WWF has taken the British government to court in order to challenge Heathrow airport’s decision to build a third runway.

The conservation group is part of 13 organizations backing the legal challenge against the expansion. The coalition includes leading groups such as Greenpeace, RSPB and CPRE, as well as residents’ groups combining to form a force of approximately two million people.

WWF claims that if the third runway is built the airport will become the single largest emitter of carbon dioxide in the UK, and would destroy all 700 homes in the nearby village of Sipson.

The coalition is fighting the project on the legal basis that the runway consultation process was fundamentally flawed and that construction of a third runway goes against the UK’s climate change targets.

Additionally, the coalition is working with Transport for London arguing that the government has no proof to support its claim that there will be enough public transportation to cope with a Heathrow expansion.

The decision to proceed with a third runway was made by former Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon in 2009, but WWF is arguing that the most recent proposal is vastly different than the one that was initially proposed to the public in 2007.

The coalition argues that the newly proposed measures are fundamentally flawed. For example, the government has vowed to bring aviation carbon emissions down to 2005 levels by 2050 but the Committee on Climate Change says the government would have to severely alter the expansion plans in order to achieve that goal.

Additionally, the government has suggested operating the runway at half capacity until 2020 to determine if noise, air pollution and carbon targets could be met. But the coalition says not only will imposing such a limit destroy the government’s economic case for expansion, but the village of Sipson will still be demolished as well.

Pete Lockley, head of transport policy for the WWF, says the government is in serious need of a “complete rethink” of its aviation policy.

“The government’s decision to allow expansion at Heathrow flies in the face of common sense, which is why we’re asking the high court to consider the case,” he said. “A third runway will make it much more difficult to achieve our carbon reduction targets, and doesn’t justify its cost in economic or environmental terms.”

If the coalition is successful in its legal endeavours the government’s decision to allow the third runway will ultimately be overturned.

By Taylor Turner