Richard's blog

Proving that our finger is on the pulse of all things aviation related, Plane Stupid can exclusively reveal today that Boris Johnson has agreed to part-fund a legal challenge to Heathrow's expansion. (Exclusively, because everyone else ran this story last week.) London's mayor has stumped up £15,000 to help 2M prepare a challenge based on breaches of the EU-set NOx limits.

In 2010 a series of NOx limits will come into effect, and any country who breaches them will meet with heavy fines. It's expected that Governments would have taken steps to reduce emissions to avoid the fines, but there are already breaches at Heathrow airport and no sign of any action to reduce NOx levels. We're not very optimistic of any either, given that this would basically necessitate closing the M4 or the M25, or digging up runway 2. The current solution is to push for a 5 year exemption... basically to postpone the enevitable.

If Heathrow is already breaching NOx limits then building another runway is unlikely to reduce its emissions, so the councils, backed by Boris, are to take the UK to court to challenge the expansion plans. I think they've got a pretty strong case - after all, BAA had to do all sorts of fiddling to rig NOx levels in the consultation document. I suppose I should be grateful to BoJo for his cash - but given that he's supporting expansion at City Airport, I'm not. Green with one hand, blue with the other.

The five Plane Stupid activists who marked the end of the Heathrow consultation by scaling Parliament and unfurling banners have been found guilty... and punished with a £365 fine. Not bad, all things considered. The day-and-a-half trial saw the five - Olivia, Leo, Tamsin, Graham and myself -  accused of section 128 of the Serious and Organised Crime and Police Act: trespass within a restricted area.

Given that the world's media had covered the action and had photographed us up there we didn't deny it, but were arguing that we had broken the law to prevent a greater crime. It's the same defence Greenpeace used last month when they were acquitted of damaging Kingsnorth coal-fired power station. We spoke about the corruption that had gone on between the DfT and BAA - the moving of the NOx meters further from the source of the emissions to make the readings lower; the invention of new 'green' planes that no one planned to build and other desperate attempts to rig the outcome from the start.

The judge wasn't convinced our defence applied - it all comes down to whether we used force or not - but after being presented with written evidence from climatologists, MPs, campaigners and other experts he agreed that something untoward had gone on. He found us guilty (because he remained convinced we couldn't run our defence) but then handed out the most minor of punishments: £150 fine, £200 costs and a £15 'victim surcharge' (presumably to buy some locks for the unlocked doors we waltzed through). It's a great result, and I just hope that the activists who boarded a coal train earlier this year get off equally lightly...

Whatdya think about aviation? Like the quick trips to New York to go Christmas shopping but hate the roar of jets overhead? Think we’ve broadened our horizons but terrified of climate change? Think your travel is essential but everyone else is binge flying? Then congratulations! You’re a member of the British public.

Yesterday the Government released its annual Attitudes to Aviation report, which showed that people are confused about airport expansion and climate change. Take some headline stats: 48% of people think we should expand our airports to boost the economy but 60% think we should limit expansion to protect the local environment and 56% oppose expansion on climate change grounds. 22% of people simultaneously want to expand airports and limit their expansion. At the same time.

The government has backed down on aviation and shipping, agreeing to include both in the Climate Change Bill's 80% emissions reduction targets. They had planned to let the industry grow as much as it liked while cracking down on other sectors, but changed their mind when faced with a major backbench rebellion.

So in theory aviation emissions will have to reduce by 80% - and, as there are no sustainable fuels in the pipeline, that should mean a lot fewer flights. The problem is that like all good Labour projects, there'll be plenty of creative accounting. This time its a cunning plan to let the UK buy other countries' emissions reductions off them, perhaps by taking a bunch of greener lightbulbs and handing them out around the world. This, frankly, is cheating.

At 4am this morning, residents from Clydebank, Paisley, Kirkliston and Cramond peacefully set up a stereo and blasted aeroplane noise through the entrance of the First Minister's private residency in Edinburgh. The action stands as a protest 'dawn chorus' to highlight the experience of living life in the shadow of a growing airport. Ironically, the stereo caused 110 decibels of noise - the equivalent of a jumbo jet taking off.

For half an hour about ten residents surrounded the building dressed in bright pajamas, night caps, clutching teddybears, with ear defenders to display the dangerous levels of noise pollution endured by their families and communities. Their placards stated "It's time to wake up to the impacts of aviation" and "have a taste of your own medicine".

The residents took these extraordinary steps to state loud and clear to the First Minister, who holds ultimate say over the fate of the expansion plans, that he cannot ignore any of the effects of airport expansion. These impacts include dangerous noise levels, rising air pollution, climate change and increasing economic uncertainty during the current credit crunch.

Jimmy Kerr, 33, a community worker from Paisley said:

"For us it is a continuous descent into depression. Most mornings I am woken at 4am by the first flights. A sense of frustration with the anti-democratic so-called consultation process has galvanised me into taking action."

Anne, 29, a teacher from Kirkliston said:

"We have taken our issue to the top to say that we cannot remain passive on airport expansion plans anymore. For years we have had to endure environmental injustices perpetrated by the government and BAA and today we are taking a stand."

Today's action marks the first in a new phase of direct action against airport expansion in Scotland. Today's direct action is the first to arise from the 'Plane Speaking' tour of communities, where residents joined Plane Stupid to plan their response to airport expansion plans and sign an 'airports action pledge'.

Activists do not believe that the Scottish Government's plans for sustainable economy and a strong Climate Change Bill are compatible with expanding airports. Aviation is the fastest growing cause of climate change and excessive noise and local pollution means that communities around Glasgow and Edinburgh airports are calling for BAA to be slapped with an Anti Social Behavior Order.

The World Health Organisation has expressed concern about the impact of aviation on human health. Long term (5-30 years) exposure to air traffic noise levels averaging 65 to 75 decibels increases blood pressure and the risk of hypertension. Sleep disturbance leads to fatigue, hypertension, greater risk of heart and respiratory problems, poor concentration in work and school, increased risk of accidents, depression, anxiety and higher rates of drug and alcohol abuse.

Today's action is particularly appropriate as Scotland's planning system is undergoing its most extreme overhaul in 60 years and both Glasgow and Edinburgh airports are due for expansion directed through the National Planning Framework 2 (NPF2).

The Government has given the go-ahead for the first expansion at Stansted, paving the way for 10% more flights each year. It's a decleration of war: on the climate, local communities and democracy.

Stop Stansted Expansion have fought long and hard against any expansion, citing noise, environmental destruction and climate change. The local council opposed expansion, so the Government overruled them and found in favour of the airline industry. That's not democracy - that's dictatorship.

The inquiry into a second runway will take place next year, but don’t expect a miracle. The Government has shown that it’s prepared to stamp on local democracy and bulldoze through the science if it keeps the aviation industry happy. Fine – all that does is galvanise residents and environmentalists who aren’t so prepared to roll over for a dinosaur industry. If the Government wants a fight, it’s going the right way about it…

Looks like some hardcore lobbying might be paying off: the influential Climate Change Committee, which is advising the Government on its climate change targets, has just announced that it wants international aviation to be included in the Climate Change Bill.

The Government has always been opposed to this, because it's harder to meet emissions targets if you have to count things that actually pollute. It would much rather focus on all sorts of areas which can be sorted out with superficial changes - like new lightbulbs or a draught excluder. Crucially the CCC also recomended an 80% cut in emissions, which Brown all but promised to accept during his Labour Party Conference speech.

So is this a total victory for climate campaigners and people who don't want the earth to transform into a microwave dinner? Sadly not; important as the Bill is, it won't mean a thing unless the public forces Government, civil servants and corporations to act on CO2. Amid all the self-congratulation we mustn't lose sight of the urgent need to physically block any efforts to build new coal-fired power stations, roads or runways. Failure simply isn't an option.

Breaking news: of course it could never be so simple. As the smoke cleared it's become apparent that the CCC had not actually called for international aviation to be included. Instead they want international flights to be counted seperately and airlines asked very nicely if they'll reduce their emissions. If they fail to then other sectors will be expected to pick up the slack. For god's sake people, grow a backbone and stop including pathetic caveats to exempt an industry that has consistently failed to sort itself out.

We’re through the looking glass people. I woke up yesterday morning to discover that the Conservatives have opposed the third runway, and are actively warning contractors that if they sign a deal with Labour it won’t be honoured under the Tories. What the bloody hell is going on?

A little background: as a child of the early eighties I grew up under a blue Government, and came of age under a red one. I still associate Conservatism with milk theft (not so bad: I was allergic to it) and very spotty six formers. At age 11, that’s about as evil as life gets. Only axing Cities of Gold could have increased my hatred.

But Cameron and Villiers have been tiptoeing around the third runway for some time now: last year’s Quality of Life Commission report opposed expansion, and there have been constant noises from Tory HQ on ‘economic arguments’ not yet being proven. But the industry is hopping mad and pushing harder than it's ever pushed before, so until the plans are six feet under, forgive me for not raising a glass just yet.