Oakland Airport expansion is a threat to climate change goals, environmental coalition warns

Groups to rally in protest of plan for new 830,000-square-foot terminal

Following an onslaught of wildfires, dangerous heat, and flooding in recent years, a recent survey found that one-third of Bay Area residents consider climate change to be one of the region’s most pressing challenges.

So far, air travel appears to have escaped scrutiny in the ongoing debate. However, as Oakland International Airport prepares for its first major expansion in 40 years, this may change. On Tuesday, a broad coalition of over 60 organizations will protest the airport’s plan to build a new terminal, add more gates, and ultimately increase East Bay air traffic.

Public awareness of aviation’s contribution to climate change “has been a huge blind spot,” according to Lin Griffith, a member of the Stop OAK Expansion Coalition’s steering committee. “We don’t need this.”

Oakland Airport officials released a draft environmental report in July outlining their plans for a “long overdue” effort to reimagine an airport that hasn’t seen significant upgrades in decades. The plan calls for the construction of a new terminal building of 830,000 square feet, upgrades to existing facilities, and the addition of 16 gates.

The plans, according to the coalition, come at a time when the region should be working to reduce rather than increase commercial air travel. According to the group, aviation already accounts for more than 11% of Bay Area CO2 emissions. California has set a goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2045.

Advocates argue that if the region is serious about reducing emissions, air travel must play a significant role. According to a July survey conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California, 31% of Bay Area residents ranked climate change as their top concern.

The Stop OAK Expansion Coalition is concerned about the impact of air pollution caused by ultra-fine particles in jet fuel, which has been linked to decreased lung function, airway inflammation, and other negative health effects. East Oakland residents who live closest to the airport already have some of the highest asthma hospitalization rates in the region, as well as higher rates of death from heart disease, stroke, and lung cancer.

“We’re breathing this air pollution all the time,” Griffith explained. “It’s not looking good.”

The Port of Oakland, which operates the airport, stated that the development will benefit the local economy and that the airport will be “a crucial driver of the region’s economic future.” The new terminal will be built on the airport’s existing footprint, with no additional runways or sediment added to the Bay.

“Oakland International Airport must improve its facilities or risk jeopardizing its role as a job and economic generator for the East Bay,” said Robert Bernardo, a Port of Oakland spokesperson, in a statement. “We take our responsibility as an environmental steward very seriously.”

Even before considering health and climate concerns, Griffith believes that all of the development could end up being a bad investment. Although the airport anticipates increased air traffic, Griffith envisions an alternate reality in which Bay Area residents cut back on flights as they become more aware of the climate implications of air travel. The population of the region has already been declining in recent years. Because the Oakland name reduces passenger demand, the airport has already considered rebranding.

To spread their message, the coalition will march to the first of four public meetings on the airport’s draft environmental impact report process on Tuesday.

“It’s very difficult for people to go backwards on things that we have become accustomed to,” Griffith said. “However, we could end up with a stranded asset – a large old building with no one in it.”