A letter to the PM.

So I decided to sign up to a Greenpeace initiative, whereby I seem to become a proxy land-owner of some of the land that Greenpeace bought in opposition to the Heathrow Airport expansion plans. The initiative also gave me the opportunity to send my thoughts on the matter to Gordon Brown. My own reasonings weren't entirely environmental, and involved a little grandstanding, so I have no idea if it will be forwarded to number10@gov.uk(Or whatever they actually use for der fuher's inbox). But, submitted for your approval, the copied and pasted text of my message to Gordon.

Dear Prime Minister.

I write to you as a concerned citizen. The recently confirmed plans to create a new runway at Heathrow Airport is the reason for this concern. I understand the need for expansion as underlying for future growth, but I cannot find any reason in me why Heathrow should be the answer.

Quite simply, Heathrow is being painted as a future "Transport Hub", a great airport to cement Britain's place in the future of not only Europe, but the world. Heathrow is not a great airport, and in fact is put to shame by many of the smaller airports throughout the nation. More than that, the problems an expanded Heathrow faces cannot, and will not be solved by the presence of a new runway.

The tawdry facilities throughout the airport, and general low standard of the site, are so low, that people have begun to complain about Heathrow, where once they would have bemoaned the state of Gatwick. The transit connections that currently exist are hopeless, and cannot hope to provide a valid route to air travel via Heathrow. The proposed new train link to Scotland is interesting, but bearing in mind the price to fly budget from any local airport to the capital is the same or less than any rail fare, a new rail link is superfluous - especially considering the shambles that the rail industry is in.

The environmental considerations are also present in my mind; There is no "green" treatment for an airport. Providing a new runway will work to make the airlines and BAA happy, but will only make the carbon footprint of the airport more significant. As for the emissions caps that are being bandied about in non-binding terms? They will not come close to covering the influx of new flights the new runway would create. And I say flights, not passengers, because there are always a massive amount of flights(Every day), that are far from full, many below half-full.

I've heard the argument put forward that electric cars would somehow offset the pollution from new flights arriving and departing an expanded Heathrow. But here's the thing. In order to prevent coastal towns falling into the ocean within my lifetime, carbon emissions need to be reduced massively, not passed around like you're trying to pay Paul by avoiding Peter. Electric cars are a start. Perhaps they'd do well if they were driving into a purpose-built, streamlined and well-thought, well-delivered new national airport in the Thames Estuary area. Or, failing that, to newly-equipped charging points in the car parks for the nation's other airports.

This plan, is ultimate folly. It has very little to create benefit for the country, only to benefit the introverted airline and airport cabal.

You are losing my vote, and speaking as someone both politically minded and blessed with a gift for words, you would be well-advised to hear these words.

Yours Sincerely,

Chris Johnson