New Airport Plan Ditched

It is very welcome news that a new airport will not be built in the Thames Estuary. The decision is a victory for common sense and I hope that the decision by the Airports Commission will draw a line under any more similar proposals. Any attempt to build in the estuary, despite what Boris Johnson would have you believe, would be disastrous.

Is it not a fact that any expansion in aviation capacity may lead to the UK breaching limits on carbon emissions?

Plans for a Thames Estuary Airport

BTO ecologists have recently reported on controversial proposals to build an airport on the Isle of Grain in the Thames Estuary. The study shows that this development would cause significant loss of coastal habitat within two areas that are protected under European law for their internationally important waterbird populations.

The proposal would cause a significant loss of coastal wetland habitat, largely within the Thames Estuary and Marshes Special Protection Area (SPA), but also affecting the Medway Estuary and Marshes SPA. These areas as already stated are protected under international law for their internationally important bird populations; together they support more than 140,000 waterbirds.

Development at these sites would have significant negative impacts on the bird populations that live there. This would occur through:

1. habitat loss within the footprint of the airport.
2. disturbance or habitat change affecting other areas near the airport.

Over 21,000 waterbirds currently use the area proposed for development. This represents around 25% of the current total bird population on the two affected SPAs and 37% of the current bird population on the Thames Estuary and Marshes SPA.

One can only hope that this alarming proposal does not fly....

Davies Commission Report on Future of Aviation

The Davies Commission into the future of aviation has once again highlighted the environmental destruction an airport in the Thames Estuary would cause. In his report, Sir Howard favours new runways at existing airports with Heathrow ahead of Gatwick. But he has included a second-division level of a new airport on Kent's Hoo Peninsula in the Thames Estuary, which he acknowledges would be both expensive (up to £112 billion) and environmentally damaging.

The RSPB believes that further airport expansion will undermine efforts to reduce our climate impact in the UK and that further scrutiny of an option in the Thames Estuary will lead to it being ruled out completely. The tidal mudflats, saltmarsh and reedbeds that line the estuary are one of the most important wildlife habitats in Europe, home to a rich ecosystem that includes hundreds of thousands of threatened wintering birds. It is designated with the highest environmental protection available.

Sue Armstrong-Brown, RSPB Head of Policy, said: "Every time a spotlight is put on the Thames Estuary as a potential site for an airport it is revealed to be both an environmental disaster and economic lunacy. The more scrutiny put on this proposal the clearer it will be for all concerned that it is a non-starter. However, climate change remains the greatest long-term threat to wildlife. We believe that there should be no further airports in this country until the Government can demonstrate how they can be built and operated without busting our legally binding climate targets".