Labour’s landslide victory in July 2024 saw a commitment to deliver growth for the country, and Heathrow’s third runway – a project that’s been on and off for over three decades – was seen as the type of large infrastructure project that had economic potential. Two years on, and the Government is currently consulting on the Heathrow Expansion National Policy Statement (HENPS) before it goes to a parliamentary vote at the end of the year. If adopted, Heathrow Airport, or a rival promoter, is expected to come forward with a formal application next year.
While adopting the HENPS is far from the end of the approval process, its importance cannot be overstated, giving permission in principle for the third runway to proceed subject to demonstrating that a series of tests and conditions can be met. So before this process goes any further it’s pertinent to pause and ask what kind of growth we want, does it meet Andy Burnham's ambition to bring growth and prosperity in every postcode, and at what cost?
Do airports drive growth?
Let’s look at the facts, specifically the Government’s own economic analysis. This calculates that the third runway will deliver a pitifully small 0.05% boost to economic growth. But even that doesn’t materialise until 2056, some 20 years after the runway is scheduled to open, when the runway is being fully utilised. The very fact that the runway is forecast to take around 20 years to fill up is an admission that any benefits are likely to be small and incremental.
As for bringing growth and opportunities to the regions outside of London, the analysis shows that almost all the 0.05% GDP increase will occur in the south-east, with many UK regions seeing no benefit at all. Worse still, the project could drain jobs and investment away from the regions: if Heathrow expands, the latest national demand forecasts show that regional airports will handle far fewer passengers than otherwise predicted. If Andy Burnham was still the mayor of Greater Manchester, he and other metropolitan mayors would be asking serious questions.
Once the environmental costs of the project are included (air pollution, carbon emissions and noise impacts), the Treasury assessment of the project’s welfare impacts found there would be a net cost to society of between £23bn and £62bn over 60 years. You read that right. The New Economics Foundation recently wrote that “The figures likely represent the worst Green Book performance of a government-backed scheme or policy in history”.
The human costs
It goes without saying that valuing the environmental impacts is largely for spreadsheets and should not distract from the very real impact on people, public health and wellbeing. Think about the very human cost of demolishing at least 800 homes and erasing entire villages off the map. Once you include properties that will be left uninhabitable due to their proximity to the runway and flightpaths, the actual number of homes lost is likely to be in the thousands. The assessments also show that hundreds of thousands more people will be exposed to noise in the 2050s compared to a two-runway airport, including 5 more hospitals and 120 more schools. Yes, that’s less that are impacted by Heathrow operations today, but it will erode many of the promised benefits to communities of quieter aircraft.
And let’s not forget that this comes in the middle of a climate emergency. While aviation is today the 7th most polluting industry in the UK according to the Climate Change Committee, by 2040, it is on course to be our biggest emitting sector. The latest aviation forecasts from the Department for Transport show that instead of going down, emissions are stubbornly going in the opposite direction. The forecast 41MtCO2 of “residual” emissions (read continued fossil fuel use) from aviation in 2050 is more than twice what the CCC recommended, and more than the sector emits today. An expanded Heathrow would represent 45% of this figure at a time when many other sectors will have successfully decarbonised.
A better way forward
The sector has enthusiastically embraced the moniker of a “hard to abate” sector, but hard doesn’t mean impossible. The future of UK aviation doesn’t have to look like that. There is an alternative to this destructive growth - a sustainable aviation sector which delivers more economic benefit to the UK in the form of new jobs and investment in new technology.
The government is taking the first steps. It recently announced incentives to encourage producers of 2nd generation fuels from waste feedstocks to establish first of a kind SAF plants in places such as Teesside and the north-west. It is working to deliver reliable carbon transport and storage networks in our ample geological storage formations under the North Sea, and designing revenue support for UK-based carbon removal technologies. A number of electric and hydrogen flight demonstrator programmes have received funding, including at Bristol Airport. These could become real, quality jobs at the forefront of technology development, based all around the UK. But the money being spent on stimulating this new sector is tiny.
The expansion of Heathrow airport has been touted as an easy win, because it would be privately funded and wouldn’t cost the Treasury. But with higher landing charges leading to increased air fares it’s likely to cost consumers, and we’ve all seen how easily complex infrastructure projects fall behind schedule and explode over budget - after HS2, the third runway would be the country’s second biggest compulsory purchase scheme, surely a protracted process as thousands of people are forced to give up their homes and relocate. And there is nothing in the draft HENPS to protect a future government from having to fund the astronomical costs of improving highway access and rail links to the expanded airport - without which there would be an additional 40,000 car journeys a day.
Aviation will not have a future if it continues to fall behind the innovation seen in all other sectors, and prioritising expansion now just makes this really big problem a whole lot worse. Why not invest in an alternative future, where the UK can show international leadership, while ensuring a just transition, green aerospace technology exports, and equitable regional growth?
