Bristol Airport’s expansion project to handle 15M passengers faces criticism over climate change and environmental impact, with some supporting and opposing.
The airport hopes to add new routes, including direct flights to the Middle East and North America. This could attract more tourists to Bristol, but while some support this expansion, others disagree due to environmental worries.
An airport spokesperson defended the proposal, stating the airport employs over 5,000 people and that growth benefits south Bristol, an area with some deprived communities. They see the airport as a major local employer.
Green Party councillors strongly oppose the plan, citing environmental and social concerns. Councillor Emma Edwards criticized it, noting the worsening climate crisis and worrying about increased carbon emissions, traffic, and air quality.
Critics argue the plan could harm the greenbelt, leading to the loss of 33 hectares of land, potentially damaging wildlife and nature. They also claim that only 13% of passengers visit Bristol, implying most benefits may leave the region.
Several readers shared concerns, with one mentioning plane fuel consumption, another lamenting pollution increases, and another suggesting improving current services first and cutting emissions.
However, another person supports the expansion, desiring longer flights from Bristol and better transport options. Someone else dislikes the “green agenda” and believes flying and driving are acceptable.
Furthermore, someone called the Green Party a menace, feeling they increase living costs, while another joked that flying to Spain might be faster than traveling within Bristol.