This study tries to increase the understanding on how expansionist aviation policies are rationalized against the background of climate change politics. The study executes a case study on the Netherlands, focusing on the Royal Schiphol Group aviation expansion project. In order to aid the understanding of the rationale justifying the expansion project, a discourse analysis inspired by environmental discourse theory, is employed. The methodological framework is grounded in John S. Dryzek’s literature on environmental discourses and supported by Fairclough’s school of critical discourse analysis. This framework allows the study to touch upon elements of knowledge and power and incorporates elements of explanatory critique. The results of the discourse analysis uncover that the Royal Schiphol Group expansion project is justified by two dominant narratives. The first is a rather practical argument that excludes the aviation sector from the countries national emission reduction pledges, based on the notion of economic competition. The second and most dominant narrative appears to be a reproduction of the discourse of ecological modernization, promoting the idea that ecological conservation and economic growth have a harmonized and even empowering relationship. Yet, the discussion uncovers that these discursive elements are largely grounded in false claims. It furthermore explains that, even though the knowledge claims appear to be flawed, they still prevail as alternative knowledge is neglected from the debate. Supported by literature of Geels, it argues that the dominance of these narratives is largely motivated by an attempt to resist structural change to low-carbon futures.