It was announced last week that Stansted and City airports [would] get the expansion go ahead (Greenpeace UK).
So, where does that leave us with the Heathtrow expansion?
Heathrow expansion (the current plan is a third runway between the A4 and M4, requiring to bulldoze 700 homes, effectively razing Sipson) is probably the most controversial: because it's the busiest airport but also the worst location (Westerly winds prevalence means its flight paths send planes droning over no less than 2 MILLIONS of residents.
It looks like the government (and the councils) are not serious about the green agenda but are rather happy to listen to the aviation lobbies. Over the years The most enraging is that both the Government (the Dft) and BAA have been consistently lying and breaking promises over the years. They keep comparing Heathrow to its European competitors, which is disingenious at best, as they conveniently forget that only London has FIVE international airports.
Like quite a few other persons, I think the solution is to do in London what has been successful elsewhere and plan for a sustanable future by doing what many other major cities have have done by relocating their airport. The image above is the plan for an airport in the Estuary. Of course, that would require a substantial investment, but not massively more than building T6 and a third runway. Of course, we should also invest in rail: read Lyon-Paris vs. Manchester-London (from Euroblog by Jon Worth)
Member since: 11th September 2009
I write on local issues on my blog, <a href="http://richmondtransits.blogspot.com">Richmond Transits</a>