Press Gallery

Laut Großbritanniens Berufungsgericht entspricht die Entscheidung, grünes Licht für die dritte Start- und Landebahn in Heathrow zu geben, nicht dem Pariser Klimaabkommen.

Comment from the Englishspeaking world

It’s not often that climate activists get to punch the air. So campaigners were understandably jubilant this February when the court of appeal issued its surprise ruling that government plans to build a third runway at Heathrow are illegal. This makes it increasingly unlikely that the controversial project, approved by the House of Commons in June 2018, will go ahead. The judges set an extraordinary precedent by ruling that expanding the airport is incompatible with commitments made by the government in the Paris climate agreement.

Given Boris Johnson’s earlier opposition to Heathrow expansion, it is possible, if not yet certain, that he will use this week’s court ruling to abandon the third runway once and for all.

The judgement highlights a deeper tension between economic development and climate policymaking. We are in a climate emergency. This legal ruling shows that ministers cannot default — when it suits them — to business as usual.

There is probably no area in which economic and environmental imperatives are harder to reconcile than aviation. Cur- rently responsible for around 2 per cent of global emissions, its share is predicted to grow fast.

Aviation emissions in the UK are expected to overtake all other sources by 2050. While new batteries, sustainable fuels and new engine technology are all anticipated, the prospect of anything approaching “green” flying remains remote.

That’s why the government’s official advice is that aviation should be allowed to buck the trend of decarbonization, and to grow by up to 25 per cent between now and 2050. But even if this is accepted, ministers must address the question of where this growth will take place.

While there is spare capacity in some places, airports from Aberdeen to Southampton have plans to expand passenger numbers by 59 per cent, far beyond the official guidance. Such plans are not compatible with the UK’S climate goals.

© Guardian News & Media 2020