Once again the courts are cast in the role of arbiter of climate obsessions as so-called ‘campaigners’ try to suppress modern developments, intended to meet rising demand, by the usual claim that any minor increase on the 0.04% carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is a problem rather than a benefit.
– – –
Bristol Airport Action Network (BAAN) has lodged an appeal against the Planning Inspectorate’s recent decision to approve the expansion, after raising more than £20,000 to cover legal fees, reports New Civil Engineer.
BAAN believes the expansion will be damaging for local people and the environment, and lead to a rise in road traffic, increased noise and air pollution and an “inevitable rise in carbon emissions”.
BAAN representative Stephen Clarke said: “This decision is so damaging for the local people and the climate that it simply cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged.”
Tarisha Finnegan-Clarke, from BAAN’s coordinating committee, added that the expansion is “not wanted, nor is it needed”.
She said: “We contest this outrageous decision on behalf of the local residents whose lives are already blighted by the airport and the many parish, town and city councils that have declared climate emergencies and have written statements of opposition throughout the process.”
Plans to expand the airport to cater for an additional 2M passengers a year were knocked back by North Somerset Council in February 2020, but the airport then appealed to the Planning Inspectorate to overturn the decision – which it did last month.
At the time, Bristol Airport chief executive Dave Lees described the decision as “excellent news for our region’s economy”.
The expansion will lift the cap on Bristol Airport’s capacity from 10M to 12M passengers a year and enables additional investment, including new upgrades to the terminal building, parking facilities, and public transport links.
Full report here.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
Why don’t these green agitators think, is it because they are unable to and must rely only on emotions?
If they were capable of thought they might wonder why all those attending international green events use private planes but don’t allow ordinary people to fly off on holiday – complete hypocrisy just like green intermittent power that costs 100 times more than non green reliable power.
Reblogged this on Utopia, you are standing in it!.
The greentards’ idiocy shows again. Seems to be a NIMBY argument, the airport was there, first, though.
So the additional 2 million people who will use it don’t putnumver these fringe groups? Makes their claims simply false surely?
‘Campaigners’ are a British phenomena. From this west side of the Atlantic, it appears campaigning is an industry. The cause is merely a tool to make money for the campaigners.
Hence, achieving their stated goal would be a disaster for campaigners.
Noise from the ignorati stifling progress.
If you can’t strangle demand, strangle supply. That seems to be the idea.