Environmental impact of aviation in the United Kingdom
The strategy is generally based on making the best use of existing facilities, although an additional five new runways nationwide are considered to be necessary, three of them at the London airports of Stansted, Heathrow and, towards the end of the timeframe involved , Gatwick.
Another study which is critical of the government approach, and which favours addressing environmental effects through increased taxation of air transport, indicates a negative economic benefit resulting from airport expansion.
[8] Whilst the number of airports in the UK runs into hundreds, many are smaller aerodromes dealing with general aviation rather than air transport.
In terms of the latter, statistics are collected from 59 main airports, and the largest concentration of services is located in the London and South East of England areas.
[15] Outside of London and the South East, the use of regional airports has increased dramatically in recent years, with the amount of air traffic using these facilities doubling in the period 1995 to 2005.
In terms of capacity, both available and used, British Airways is again the largest airline, whilst easyJet is pushed into third place by Virgin Atlantic.
[24] Recent growth is being serviced by the no-frills airlines at the expense of traditional carriers which, since 2000, have experienced flat or declining traffic levels.
[34] Researchers have been raising concern about the globally increasing hypermobility of individuals, involving frequent and often long distance air travel and the resulting environmental and climate effects.
These focussed on the economic, environmental, social and airspace appraisals relating to options for future airport development specific to the regions, and together they generated half a million responses.
[45] The consultation process ended in December 2003 with the publication of The Future of Air Transport White Paper which detailed the government's conclusions.
[46] The principal conclusion is that the two extremes of failing to provide additional airport capacity, and encouraging growth without regard for the wider consequences, are equally unacceptable options.
"[60] The report re-iterates the government's commitment to the strategy defined in the original White Paper, stating that it "... strikes the right balance between economic, social and environmental goals.
The first; The Contribution of the Aviation Industry to the UK Economy, was published in 1999 and was used as a source of economic information in The Future of Air Transport White Paper.
"[77] In response to government policy supporting further growth in aviation, Friends of the Earth (FoE) published Pie in the Sky in September 2006.
[78] Also published in 2006, the Environmental Change Institute study Predict and decide – Aviation, climate change and UK policy re-examined the economic arguments made in favour of aviation, concluding that restricting future growth would not necessarily be detrimental to the economy, and could potentially result in some economic benefits.
[95] The survey has been criticised as suffering from a poor response rate and therefore open to bias,[96] though this issue has been recognised and rationalised by the report's authors.
In 2005 some 22 million overseas visitors arrived by air, spending around £12 billion (1.1 per cent of GDP) and supporting 170,000 jobs in the tourist industry.
[101] Whilst export/import facilities provide opportunities for international trade and competition, they are not without negative effect, and British horticulture is one example of domestic industry damaged by cheap imports.
[102][103] Attempts to quantify the economic effects of growth in the air transport sector generate results which depend on assumptions made, and therefore the viewpoint of the organisation making the analysis.
Full implementation of the White Paper runway proposals resulted in a forecast yield of an additional £13 billion per annum in GDP by 2030.
[104] Calculations done for the AEF, based on a new runway at Stansted, and which assume increased taxation of the industry, result in a negative economic benefit.
[107] Based on figures produced by the European Environment Agency the AEF has calculated a much higher total external cost for 2000 of around £6 billion.
[114] The strategy adopted in the White Paper seeks to mitigate the global effects of air transport primarily through emissions trading schemes.
The government is seeking to redress this through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), which has been working on the environmental issue since 1998, but progress is slow.
[120] In June 2005, Sustainable Aviation; a joint initiative involving a number of UK airlines, airports, manufacturers and the air traffic service provider NATS, was launched with a vision statement relating to environmental issues of "...removing or minimising any negative impacts on the local and global environment...".
[122][123] Critics of an expansionist policy consider the EU ETS to be too late and to price carbon too low to adequately mitigate the climate change effects of aviation emissions.
[125] This would be accomplished via a strategy that presumes "... against the expansion of UK airport capacity" and constrains demand by the use of economic instruments to price air travel less attractively.
[127] Under the provisions of the Civil Aviation Act aircraft in flight are specifically exempted from trespass and nuisance controls, which denies any form of redress to those living near airports who are disturbed by noise.
Whilst aircraft contribute to the problem the study states that "...cars, buses and taxis ferrying passengers to and from these sites are dominant sources of pollution.
[142] The Civil Aviation Act 2006 also extends the provisions of section 78 of the original act, augmenting the powers of the Secretary of State to intervene directly in operations at designated airports; currently Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted, "...for the purpose of avoiding, limiting or mitigating the effect of noise and vibration connected with aircraft landing or taking off.
