So what ARE our opinions on the Third Runway?

[Marmora Man]

I don't buy into the eco arguments about climate change but I'm against a Third runway because of noise / congestion - the same reasons I helped (as a youngster) my parents oppose the opening of Stansted as a third London Airport.

Heathrow is a logistical nightmare, very scruffy & cramped in comparison to other airports built on greenfield sites up to 40Km outside of major cities (I'm thinking Dubai, Kuala Lumpur etc). I support Boris Johnson's support for a Thames Estuary airport with high speed links to LOndon and elsewhere.

[PeckhamRose]

So it's pretty much in the bag then.

[snorky]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jaysus snorks, it must have taken you ages to

> carve that one out on stone tablets

I know its a lectury mouthful, but you cant have the benefits of this wasteful, excessive, bloated society without taking on some of the downside - Im sure if the H/row planes pootled off across Slough & Westwards 100 % of the time, there wouldnt be such an outcry about the extension

All it needs now is arch turd Bono & useless rent a view Annie lennox to jet in to give us a lecture on how this runway is a bad idea and the whole thing has gone full circle

[PeckhamRose]

Phew, we'll be alright then....

Anyone been to Sipson? It's lovely and the pub serves a mighty fine beer.

Howabout the next after next EDF drinks goes over there?

I'd turn up to that!

[woofmarkthedog]

Grrr as long as Midge Ure don't get involved....Thames estuary wont happen either coz of the rare wetland...easier to turf people out than birdies innit ........Grr snarl......Maybe Lillie Allen can strum up a new protest song ...(Feel free to add your verse..) Grrr wooof

"Woz down the by the estuary,went to private skool me"

though I talk all cocneyee,I wernt very 'appy see

chorus- The Isle of sheppyee it's daan by the see ee

daan by the ssee ee the isle of sheppyee is daan by the sea ee

Gunna build a runway then over at 'eathrow ohh no... no.. no

That'll make f"three yuo know ohh.. ohh.. ohh

[PeckhamRose]

I worked with her Dad once. I think you're on to a winner. Copyright it quick. I'll facebook him.

[Michael Palaeologus]

Well that's that settled. Where next?

Biggin Hill perhaps - that is surrounded by pointless green stuff and an international airport would boost the economy of Bromley and provide us with a handy airport from which to jet off on cheap flights to foreign parts. Everyone's a winner.

[LegalEagle-ish]

snorky Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Wood / trees innit

>

> You know the way in 1984, it turns out that there

> isnt really a war, but its a smokescreen to keep

> everyone toeing the line and accepting vile

> treatment ? This isnt too far displaced from that

> scenario

>

> Imagine a world where the need to travel back &

> forth as quickly as possible was pretty much

> removed- we do it like this at the minute as we

> have to fit Hols & travel in with work. Most

> people at Hrow are on business, jeting off all

> over the world to play their role in the gigantic

> machine of capital.

>

> If we removed Capital from the equation, then most

> speedy air travel would not be required - if we

> did not have mind numbingly grim jobs to hurry

> back to, then we would take a nice slow train &

> actually enjoy the journey.Aircraft would be used

> sparingly - why put yourself through the horror of

> a flight, when a ship can get you there in comfort

> & takes a week -with no work, its not like you are

> in any hurry is it ?

>

> Its not the plane or the airport that is the

> problem, its the system we choose to live in that

> is the problem. You can bealt about minutae like

> heathrow or ponder the staggeringly huge problem

> of global warming per se, but until we see what is

> at the root of all this, then we cannot resolve

> anything - everytime you upgrade your phone, treat

> yourself to a fat telly or buy the latest facelift

> version of your car, you are feeding capitalism &

> are as responsible as the bloke that lifts the

> first sod at the new runway

Viva la Revolucion!!!!

[louisiana]

I fly from Heathrow mainly on business, but the majority of flights from Heathrow are leisure, not business (according to various sets of stats that have been quoted in the broadsheet press this week). There's also a tremendous number of people passing through Heathrow who never come landside.

Just as important as climate change will be the impact of peak oil.

The International Energy Agency (paid for by governments) forecast in November(?) 2008 that peak oil from conventional sources (i.e. not Canadian tar sands of the really expensive stuff under the ocean that Brazil can't afford to drill) will be around 2020. After that, production will fall by 6.7% pa, they forecast (i.e. fast, because modern technology empties the wells/fields more quickly than in decades past). That will mean the end of cheap flights (if it hasn't happened before for other reasons e.g. global financial collapse).

Given that third runway is not due to come on stream until 2019, it seems like a complete waste of time. It does not solve Heathrow's current problems, and it will be a dead duck when it does open because the world and energy etc will have moved on by then.

I have no wish for a third runway. I am trying to reduce the amount I fly to see distant clients (train where I can) and also trying to get them to do more work remotely. Many firms I know (even the giants, and even before the autumn financial chaos) are doing the same.

We need to be thinking about using fewer resources and using resources more effectivly. Just expanding to feed some supposedly infinite current demand is short sighted and perhaps even stupid.

But Big Aero is a powerful lobby and politians are in thrall to these guys. And unfortunately both business and government are short-termers, in the one case in response to shareholders and the markets, and in the other to elections. There's nobody thinking longer term. A pity.

My view is that some airports by 2025 or 2030 could be looking like downtown Detroit:

http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1864272_1810098,00.html

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Another Community of around 700 folk will be destroyed(6)(6)

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Let's bring back Croydon Airport. And while we're at it, restore the racecourse.

Or floating planes on Dulwich Lake might be quite charming.

[brum]

Scrap the 3rd runway plan. Just divert planes to land on the Thames. It works for New York.

[Huguenot]

Aha, a coalition of the 'no consensus on option 2'.

United in opinion that the 3rd runway isn't wise, some dislike it out of grand ecological designs, some because the villages it will replace are pretty, some because politicians are liars, some because they like disagreeing and don't like losing.

Some because they bizarrely equate the economic necessities of the UK (pop 60m GDP $2 trillion) with the Netherlands (pop 16m, GDP $0.6 trillion).

Either way, you'll all disagree when you propose your alternative, as some are campaigning for the Khmer Rouge year 0, and some for Croydon.

Snorks is intrisically right - either bite capitalist trade principles and the necessary communications elements or don't.

The UK's trade is bizarrely London-centric. Heathrow isn't huge because it's in a pissing contest, it's because compared with places like Germany where trade is national the UK's punted most of its economy into a space that's 26 miles wide. The UK isn't over-supplying transport hubs, it's desperately under resourced.

It's always going to be easier to expand existing solutions than create new ones, because for every 1 Heathrow protestor, there'll be 15 against an airport in the New Forest.

The challenge is that the alternatives don't bear consideration. Mass redistribution of the industrial base outside of London, an end to capitalism or rejection of democracy all result in mass social upheaval and national disaster.

Whilst the exchange of planes for trains on the Edinburgh run is a cosmetic solution and a laudable commitment, let's be honest: Heathrow isn't there for those flights alone, it's about international trade.

So as Snorks says: either be a capitalist or don't, but be prepared for the consequences of your decision to reach far further than you imagine. Anarchy is generally a solution for the unimaginative.