Runway 3 threat

Proposed location of R3 in green [DfT]

The government's preferred option for the next runway in the southeast is a third runway at Heathrow.

This was stated in the government's 'White Paper' on airports, which was published in Dec 03 and followed an extended period of 'Public Consultation'. Most of the airlines are in favour of a third runway and it is an open secret that Gordon Brown is too.

However, a third runway could cause such high levels of air pollution that it could invoke sanctions from the EU.

Because of these concerns, the government proposes that a runway at Heathrow, named "R3" for short, is put off until about 2015-20. In the meantime, the government is undertaking a major project 'Project Heathrow' to see what the prospects are for keeping (getting) under EU limits.

R3 would have major environmental consequences for West London and beyond and would increase congestion and danger for hundreds of thousands of citizens.

Quality of life, already under assault from Terminal 5, would be worsened for millions of people. There would also, less obviously, be significant economic and employment disadvantages arising from R3.

Why R3 is a bad idea

The environmental arguments against R3 are compelling:

• Even higher levels of air pollution
• More greenhouse gas emissions (climate change)
• More noise
• Loss of wildlife and biodiversity
• Destruction of townscape and heritage
• Threats to Green Belt and urban open space

There are other serious threats to residents in West London:

• Increased congestion on the roads
• Destruction of local communities
• Increased risk of a crash killing people on the ground
• Flooding

The arguments in favour of R3 are contrived and exaggerated:

• Economic costs imposed on residents ignored
• Subsidies to the aviation industry ignored
• Economic benefits hyped up while offsetting costs ignored
• Real impact on employment hidden

For more information on these issues see Runway 3 threat page where we outline the main arguments against R3. We also give links below to other pages on this site and to other sites where more detailed information can be found.

The idea of R3 goes back more than 10 years. See our history of broken promises.

The proposal for R3 was one of a number of options put forward in the government's national consultation that preceeded the White Paper. It is now in line for 2015-20, assuming that concerns about air pollution can be overcome. See airports White Paper. For more detail on Heathrow and national issues, see the detailed response [Word file; 50 pages] of Dec 02 by West London Friends to the airports consultation which preceded the White Paper.

The government maintains that it is committed to 'sustainable development' and says it wants to ensure that " .. the long term development of aviation is sustainable". R3 would impact by far the largest population of any of the runway options in the UK and would lead to continually increasing environmental damage. This is inconsistent with sustainable development.

Links

More pages on Runway 3:

• Runway 3 threat
• Air pollution stops Runway 3
• Government White Paper
• Runway 3 broken promises
• Lobby group for Runway 3
• Political parties stance on Runway 3 (Stand-alone page)
• Rally at Harmonsworth (June 03 - archived file)

See also Heathrow introduction for pages on:

• noise
• planning and blight
• safety
• health
• air pollution
• politics and lobbying

There are a number of sites that are concerned with Heathrow and campaigns against R3:
Heathrow Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise (HACAN)
Longford village
No Third Runway Action Group
John McDonnell, MP.   (Be cautious about this site. While it says the right things about R3, remember that it is a site belonging to a Labour MP. It is his party's policies that are threatening this devastation in West London and across the country.)

Back to Heathrow introduction

Back to air transport introduction

Updated Jan 06