What do you think of the Thames estuary Airport (aka Boris Island)?

Comments (5)

• 

  Harry Akins

  14 January 2012 at 18:31 | #

  You are clearly an accountant type who lacks ambition. What about all the opportunities this new airport would provide. It would settle all arguments about who has the biggest airport - London would dominate once and for all, a single superhub to serve all of Europe, a massive growth opportunity for Essex and Northern Kent, an eco town on the old Heathrow site could be Europe's largest new town - bring it on I say!

  reply
• 

  Oscar Young

  14 January 2012 at 18:37 | #

  Harry, that attitude is typical of the kind of 'we're bigger than you' willy waving so beloved of our out-of-touch politicians! James is right on this one - expanding Gatwick is a much more logical choice, providing it is properly linked by an improved rail service.
  
  However, I don't think even this will happen - wait till Caroline Lucas and her green brigade start spouting out about the little hedgerows, sorry car parks and retail parks get displaced! Also, look at the challenges the industry faces - high price of oil, tax tax and more tax, then ETS on top, economic uncertainty etc.
  
  Then again, by 2019 this may all have blown over - although I doubt global warming will have solved itself by then. so yes, if London does need an extra runway, this is defo the place.

  reply
• 

  James Milward

  18 January 2012 at 16:42 | #

  If BA say they want it, then I will get worried. Until then, it is a non-starter. Far from making Boris look like a serious candidate for a second term, it just makes him look like a complete fool - which is a shame, I am Conservative myself, and he is otherwise quite a likeable chap, and he has a great sense of humour. Unlike, well, you know who!

  reply
• 

  Gill Moore

  19 January 2012 at 20:23 | #

  Alongside the RSPB and a broad coalition of millions, we are wholly opposed to the construction of an airport anywhere in the Thames Estuary because of the immense damage it would cause to the area’s internationally important wildlife and the wider environment. We find it sad that developers, the Mayor of London, his team and others are so ill-informed about the Thames Estuary and its internationally protected wildlife habitats. The whole issue was exhaustively investigated between 2002 and 2005 in the Government’s Aviation White Paper. ALL the key players, including the aviation industry, contributed. The idea of an airport in the Thames Estuary was conclusively ruled out and upheld by the High Court. In addition to the unprecedented environmental damage and the resulting massive legal implications, the investigation found that an estuary airport did not make sense economically, would not meet the requirements of the aviation industry and presented a significantly higher risk of 'bird strike' than at any other major airport in the UK. It would potentially be the single biggest piece of environmental vandalism ever perpetrated in the UK and any attempt to build an airport in or around the Thames Estuary will be fought with relentless vigour
  Friends of the North Kent Marshes

  reply
• 

  James Avery

  20 January 2012 at 00:05 | #

  Gill, The only thing that has changed between the 2003 White Paper and now is that most growth projections for the industry have been revised downwards, whilst Heathrow has continued its building programme.
  
  I take the view that London might benefit from one extra runway, not 4, and I agree that a business case which is built on closing Heathrow, considering all this extra investment, is very weak. I would like to know just who these investors are who are expecting a return, because I certainly can't see it lasting long in Dragon's Den - not with all the inherent risks of building on such a site.
  
  And all those issues would need to be considered before trying to get an EIA done!

  reply