Mecky Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Do we really need another airport? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
md00071 Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Before embarking on grand plans for expensive new airports, we should add capacity to existing ones, by adding second runways where necessary, and make greater use of GA airfields for commercial traffic. Luton and Stansted could be potentials for second runways. Commercialise and add second runways to Biggin Hill, Southend, Stapleford. That's the sensible option. Try telling that to the people who decide to buy a house two miles away from one of the worlds biggest airports, and then somehow think they have a right to complain about the noise. I say they should move to Catcliffe or Brinsworth and then complain against that M1 motorway-thing that they didn't notice when they looked at the house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biotechpete Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Marshland, remember you arent in London it's the Kent and Essex coast. Hundreds of thousands of migratory birds every year, alot of waterfowl and that means geese. I'd go to the bookies to place a bet on a bird strike bringing a plane down but they wouldn't take my money. It would be THAT much of an environmental problem. It's not the coast though, it's the sea. They are talking about building an island like in Honk Kong. The majority of the environmental impact would be to the sea not the coast. Plus when you take into consideration that it would need to be closer to central London than say Luton, It'd need to be somewhere inside the Thames gateway at Southend. Southend's not much of an enviromental concern to me, and there are cliffs there, not marshes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 It sounds like the hideaway of a Bond villain. Hope it has folding palm trees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glennis Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Marshland, remember you arent in London it's the Kent and Essex coast. Hundreds of thousands of migratory birds every year, alot of waterfowl and that means geese. I'd go to the bookies to place a bet on a bird strike bringing a plane down but they wouldn't take my money. It would be THAT much of an environmental problem. This was my first thought - why would anyone think its a good idea to put an airport in the middle of a bird reserve - the birds are not going to move out of their house, that's for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forumosaurus Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 The bbc keeps mentioning a new airport "boris island" on the thames estuary which sounds to me like an environmental nightmare and a quick way around the unpopularity of a new runway at heathrow which I thought was decided against due to things like environmental concerns I am missing something aren't I? When you're trying to grow an economy, it's people who have concerns like yours who will send us back into recession. "Shall we grow our country and boost our economy? =D" "No it might kill a polar bear =(" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted January 19, 2012 Author Share Posted January 19, 2012 When you're trying to grow an economy, it's people who have concerns like yours who will send us back into recession. "Shall we grow our country and boost our economy? =D" "No it might kill a polar bear =(" People like you make me dispair! The environment is a hell of a lot more important than the economy, we need it for things like food and water. What is the point in having a life if you have to exist on a vast industrial estate. Theres much more to life than money! To build an airport on such an important envronmental area is not necessary, its just damn stupid. I am pretty sure that this is a joke/threat rather than a serious idea anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glennis Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 People like you make me dispair! The environment is a hell of a lot more important than the economy, we need it for things like food and water. What is the point in having a life if you have to exist on a vast industrial estate. Theres much more to life than money! To build an airport on such an important envronmental area is not necessary, its just damn stupid. I am pretty sure that this is a joke/threat rather than a serious idea anyway. I agree, once these wild places are gone, they are gone for ever. Life would be so stressful, probably crime ridden, filthy and a complete misery for the human race, if we all lived shoulder to shoulder in brick boxes in an urban concrete enviroment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biotechpete Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 People like you make me dispair! The environment is a hell of a lot more important than the economy, we need it for things like food and water. What is the point in having a life if you have to exist on a vast industrial estate. Theres much more to life than money! To build an airport on such an important envronmental area is not necessary, its just damn stupid. I am pretty sure that this is a joke/threat rather than a serious idea anyway. So long as the government has enough to give out in benefit to stop people starving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hard2miss Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 The short shortsightedness of some people. 'Yeh lets concrete over everything so we can prosper' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.