This is my logic, when planes are queuing to take off they leave their engines on and burn more fuel, the fuel is the thing that is causing the pollution. If there are less queues then there is less pollution. If a plane is landing and has to manoeuvre the aircraft to land then they are burning more fuel so if the runway happens to be already lined up with the plane then they manoeuvre less and land more quickly and burn less fuel. If a plane has to land at an airport that is far away to save money then it is also burning more fuel because it is traveling more distance to the cheaper airport and the passengers need more taxis to take them further and burn more fuel on the ground. Am I the only person that thinks this way?
People will say, it will reduce flying to London , well...
If I go to America I can say New york airports have more runways so I won't go to Miami but that is not how people choose their trips. At least that is not how I choose my trips. They don't count the runways at the airports to choose their destination, they go there because they are attracted to that place.
I can say swallow to pip of a olive to get extra fiber, so I buy an avocado (pop!!). That is the logic of the courts. If you find the good sense then let me know because I can't find it.
