Climate campaigners win Heathrow expansion case

[AtW]

Climate campaigners win Heathrow expansion case - BBC News

Fecks sake, nothing major will be build in this country, 98% capacity used for years and it’s still a problem to build 3rd runway, crazy - hopefully everybody who protested will be put on a no-fly list

[BrilloPad]

For the best. People must travel less. Maybe the planet has a chance.....

[hairymouse]

Makes sense, you can't go around promising action on climate change and then do the opposite:

Boris Johnson has promised “urgent action” on the climate crisis, taking personal leadership of this year’s UN climate talks after a blistering attack by the sacked former minister who was to lead them.

“Unless we take urgent action, we will get 3C hotter,” the prime minister told a gathering of climate experts, business leaders and civil society groups at the Science Museum in London on Tuesday morning. “As a country, as a society, as a planet and as a species, we must now act.”

If anything, Johnson's election was a mandate for stopping expansion given his election promises on climate change and his previous promises to lie in front of the bulldozers to stop Heathrow expansion.

[Uncle Albert]

Climate campaigners win Heathrow expansion case - BBC News

Fecks sake, nothing major will be build in this country, 98% capacity used for years and it’s still a problem to build 3rd runway, crazy - hopefully everybody who protested will be put on a no-fly list

I thought you were scared of flying? Have you grown a pair?

[AtW]

Yeah, let’s not have airplane capacity on a big island with just one tunnel to the continent, makes sense

[Whorty]

Yeah, let’s not have airplane capacity on a big island with just one tunnel to the continent, makes sense

When have you ever wanted to fly somewhere and been told, sorry there is no capacity? I've never had a problem taking any flight to anywhere in the world.

The expansion isn't because we haven't got enough capacity, that's a smokescreen. It's to make the airport bigger and 'better' to win more flights and make Heathrow a larger hub than Paris, Milan etc We just want more long haul to land at Heathrow, and then fly those people out to local airports. It's not required.

[AtW]

re

I thought you were scared of flying? Have you grown a pair?

It’s scary a fook when airplane taking off from Heathrow suddenly banks heavily right after take off - yiu never know if it’s fecked or it’s normal - this is because of 98-99% capacity tulip, it’s just unsafe

[ladymuck]

It’s scary a fook when airplane taking off from Heathrow suddenly banks heavily right after take off - yiu never know if it’s fecked or it’s normal - this is because of 98-99% capacity tulip, it’s just unsafe

The banking is usually because of the route (there are 6 "corridors" out of Heathrow) and the runway in use. Sharp banking usually occurs if the airport is, for example, on easterlies but the flight is westbound. Sometimes they will reroute to a less congested corridor which may also require a sharper feeling movement.

It's not unsafe. It's very closely coordinated and actually the risk adverse option is the default.

[AtW]

It’s safer not having to do it and gain altitude first.

[BlasterBates]

Just a set back, the court ruling simply says the government didn't review the impact of CO2 emissions on their commitments to the Paris climate treaty, but there is nothing in the Treaty that stops you building new airports.

They simply need to commission a couple of nuclear power stations, problem solved.

A flight to Spain consumes significantly less CO2 than the car journey.