Should Heathrow Get a Third Runway?
Image Credit | London Museum
Heathrow Today
London’s Heathrow Airport is one of the busiest in the world. In 2024, over 83 million passengers passed through its 4 terminals. 89 airlines fly to 214 destinations in 84 countries, and Heathrow serves as the gateway to the world’s most important city.
All of this takes place on just two 12,000 foot strips of asphalt. This is highly unusual for an airport of it’s scale. Dubai, which ranks second in passenger traffic globally also operates with two runways, but that will change when operations switch over to Al Maktoum International Airport at some point in the future.
By and large, the two runway system works at Heathrow. A plane takes off or lands every 45 seconds, totalling about 1,400 movements daily. It’s not uncommon to see planes holding for a few minutes around the airport as controllers try to coordinate arrivals, but it’s usually nothing too egregiously long. That happens all time around the world, and it’s unique to Heathrow.
When everything goes to plan, Heathrow is fine. But there’s virtually no slack within the system, meaning that anything going wrong could have a catastrophic knock on effect. There’s a ton of things that throw things into turmoil. A plane could suffer a birdstrike on takeoff, and a runway might have to be closed for inspection. A crack could develop on the surface, taking it out of service until repairs can be made. In the worst-case scenario, a major incident could render a runway unusable for weeks. Having such a colossal airport running with such a thin margin of error is a recipe for disaster.
Is Bigger Better?
All these factors raise the obvious question: why doesn’t Heathrow just build another runway?
That idea is far from new. In January of 2009, Transportation Secretary Geoff Hoon announced that the UK government supported building a third, 7,200 foot long runway to the North of Heathrow. The runway would primarily be used for shorter hops around Europe, leaving the other two long ones for widebodies. This was met with immense pushback. It would require about 700 homes to be demolished and bring down property values for thousands more. Hayes and Harlington MP John McDonnell said “the entire village of Sipson could disappear.” Hundreds of thousands of people in London and Berkshire would be exposed to increased noise from the third runway, which people weren’t keen on. There’s also the environmental impact of the project, both from the increased air traffic and the actual construction process. Activist groups like Plane Stupid and Greenpeace have vehemently opposed an expansion for over a decade, staging dozens of protests.
To every downside there’s an upside. According to the Secretary of Transportation, Heathrow is currently operating at 99% capacity - this means there’s basically no room to grow. London’s population is growing, especially people moving from abroad, so demand will increase to beyond what Heathrow can support. Sure, there’s other airports like Gatwick and Stanstead, but they’re nowhere near the scale of Heathrow. By 2050, estimates suggest that a third runway could bolster the British economy by ￡17 billion and increase the nation’s GDP as a whole by 0.43%. Constructing the new infrastructure would support about 60,000 jobs and when it’s fully operational, 8,000 permanent ones.
Where Do Things Stand Today?
Image Credit | Heathrow Airport
The expansion is highly political in Britain.
The Labour Party (who’s in power now) supports an expansion of Heathrow. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is prepared to do “whatever it takes” to get work started by 2030, according to The Times. However, fellow Labour party politician and Mayor of London Sadiq Khan is strongly opposed to an expansion, arguing that it would increase noise and air pollution for hundreds of thousands of people and has gone so far as to threaten to drag the government to court over the issue. Mayor Khan instead supports expanding Gatwick, which is farther from Central London than Heathrow is. Within Starmer’s own government there’s differing views. Ed Miliband, the Energy & Net Zero Secretary does not want an expanded Heathrow, citing concerns about pollution saying that it would be detrimental to Britain’s environmental goals.
As of January 2025, Chancellor Rachel Reeves confirmed that the government would proceed with an expansion project.
Heathrow’s latest plans for expansion involve a new, 11,000 foot (3500 meter) runway, the demolition of Terminals 1 and 3, and the rerouting of the M25 motorway. Terminal 2 will be expanded, 3 new satellite terminals will be built, and a brand new terminal, T5x, will be constructed alongside the new runway. The project is estimated to cost £49 billion, and will be entirely privately funded by shareholders and funds like the Saudi Arabian Public Investment Fund. According to the proposal, the expansion would allow Heathrow to accommodate 756,000 flights and 150 million passengers annually. The timeline on this proposal has completion by 2035, which of course could be impacted by any multitude of legal challenges or general delays that are normal with any major infrastructure project.
There is a counter proposal by Arora Group, a privately-owned hotel and property firm. Their plan has the new runway nearly a thousand meters shorter and in a staggered layout so the M25 motorway wouldn’t need to be touched. Aurora’s proposal also includes a new terminal, T6, which would be fully operational by 2040. Aurora’s plan is significantly cheaper, estimated at £25 billion.
The government has to pick which plan to approve, then, theoretically, work can start.
My Thoughts
Personally, I think it’s an incredibly complicated issue. I can definitely see both sides of the argument; everyone I feel makes valid points. The risks of pollution and the impact of destroying (at least) 700 homes it too large to ignore, but so are the major economic upsides of a bigger Heathrow.
What do you think about Heathrow expanding? Do you support it?
Jokes aside, crazy to think Heathrow did have three runways in the past 