Why give Heathrow a 3rd Runway when Britains 2nd biddest city Birmingham only has 1 runway that carn't even take jumbos??? Wheres the balance in that !! London has 5 airports allready, so it's just going to increase the risk of mid air collisions even more, stupid selfish goverment !!!

Mark Howard, Droitwich, england

How Amazing Would It Be If We Could Also Go Out and buy a plot of land in amongst every new coal approval and have the people power to stop the rapid deteriation of the one planet that we have to share around to sustain life...Just a thought

robbo, ULAN, N S W AUSTRALIA

Let us assume there is an economic need for an expansion of a London airpoirt. With £9bn available one could easily build another airport in the east as proposed by Boris Johnson. London is one of the very few cities left that has airplanes land via the city itself. Talking about terror threats etc.

NeK, London, UK

The third runway is a standout example of the hypocrisy of governments. Whilst they pay lip service to environmental concerns, when a decision is made they always opt for economic growth and to hell with the planet. However this is one they will not win. Greenpeace have chosen wisely.

Mike, Milton Keynes, England

A third runway will reduce the time spent in the air by aircraft on finals. Global air traffic will increase, regardless of the size of Heathrow. Not only will this move by greenpeace have no effect to emissions from aircraft, it will also enhance the effect of noise pollution in West London.

Russ, Portsmouth, UK

All the new land owners will have their details recorded at HM Land Registry and the upshot of this campaign, if the new runway gets the go-ahead, will be that HM Government will have to write a few thousand more letters to inform the land owners that their land has been compulsorily purchased.

Ron, London,

Fantasic move Greenpeace! The press coverage will be great on this. It should be a focus for Climate Change Protest for years to come. Ignore the rubbish, concentrate on the facts. 'The truth is out there!'

Woody, Welshpool, Powys

Well done Greenpeace.Let's not forget the fight against Stansted expansion,where BAA want to make it bigger than Heathrow with another runway.We must persuade this blinkered Government that airport expansion serves no one except big business.To argue it creates thousands of jobs is pure rubbish.

Philip, Braintree,

gaydon has a longer runway than all. already there and 1 hour fromm central london.. by excellent bus and rail services nearbye.

edward walpole-brown, wall n.j., u.s.a.

Have the Greens ever heard of Compulsory purchase ?????

John, Yorkshire,

the perfect location for a new Airport is on land on the Kent coast of the Thames Estuary... the majority of approach and landing paths would be over water...

paul cooke, gloucester uk,

Manston airport has the longest runway in UK yet it is hardly used and is about the same distance from London as Stansted and Gatwick. It is set in a 'depressed' area and its development would improve the availability of work

Mike, Sole Street, England

Hope this delays the plan for a 3rd runway long enough for the Tories to get into power and finally agree a new Hub airport in the Thames Estuary. Heathrow is in the wrong place; too populated; too congested - not fit for purpose. Improve train links in UK with cheap tickets to cut internal flights.

Donna Walker, Effingham, England

For how long will aviation be the target of the 'mentalists? Airlines want to make profits and using less fuel is part of that. Look how many orders the efficient Boeing 787 has received and it's not even flown yet. I want a third runway and a UK airport that is world renowned for superb service.

Michael, Atherton, England

3rd runway? You don't think it's going to stop there, any more than Terminal 4 being the last terminal.
Let's get Cameron in Downing Street NOW and get the whole thing canceled and stop wasting everyone's time.
When the oil runs out, at least there will be somewhere green left to go for a walk!

Kevin, Harmondsworth, England

Round of applause for Greenpeace! When are people going to realise that green belts cannot be replaced. Yes, people need airports, and yes people need jobs. I use airports and yes, work in the construction industry as well, but this doesn't mean we should keep riding rough shot over our land.

Tina Alefounder, Liverpool,

First, I never fly to Heathrow. It's way to iffy as far as flight delays and such. Second, Anyone who listens to a celebrity and their hypocritical trash should have their head examined. Third, Greenpeace is not really concerned about the environment. They want total socialism.

Jake, London,

Wonderful Greenpeace! Let the same methods be used everywhere that this government (or any future government) proposes to grab OUR remaining, immensely valuable, open spaces,countryside, villages et al for development which is not needed and serves only political enhancement and/or private profit.

Judith C, London, England

Richard Johnson, Aberdeen. Aviation demands may be insatiable, but they do not work for free, they are responding to the demands of the travelling public.
Greenpeace, et al should learn that the public will only support what doesn't affect them directly. As for celebrity travellers, nuff said.

Malcolm C, Edmonton, Canada

The Government should consider this piece of advice from Mr. Chris Mullin (Sunderland, South: Hansard 28th Nov 2002, Aviation Bill, Column 478):
'During my 18 undistinguished months as aviation Minister,
I learned two lessons about the aviation industry. First, its demands are insatiable; secondly,
successive Governments have always given way to them. May I put it to my right hon. Friend that the time
has come to make a stand? Instead of building more runways, airports and terminals, he should consider a
little demand management. Air travel is not a basic human right and it should be matched by environmental considerations.'

Richard Johnson, Aberdeen, Scotland

You've gotta hand it to Greenpeace, they've got balls. Now if the men in grey suits who want a 3rd runway are serious about it, I want to see them out there in the Greenpeace field in hand to hand combat with the protesters. If they can physically kick them off then they get their runway. Fair?

Jamie, Oxford,

Does Ms.Thompson fly first class? Shame on her, six economy plebs could fit in her bedspace. The Olympian view of these celebs cheapens Greenpeace's argument. It's easy to protest against developments like these when you've millions in the bank. Priority from ground level is to secure UK jobs.

Sonny B, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Oh and Emma Thompson, Alastair McGowan and Zac Goldsmith never fly from Heathrow? Stinks of 'not in ny backyard' campaign.

Simon, Poole, Dorset

Spot on Chris (Swansea). Greenpeace should be worried about population growth (6billion to 9billion by 2050). As for CO2 - aviation 2 - 3 %, livestock industry 18% (Source UN) and set to double by 2050. Maybe Greenpeace supporters don't know any maths.

richard, London, UK

For years there has been a perfect site for Heathrow's third runway / London's fourth airport - call it what you will. It just happens to be in Northern France.

paul foster, Lausanne, Switzerland

The extra runway will increase the number of passengers, airport staff and new businesses with new jobs. This will increase the population, immigration and stress on housing, health and education services, transport infrastructure, even electricity and water. Are there plans to improve all these?

John, london, UK

What about the cost to the environment of planes flying in circles at holding points waiting for a slot to land? If there were a third runway, more planes would be able to land quicker and REDUCE air pollution by not remaining in the sky for so long.

Owain, Bristol,

Greenpeace wants everybody to use trains where do they except the power to come from they do not want coal or nuclear then i would advise people to only us trains when the wind is blowing hard otherwise it will be a stop start journey.

gary, hornchurch, england

Why criticise people (like Emma Tompson) being opposed to the 3rd runway, yet still flying? Where is the problem with that? Can we say “I enjoy flying but enough is enough – let’s leave Heathrow where it is and not destroy the local community”?

Kevin, Harmondsworth, England

Instead of investing in Heathrow and building a third runway,plus a land grab by BAA. WHy not invest money in developing better and more direct links from the airports in Scotland and the North of England. The bulk of passengers using Heathrow dont actually live in the catchment area!,

Edward, Hungerford, UK

Where can we buy a piece of the land from? Well done Greenpeace.

Tom, Knutsford, UK

emma thompson,zac goldsmith, well these two never take airplanes? grow up green party you will soon see that the majority of the public are not worried about airports only their jobs and the econony not about the greens

david west, sheffield, uk

"It will state that the number of flights at Heathrow will not be allowed to increase if that would result in air pollution and noise levels being breached. "

Looks like being a white elephant then........
Anyone want to invest in white elephants ?

Reduction in flights to get to 2010 limits ?

Tim, Hounslow, UK

Awesome. Loving that from Greenpeace.

Liz, Leeds,

Totally agree with Neil. The so called "business community" that supports this is the sector that stands to make hard cash out of building or providing services to the development. They should ask the business sector that uses Heathrow as a service why they only use Heathrow as a last resort.

James, Maidenhead, UK

The IEA says oil supply will peak in 2020 which for them is quite a radical statement to make as their advice is what governments use to make policies.

http://www.peakoil.net/headline-news/iea-sees-peak-oil-in-2020

Most analysis says we will peak sooner so R3 will just be a costly memorial.

Paul, Hounslow, UK

Emma Thompson was at the Golden Globes recently. How did she get there, did she swim the Atlantic?

Chris, London, U.K.

Steve in Surrey knows nothing about modern Air Traffic Control.

A 3rd runway at Heathrow is all about vested interest. Do MPs still get their free airport car park passes?

Do they still lend them out to their friends?

Tom Maxwell, Redhill,

According to the American research firm Gartner, the carbon footprint of information and communications technology exceeded that of the global aviation industry for the first time in 2007 - so stop web surfing & posting comments - let's buils that 3rd runway

Pablo, Brentford, UK

I avoid Heathrow like the plague (nasty jobsworths everywhere). However, another runway will not solve the problem but only make congestion worse. Four airports serving one city is too many. Much better to follow the Japanese and Hong Kong ideas of a large offshore pad with rail links (Maglev?

percy, london, uk

Worrying about human sourced emissions, is shutting the stable door AFTER the horse has bolted. A rapidly growing population set against rapidly dwindling resources of all kinds. Why worry about the CO2 mouse, when there is the massive elephant (of human population) in the other corner of the room?

Peter East, Grays, United Kingdom

We now dont use Heathrow for business mtgs as it takes longer to take a bus from the terminals to the nearby hotels than the flight itself, the Taxi drivers are only interested in fares to Central London. How will r3 solve this and really make Heathrow attractive to businesses who use it a service?

alex, Twyford, Berks

when will the land be up for sale at heathtow airport

barry, london, england

Let's not use arguments against other heavy polluting sectors of society and industry as an excuse for not seriously considering the plight of our environment and our very survival.

The "Do nothing" brigade are as big a threat to the environment as the expansion of congested southern airports.

Craig Watts, Northallerton, UK

They have a sign on it claiming ownership over the climate, presumably exclusive ownership. Move the runway 100 yards, build round them.

_Felix, Nottingham,

British jewel? Are you joking? Heathrow acts predominantly as a transit airport with the only benefit for the economy coming from airport duties. London is already permeated by the near constant drone of aircraft and I for one will be standing in front of the bulldozers when they come.

James, London,

Well said Lizzie, the absolutely prehistoric attitude of the Business lobbyists needs to change and not repeat the same old mantras used at Stansted etc.
No wonder we are a country in decline when our leaders are so short sighted and feeble.

Drew, woodbridge, uk

The country needs a new hitech airport, r/w #3 will only benefit the BAA. If Gov go ahead with this then many will provide unbiased evidence of the folly.
It is not only pollution, 500,000 to 700,00 flights even if new a/c reduce emissions by 25% go figure! There is simply no UKplc business case

Mel, Interlaken, Switzerland

Celebrities have by far the worst carbon footprint than any of us mere mortals. They are 'always very busy' flying around promoting their books and films, around Europe then over to the US of course where they have second homes.

It's hilarious to see them jump on the bandwagon.

Gareth, Weybridge,

How many of us have spent 20 - 30 mins circulating around Watford waiting for a slot? This is itself a burden on the environment. The Government always have to balance growth with environmental concerns whereas Greenpeace don't have the mindset to analyse the concerns of others (jobs, safety etc)

Jamie, Wickford, UK

Bunch of loonies. Why not close the entire road network and all the airports as well?

We could then enjoy the delights of 12th century living with the attendant poverty and disease.

James , London, UK

maybe the protesters in Tasmania against the puplp mill and the destruction of the old growth trees in the flornetine valley , could do something similar. I for one would be happy to contribute

sandy grealish, castlemaine, victoria

Why do they need an extra runway, Heathrow is the worst airport in Europe and I now have all my meetings at schipol or frankfurt where there are no stupid passport controls delaying you for 45 mins and the security ques are minimal

neil, almere, holland

an absolutely brilliant move! Well done Greenpeace!

cww, Ipswich,

I disagree with Steve. Planes fly for a long time and landing slots are organised so surely it is easier to tell a plane to slow down if it is going to arrive early. We do need to fly but we also need to find alternative solutions. Heathrow is a terrible airport most people try to avoid.

joe, edinburgh, scotland

Hear, hear - well done Greenpeace!

kazza, melbourne, australia

Well said Steve. When will Greenpeace actually come up with a viable plan for the way forward in dealing with climate change. All we ever hear about is what they are against and what they will protest about. Never why don't we do this or that. Come up with a viable alternative for once.

Joel Short, Adelaide, Australia

I respect the message that green campaigners are trying to get across, but it seems to me this is politically motivated rather than a genuine environmental concern.The balance of economics and climate change is precarious. I take it none of the campaigners ever leaves the country except by train.

Brett, Los Angeles,

Im all for the enviroment but this action is completely nuts. Currently hundreds of bloomin great jumbo jets are forced into holding patterns above the airport burning tons of fuel every single minute. Greenpeace are not going to stop planes flying but a 3rd runway will let them land quicker !!!!

Steve, Surrey, UK

Lets keep things simple: Runway 3 is for London (UK) to compete with Frankfurt, Paris and Amsterdam. If it is not built then another British jewel will go into decline. Does Mrs Thompson and Greenpeace want to fund the jobs which will be lost? Rail argument: this is about Heathrow being a world hub.

Chris, Swansea, UK

Way to put their money where their mouth is!
Cheaper/more profitable to improve LHR's rail links & let airlines sell "trainplane" tickets. A Japan-style maglev train to Edinburgh, Paris etc would be quicker (allowing for security/travel into city). And people spend money locally when on the ground.

Lizzie, London,

Hats of to Greenpeace for there stand against expansion of the runway

Robert N Blundell, Liverpool, Uk