The Chancellor has confirmed her support for a third runway at London’s Heathrow Airport, claiming the expansion will stimulate growth and spur the aviation sector’s progress towards sustainability.
It is part of Rachel Reeves‘s broader plan to invigorate the economy by driving forward several major infrastructure projects, as well as a second runway at Gatwick and increased capacity at Luton Airport, decisions on which will be made “shortly”, Reeves said.
The move will likely spark fury among campaigners, including those within the Labour Party, but Reeves said that growth “will not come without a fight”.
Ahead of the speech, green energy boss and Labour donor Dale Vince said that the expansion would create the “illusion of growth”.
“I think it’s a mistake,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. “It’ll take 10 years to build a runway, cost maybe £50bn. It’ll create the wrong kind of growth – we’ll be exporting tourism money abroad, creating a bigger imbalance than we already have, and it will come at the expense of our carbon-cutting effort.”
Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds backed the plans, saying the UK “can’t afford” to be a country that “doesn’t build runways”.
“We simply cannot afford to say we don’t build reservoirs any more, we don’t build railways, we don’t build runways,” he told the BBC. “That’s not good enough, we will be left behind.”
There have been decades of wrangling over the plans for a third runway, with vociferous opposition from environmental groups and communities set to be impacted by the expansion.
Below we’ve fact-checked some of the Government’s claims about the benefits of an extra runway for growth and sustainability.
Large airports create jobs, promote trade and bring in both business travellers and tourists.
Heathrow currently handles £200bn worth of trade a year and – the airport’s owner would argue – provides a vital avenue for exports, particularly for small and medium-sized businesses.
But flights from the airport are currently capped at a maximum of 480,000 per year – signalling it has reached its capacity. A third runway would potentially increase the number of flights permitted to 720,000, according to the airport.
Heathrow told the BBC that it would eventually be able to serve up to 140 million passengers a year once the third runway is in operation
But – the scheme would involve years of construction to produce a third runway and a new terminal. It would also require hundreds of houses to be demolished and the M25 motorway to be moved into a tunnel.
The scheme faces a long wait for planning approval and the prospect of legal challenges – it has already been kicked into the long grass on several occasions. It may be that construction does not even begin on a third runway before the next election.
Verdict: Mixed – Airport expansion does have the potential to propel investment and grow the UK economy, but opponents argue there is no way it will bring any immediate boost
Claim: Stopping planes stacking around London cuts emissions
One of the arguments employed by those endorsing a third runway is that it would mean fewer planes circling over London waiting for space to land at the airport.
According to Heathrow Airport, in 2023 more than a third of all arriving planes – 232 – were held in one of four “stacks” above London every day where each aircraft spent about 6.85 minutes before landing.
Cabinet split over backing for Heathrow expansion
Read MoreCircling at a low altitude, of 7,000 feet or more, as planes waiting in a stack do is less fuel efficient than cruising at high altitude and therefore results in higher carbon dioxide emissions.
Since 2014 Heathrow has been working alongside traffic control company NATS to slow inbound flights from Europe as far as 350 miles away in an attempt to reduce stacking.
While it is likely that a third runway would ease stacking at the airport and the emissions involved, it is unclear how great an impact this would have, particularly when considering the overall carbon footprint entailed in an additional runway.
Verdict: True – though there are concerns about how much of an impact this would have
Part of the Chancellor’s rebuttal to those that claim a third runway will be detrimental to the environment is that there is huge investment being channelled into electric planes.
While it is true that a number of small battery-powered electric planes have been developed and investment is mounting, there are significant obstacles to their widespread adoption.
Most of the issues stem from the current limitations of battery technology. The weight of the batteries is a barrier to their use for long-haul flights meaning electric planes have limited range and there is not yet the charging infrastructure needed to support scaling up their use.
Verdict: Mixed – the use of electric planes faces significant and lengthy obstacles
Claim: It will accelerate the use of sustainable fuel
Reeves has claimed that “a lot has changed in aviation” since plans for a new runway at Heathrow were first put forward and that “sustainable aviation and economic growth go hand-in-hand”.
The Chancellor said that “sustainable aviation fuel” is “changing carbon emissions from flying” and would slash emissions.
Yet again our government is abandoning the North
Read MorePlanes typically run on kerosene for jet fuel, which is highly polluting. ‘Sustainable’ alternatives made from renewable sources, such as feedstocks or agricultural waste, can reduce emissions by about 70 per cent.
Labour has maintained a target set by the previous government that 10 per cent of all jet fuel used in flights taking off from the UK must be sustainable by 2030.
However, only a tiny fraction of jet fuel currently used is sustainable, with the target for 2025 two per cent and widespread adoption a long way off.
And there are a number of concerns about the viability of sustainable fuels, including challenges in scaling up production, the use of crops and land that could be devoted to growing food, and the emissions incurred in producing, refining and transporting them.
Verdict: False – a tiny fraction of jet fuel is currently “sustainable” and scaling up use is a long way off to use as a benefit of Heathrow expansion
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Could Heathrow expansion really make us richer and more sustainable? )
Also on site :
- Iconic Sitcom Actress, 67, Stuns With Ageless Appearance 20 Years After Show Ended
- Nazi symbols prevalent in Ukrainian military – Le Monde
- Beloved ‘90s Icon Meets Iconic ‘Pitch Perfect’ Stars in an Unforgettable Red Carpet Moment