NORTH KENT: Thames Estuary airport report imminent

11:00am Saturday 17th October 2009 in News By David Mills

Boris Johnson Boris Johnson

A STUDY into the feasibility of building an airport in the Thames Estuary is expected next week.

Although no flight paths have been discussed, the estimated £40bn brainchild of Mayor of London Boris Johnson could lead to planes flying low over north Kent.

The airport could be built in as little as six years.

Councils and the RSPB have condemned the plans.

Councillor Paul Carter, the leader of Kent County Council, said: “There is a growing consensus that the Estuary airport is undeliverable, unaffordable and unnecessary.

“There is no need for a third runway at Heathrow. What is needed is a review of the capacity of the existing airports and their transport links – Birmingham to Heathrow, Heathrow to Gatwick, London to Stansted and Manston.

“It makes sense to sweat the assets already available to us in the South East. Kent International Airport at Manston, for example, has one of the longest runways in Europe.

“Manston could, at far less cost be connected to the Channel Tunnel Rail Link domestic services for fast journey times from London to Kent.

“Manston could also handle six million passenger movements a year which would boost the local economy in an area of high deprivation. Far more sensible in our view.”

Chris Corrigan, RSPB Regional Director, said the RSPB opposed the construction of an airport anywhere in the Thames Estuary because of the damage it would cause to the area’s wildlife.

He said: “The airport would damage or destroy huge areas of legally protected habitat. In addition to direct environmental destruction, a new airport would exacerbate climate change, which remains the greatest threat to biodiversity.

“As well as massive environmental damage, there could be a significant risk of birdstrike, as the Thames Estuary is a hub for hundreds of thousands of migrant birds. Even with an aggressive bird hazard management programme (such as shooting or scaring birds away), the bird strike hazard would be up to 12 times higher than at any other major UK airport.”

Both KCC and the RSPB have signed a petition against the airport at stopestuaryairport.co.uk

Comments(4)

shergars ghost says...
2:49pm Sat 17 Oct 09

I must agree that Manston is ideally situated, as stated already, the area has a level of high unemployment, the transport links can easily be hooked up being not far from the Channel Tunnel rail link, M25 etc.

Report this post »

bexleyman says...
3:50pm Sat 17 Oct 09

It is just mad Boris being mad Boris! What does detailed policy matter, what matters are headlines, votes and a legacy!
He's a buffoon of the highest order! "Oh we'll scrap that congestion charge, that'll win me a fairly large chunk of votes, never mind where the money will come from, just pull some from TfL, they can just raise fares for public transport which we'd like to see more people using!"
"Oh lets build Boris Island, people will remember me for decades, the millions it will affect and all them birds, what do they matter, few will vote in the london mayoral elections anyway"
"oh lets just bring back the routemaster, whatever it costs! Who really cares about all that money we've spent on other vehicles, we can just forget about those for now"

Quite simply, Boris is the worst mayor imaginable! ?

Report this post »

mathcook says...
5:33pm Sat 17 Oct 09

Paul Carter's grasp of the facts relating to Manston is, not for the first time, flimsy. At number 14 in the UK its runway isn't even one of the longest in the country let alone Europe. However far more important is the fact that the expansion of aviation in the UK needs to be halted because of the damage it does to the environment and to the economy. As an island nation we stand to suffer particularly badly from rising sea levels caused by climate change but incredibly our annual CO2 emissions per adult from flying are easily the highest in the world, being more than twice that of the US. Furthermore, foreign holidays and imported goods are a big drain on the economy. We don't need any new airports or to expand any existing ones.

Report this post »

bexleyman says...
7:18pm Sat 17 Oct 09

mathcook i'd like some help, some references if you will!
It is my belief that Manston has an extraordinarily long runway, it is a designated shuttle landing airport you know and therefore does indeed have a runway longer than most!
I have no factual basis, but one would anticipate a greater CO2 emissions per head than an American for flying, but statistics are all you greens have and they are, as Dan Todman said, statistics are like puppets, the further you shove your hand up their bottoms the more you can make them say...
Imports are not a drain on our economy, explain this please?
We do need larger aviation capacity. As much as we may hate it, the financial sector is essential for tax revenues, and is a remarkably footloose industry. If it wants more runways it can have it, for as long as we get their tax money then we can fund other projects, green or otherwise.
Take the third runway at Heathrow for example, how many flight hours of stacking would that elimate, and thus how much less CO2 would be pumped into the air by its construction? Tell me this mathcook!

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree