They may be cheap, cheerful and convenient. But budget flights to short-haul destinations will leave a catastrophic environmental legacy, according to scientists who yesterday slammed the government for indulging Britain's passion for air travel.
The royal commission on environmental pollution told the transport secretary, Alistair Darling, that his expansion policy was "deeply flawed". A scathing report said ministers showed "little sign of having recognised" the atmospheric havoc wreaked by aircraft.
It advocated a freeze on airport expansion, together with a tax of between £40 and £100 on every ticket, which would double the price of many journeys. Sir Tom Blundell, the commission's chairman, said: "We believe we should restrict airport development, rather than just expand in response to demand."
The commission, appointed by the Queen, has a mandate to advise the government on long-term environmental issues.
Its report was a response to Mr Darling's consultation on airport expansion, which suggests extra runways in the south-east, the Midlands and Scotland. The plans could include new international airports in north Kent, Cambridgeshire and Warwickshire.
Professor Brian Hoskins, a member of the commission, warned that an expansion would contribute to "anomalous" weather events occurring more often, with "sea levels rising inexorably".
The scientists identified short-haul flights as the worst offenders, because of their inefficient use of fuel, branding air journeys between London and Manchester as "daft".
Among the problems are vapour trails from aircraft, which can turn into cloud cover. By 2050, the scientists warn that 10% of the sky could be covered with high-level "cirrus" cloud, with a greater concentration in the northern hemisphere where more air travel takes place.
Emissions of nitrogen oxides and carbon dioxide add to pollution, while supersonic aircraft such as Concorde contribute to ozone depletion by flying through the stratosphere. The scientists said aviation was likely to contribute to 6% to 10% of all global warming by 2050.
The aviation industry insisted the commission was exaggerating. Roger Wiltshire, director general of the British Air Transport Association, said: "What they're advocating is a post-war style rationing, pricing people out of the market, which is totally unrealistic."
Airlines were prepared to pay the cost of cleaning up their pollution through an emissions "trading scheme" in which carriers with more damaging aircraft pay more. But the industry believes the cost would be more like £3 a ticket than £40. "This would hurt the British economy, the British consumer, the tourism industry and everybody else who flies," Mr Wiltshire added.
Business leaders, trade unions and regional development agencies have all thrown their weight behind airport expansion, with Heathrow and Stansted considered the favourites for new runways.
The TUC this week called for five new runways including one at Heathrow, and a new airport at Finningley, near Doncaster. It said this could create 260,000 new jobs by 2030.
Battles are waging with communities near airports fiercely opposing growth. Residents from Rugby this week delivered a petition to Downing Street bearing 69,000 signatures. The celebrity chef Jamie Oliver, who lives in Essex, led a march through London last week.
But Mr Darling's decision has been delayed until the end of next year because of a high court ruling this week that he was wrong to exclude Gatwick from his consultation.
