitors cite failings in the Airport Commission’s report over noise and air pollution as reasons for a legal challenge. They also say that, on the basis of David Cameron’s clear promise in 2009, ‘No ifs; no buts; there will be no 3rd runway’, people in the Heathrow villages had a ‘legitimate expectation’ that they could plan their lives on the basis that no runway would be built.
Any challenge is expected to be made after the Government makes known its decision later this year as it is that decision that will be challenged in the courts.
Campaigners plaster Osborne’s constituency with no 3rd runway signs
Campaigners against Heathrow expansion today plastered George Osborne’s constituency with No Third Runway signs. They put up the signs in the main street of Knutsford in the heart of the constituency, including one outside Conservative Party headquarters in the town. The campaigners wanted to get across to the Chancellor, thought to back expansion at Heathrow, that a new runway would cost the taxpayer billions of pounds .
Peter Jones, one of the Londoners who went up to Knutsford, said, “We deliberately chose the day after people have had to get their tax returns in so as to emphaisise to George Osborne just how much public money will be needed to pay for the road and rail links for a third runway.”
The Airports Commission, which the Government set up to look at the need for new airports, put the cost at almost £6 billion. Transport for London has put it even higher. Heathrow has said it will pay no more than £1.1billion (1).
Jones said, “That leaves the taxpayer to find around £5 billion.”
Campaign group HACAN calculated that everybody in the country would each need to fork out £80 to pay for the road and rail links a third runway would need (2).
HACAN also unearthed evidence that £5bn could buy 83,000new social homes or 835,000 hip replacements (3).
HACAN Chair John Stewart, said, “The billions of pounds of Government money that would be needed for 3rd runway road and rail schemes might even make the Chancellor, George Osborne, think twice about backing it.”
ENDS
Notes for Editors:
(1). Heathrow would pay for the runway itself but not all of the associated road and rail costs.
(2). If the cost is £5 billion and the UK population is 63,182,000 (2011 census), that’s £79 each.
A major new report published today has found that the health of over one million people in the UK is at risk from aircraft noise. The report, Aircraft Noise and Public Health:The Evidence is Loud and Clear, commissioned by campaign group HACAN and produced by the Aviation Environment Federation, has called on the Government to undertake a complete review of all its polices to ensure that they take full account of the health impacts of aircraft noise.
People exposed to high levels of aircraft noise around Heathrow have a 24% higher chance of stroke, 21% higher chance of heart disease, and 14% higher chance of cardiovascular diseases compared to people exposed to low levels of aircraft noise
Over 460 schools around Heathrow are exposed to aircraft noise levels that may impair learning and memory
In the UK close to 600,000 people are exposed to night-time aircraft noise levels far above WHO recommendations
HACAN chair John Stewart said, “These findings are shocking but not surprising. Aircraft noise is having a major impact on people’s health. HACAN is calling on the Government to postpone any decision on new runways until a full health assessment has been carried out on each proposal. Today HACAN is setting up the Heathrow Health Alliance to monitor progress.”
Launch: Tuesday 12th January, 2 – 3pm, Committee Room 19, House of Commons; Hosted by Tania Mathias MP; Key Speakers:Tim Johnson, Director of AEF, Professor Stephen Stansfeld, Professor of Psychiatry, Queen Mary University of London
On January 5th, the day Parliament returns, campaigners against a third runway at Heathrow ‘planted’ 2000 black paper planes in Victoria Gardens in Westminster at 10am to highlight the fact that 2016 will be a grim year for residents if a new runway is given the go-ahead. The campaigners expect around 2000 flights at day will use the airport if it gets a third runway, up from 1350 a day at present.
(photo by Phil Weedon)
HACAN was joined by people from groups in Chiswick and Ealing as well as Stop Heathrow Expansion, which represents people in the Heathrow Villages whose homes are under threat, Friends of the Earth and residents west of Heathrow (1).
HACAN Chair John Stewart said, “2016 is likely to be the year when the Government makes a decision about a new runway. It will be a grim year for Heathrow residents if the Government decides to go for a third runway at Heathrow. Our New Year’s message to the Prime Minister is we will fight to the bitter end to stop a third runway happening.”
Just before Christmas the Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin announced that a decision about a new runway, expected in December, would be deferred for at least another six months.
The Department for Transport is still looking at the options for a third runway at Heathrow, a second runway at Gatwick and the plan put forward by Heathrow Hub to double the length of the existing northern runway at Heathrow.
(1). The organisations represented were HACAN, SHE (Stop Heathrow Expansion), CHATR (Chiswick against Third Runway), ENAG (Ealing Noise Action Group), Friends of the Earth as well as residents living west of the airport.
A guest article fromJane Davison, Professor of Accounting, Royal Holloway, University of London, a longstanding resident of Bedford Park in Chiswick and a member of CHATR, Chiswick Against Third Runway.
Anti-3rd Runway Campaigners post pre-Xmas thank-you letters to PM
Over the past week hundreds of people campaigning against Heathrow expansion wrote pre-Christmas letters to David Cameron thanking him for keeping his promise not to build a third runway and urging him not to break it next year when a decision on runway capacity is expected to be announced. This morning three representatives of the campaigners posted letters through a post box in the heart of Westminster.
Last week the Government announced that it would postpone a decision on new runways until at least the middle of 2016. It made clear that Heathrow and Gatwick were still in the frame.
In 2009 David Cameron, then leader of the opposition, pledged in a speech in Richmond, “No ifs, no buts; there will be no third runway at Heathrow.”
John Stewart, chair of HACAN, one of the groups opposed to expansion, said, “These letters are yet another indication of how strongly people feel about a third runway. We urge David Cameron to keep his promise in 2016.”
I’ve written about this before, but it is worth saying it again. Heathrow is not just a West London problem. Or just a Windsor problem. Its impact is felt over 25 miles from the airport. Kate Hoey, the Vauxhall MP, emphasized it again in the House of Commons this week ((14/12/15) during questions to the Transport Secretary when she SAID:
The Secretary of State is a very honourable gentleman, particularly as he is my constituent. I am sure that deep down he is not particularly happy today. In his statement, he talked about the best possible outcome for local residents. Does he accept that my Vauxhall constituents may not be considered as local residents to Heathrow, but that it is crucial that their views are taken into consideration?
This video, commissioned by HACAN, illustrates the impact of aircraft noise on Vauxhall, about 17 miles from Heathrow: https://youtu.be/rXf8o_khz8s
A study HACAN commissioned from the independent noise consultants Bureau Veritas in 2008 found that in Kennington Park, close to the Oval Cricket Ground “aircraft noise dominated the local environment.” In a separate study found that during certain periods of the day over 40 planes an hour fly over the Oval.
It is important to stress the extent of the noise problem to counter the accusation heard again in recent days following the Government’s decision to postpone a decision on expansion that it is a handful of ‘West London Nimbys’ who are damaging the national interest by holding up a third runway.
An email sent to HACAN in August. From Hounslow, Windsor or even Vauxhall? Try Walthamstow, deep in North East London.
Of course, it is not true that everybody in Walthamstow is disturbed by the noise. Just as there are people in Hounslow, Windsor and Vauxhall who are not bothered by it.
But my point is that there are people from the airport seriously impacted by it. A lot of them. HACAN gets more emails from South East London than from any other area.
Most of these people are not captured by the noise statistics. They live outside the official noise contours, even the more realistic ones used by the European Commission. Their opinions are not sought in the (in)famous Populus polls commissioned by Heathrow which claim to show just over 50% support for a new runway in the boroughs closest to the airport.
What they are looking for is respite: a predicable break from the noise. It is the constant refrain in email after email, week after week which HACAN receives. Heathrow Airport has now recognized the problem and has commissioned research to look at practical ways of introducing respite. It is a considerable piece of work which won’t report until the end of 2016. But the sooner
The Secretary of State is a very honourable gentleman, particularly as he is my constituent. I am sure that deep down he is not particularly happy today. In his statement, he talked about the best possible outcome for local residents. Does he accept that my Vauxhall constituents may not be considered as local residents to Heathrow, but that it is crucial that their views are taken into consideration? They live under early morning noise pollution that is absolutely shocking. An extra runway at Heathrow will make it much worse.
At 7pm on Friday 11th December the Government announced that it is delaying any final decision on new runways until at least the middle of next year. It wants to do further work in assessing particularly the environmental impacts of a 3rd runway at Heathrow, the Heathrow Hub proposal for an extended runway and a 2nd runway at Gatwick.
This delay shows once again just how difficult it will be to build a third runway at Heathrow. The last Labour Government tried and failed. And now this Government has run into real obstacles. Heathrow would require almost 1,000 homes to be demolished and part of the M25 to be moved and put in a tunnel. It would mean a quarter of a million more planes flying over the city with the biggest aircraft noise problem in Europe and could cause air pollution to exceed the EU legal limits. Many of these problems won’t go away however long the final decision is delayed. The Government should face up to the reality that a third runway is unlikely ever to see the light of day. Although there are party political reasons for this delay, these should not obscure the fact that the real problem with a third runway is its impact on the area London and its people.
