.png)
A storm is brewing over the UK’s aviation policy. The cross-party Environmental Audit Committee (EAC), chaired by Labour MP Toby Perkins, is launching an inquiry that will put government ministers, environmental specialists, and aviation industry leaders in the hot seat.
At the heart of the investigation? A fundamental contradiction: How can the UK government champion airport expansion in the name of economic growth while simultaneously pledging to cut emissions, improve air quality, and protect communities from noise pollution?
Despite past opposition to Heathrow’s third runway, Chancellor Rachel Reeves and key Cabinet ministers have thrown their support behind the controversial project. Their backing signals a shift in Labour’s stance now that it holds power. Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner has given the green light for London City Airport’s expansion. At the same time, Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander has signalled she is “minded to approve” Gatwick’s expansion, pending additional environmental impact assessments.
The Climate Change Committee (CCC)—the government’s independent advisory body—has been unequivocal in its warnings. It urged ministers to halt all airport expansion plans until a UK-wide passenger capacity management framework could be established to measure the aviation sector’s climate impact. The government, however, flatly rejected this advice.
More recently, the CCC raised another red flag. If the rollout of low-carbon aviation technology lags behind expectations, managing passenger demand will become an even more significant challenge in the 2040s. And by then? Expansions would already be in place, making course correction far more complex. The CCC stressed that the 2020s and early 2030s are critical, as sustainable aviation fuels and large-scale carbon removal technologies remain in short supply.
The EAC has long argued that aviation emissions are among the hardest to reduce. London’s airport expansion plans, in particular, have drawn repeated scrutiny—not just for their climate impact but also for their potential to derail national air quality improvement targets.
With Parliament now set to grill policymakers and industry leaders, one question looms: Will economic ambitions continue to outweigh environmental responsibilities? The coming weeks will provide the answer.
Perkins, MP for Chesterfield and Staveley, said: “The aviation sector is a major contributor to the UK’s carbon emissions, and on the face of it, any expansion in the sector will make net zero even more elusive. However, the Government has been clear that any decisions on airport expansion must meet strict environmental and climate commitments.”
Perkins said he currently believes that it is “possible but very difficult” for the Government’s proposed programme of airport expansion projects to align with its binding environmental goals.
EAC member Blake Stephenson, Conservative MP for Mid Bedfordshire, said: “It is vitally important that economic growth is sustainable and that the Government’s plans for infrastructure do not sit at odds with environmental commitments. This inquiry will allow Parliamentarians to ensure that the public can be confident that by throwing their weight behind airport expansion, they are not damaging the environment for their children and grandchildren.”
The UK government’s aviation expansion plans are under increasing scrutiny as the cross-party Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) inquires into their environmental consequences. With a deadline for written submissions set for April 24, 2025, and oral evidence sessions expected with policymakers, climate scientists, and aviation leaders, the investigation comes at a critical moment for the nation’s climate strategy.
This inquiry aligns with the government’s ongoing work on the Sixth Carbon Budget (2033–2037), a legally mandated emissions reduction plan due by October 29 following a court order. Simultaneously, the government is setting emissions limits for the Seventh Carbon Budget (2038–2042) after receiving advisory input from the Climate Change Committee (CCC). The stakes could not be higher.
Meanwhile, a new report from Boston Consulting Group (BCG) highlights a significant bottleneck in the industry’s green transition: the slow adoption of sustainable aviation fuels (SAFs). Limited supply and high costs hinder SAF deployment, while investment remains shockingly low.
BCG’s survey of over 500 aviation executives found that airlines and airports allocate just 1–3% of their revenue or budget toward SAF development, with only 4% invested by aircraft manufacturers and project developers.
Despite a staggering 1,150% increase in SAF supply over the past three years, these fuels made up a mere 0.3% of global jet fuel production in 2024. The supply is projected to fall 30–45% short of 2030 targets at this rate, casting doubt on the aviation sector’s ability to scale low-emission fuel solutions effectively.
BCG identifies carbon pricing as a potential solution to this deadlock. While some nations, such as Canada, have begun scaling back carbon policies, BCG’s research suggests that most aviation executives would welcome progressive policymaking.
Markets like the UK and EU have introduced SAF mandates to stabilise supply and demand. However, experts argue that mandates alone aren’t enough—additional interventions are needed to strengthen the business case for SAF production and accelerate industry-wide adoption.
Comments