Stop the Estuary Airport

RSPB Position Statement

Background

The RSPB is wholly opposed to the construction of an airport anywhere in the Thames Estuary because of the immense damage it would cause to the area’s internationally important wildlife and the wider environment.

The issue was exhaustively investigated in the Government’s Aviation White Paper. All the key players, including the aviation industry, contributed, and the idea of an airport in the Thames Estuary was ruled out. In addition to the unprecedented environmental damage and the resulting legal implications, the investigation found that an estuary airport did not make sense economically, would not meet the requirements of the aviation industry and presented a significantly higher risk of ‘birdstrike’ than at any other major airport in the UK.

Recent statements by London Mayor, Boris Johnson, suggesting that he would like an estuary airport, do nothing to alter these findings. The threats and the risks remain the same. An airport in the Thames Estuary is unrealistic due to the ecological, environmental and economic impacts it would cause.

As well as being hugely expensive, an airport in the Thames Estuary would cause massive environmental damage, and there would be a significantly increased risk of birdstrike as the Thames Estuary is a hub for hundreds of thousands of migrant birds.

The RSPB advocates a moratorium on air travel expansion until it can be demonstrated that significant increases in emissions from air-travel can be accommodated within a UK cut of 80% in emissions by 2050, as recently put into law by the Climate Change Act. Without this, the scale of the cuts required in the rest of the UK economy to offset a continuing rise in aviation emissions would be potentially crippling. Instead, demand for flights should be managed through removing the substantial subsidies that the industry currently enjoys including tax-free fuel, and the absence of VAT on all aspects of aviation.

The RSPB fought its largest ever campaign against a proposal to site a new airport on Cliffe Marshes. These proposals, which were part of a Government review of airport capacity in the South East, were eventually rejected. The review also considered the option of siting an airport in the Thames Estuary. These proposals were also rejected.

Key issues:

1. Damage to wildlife sites

An airport sited in the Thames Estuary would, damage or destroy huge areas of legally protected habitat.

The Government would have to recreate any lost or damaged habitat elsewhere before work on the airport could start – and even then only if it could prove there is no alternative site for the expansion and it is in the overriding public interest. It could face a long and protracted legal battle.

• The Thames estuary has extensive areas of internationally protected wildlife habitats (called Special Protection Areas). These protected areas stretch along the estuary from Gravesend to Southend and Sheerness.

• In addition to these existing areas, a new internationally protected area is being proposed which will include the entire wider Thames Estuary, east of Sheerness.
• Every year, the wider estuarine complex is a hub for 300,000 migrant birds that rely on the area for feeding and roosting.
• Any damage must be compensated for and there is nowhere in the Estuary or arguably in Europe where such large-scale damage could be compensated for adequately.

2. Wider environmental impacts

Climate change remains the greatest threat to biodiversity and the RSPB believes that there should be no further airport expansion.

The construction of a massive new airport in the Thames Estuary will have impacts that extend far outside the immediate area. Emissions from aircraft are one of the fastest increasing sources of greenhouse gases. Unchecked, climate change may see up to a third of land-based species ‘committed to extinction’ by regional climate change effects by 2050. The impacts of climate change on wildlife in the UK and abroad are already being felt. Emissions need to be slashed across all sectors if the 80 percent target is to be achieved, but emissions from aviation are rising rapidly – doubling between 1990 and 2000. Further airport expansion should be prevented until it can be demonstrated that significant increases in emissions from air-travel can be accommodated within a UK cut of 80% in emissions by 2050.

• The demand for flights should be managed.
• In a low-lying area like the Thames Estuary, the threat of climate change is particularly significant and it is foolhardy to consider building an airport that would only contribute to the underlying problem.
• The Government’s regeneration of the Thames plans for the Gateway are being promoted as low-carbon and stress the importance of greenspace and the natural environment as part of its success. An estuary airport would remove any possibility of the Thames Gateway being “low-carbon”.

3. Birdstrike

An airport in the Thames Estuary would be unsafe.

• Even with an aggressive bird hazard management programme (i.e. shooting or scaring the birds away), the bird strike hazard would be up to 12 times higher than at any other major UK airport.

4. Economic issues

An airport in the Thames Estuary would be massively expensive. The necessary additional transport infrastructure would further add to the cost. The overall cost combined with its apparent unpopularity with the aviation industry may mean that the airport could struggle to survive economically.

Furthermore:

• There is no evidence of support from the City and thus nobody to pay for it.
• The cost could negate the chance of any significant return on investment.
• The volume of air traffic could mean that other London airports might need to close or have travel from them severely restricted.

Further information

If you would like more information about the RSPB’s views on the proposal for an airport in the Thames Estuary, and how you can help protect wildlife in the Thames Estuary, please contact Paul Outhwaite on 01273 775333