Richard's blog

Back in February of this year I broke off discussing aviation to talk about how extending the congestion charge zone was drawing protest from those affected by the new charge. I said at the time that "If you want to live a lifestyle which relies on excessive consumption of fossil fuels, then expect to pay" - a not unreasonable suggestion, given that our CO2 emissions are causing all sorts of climatalogical problems.

Almost a year later, and rising fuel prices have brought out the spectre of fuel protests and blockades. Last time the hauliers forced the Government to scrap the fuel duty escalator, which deliberately pushed petrol above the rise of inflation to check rising car use and fuel consumption. As the BBC noted in 2003, removing the escalator made sure that, contrary to popular belief, the real costs of driving continued to fall - particularly in relation to public transport costs.

What a surprise. The findings of long-awaited release of the ANASE report, exploring the noise from Heathrow airport, has been rejected by the Government as, apparently, it "does not give us the robust figures on which it would be safe to change policy".

The Government has said that expansion at Heathrow can only take place if it can be done without increaseing the number of people affected by aircraft noise. As more planes from more runways is pretty dammed likely to cause more noise, the DfT has started playing silly buggers with the measuring.

As radical and outspoken opponents of airport expansion, we occasionally recieve illiterate and ill-thought out rants accusing us of being facists or communists (and everything in between). However every now and then we get an email which makes us stop and think, and this is one of them.

Dear Plane Stupid,

I'm constantly inspired by the brave actions which continue to bring public attention to the madness of airport expansion. You are an example to us all! However, I’m not so sure about all your policies. On a few major issues, you simply aren't being radical enough.

Richard Branson, part-time eco-warrior, part-time carbon criminal, spent today opening a new university and asking students to help him 'think green'. Branson wants students to pitch into his efforts to reduce the emissions from his growing fleet of trans-Atlantic aircraft.

"Among ideas the entrepreneur is inviting undergraduates to consider are lightweight seat to improve fuel efficiency, Virgin Atlantic uniforms made from recycled materials and energy efficient facilities at airport terminals."

Our spy-in-the-sky reports that Mr. Branson's suggestions met with hushed giggles from the students, who pointed out that grounding Virgin aircraft and stopping plans for space tourism might do more for reducing emissions than dressing trolley dolleys in costumes made from old duty-free bottles.

Call me a cynic, but I'm willing to bet the upcoming consultations on expanding Heathrow airport don't halt the government's madcap plans to lay tarmac all over west London. It's not that I don't trust the public to make the "right" decision; more that whenever the aviation industry asks the questions it gets the result it wanted, even if it contradicts every other survey.

Pro-expansion lobby group Future Heathrow recently published a Populus survey which shows surprising support for Heathrow expansion. They polled 1,000 residents from the west London boroughs that comprise the 2M group, and discovered 56% supported ending runway alternation (switching the runway used for take-offs at 3pm, to give locals respite from aircraft noise). This contradicted last year's ICM poll by the Mayor of London, which found only 26% supported ending alternation. Begging the question: why did the industry survey get the results it did?

"Its always a sign that someone is losing an argument when they start making unfounded allegations." So says our arch-nemesis Flying Matters, accusing us of lying to the Times, which last week published an article claiming that they were spying on us.

Only problem is that we caught them at it. Earlier this week FM Director Michelle Di Leo sent an email to the administrator of an aviation campaigners discussion list, pretending to be an Italian campaigner against airport expansion. Calling herself 'Bella Regazza', she asked to be included in the mailing list.

In a shocking move, the Government has called for an end to all new road building and runway expansion.

Responding to the Stern Review and Eddington Report, Secretary of State for Transport Ruth Kelly said "For too long we've been forced to pretend we can have sustainable transport growth - a policy that's lead to more driving, more flying, more emissions."

"Well those days are over. It's time for a radical rethink of aviation expansion. For the sake of the planet, we're hitting the emergency stop button."

Of course she didn't really say any of that - it's business as usual!

In typically Gallic style, French President Nicolas Sarkozy declared a "green revolution" yesterday, announcing that there would be no more roads or runways built, alongside the construction of more high-speed rail networks to help shift people out fo the skies and onto the trains.

In a speech which could have come from any number of protest site campfires, Sarkozy called for a "revolution in our way of thinking, in our way of making decisions, a revolution in our way of life".

Will this put a stop to the industry's bleating about how Charles de Gaulle will overtake Heathrow if we don't expand it? Don't hold your breath...