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

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3322277.stm

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.

And it's put directly into the upper atmosphere which has more of a
detrimental effect than if it were released at ground level.

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.

Exactly. Much of the air travel expansion in the last few years has been
with the budget airlines. These are typically short hops which, if there
was a sufficiently good high-speed rail network, would be unnecessary. In
addition, if these short hop flights were removed from airports there would
be the space available for long-haul flights without the need for airport
expansion.

While many people are quite aware of the environmental impact of road
traffic, air travel has got off scott free, essentially the attitude
towards
airport expansion is rather like the attitude to road expansion 50 years
ago.

Indeed. Take, for example, no tax being placed on aviation fuel. Wasn't DB
(German railways) going to sue the EU or something for letting aviation fuel
stay untaxed? I can't remember...

I think some serious questions need to be asked, specifically whether this
really is necessary, and what the costs and benefits of increased air
travel.

This question should be asked of *all* forms of travel. Do we really to
travel as much as we do? The problem is, more capacity creates more demand,
which then outstrips capacity, so more capacity needs to be provided. We
blatantly can't carry on like this forever, so a government somewhere along
the line has to limit the demand, either passively by letting congestion put
people off, or actively by using tolls or price increases. One simple way
to do this to alleviate the rush-hour peak is to give tax incentives to
companies who let people have more flexible working hours to try to spread
the rush out.

Sorry this has turned into a rant! :-)

Angus