A third runway would increase global warming emissions from Heathrow by around 30 per cent, according to a new analysis.
Rachel Reeves has argued that developments in sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) mean that the Government can back airport expansion while still meeting its net zero legally binding commitments.
The Chancellor, who is MP for Leeds West, previously opposed expansion at Leeds Bradford airport and now supports another runway at the west London airport.
But Dr Rick Lupton, a senior lecturer in the University of Bath’s Department of Mechanical Engineering who specialises in modelling uncertain dynamic systems, has cast doubts on the likely impact of SAF that the Government is claiming as it has swung behind airport expansion in its dash for economic growth.
With Heathrow planning to increase the number of flights a year from 480,000 to 720,000 or more, he stressed: “Allowing more flights is incompatible with our need to reduce carbon emissions, and our commitments to do so.”
Dr Lupton explained further: “Heathrow’s analysis of the expansion expects a 50% increase in flights by 2040, which will cause more emissions and climate change.
“The Chancellor’s suggested solution for this is sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), but this is currently expensive and produced in limited quantities, and isn’t expected to replace a majority of the current fossil-fuel based aviation fuel used any time soon.
“Even if the government’s new mandate of using 10% SAF by 2030 and 22% by 2040 was fully met, and taking the Chancellor’s figure that SAF reduces emissions by 70% compared to fossil fuels, this will still lead to an increase of emissions from flights of about 30%.
“This is entirely the wrong direction, at a time when widespread natural disasters show we need to do more to cut emissions, not increase them.”
Sir Keir Starmer’s government, with its Commons majority of 163, will easily be able to push the plans for airport expansion through the Commons.
But they will almost certainly be challenged in the courts by local councils in west London, environmentalists, and possibly Mayor of London Sir Sadiq Khan.
Ms Reeves says improvements in sustainable aviation fuel have “changed things”.
She also said that now: “If plans came forward again at Leeds Bradford I would support expansion.”
Net Zero Secretary Ed Miliband, who has previously opposed a third runway, has stressed that the whole of the Government is committed to meeting its plan to tackle global warming as well as its No1 priority to boost economic growth.
The Chancellor has emphasised that the Supreme Court backed the Government’s airport strategy and a third runway in 2020, ruling against environmentalists.
At the time, the top judges put significant weight on the views of the UK’s Climate Change Committee, the Government’s advisers on global warming.
The CCC is now emphasising “there should be no net airport expansion unless the carbon-intensity of aviation is outperforming the Government’s emissions reduction pathway and can accommodate the additional demand”.
A Heathrow spokesperson said: “We have always been clear that a third runway at Heathrow would only be delivered within strict tests on carbon, noise and air quality.”
He highlighted other moves to reduce environmental harms including airspace change, efficiencies from newer aircraft, changes to operational procedures, electrification on the ground and electric-power aircraft.
