| Andover airfield development |
| The issue: |
Sir George,
In advance of the imminent meeting to decide the future of the Andover airfield site I posted this to the Andover Adevertiser, however I thought you might also be interested in this angle on the development. I'm not sure how much it will influence the debate but it is really important that the decision makers take a long term view of the impact of what is proposed.
Simon Duffield
Megashed or white elephant
I have been reading with interest the arguments for and against the proposed development at the airfield. However one area that doesn’t seem to have been debated is the future of the development it if goes ahead.
The Climate change bill currently going through Parliament proposes an 80% cut in greenhouse gas emissions. Whether you believe this is sufficient to prevent further climate change is irrelevant. The fundamental point is that it will change dramatically the way we live, and transport by road is going to be one of the areas which will have to change.
Currently transport accounts for between a quarter and one-third of UK carbon emissions with road transport the main component. Within this, emissions from vans and lorries are one of the fastest-growing source of emissions.
Test Valley currently has the third highest CO2 emissions per person in Hampshire with emissions from road transport over 1/3 higher than the rest of the South East. The additional road traffic that this development will generate will increase this further.
That the trucks will use a proportion of biofuels does not really address the question. A few years ago biofuels were thought to be the silver bullet, but the situation has changed as the implications their widespread use have become more apparent. They are not as efficient at reducing emissions as first thought once the inputs required to grow the crops, process and transport them are taken into account. Also 90% of the UKs biofuel is imported of which only 19% met an acceptable environmental standard. In addition the production of biofuels have not only been linked (in some cases) to rainforest deforestation, but also last years large increase in food prices, as land where crops used to be grown for food is now being used to grow crops to fuel lorries.
Much has been made of the energy efficiency and use of renewables on the development, which in itself is excellent, however it is the business model that it supports and serves, that could be the problem. Having an operation that relies so heavily on road transport has risks. We are likely to find that within a few years the world has moved on and Andover is left with a very large empty white elephant or a development that makes achieving our emission targets almost impossible.
|
| Date Issue Raised: |
28 Nov 2008 |
| My response: |
Many thanks for the email. I entirely agree.
The business model on which the megashed is founded is rooted in a centralised distribution system, founded on economies of scale. It does not minimise food miles, nor does it promote local supply. I believe we are moving away from this traditional approach, for all the reasons which you mention in your letter. If the megashed is built, it is likely to be uneconomic within a few years, and the building will have no alternative use.
Whether the DCC can take these macro factors into account is a moot point; but I believe there are good planning reasons for turning it down in any case.
Best wishes, George Young
|
|
Sir George Young Bt MP: Constituency and Parliamentary Website 