system
So… people will have to drive farther and air traffic will make shorter connecting hops around Heathrow and that will save emissions? Just curious.
So… people will have to drive farther and air traffic will make shorter connecting hops around Heathrow and that will save emissions? Just curious.
They can solve the climate change issue easily here, shutter Heathrow, Gatwick, and Stansted completely. The UK, like the rest of Europe, has a good train system so passengers can easily travel to - from Manchester or even Glasgow to catch a flight. Heck, close all the UK airports for a better result. After all, Shannon is on the west coast of Ireland, closer to the US, and there is great ferry service across the Irish Sea…
1 reply
I wonder if the court took into account the amount of jet fuel being wasted while the planes sit in long lines waiting to use the current two runways. An idling turbofan engine on a wide body is not exactly producing zero emissions. But, $40 billion for one runway? Are they paving it with gold?
Not sure everyone got the sarcasm - I find I usually have to include #sarcasm or people often reply completely agreeing with me 
One way to reconcile these constraints is to have the industry fly fewer passenger-kilometres. That is one of the long-term ways to address the travel industry’s contribution to human-caused climate change. Fewer passenger-kilometres can mean fewer takeoffs and landings, which can perhaps mean that the present set of runways is adequate. Maybe the COVID-19 slowdown is a rehearsal of that? Let’s not take it as axiomatic that passenger-kilometres flown will increase without limit.
1 reply
What is the percentage of the UK’s contribution to human-caused climate change based on observable data? There must be a quantitative number and is at least more than the margin of error in the data. Anyone?