"Oliver Keating" wrote in message
...
So, massive expansion planned for Heathrow, Stanstead and Luton:

One new runway for the least useful airport for the bulk of the population
of SE England is hardly a massive expansion. Luton gets to use its current
ruwnay a bit more and Heathrow might get a new runway, if it can meet
pollution levels that it cannot achieve with the current ones.

This seems deeply concerning. If air traffic growth continues at it's
present rate, then in 50 years time air travel will account for 40% of all
CO2 (greenhouse gas) emmissions.

These minor expansions will not give anywhere near the capacity to achieve
that sort of level of growth.

The noise from Heathrow airport alone affects some 1 million people.

The majority of whom would have been born after it was built, so it has been
there longer than they have.

There is no "need" to have massive expansion in air travel, most expansion
comes from people going on budget holidays, i.e. things that are not
essential for the general operation of our society.

A lot of people would argue that holidays are essential for the successful
operation of our society. However, according to Newsnight, the main growth
area is now in the middle-to-high income bracket travellers.

....
As far as I can see, being able to go on holiday twice a year instead of
once is nice, but the environmental damage is a price that is not worth
paying.

Nobody is forcing you to take two holidays a year if you think that, but I
will continue to take my usual three and I have a target of at least one
long weekend in France each month as well.

My personal view is that it is a pity that Gatwick did not get another
runway and that the RAF never finished Heathrow's nine runways before they
handed it over.

Colin Bignell