heathrow

A new report published today undermines the economic case for building a third runway at Heathrow Airport. It shows that the Department for Transport (DfT) based part of its case for expansion on an Oxford Economic Forecasting (OEF) study commissioned by BAA, the company who own and manage Heathrow.

Unsurprisingly, the BAA funded study over- estimates the benefits of a third runway, assuming it would generate an extra 3 million business passengers contributing £400 each to the UK economy (making it worth £5billion over 70 years) - the DfT's original estimate was for half a million new business passengers spending around £120 each.

There's still time to let the government know how you feel about BAA's plans to build a third runway at Heathrow Airport, but the consultation process end on the 27th February so time is running out. If you live in London you can make your voice heard at the public meetings listed below.

Anti-Heathrow expansion activists were out and about at the weekend keeping up the pressure on the government to think again about plans for a third runway at Heathrow Airport. This time they took to the streets - literally - to get the message across, using a new method called 'clean grafitti'.

Taking a cue from the "wash me" messages scrawled on the back of delivery trucks, clean (or reverse) graffiti uses high-pressure steam to imprint images on dirty walls and pavements.

More on how the Heathrow public consultation is being fixed.

The government's consultation on Heathrow is fixed.

• There is evidence of extraordinary collusion between the government and BAA working together to influence the outcome of the consultation. [1]

• The prime minister and government ministers have made repeated comments that they want the expansion to go ahead, pre-empting the outcome of the consultation. [2]

• The evidence put forward within the consultation is confusing and incomplete, making it impossible for people to make an informed response to the consultation. [3]

• The consultation document is heavily biased, presenting leading commentary on the economic benefits of Heathrow expansion, and down-playing the effects of the proposed expansion on the climate and on Londoners. [4]

Greenpeace volunteers attended the final Heathrow consultation exhibition today to let the public know that the whole process is a sham - ignoring the threat of climate change in favour of the quick profits to be made from airport expansion.

Earlier this week the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) released a report identifying things the public should be doing to limit climate change. Third on the list is to "avoid unnecessary short-haul flights". Apparently we find this hard to do because of "divided consumer attitudes" - ie, we want to have our cake and eat it.

All four leading candidates for the forthcoming London mayoral election have joined forces to fight Gordon Brown's push for a third runway at Heathrow Airport. Ken Livingstone, Boris Johnson, Brian Paddick and Sian Berry have all agreed to feature in a new anti-expansion advertising campaign launched today. The ad features in the Times, Guardian, Independent and Evening Standard newspapers.

You may remember that a few weeks ago we ran a story about British Airways emailing the members of its Executive Club (who number in the tens of thousands) asking them to sign a petition supporting the proposed third runway at Heathrow Airport.

In it, BA chairman Willie Walsh made the rather remarkable assertion that the massive increase in traffic wouldn't increase emissions in climate change gases. According to Mr Walsh, the fact that airliners would spend less time queuing for take-off and landing spots would reduce CO2 emissions by 330,000 tonnes a year, a figure which the email implied had been endorsed by the government.