Gatwick No 2nd Runway for a greener future
Quick survey – Have your say over Gatwick’s plans to rebuild the emergency runway
(northern/standby) as a second runway.
Take part here: https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/D9J9MC9
We are all facing a climate emergency and yet the shareholders of Gatwick Airport announced on the 25th August that they will push ahead with rebuilding the emergency runway as a second runway to benefit Gatwick Airport. Earlier this month, Gatwick reported a £204m pre-tax loss for the first six months of the year, following an annual loss of £526m for 2020.
A public consultation will start on 9th September and Gatwick will be presenting their plans at a series of public roadshows the dates and locations of which can be found here.
The Gatwick Airport statement –
‘The project proposals are low impact and are in line with Government policy of making best use of existing runways. The project will be delivered in a sustainable way which helps to achieve the Government’s overall goal of net zero emissions by 2050.’
Disingenuous statements by Gatwick Airport management are to be expected but to state going from 285,00 flights a year to 382,000 is ‘low impact’ shows total disregard for communities that suffer Gatwick Airport’s noise now.
- Rusper, West Sussex, as well as other areas in Surrey close to the runway to the west and east, will be ‘no-sleep noise ghettos’ due to two runways constantly releasing planes early in the morning to maximise flight numbers, as well as at night. What goes up must come down, so residents who suffer from arrivals can expect to see major increases – so much for ‘low impact’. Going from 285,00 flights a year to 382,000!
- Gatwick Airport has caused major highs and lows in our local economy – e.g. 2008 recession, and was hardest hit by COVID lockdown due to being a leisure airport. This airport is reliant upon spare money in the consumer’s pocket, low-cost fares, and residents ignoring that aviation is a major polluter. To believe that Gatwick is sustainable would seem unrealistic, as it provides peaks and declines in economic terms. Sustainable growth must be in green industries if we are serious about net-zero and leaving a healthy planet as a legacy for our children to enjoy.
- Automation has been aviation’s goal, and continues to be so; as such, jobs are declining in aviation, and other airports have illustrated that promised jobs do not materialise. Gatwick is using ‘smoke and mirrors’ to increase job numbers but are reliant upon other industries wanting to be close to a leisure airport.
- Aviation says there is no one silver bullet for an alternative to fossil fuel – read why, and why carbon-trading is a myth here. Should financial gain come before our children’s and grandchildren’s future? Aviation is a major polluter and so constraint must be the answer until technology and alternative fuels are available and not a distant dream. Should any council that is seeking to reduce carbon support Gatwick 2? Please let your councillors know your thoughts for the sake of our children’s children.
- The emergency runway (northern/ standby) cannot currently be used in conjunction with the main runway as they are too close together (safety reasons prevent this). As such, rebuilding the emergency runway 12m north, away from the main runway, as well as 28 taxiways, is not ‘making best use of current facilities’. A major traffic light system will have to be in place to ensure safety of planes on the ground, to allow both runways to be used in unison.
- Major new flood defences will have to be installed, disturbing the biodiversity of nature.
- Gatwick said the work could be completed by 2029. Airport operators said the project would grow passenger capacity to 75 million passengers per year by 2038, so what of the congestion on our roads and decline in air quality?