Economic case for Heathrow expansion 'flawed'.

"The economic case for expanding Heathrow is flawed, a new report
claims.

Independent international research body the Stockholm Environment
Institute was commissioned by Friends of the Earth to examine the UK
Government's economic justification for allowing airport expansion.

The Government's case for growth rests on an evaluation of the
economic benefits of providing more flights at cheaper prices to an
increasing number of people and weighing this up against an evaluation
of the "dis-benefits" from expansion such as an increase in climate-
changing emissions.

The report found three major flaws in the assessment of these benefits
and called for an independent review:
# The passenger demand projections are uncertain - for example they
rely on fares falling because the cost of oil per barrel is predicted
to fall from an assumed $65 in 2006 to $53 in 2030. Oil is currently
around $130 a barrel and experts predict will not fall below this
before the end of 2016.

# Foreign passengers changing planes in the UK are counted as a
benefit to the UK economy - but this is against HM Treasury guidance
on project appraisal. In 2005 nearly 30 per cent of Heathrow
passengers were travellers simply changing planes.

# It assumes "doing nothing" is the only alternative to airport
expansion ignoring alternatives with less environmental impact like
switching short haul passengers to rail travel, investing in video
conferencing or limiting transfer passengers..."

More:

http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/news/topstories/display.var.2408362.0.economic_case_for
_heathrow_expansion_flawed.php

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
Travel broadens the damage.
[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]