Representation by Mair Bain
- Date submitted
- 17 June 2021
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I object to this scheme because... Road traffic numbers must reduce if the UK is to met legally binding carbon emissions targets. This scheme will increase capacity and increase emissions. Carbon emissions should be tested against inter/national legislation and guidance including the Paris agreement, the legally binding target under the Climate Change Act 2008 to meet net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, the UK Sixth Carbon Budget (6CB), science-based carbon budgets from the Tyndall Centre, NPPF 148 which requires the planning system contribute to “radical reductions of greenhouse gas emissions”. The impact of COVID-19 on travel demand has not been assessed and taken into account with this scheme. It is based on pre-pandemic and pre-climate emergency data and plans. The scheme involves fragmentation, loss or displacement of diminishing wildlife habitats such as wet grazing meadows and protected species, notably bats and the urbanisation of mature countryside. This will hinder the UK's nature recovery targets set to act on the biodiversity crisis. It is illogical to be using public money on increasing capacity for a form of transport that must be reduced if the UK is to meet climate targets. The electric vehicle revolution will not happen fast enough and the resources and energy required for EVs and highways are higher with greater carbon and ecological impact than mass transit and active travel transport.