Airports Commission Air Pollution Consultation

The Airports Commission has released a short consultation on air pollution, with  29th May deadline.  The consultation documents can be found on the Commission’s website:  https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/airports-commission-air-quality-assessment

This is a technical consultation assessing  future air pollution levels around Heathrow and Gatwick if new runways are built.

It is unlikely that this consultation was prompted by the recent Supreme Court ruling that required the Government to draw up plans by the end of the year on how it was going to meet the EU legal limits on air pollution (across the UK).  The Airports Commission, under Sir Howard Davies, always intended to do this work.

The legal limits came into force in 2010 under the terms of the EU Air Pollution Directive but the EU has not taken action against breaches of them because no member state has been able to meet the targets.  So the Commission is now asking member states to outline plans on how they intend to meet the targets but without having set a new date.

During the last consultation the Airports Commission carried out, it said it was going to do more work on air pollution, particularly on how pollution levels might disperse.  This is critical because the predictions were that by 2030 (when any new runway would be up and running) there might still be pockets around the airport that would be over the EU legal limits.  Dispersal could potentially spread the pollution more thinly so that no area remained above the limits.

The Airports Commission commissioned the consultancy firm, Jacobs, to do the work on dispersal.  Jacobs has found that by 2030 there will be a problem in small areas close to the Bath Road (very close to the airport) if no mitigation measures have been put in place.  The problem would be a little worse from the Heathrow Hub scheme that with the Heathrow Airport’s 3rd runway scheme.  But it expects the problem to be resolved within a few years.  Jacobs doesn’t appear to foresee a problem at Gatwick.

Jacobs then lists the mitigation schemes by Heathrow – things like encouraging airlines to shut down an engine during taxiing, the use of the extended runway to allow a proportion of the take-off emissions to be well away from the airport boundary and the introduction of congestion charging in the area.  But it doesn’t really analyse them.  Rather it tends to assumes that, with some mitigation, the levels will be below the EU legal limits in 2030.

There is one other point that it not addressed.  A new, if built, will not be running to capacity by 2030.  Jacobs doesn’t look at what air pollution levels will be when it is running to capacity.  It implies that with mitigation measures in place and, as aircraft become cleaner as the years go by, there should not be a problem.  But no detailed work has been done on this.

Protesters stage silent air pollution protest in Terminal 5

Press Release

 10/5/15 for immediate use

 Protesters Stage Silent Air Pollution Demo in Terminal 5

 

Heathrow pollution protestAround 50 campaigners staged a silent protest against air pollution in Terminal 5 this afternoon.  The protesters donned masks and t-shirts to make their point that the high air pollution levels in the Heathrow area should rule out a third runway at the airport (1).  The protest comes just days after the Airports Commission announced a further consultation into air pollution at Heathrow (2) and a fortnight after the Supreme Court ordered the UK Government to produce plans by the end of the year on how it intends to tackle pollution across the country (3).

Heathrow pollution protesters lying down

The protesters at Terminal 5 included local people whose homes are threatened by a third runway, activists based at Transition Heathrow and residents whose lives are disturbed by aircraft noise.

Local resident Neil Keveren (4), whose home faces demolition if a third runway goes ahead, said, “Right now air pollution badly affects our communities.  In a number of our areas pollution levels are above the legal limits set down by the EU.  Heathrow Airport claims things are getting better.  But it simply cannot guarantee that, with a third runway and an extra quarter of a million planes a year, air pollution levels will come down so they meet the EU legal limits.  It is just wishful thinking.”

The EU legal limits, set out in the Air Pollution Directive, came into force in 2010.  Because countries across Europe have struggled to meet them, the EU has not fined member states for breaching the limits.  But it has indicated that it expects the member states to draw up plans outlining how they will meet them.  The UK Government had argued that it could take its time in drawing up the plans but ten days ago the Supreme Court ruled that it needed to have plans in place by the end of this year.

Since 2010 air pollution levels in areas around Heathrow have consistently breached the EU legal limits.  The pollution is caused by both the high traffic volumes on the surrounding motorways and the aircraft using the airport.  Heathrow is the only airport in the UK where air pollution is above the legal limit.  Even if a second runway is built at Gatwick, it will not exceed the limits.

The Airports Commission, set up in 2012 to look at the case for new runways, issued a consultation last week into further work it has done on air pollution.  The consultation closes at the end of this month and its findings will be included in the Commission’s final report which is expected to be published in June.  The Commission will either recommend a third runway at Heathrow or a second runway at Gatwick but the Government is not bound by its findings.

ENDS

 Notes for editors:

 (1). Pictures above

(2). https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/airports-commission-air-quality-assessment

(3). http://www.clientearth.org/news/latest-news/uk-supreme-court-orders-government-to-take-immediate-action-on-air-pollution-2844

(4). Neil Keveren chair SHE (Stop Heathrow Expansion) which represents the communities close to Heathrow whose homes are threatened by a third runway.

For further information:

Neil Keveren:  07850904677

John Stewart:  0207 737 6641; 07957385650

Landmark Air Pollution Ruling Could Scupper 3rd Runway

Press Release

 29th April 2015 for immediate use

 Landmark air pollution ruling could impact 3rd run way at Heathrow

A landmark ruling by the Supreme Court handed down this morning could have implications for a third runway at Heathrow.  In a unanimous verdict, five judges ordered the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to consult on strict new air pollution plans that must be submitted to the European Commission no later than 31 December 2015.  The plans require the Government crack down on the UK’s high levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) pollution. Lord Carnwath said the court was “in no doubt about the seriousness” of the UK’s breach of EU law in failing to meet legal pollution limits, which leaves it open to the risk of European Commission fines totalling £300m.  The EU Air Quality Directive demanded the UK brought pollution down to legal limits by 2010 or apply for an extension by 2015. But the government in 2011 said that a number of areas, including London, would be unable to comply by 2015 and instead argued the law allowed it to comply “as soon as possible”.

The judgment marks a victory for the campaigning legal firm ClientEarth which had sued the Government over its lack of action.

The judgment could also have implications for a third runway at Heathrow.  Areas around the airport continue to be stubbornly above the EU legal limits.  It is down to a combination of pollution from the planes and the huge amount of traffic on the M4 and M25.  It is the only airport in the UK where the EU limits are breached or are likely to be so in the future.

John Stewart, the chair of HACAN, which campaigns against a third runway, said, “This is a potential show-stopper as far as a third runway is concerned.  It is difficult to see how any Government will get away with backing a new runway at Heathrow when the plans it is now required to draw up urgently to present to the EU say it must come up with a coherent plan to cut air pollution.

ENDS

 For more information:

John Stewart on 0207 737 6641 or 07957385650

 

Campaigners issue their ‘noise manifesto’ on International Noise Awareness Day

Press Release

26th April 2015 for immediate use

April 29th:  International Noise Awareness Day

Campaigners issue their ‘Noise Manifesto’

HACAN, the campaign group which gives a voice residents troubled by noise from Heathrow, has joined noise campaigners representing different organizations which  have come together to call on the next Government to take noise seriously.  To mark the 20th anniversary of International Noise Awareness Day (1)  on 29th April, the campaigners have issued their Noise Manifesto.  It outlines six key things the next Government could do to improve the noise climate (2).  The UK campaigners have made links with anti-noise campaigners in Germany.  A day of events, including demonstrations and a conference, will take place in Berlin on 29th April organized by campaigners against road, rail and aircraft noise .

HACAN chair John Stewart said: “Each year local authorities and government departments are deluged with complaints about noise.  And of course complaints about aircraft noise continue to mount.  Yet the election manifestos are virtually silent on noise.  We are urging the next Government to speak out about noise and implement practical measures to improve the noise climate”.

ENDS

 Notes for Editors:

 (1). http://chchearing.org/noise/day/

(2).  Demands below

For further information:

John Stewart, Chair HACAN, 0207 737 6641 or 07957385650

For more information of the Berlin events:

Erwin Stufler:

+49 172 811 27 78

+49 6131 200 – 516 Büro

erwin.stufler@t-online.de

Six key things the next Government could do to improve the noise climate:

Aircraft Noise: Ensure fair flight paths for all

Road Traffic Noise: Cut speed limits

Rail Noise: Retrofit all trains with quieter brakes – would cut noise by up to 50%

Wind Farm Noise: Update official noise guidelines in order to better assess the impact on communities

Neighbour Noise: Fine local authorities who persistently fail to tackle neighbour noise problems

Piped Music: Ban piped music from public places, such as hospitals, where people have no choice but listen to it

Six simple steps to cut noise next Government could take

HACAN has joined other UK noise campaigners to call on the next Government to take six simple steps which would cut noise:  International Noise Awareness Day demands

International Noise Awareness Day Photo

They have been launched on 29th April, when International Noise Awareness Day celebrates its 20th Anniversary.  A major day of action is being staged in Berlin by German air, road and rail noise campaigners:  2015_04_29_Sternfahrt

I

Schiphol

We routinely are told that, if Heathrow doesn’t expand, people from other UK airports will choose to fly to Schiphol to interchange on to a long-distance flight.  The CEO of Schiphol has even rather cheekily called it ‘Heathrow’s third runway’.  He knows full well it can never be that because Schiphol has almost reached capacity.

It is not that Schiphol lacks runway space.  It has five runways (six if you include one for very small planes) and fewer flights than Heathrow.  The capacity constraint is down to the strict rules which exist about which runways can be used and when.  There are tight noise regulations in place which mean that all five runways are never in use at any one time.  Indeed, rarely are more than three of the runways used at once.  And the use of the two runways which go over densely-populated areas is avoided whenever possible.

But here’s the big reason why Schiphol can never become London’s third runway.  It has almost reached its permissible noise limits.  The airport has a complex way of regulating noise:  “the present system as from 2005 consists of 35 points around Schiphol where the actual noise of passing planes is physically measured and added up to annual totals per point. If a total at a certain point exceeds its legal maximum, the relating runway can no longer be used and traffic should be diverted to alternative runways. The maximum capacity of this system is some 480,000 air traffic movements each year.”  You can read more about this in the paper Noise Reduction at Schiphol. 

The system is being altered so that possibly 510,000 flights will be able to use the airport each year.  But that’s it.  No more.  And not significantly greater than the 480,000 cap at the two-runway Heathrow.  The trips from Edinburgh, Manchester or Newcastle to Schiphol to interchange will have a finite limit.  

Schiphol is looking to get round its limits by ‘outsourcing’ perhaps as many as 70,000 low-cost, leisure flights to the smaller airports Netherlands.  If  – and it still very much is ‘if’ that happens – it will free up some space at Schiphol but not enough to dent the myth that Schiphol can ever become Heathrow’s third runway.  Gatwick maybe.  Stansted possibly.  Even Birmingham or Boris Island.  But not Schiphol.  The Dutch take their noise responsibilities far too seriously for that to happen. 

 t

Community Noise Forum set up

Heathrow Airport has set up the Community Noise Forum.  It consists of representatives of the Airport, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), National Air Traffic Control (NATS), British Airways, local authorities, community organizations and campaign groups.  It was set up following the complaints received during the recent trials carried out by Heathrow and NATS.  In particular, it was hoped it could resolve the dispute between Heathrow and the communities where the trials took place that flight paths have or have not returned to their pre-trial pattern.  It is the reason why these communities and local authorities – largely to the west of the airport – are at present the main participants.  Local authorities and community organizations to the east of the airport are expected to be invited to join at a later stage, though HACAN, as the overall body, is on the Forum and does represent residents in these areas.

 Its first task will be to commission an independent study to look at the flight paths before the recent trials took, during the trials and post-trials.  The aim is to see whether flight paths post-trial have gone back to their pre-trial routes.  Many in the communities impacted – places like Ascot, Teddington, Englefield Green, Lightwater, Binfield and Bracknell, claim they have not.  Heathrow Airport claims they have.  The independent study will also look into whether any other changes had taken place. The steering group which will draw up the brief for the study and which will oversee it will be drawn entirely from community representatives of the areas where the trials took place. Heathrow has offered technical assistance and will pay for the study. The steering group will meet soon. It will report back to the Community Noise Forum.

 NATS explained to the Forum the change they made to some flight paths in June 2014 without telling anybody. It transpires that what happened was that, when easterly winds were blowing, around 20 aircraft a day departing on the Compton Route were moved north and concentrated over a 7 mile band covering places like Ascot, Bracknell and Binfield. Previously they had been spread across a 13 mile band which included areas to the south of these places.  It is not regarded as a major change and won’t be reversed.

There is a separate Noise Forum, on which HACAN also has a place along with a local authority representative and representatives from the industry, which doesn’t look at area-specific work but concentrates on more generic issues such as respite.

How Back Heathrow get their supporters

Back Heathrow claim 80,000 supporters.  Read this letter sent to HACAN and you’ll question their figures immediately:

Dear HACAN,

I am sending you a mailout I received from the pro-Heathrow people, Back Heathrow, because I was so cross and felt misrepresented.

A few weeks ago they mailed everyone locally with a questionnaire, asking for our preferences with flight paths/times etc IF the expansion were to go ahead.  I replied, feeling if it did go ahead at least I might have had some say in the conditions.  I also wrote at the end that I was opposed to the expansion, did not think we needed the jobs in an area of high employment, that a hub for transit passengers would not benefit anyone except business and it would make the would make the quality of thousands of peoples’ lives much worse.

Imagine my astonishment to receive this mailout a couple of weeks ago, thanking me for being a supporter!  This raises a real concern, I think.  If they are counting everybody who responded presenting these as a measure of their support, and naturally many local people have replied in the same way I did.

You may already be aware of this, or you feel you can do nothing, but I thought it might give you some way of challenging their figures.

Yours sincerely,

name and address supplied

Historic village threatened by 3rd runway opens its doors to the press and public

The ancient village of Harmondsworth, which originated as a Saxon manor and is now facing demolition if a third Heathrow runway goes ahead, will be staging an Open Day on Sunday 12th April to give the media and members of the public a chance to see what would be destroyed (1). 

The focus of the event is the re-opening of the celebrated 15th-century Great Barn for the first time since the completion of major repairs by English Heritage (2).  The Barn, described by poet Sir John Betjeman as “the cathedral of Middlesex”, was saved from developers by the intervention of a group of determined villagers, who will be available to talk to visitors. It will be open from 11am until 4pm.

A huge mural, especially created for the occasion, will illustrate the proposed airport boundary cutting through the heart of picturesque Harmondsworth.  It will be unveiled at 1.30pm providing a photo-opportunity on the village green outside the historic Five Bells pub.  This will be followed by a visit to the newly-planted trees on the Recreation Ground which demonstrates that the community intends to fight to preserve its historic roots for future generations to enjoy, rather than watch it obliterated by further expansion of the airport (3).

There will be Morris dancing at various times throughout the day (4).

SHE (Stop Heathrow Expansion) worked with the Friends of the Great Barn to organise the Open Day. Neil Keveren, the chair of SHE, said, “This is a great opportunity to see the unique village of Harmondsworth.  But it is also a chance for us to show to the world that we are utterly determined to fight for our homes and our community.  We will not be going anywhere else.”

He added, “We are thankful for the backing we have received from Hillingdon Council and from Harts, the community arts project”.

The Airports Commission has been examining potential sites for new runways in the South East and is expected to publish its final report in June.  It will recommend either a separate third runway at Heathrow, a third runway at Heathrow added to the existing northern runway (5) or a second runway at Gatwick.  The next Government will consider the recommendation but is not required to endorse it.

ENDS

 Notes for editors:

 (1). Flyer: 12th Apr flyer complete v5

(2). The Barn is a Grade I listed building. It is essentially unaltered since it was built in 1426 and over 95% of its structural timbers are original. It is owned by English Heritage who bought it in 2011 to add to the National Heritage Collection, and is managed for them by the Friends of the Great Barn. For more details see: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/harmondsworth-barn/

(3) The tree-planting is part of a council-backed project to re-forest the villages threatened by a third runway.  It is a collaborative project between SHE, Transition Heathrow and Harts, the arts network based in the villages:  http://www.communityharts.org/

(4). Datchet Border Morris will be at the Great Barn at 12.00pm; outside the Crown pub at 12.45pm; outside the Five Bells pub at 14.00; and back to the Barn at 14.30pm.

(5). This runway would not require the destruction of Harmondsworth.  It would mean the demolition of properties in Poyle, west of the airport.

For further information:

Neil Keveren, 07850904677

Christine Taylor 0208 564 8345; 07960490831

Justine Bayley (for info on the Barn), 020 8759 1874

General Election: where parties stand on aviation

So where do the parties stand?

 Let’s start with the Greens because they are probably the simplest.  They are opposed to any new runways and favour removal of the tax-breaks aviation enjoys in order to curb demand.  They estimate it would bring in £16 billion a year to the Exchequer.

UKIP favours reopening Manston to turn its huge former RAF runway into an international airport, with much improved links to London.  Manifesto: “The final report of the Davies Commission into airport capacity and connectivity in the UK will be published later this year. UKIP will consider its recommendations and then take a position on the basis of what we genuinely believe to be in the long-term best interests of the country. However, we firmly believe that part of the solution to address the lack of airport capacity in the South East is to re-open Manston Airport. Manston is ideally placed to take low-cost airlines and freight-only aircraft; it is close to the railway network; enjoys good connections to Ashford International; will release additional capacity in the region; and take pressure off other airports.

The Liberal Democrats manifesto says:  “Ensure our airport infrastructure meets the needs of a modern and open economy, without allowing emissions from aviation to undermine our goal of a zero-carbon Britain by 2050. We will carefully consider the conclusions of the Davies Review into runway capacity and develop a strategic airports policy for the whole of the UK in the light of those recommendations and advice from the Committee on Climate Change. We remain opposed to any expansion of Heathrow, Stansted or Gatwick and any new airport in the Thames Estuary, because of local issues of air and noise pollution. We will ensure no net increase in runways across the UK.”

Labour has said it will make a “swift” decision after it has seen the Davies Report but will not necessarily endorse Davies.  Some key Labour figures like Ed Balls support a third runway at Heathrow.  As does UNITE, the union which sponsors many Labour candidates and backs the party with money.  The key may be Ed Miliband himself.  He has been a strong opponent of a third runway at Heathrow – has he changed his mind?  Will he be strong enough to stand up to Balls and co?

The Conservative position is similar to the Labour one, except they have not talked about necessarily taking a swift decision about runways.   Their manifesto simply says: “We will respond to the Airport Commission’s final report.  Does the lack of a commitment to a “swift” decision mean they may revisit the idea of an Estuary Airport or an expanded Stansted? Conservative ‘big beasts’ appear divided over Heathrow and Gatwick.  The Chancellor is thought to back Heathrow, but a number of cabinet ministers oppose a third runway, including Philip Hammond, Theresa May, Justine Greening and Theresa Villiers.  As does the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, who is likely to become the MP for Uxbridge.  There are signals from the Mayor’s office and from MPs like Justine Greening that they would like to see Stansted/Estuary brought back into the equation as they are looking for a four runway airport at some stage in the future.

The SNP are most interested in the key Scottish airports having good links to the rest of the world.  This includes better links to London.  They feel Gatwick is on the wrong side of London for them and are likely to back Heathrow, but only if it included the best possible deal for residents as they are very aware that no residents in England voted for them to agree to knock down their homes or impose new flight paths.