Government tells government to stop building runways

Stop sign 2

The Sustainable Development Commission, the government’s green watchdog, has decided that destroying the planet may be harmful to the environment. God alone knows how this bunch of dangerous subversives managed to get through the quango filter. Even more amazingly, despite the SDC being a creation of the Blair government, not a single one of its members used to be the chief executive of British Airways.

They've told the government to stop it's mad schemes for airport expansion, and to rethink the whole dammed aviation thingie. Well really - this total lack of joined-up-government is likely to be a severe embarrassment to Gordon Brown, although it is right at the back of the queue. The PM has allegedly penciled in a deep blush and guttural stutter from now through to late November, 2009.

Rising oil pushes carriers into the red

Rusty plane

Despite my last post on peak oil (and why we shouldn't rely on it) rising oil prices do impact transport and aviation growth. With oil currently hovering around the $128 / barrel mark, and widely predicted to hit $150 or even $200 / barrel by the end of the year, airlines are having to up their prices to avoid bankruptcy.

With no tax on aviation fuel the industry has no buffer zone: every dollar hike is another dollar that needs to be squeezed out of ever tighter margins. This weekend Richard Branson joined the doom-and-gloomers, predicting $200 / barrel oil in the very near future. Meanwhile BA is planning to ground planes because of rising fuel costs. The American market is widely tipped to implode if prices keep rising, and the British outlook is not so rosy either.

Meanwhile the government wants to expand airports all over the place, because demand for flights will keep going up - even if there's no airlines left to supply them. They claim that demand is inelastic - i.e. that it will remain constant no matter how hard it is stretched by rising prices. A Parliamentary Question last week showed the cause of their market-defying confidence: the government's modellers are working on the assumption that by 2010, oil will have rised to... $65 dollars a barrel. By 2020, the government is assuming that oil will have reached the staggering price of $75 / barrel. No wonder they think people will keep flying regardless...

The dangers of peak oil

Tags:

Peak oil

The longer you campaign on transport issues, the more you find yourself tiptoeing around the ugly face of peak oil. Hailed by advocates as the best thing since the bread slicer, peak oil is the point at which oil supply peaks and begins to taper off, pushing prices higher and higher until economic forces demand a shift to alternative energy sources.

This might sound like great news to those campaigning against the fossil fuels economy, but it’s a poisoned chalice for a number of reasons. Firstly, rising oil prices make more polluting sources of energy (such as coal) very attractive – well before green energy like solar or wind becomes economically viable. Extracting oil from tar sands – incredibly ecologically destructive – is uneconomical when prices are low, but as they climb higher then wholesale investment becomes very attractive indeed.

Transit passengers behind third runway demand

Transit passengers

Last week the Sunday Times carried an editorial by the former head of British Airways, Bob Ayling, in which he called the third runway a "costly mistake". He argued that the government's attempts to impose a 'hub-and-spoke' model onto the UK's airports was outmoded thinking, based on a disproven theory of air traffic control which almost bankrupted the American airlines which first tried it.

This week the Times has revealed just how damaging the hub-and-spoke model really is. Not only does it force people to fly further than they need to by routing them all through Heathrow instead of flying direct, but the number of international transfer passengers is rising so fast that they will take up most of the new capacity from the third runway by the time it opens in 2020 - and all of it by 2030!

Subsidised flights just can't compete with the train

Tags:

Welsh plane

A year ago the devolved Welsh Assembly government decided that the subsidy flying receives by our turning a blind eye to the environmental damage of aviation (and leaving the fuel untaxed) just wasn't giving enough of an advantage to the beleagured aviation industry.

Instead they simply decided to hand over wads of cash to support a ridiculous air link from Cardiff to RAF Anglesey. Even though the link was designed to improve business travel the subsidy per passenger is double the average single fare - a whopping £84 for every passenger.

London City Airport: lies, damn lies, and airport expansion!

London City airport

London City Airport (LCA) is a small airport with big ideas. It submitted an application to expand flights by 50%; another application (due in June) will take flights to 176,000 by 2010. LCA claims to have brought prosperity to Newham but walking from North Woolwich to Silvertown shows no sign of it: roaring jets over head, no open spaces for recreation, a poor bus service, streets full of derelict buildings and a constant stream of taxis and chauffeur driven cars bound for the airport. The 'prosperity' LCA is so proud of arrives and departs in a car, leaving nothing for Newham residents - apart from the fumes and noise and inconvenience.

London City Airport and Newham Council claim to have carried out "extensive consultations", but many residents who live in the Royal Docks and surrounding areas have no idea about the expansion plans. They claim that the 50% increase in flights would only affect a very small area - wishful thinking, as the expansion will extend the noise contours over 26,000 residents in east and south-east London. Newham already has the worst housing shortage in the country and the highest asthma mortality levels in under 30s in the whole of the country - how much more suffering can the Council heap on it's constituents?