Manchester Airport will double the number of flights it handles and become as busy as Heathrow is today, the government has predicted.
According to the official forecast, there will be 449,000 take offs and landings at Manchester by 2050 – up from 213,000 in 2005.
It would mean a flight taking off or landing on average every 70 seconds.
The forecast was published in a report to the Committee on Climate Change and has been described as ‘shocking’ by opponents of the airport’s expansion.
Campaigners warned that the surge in air traffic would lead to another terminal being built at Manchester, although airport chiefs denied the claim.
The Department for Transport put forward the predictions as part of efforts to determine Britain’s carbon dioxide emissions. They predict Manchester will be the fastest growing of the four biggest airports in Britain and will overtake Gatwick to become the second busiest. By 2050, it is predicted to handle as many flights as Heathrow does now.
But Heathrow is also forecast to expand, albeit at a slower rate than Manchester, and will still be the country’s busiest airport, with just over 700,000 flights.
Lib Dem councillor Martin Eakins, who has campaigned against airport expansion, said: “Nobody I’ve spoken to was aware of the extent to which Manchester Airport hopes to expand, indeed those I’ve told are both shocked and stunned by the news. The wider community should be consulted as homes under or near flight paths will surely lose their value due to the increased noise and pollution.
“Manchester council, which jointly owns the airport, should come clean and assess the impact these extra flights would cause before pressing ahead.”
Robbie Gillett from the Stop Expansion at Manchester Airport pressure group said: “It’s time to update our thinking about airport expansion. We need to create jobs in low carbon industries and move away from this ‘all-growth-is-good-growth’ mentality.”
The figures are included in a report by the Committee on Climate Change. It warns that Britain’s aviation demand could grow more than 200 per cent over the next 40 years and the number of passengers could rise from 230m to 695m per year.
That would threaten the government’s aim to keep carbon dioxide emissions at or below 2005 levels and put Britain 600,000 take-offs and landings over the target limit.
A Manchester Airport spokesman said: “We welcomed the report published by the Committee on Climate Change and as an industry pledged again to reduce levels of carbon dioxide emissions substantially in the years ahead. Aviation holds a key role, not only in providing essential transport links that enable economies to grow, but in bringing important benefits to society, the value of which should not be underestimated.”

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All
Mad Welsh Scotsman, Cadishead (08/03/2010 at 08:32)
How can they double the number of flights and seriously expect us to believe that they can also cut carbon emmisions, people high up expect us to tow the line on emmisions but have absolutely no intention of doing so themselves.
TheRealWorld (08/03/2010 at 08:34)
How can anyone possibly predict what will happen in 40 years?
How many of the prediction of 40 years ago were correct?
I remember the 1980's film Back To The Future 2, we should all be on hover boards by now and flying around in our cars.
Seasick Gary (08/03/2010 at 08:51)
I didn't realise that the airport was owned by the local councils until today. Is this really true?
They are fining us left, right and centre over recycling, trying to get cars off the road yet are making money out of the worst polluter of all, if indeed they do own the airport.
If they do own the airort it would be the equivalent of an anti gun campainger owning a gunmakers company.
Preach one thing but do the exact opposite. If indeed they do own the airport they should sell it off otherwise how can anyone believe anything they say about being 'green'.
thoughtful, East of Manchester (08/03/2010 at 09:05)
Huge population growth over the last 15 years of Labour government has meant a proportionate growth in demand, if the population explosion is set to continue then we will need to plan ahead.
One of the worst contributors to greenhouse gasses is the stacking of several aircraft waiting for a landing slot, adding capacity gives the means to allow aircraft to land as soon as they arrive over the airport, thus shortening the flight.
Chapman (08/03/2010 at 09:09)
William Griffiths (08/03/2010 at 09:49)
Yes the airport is owned by the GM councils (we GM residents also own Bournemouth, Humberside and East Midlands airports), it pays a lot towards local transport projects like Rail and Metrolink as well as a few million a year in Dividends to lower your council tax. Would you prefer it was Spanish or Canadian owned with them reaping the rewards?
source de sagesse, Manchester (08/03/2010 at 09:51)
Mark, South Manchester (08/03/2010 at 09:57)
Really? So how come Manchester Airport's passenger figures all but "stagnated" during the recent economic boom then? (Unlike "every other" airport in the country.)
Leeds Bradford, Liverpool, Birmingham & Manchester Airports will all eventually reach a similar size, whilst London's airports will continue to boom.
Face it, Manchester Airport's passenger growth claims are now a "busted flush"!
Justified True Belief , - ... (08/03/2010 at 10:02)
Gatley Blue (08/03/2010 at 10:12)
Almighty God, Salford - vote Green (08/03/2010 at 10:17)
torture is a class 142 (08/03/2010 at 10:20)
How about the council pressuring and investing in building this high speed train network we've been promised for years instead, so domestic flights are rendered uncompetitive and fade away? The freed up space at the airport might save stacking planes and need for new terminals etc.
Bishop, with his arms out wide (08/03/2010 at 10:28)
gilbert (08/03/2010 at 10:44)
MPs gravy train, UK (08/03/2010 at 11:14)
Now 15 years later, we have lost international services to many US cities, Australia, South Africa, Malaysia and Hong Kong to name just a few. Passenger numbers are stagnant at around 20m and haven't increased at all in a decade.
This report is really trying to justify Heathrow expansion because other airports can't take extra traffic. It just isn't true. And where are the larger plane forecasts that reduce the number of take offs?
Donnie Tobasco, Rochdale (08/03/2010 at 11:17)
As for the Climate change bizzy bodies - Like they dont use planes......... if the demands there the airports trying to meet them. I hardly think an attack on the airport itself is productive or neccassary.
Stuie72, Manchester (08/03/2010 at 12:19)
Vote for David, tory land (08/03/2010 at 12:26)
Gary SK13- , Glossop SK13 (08/03/2010 at 13:10)
Not a Number, just down the road (08/03/2010 at 13:11)
They are like politicians - what do you want to know- giz us a fee and we'll tell you!
Until the airline industry realises that the public don't like hanging around in airport retail malls they will hub and spoke us through Thiefrow to their heart's content - i.e. No expansion of Manchester until they decide.
Carbon Footprint - oil running out - Perhaps in a hundred and fifty years or when Turkey Lurkey calls "time"
By then we'll be on hydrogen or some other technologically developed fuel source for the puritans to condemn.
ps I am working on budgets for an upgraded road network to the airport right now, while I take a little time out to see what's in the news
Redcap49, Stockport (08/03/2010 at 13:13)
They must be expecting a substantial increase in low cost operations because all the major carriers have either pulled out altogether or reduced their services.
Deejay, Bury (08/03/2010 at 13:23)
Passenger figures over the last 5 years have dropped significantly - and they are nowhere near the projections for the last decade. Major airlines have pulled out of Manchester (mainly due to exorbitant landing charges), and people are favouring other regional airports now.
Last time I flew through Manchester - I realised that it was the dirtiest, rudest and most inefficient airport that I had flown through in the last 10 years. The rate it is going - it's is likely to be closed within 40 years - not larger.
Vote for David, tory land (08/03/2010 at 15:24)
Vote for David, tory land (08/03/2010 at 15:33)
Andy, Wythenshawe (08/03/2010 at 16:35)
HALT the rise in environmental damaging air travel and invest tax raised in affordable local transit systems.