But as I have said before, if a Thames estuary really is such a total non-starter it would have been abandoned long, long ago. The fact that it hasn't would suggest any wildlife issues can be overcome. Otherwise the promoters of the scheme would look very, very silly still spending millions on consultants and feasibility studies for something that could never happen.
The reason why it gets a regular ressurection is because people won't read the previous reports that have said why a Thames airport won't work. So they get some expensive consultants in to re-do the work and come up with exactly the same conclusion as they did ten years ago and the ten before that and the ten before that as to why it won't work.
The same people also massivly underestimate the costs and the timescales for building such a massive piece of infrastructure.
And whilst there might be land available to build the actual airport what about all the ancilliary businesses? Where would the caterers have their production plants for example? where would the workers live? where would their children go to school? what about hospitals etc
As Jenbel said (great post) btw there are some people who seem to have this beliefe that these issues can go away 'because I said so' yet the world dosen't work like that
People are entitled to their own BELIEFS but they are not entitled to their own FACTS