A vote for nature!

In a historic move in the fight against climate change, the North Somerset council in the United Kingdom rejected a planning application to expand Bristol airport, a move which would have raised the capacity of the airport to 12 million. The expansion could have negatively impacted the environment of the surrounding areas and hence, saw a major protest from climate change activists

Surprising as it may sound, bats and birds have just won a battle over an airport. As the world grapples with a state of climate emergency and the current model of growth is being growingly challenged worldwide, councillors of the North Somerset Council in the UK have rejected the expansion plan of the Bristol airport. Extra parking space for thousands of more cars, the extension of passenger terminus and plane taxiways, major changes to the roads around the airport and other works that the expansion would have permitted at the cost of a greenbelt was being opposed by people concerned with the environment. Following an opening debate at a Planning and Regulatory Committee meeting of North Somerset Council in which a motion was proposed to refuse the application, councillors voted 18 in support of the move and seven against, with one councillor abstaining. Reports point out that the councillors who voted against this expansion after a four and half-hour-long meeting actually became the voice of more than eight thousand people who had been protesting against this extension plan.
After deliberating the move in the councillor meeting Don Davies, leader of North Somerset Council, said, “What the committee has considered is that the detrimental effect of the expansion of the airport on this area and the wider impact on the environment outweighs the narrower benefits to airport expansion. I know some people will be upset by this decision and I am sure that we can reconsider it in future when the airline industry has decarbonised and the public transport links to the airport are far stronger.”
That’s actually a rare thing to happen at a time when humans want to expand their transport network to run fast, and slowing down such growth is largely considered to be a regressive move. But that’s what we see from the common and conventional human being’s point of view. If we consider the same from an ecological conservation lens, this is a historic vote for the sustainability of civilisations on earth, a much-needed breather for Mother Earth. People who have supported this vote said it was a welcome step towards fighting climate change. The airport expansion would have eventually led to an increase in health problems of people around the location and would also have harmed precious colonies of bats and birdlife. Officials, whose nod for the project was stuck down by the councillors, feared the loss due to this decision would be to the tune of 1.4 billion pounds over a decade. That’s historic in many senses.

If our climate actions continue to remain slow, at least 80 airports worldwide could go underwater due to sea rise by 2100.  Even if we are able to limit our emissions to 2OC, at least 44 airports would face this fate. The message is clear. Vote for nature! 

Planet versus profit
It’s a clear case of planet winning over profit of humans and comes at a time when the earth experienced its hottest January in recorded history. The ongoing climate crisis has seriously challenged us to rethink the way humans are growing, necessarily at the cost of ecology, all other species. And that means our capacity to adapt to the catastrophic changes is shrinking by the day. In fact, a recently published report has estimated that UK would be the third-worst hit country by loss of nature. The World Wildlife Fund estimates that by 2050 loss of nature will wipe 368 billion pounds a year off global economic growth. UK alone will face a 16-billion-pound loss per year.

Biodiversity loss
So even if planners, like the ones who planned the airport expansion, only understand the language of business and profit, the time is to take a pause and read the huge warnings on the wall. A report “Nature Risk Rising” released at the World Economic Forum this year says that 44 trillion dollar of economic value generation – over half the world’s total GDP – is moderately or highly dependent on nature and its services and, as a result, exposed to risks from nature loss. It is now amply clear economic growth alone cannot drive our progress. A UN report released recently said that biodiversity, and the benefits it provides, is fundamental to human well-being and a healthy planet. However, our actions have made a million of the world’s eight million species face extinction, many within decades. As scientists have already warned, we are already in the midst of the sixth mass extinction, the first one to be caused by humans. The unprecedented rate at which species extinction is happening is alarming.

Growth and climate change
The UN has said in a 2019 report that shrinking habitats, exploitation of natural resources, climate change and pollution are the main causes of this. In fact, it is warned that the global rate of species extinction is at least a thousand times higher than it has been on average over the past 10 million years. The World Economic Forum’s 2020 Global Risks Report has listed biodiversity loss as one of the top five major risks in terms of likelihood and impact in the next 10 years. Nature’s loss is a fat-tail risk like the 2008 asset-price bubble: It cannot be seen with a linear world view, but once triggered can have far greater than average implications, says this report.
The vote against the expansion of Bristol airport should be seen as a small win in our battle against climate change. Growth can be slowed down till we have rejuvenated our natural resources to an extent that it can ultimately sustain our growth. However, in this defining decade, which is being considered as the last decade of serious climate action if we want to survive, nature should be prioritised over economic growth. Take the case of airports alone. If our climate actions continue to remain slow, at least 80 airports worldwide could go underwater due to sea rise by 2100. Even if we are able to limit our emissions to 2oC, at least 44 airports would face this fate. The message is clear. Vote for nature!