Skip to content or view screen version

Anti-Lydd Airport demo-report

pirate | 27.08.2005 12:41 | Globalisation | Social Struggles | Technology | South Coast | World

A protest against Lydd Airports expansion plans was held Aug 27th.


Around 40 or so people protested outside the entrance to Lydd Airport on Romney Marsh today. The demo had been called by a new coalition in the area - Keep The Marsh Special Alliance- to help raise awareness of the grave dangers to the local environment and the wider threat to climate change from continued airport expansion projects such as Lydd.

Vehicles passing were around 2.5 to 1 in support of the anti airport demo.

(A mere 'clack' of 10 or so assembled opposite to feebly support the airport.)

People from the local area along with members of the Shepway FoE, Kent and Shepway Greens and Shepway Lib Dems joined coalition partners Lydd Airport-No Expansion in a noisy and colourful demo with a variety of banners.

Anyone looking in on the BBC South East region (esp Kent). There should be a report on the local prog at around 5.30pm (after the footie results/Main news) tonight.
----------------------------------------------------------

In brief response to posts under the demo alert posted on the 25th Aug

There is a great deal of already established evidence of the damage to the climate from air travel. It is ranked second only to car emissions as a producer of excess CO2.

The arguments that this airport would help relieve congestion elsewhere are absurd given that EU Jet collapsed at Manston and people are increasingly taking the Eurostar to Europe ( takes nearly two thirds of people to the EU etc and is set to increase as/when the new CTRL link is finished) That's how people can travel instead of by polluting air.

Despite so called Gov statements about any 'need', it really is a non starter for any further air expansion. The very latest evidence on global warming has climate scientists revising their figures on temp levels and sea level rises both upwards and sooner. It is increasingly urgent that strong action against those factors that contribute to it are curtailled NOW.
Romney Marsh is very likely to start flooding far sooner than most think.

Further the ever rising price of oil and the eventual need to tax aviation fuel and other parts of the industry make the economics unviable- espcially for anyone trying to invest and or expand. The person who bought Lydd Airport is very likely to find it becomes a millstone if he keeps trying to get it expanded and maybe even kept at or near present levels.

Kent County Council has already thrown out the idea of an increase to 2 mill passengers a year as again unlikely and unviable.

Alternative employment on Romney could easilly come from improving tourism to the area (which would be driven away by noise from aircraft), Possibly making microgeneration units at a factory on the old Dungeness N power stn. biocrops , cottage hospitals and many other ideas that have and are being advanced.
----------------------------------------------------

www.lyddairport-noexpansion.co.uk

see also (for general info)
www.foe.org.uk

and

www.airportpledge.org.uk
(the campaign alliance against UK airport/transport expansion- FoE/Greenpeace/People&Planet/Transport2000/RisingTide).

-----------------------------------------------------

pirate

Comments

Hide the following 4 comments

So the yes camp are complacent and the no camp don't exist

27.08.2005 15:33

So it was a pretty poor turnout on both sides then. The no camp can't gather even a fraction of the people living under the flight path, the yes camp don't bother to demonstrate because they know they will get their way. Not quite Manchester second runway or Heathrow T5. Of the 40 whi turned out, how many are genuine local prople and how many are FoE, Greens, Lib Dems etc who oppose every construction project for the sake of it.

There is no scientific consensus on the causes of climate change. For every reputable scientist who believes in the CO2 theory there is an equally reputable one who dosn't. In any event, modern aircraft used correctly can be more fuel efficient than motor vehicles. The quantity of fuel used by aviation is dwarfed by that used by the motor vehicle. If you're concerned about the oil supply or CO2 you would be better campaigning against Americans doing their shopping in huge 4x4s. The price of oil is a function of politics and unnecessary wars, not supply. There are many reserves of oil we have not even considered tapping yet.

You may be unaware whilst AVTUR (jet fuel) is exempt from duty, AVGAS (aviation gasoline, used by prop driven aircraft) is subject to duty at GBP0.2895 per litre. This is something the general aviation community, who generally use smaller aircraft, are most unhappy with.

Tourism will benefit from improved air transport, as would small business using the microgeneration units you propose. Small business would also benefit from being able to supply the airport - this is where some of the 7000 jobs which will be created come from.

Mi


Usual promotors bleating

28.08.2005 09:53



Climate change. There are NO reputable scientists who are now denying global warming.
Previously there were far fewer deniers than those agreeing anyway.
Even Lomborg (who's own tutor trashed his claims) now accepts that it's happening.
Bellamy has recently been exposed for pinching dodgy 'evidence' from an even dodgier
US website run by Lyndon La Rouche and has now 'retired' from the debate.
The evidence is in and the science proven beyond disagreement by corporations/polititians
(however they may try to continue to deny or spin their way around/out of it - ie: Bush and
oil giant Exxon etc plus, it seems LyddAirport)


Numbers.
Many on the Marsh were probably on their weekend break- but those just leaving in their vehicles appeared to be largely suppostive, I only heard 4 cars passing in support.
It is also typical of protests that only the committed turn up but they represent a much larger
constituency. In this case the anti's trounced the proponants by 4 to 1.

The proponants of the airport are using the 'me,now' short termist view that has brought the
world to it's current parlous state economically and environmentally.

Construction.
It is simply not true that NGO's etc oppose something merely for the sake of it. Green groups oppose only those constructions that would genuinely be damaging to the environment both in the short and long term. If others agree with us, then they join in.



pirate


Mi??

28.08.2005 11:05

"There are many reserves of oil we have not even considered tapping yet."

Please do tell us where these are Mi, I'm sure we're all very interested.

interested


sad thing is...

30.08.2005 12:11

...that Mi is not even in the pay of the oil/aviation/etc industries!

Rubbish title, rubbish arguments that had already been answered in post before you, if you can be bothered to read it. If you can't please don't keep repeating yourself.

Just 'cos people are part of an interest group doesn't mean they're not local. And anyway, the future of the planet shouldn't just concern local people! Bogus argument award to you.


I want a future