Illness and premature death will result from Government's ineffective Clean Air Strategy

From the Greener Jobs Alliance

Battersea and Wandsworth Trades Union Council (BWTUC) slammed the Government newly published plans to improve air quality as being totally ineffective and that they will utterly fail to remove dangerous pollutants from the air in Wandsworth.

The Government were forced to produce an Air Quality plan for consultation by the courts this month. They had tried to use the election as a reason to delay publication but this was rejected by the Court.

Graham Petersen, spokesperson for BWTUC, said,

If this document represents their vision of how the public will be protected from air pollution it is no surprise they wanted to keep it under wraps.

If this is how you respond to the Number 0ne public health hazard then the Conservative Party have lost all credibility on this important issue. Instead of providing clear leadership from central government, control measures have largely been delegated to local authorities. This wouldn’t be so bad if it wasn’t the same government that have stripped local government finances to the bone. A public health emergency that claims the lives of around 40,000 people every year requires a clear national direction.

People in Wandsworth are in the front-line of toxic air. We have the most polluted street in Europe – Putney High St. Levels in some parts of the borough show over 2 twice the legal limit of 40ug/m³ for nitrogen dioxide. In April, the Wandsworth Guardian quoted a report that showed 29 schools in the borough located in areas exceeding the safe legal limit.   Wandsworth Council’s own Air Quality Action Plan identified the importance of a campaign ‘to national government towards a non-diesel economy’ as a priority action. If they are serious about this then the Council should join us in condemning these inadequate proposals.

BWTUC believes that new statutory duties are required under a Clean Air Act that provides a national plan covering low emission zones, clean energy public transport provision, and duties on manufacturers and employers.

Currently businesses pay a fraction of what it costs the NHS to treat victims of toxic air. Yet it is employers that are the root cause of diesel emissions from their transport fleet as well as the individual work journeys to and from work made by their staff.

That is why BWTUC believe that air quality is a workplace issue. It is also why we provide funding for awareness raising initiatives like the Greener Jobs Alliance training modules on Air Quality which will be launched at the end of the month.

It is clearly now a political issue in this election. The Government have shown they have no effective strategy. This is not strong leadership, it is passing the buck, and relying on a voluntary approach that will not deliver on the scale required.

What you can do for Clean Air for Brent

From Transition Willesden

Clean Air for Brent is a coalition of local residents' groups, Transition Towns, Friends of the Earth and the Council to improve air quality in the borough.  We met earlier this week, and are keen to involve people in having their say on air quality in Brent and also on diesel vehicles, especially in view of the results from our pollution monitoring in October.

Last October we carried out air pollution monitoring in Willesden, Dollis Hill and Cricklewood, and found 7 out of 10 sites were above the EU legal limit for nitrogen dioxide (NO2), with Cricklewood Broadway being well over twice the limit (see maps here and here).  For more about the project see our online group.

Brent Council is consulting residents and businesses on its Air Quality Action Plan for the next 5 years.  You have until Thursday 30th March to add your comments. Please take a little time to read the plan and respond to the survey online here.  You can also email feedback to ens.monitoring@brent.gov.uk

If you have less time, please sign one or more of these petitions against diesel.  It is largely the increase in diesel vehicles that is having such an impact on the air we breathe:

-Ditch diesel in the UK by Friends of the Earth

-One directed at car companies from Greenpeace.

-You can also write to MEPs asking them to clean up vehicle testing.  They will be voting on this issue on 5th April.

Stanmore meeting on air quality with Caroline Russell

Brent Council steps up action on air quality

When Mayor Boris Johnson concealed London's air pollution crisis as much as he could so Sadiq Khan deserves praise for bringing the issue out into the open, with Green AM Caroline Russell providing much of the pressure. Last week's alerts to Londoners demonstrate the seriousness of the issue.

Brent Council's Cabinet is due to approve the Council's own Air Quality Action Plan for consultation. The Action Plan opens with a declaration:

Brent council acknowledges the impact of poor air quality on health and the need for action to reduce or eliminate air pollution where possible. In Brent it is estimated that 200 premature deaths occur each year which are directly attributable to air pollution as well as further unquantified premature deaths where air quality is a factor. We accept air quality in Brent is poor and recognise significant intervention is required to improve local air quality for all. We have made some progress but accept that further work is needed to meet this challenge. Our air quality action plan demonstrates we are taking this issue seriously and will endeavour to tackle air pollution at source or reduce exposure where this is not possible. 

We will demonstrate our leadership by exploring options for low emission neighbourhoods, promotion of low emission vehicles and fuels where possible, reduce pollutant emissions from our buildings and vehicles and develop meaningful partnerships with others to get the most out of our air quality action measures.

We recognise air pollution as a shared problem and everyone must play their part to commit to continue to work with our communities to achieve air quality improvement. As we understand more about air pollution and the impact on health, we want to empower our residents to make informed choices about their options for travel and participate in decisions about air quality in the areas they live and work in. We must commit to safeguarding those at highest risk to provide additional information and limit or prohibit the development of areas where air quality is likely to be made worse. 

Not all air quality improvements can be delivered directly by our actions and so we will develop partnerships with other Local Authorities, the London Mayor, and other agencies where appropriate to maximise resources where we can and realise wider air quality benefits from our actions. 

We will commit to keeping this air quality action plan under review and will continue to identify new opportunities for air quality action in response to changes in legislation or local air quality as the need arises.

Our ultimate aim is to secure clean air for all especially for those at greatest risk or in the worst affected areas in the borough. We accept that this is likely to be a challenge to fulfil, but commit to investing in air quality action for improvement now and in the future. .

Brent's current Air Quality Management Area

The Action Plan acknowledges the impact of poor air quality on different sections of Brent's population:

...some areas of the Borough are more likely to be affected by poor air quality than others as the wider problems of poverty; deprivation and general poor health make people more vulnerable to the effects of pollution. This contributes to an almost 9-year difference in life expectancy between the most affluent and least affluent wards in the Borough. The council is committed to reducing this gap.

Four Air Quality Action Areas are proposed:

0. The revised action plan includes the creation of four Air Quality Action Areas (AQAA) or hotspots, as Neasden town centre, Church End, the Kilburn Regeneration Area, and Wembley and Tokyngton. These areas were selected based on traffic volumes and levels of traffic emissions, and have been identified as areas of planned development and aligned with the priority areas identified in the current Borough Plan. Brent will develop strategic policies and localised focussed air quality measures in these areas. 
   
   

They will:

·      provide extra assistance and support to ensure that all schools within the AQAAs have and use school travel plans, reducing vehicle use associated with schools, regularly reviewing targets for reducing air pollution and establishing programmes for raising awareness; 


·       provide assistance and support to businesses within the AQAAs with large fleets to have and utilise travel plans. The council and businesses will agree targets for emission reductions; 


·      Identify possible Low Emission Neighbourhoods in each AQAA and draft implementation plans for areas within each; 


·      Consider these sites within these areas as highest priority for public realm improvements (such as additional green infrastructure) especially where there are 
 those at highest risk or the most susceptible are located such as schools, residential properties and hospitals 

·       to educate and raise awareness about local air quality; - working with communities and public health professionals to protect and inform the most vulnerable 

The Plan lists detailed action points for each of these areas:

• Emissions from new developments and buildings
• Public health and community engagement
• Delivery servicing and freight
• Exposure reduction measures
• Cleaner transpor

See the full action points in Appendix 1 below:

 

Click bottom right to enlarge.

Green MEP says EU Exit must not be used as a cover to abandon air quality laws

Keith Taylor, MEP for the South East of England, has responded with concern following the government's refusal to commit to retaining EU air quality laws after an exit from the European Union.

The Environment Minister, Therese Coffey, and Minister for Exiting the European Union, Robin Walker, were asked no less than seven times, during questioning by the Environmental Audit Committee on Wednesday, whether the UK would maintain EU air quality laws post-Brexit. Neither minister made a commitment.

Taylor,  who sits on the European Parliament's Environment and Public Health committee and is a vocal air quality campaigner, said:

This is a truly concerning response from Ministers. Leaving the EU cannot be allowed to become a cover under which the government abdicates its responsibility for this public health emergency.

Despite the preventable deaths of 50,000 British people, every year, and an annual public health bill of £20bn, the government is still, apparently, failing to take the air quality crisis seriously. Under David Cameron, the government was held to account for failing to do the bare minimum, as required by EU law, to improve the quality of the air we all breathe.

EU air pollution limits are preventing thousands of deaths every year across Europe and the government readily acknowledges that it is EU law that has been the driver of any positive air quality action in the UK. For the sake of the health and prosperity of the British people, we cannot risk scrapping these safeguards.

I am calling on Ministers to make a firm commitment to maintaining and strengthening vital EU air quality standards.

FoE Air Quality meeting now to include other parties - April 12th

This message from Brent Friends of the Earth has appeared on Facebook today:


Brent Friends of the earth Air Quality meeting 12th April

We have now asked the local Lib Dems and the local Conservatives and the local Green Party if they would like a rep on the panel.

When, some weeks back, we invited the lead councillor for the environment in Brent, and the local M.P. and the GLA rep to speak all were invited as local reps and not, in any way, related to anyone’s political affiliation. We also invited a local council officer and a campaigner from Friends of the Earth national office.

As all the politicians we had invited are Labour we've been persuaded that since the meeting is close to the London elections it would be seen as unfair not to ask reps of other parties if they would like to join the panel. When we began setting up this meeting we had not thought about the date being close to the London elections

Inviting others on to the panel will make the panel larger than we would have preferred; we hope we can still have a good meeting.

With Good Wishes,
Pam L

This is the original poster for the meeting with all the details:

Brent FoE meeting on air pollution - its impact and solutions

 From Brent Friends of the Earth

A panel of politicians and campaigners will be discussing air quality at Brent Friends of the Earth's (Brent FoE) monthly meeting at Watling Gardens Community Meeting Room in Kilburn on Tuesday April 12th at 7.30pm.

Brent FoE's meeting will discuss the situation with air pollution - which is a serious health threat for Londoners and is a major problem in Brent. It will be a chance to learn about how air pollution is affecting us and to discuss what we need to do to get cleaner air to breathe. The speakers will be: Cllr Eleanor Southwood - Lead member for the Environment at Brent Council, Navin Shah - Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow, Dawn Butler - MP for Brent Central (to be confirmed), Juhaina Junaid from the Pollution Control Services at Brent Council and Ollie Hayes - Campaigner from Friends of the Earth.

Pam Laurance, a Co-ordinator of Brent Friends of the Earth says, “Poor air quality in London has a significant effect in shortening the lives of many people. In 2010 almost 9,500 Londoners died prematurely from causes linked to air pollution. The main pollutant is nitrogen dioxide, plus in some areas it is particulate matter, particularly from diesel vehicles, that do most of the damage. The principal source of air pollution in Brent is road traffic emissions, though emissions from residential and commercial heating systems also contribute.”

The discussion will start at at 7.30pm till approximately 9pm, and will be followed by Brent FoE's AGM. Everyone is welcome to attend this free event, and stay for the rest of the group meeting. Light refreshments will be available.

The meeting will be at Watling Gardens Community Meeting Room, 97/135 Watling Gardens, Shoot Up Hill, NW2 3UB (5 mins. from Kilburn tube/buses on Shoot up Hill). For more information see http://www.brentfoe.com or email info@brentfoe.com.

NOTE FROM MARTIN

As the only political party represented at this meeting is Labour  you may want to read what the Green Mayoral candidate, Sian Berry, has to say about clean air for London HERE

Brent addresses air quality in Transportation Strategy but needs to be key issue in GLA campaign

Target Summary - note walking target should be 10% increase in schools with Gold Standard Travel Plans

Brent, faced with a growing population, new schools and several major regeneration areas along with infrastructural projects such as Cross Rail and HS2, as well as ongoing problems of road congestion and poor air quality,  is clearly in need of a long Term Transportation Strategy.

Following feedback from organisations, individuals and Scrutiny Commitee the Plan going before Cabinet  on Monday has undergone substantial changes.

The full document can be found HERE

This is a summary of the Objectives from the plan:

Objective 1: Increase the uptake of sustainable modes, in particular active modes.

2.13.    Increasing the uptake of cycling and walking will actively contribute to a reduction in congestion and air pollution and improve the health of Brent residents. Use of public transport or car clubs instead of the private car also contributes to reduced congestion and is important in enabling access to services. Uptake of all these modes can be influenced by effective travel planning measures and infrastructure.

Objective 2: Reduce conventional vehicular trips on the network, particularly at peak time


2.14. This is not about reducing the total number of trips on the network as mobility is highly important for local economic growth and for those residents who struggle to travel by other means, and require motorised travel to facilitate independent travel. However, trips can be re-timed to avoid peak hours or take place in less polluting vehicles.

Objective 3: Support growth areas and town centres to enable acceptable development

2.15.    Brent is expected to see high levels of growth over the next 20 to 30 years, focussing on the growth areas.Adequate transport investment will be required to ensure this development takes place on a sustainable basis, is accessible for all users and does not place undue pressure on the transport networks.

Objective 4: Reduce KSI incidents and slight accidents on Brent’s roads

2.16.    Over the last 10 years roads in Brent have become safer, however there is still considerable amounts of work to do in further reducing accidents to create safe and accessible streets for all users.

Objective 5: Reduce the exposure of Brent residents to particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) generated by the transport network

2.17. It has become apparent that particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide generated by a variety of sources has a significant adverse impact on the health of those who are regularly exposed. A proportion of these pollutants are generated by transport. Reduction in exposure of Brent residents could result in significant health benefits. 

This blog has had several articles expressing concern about air quality in Brent, particularly on the North Circular Road, in Neasden and as a consequence of the Brent Cross development. A further consideration has been the number of Brent schools sited close to major roads.

Air quality monitoring statins in Kingsbury, Harlesden and IKEA on the North circular have been closed.

Clean Air in London  estimates that there are 7,500 premature deaths in London annually due to nitrogen dioxide and particulate pollution as wellas the 3,400 caused by toxic air. Barry Gardiner (Brent North) told the Evening Standard Standard in June LINK:

So far this year 1,337 people have already died as result of air pollution yet the mayor’s proposals will not bring this down to safe levels until 2030.

We need a new national framework of low and ultra-low emissions zones within which London must roll out the electrification of buses and the highest vehicle standards for all new fleet vehicles within four years. We need decisive action now to protect our children not vague promises for 15 years down the line.

Air quality should be a major issue in the upcoming London Mayoral and  London Assembly elections as the Green Party attempted in the 2012 campaign (see video below):
 
 

This is the detail of the proposed Brent  Long Term Transportation Strategy  (LTTS) Objectives on air quality:

7. Reduce the exposure of Brent residents to Particulate Matter (PM) and NO2 generated by the transport network 

.        5.36.  Air quality improvement measures have previously been focussed on the reduction of carbon and CO2 production. However, in recent years it has become apparent that particulate matter and NO2 pose the most significant risks to the health of those exposed to them on a regular basis. 


.        5.37.  Evidence shows that fine and ultra fine particulate matter present in air pollution increases the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Conventional vehicles are responsible for 41% to 60% of air pollutants in the UK, which have an impact on cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. 


.        5.38.  It has been shown that NO2 acts as an irritant, exacerbating respiratory conditions and contributing to premature deaths, particularly in vulnerable members of the population such as those with asthma. NO2 is generated as part of the combustion process that takes place in conventional cars. 


.        5.39.  Particulate matter can enter the body through the lining of the lungs and creates inflammation. In particular, particulate matter has been shown to contribute to conditions that have an inflammatory element, such as heart attack and stroke. It is uncertain precisely how many deaths are brought forward by the presence of particulate matter, however, it is estimated to be a significant number. 


.        5.40.  Though not all particulate matter is generated by transport, diesel engines do produce significant amounts as does friction on the road surface and other moving parts. 

.        5.41.  Reducing the exposure of Brent residents to both of these substances will directly contribute to improved health and longer life. Though it is not achievable through this strategy to reduce exposure from the transport network to 0 due to the nature of transport and the built environment, there are some measures that are achievable that will both reduce overall levels of air pollution and lessen the exposure of individuals. 


Reducing exposure

5.42.    There are two main ways in which the exposure of Brent residents to this type of pollution can be controlled and reduced. These are reduction in the overall production of the pollutants and avoidance of the pollutants that are still produced.

Reduction

5.43.    All the objectives of this LTTS will contribute to improved air quality through reduced vehicle trips on the network. In particular increased use of sustainable modes and reduced peak-time freight movements combined with greater use of LEVs and ULEVs will contribute to improved air quality. However, there are some specific measures that relate more closely to air quality.

.        5.44.  The Transport Emissions Road Map (TERM) produced by Transport for London in 2014 identifies a number of measures that may be implemented in the boroughs to reduce the production of pollutants. Among these is the introduction of Low Emission Neighbourhoods which identify particular areas as zones in which heavily polluting vehicles are limited or controlled. 


.        5.45.  Though the introduction of these would be supported by the LTTS it should be noted that the terms on which they are implemented should be considered carefully to avoid inequitable impacts on residents. 


.        5.46.  It must also be considered that the current Transport for London bus fleet runs on diesel, which produces high levels of particulates. There are no current plans for this fleet to be changed for one running on alternative fuels, so this restriction must be considered when introducing restrictions. 


.        5.47.  However, due to the large number of bus routes running through Brent and in particular certain strategic corridors Brent will continue to lobby TfL for changes to the local bus fleet to reduce dependency on diesel. 


.        5.48.  The TERM also identifies the possible introduction of an Ultra Low Emission Zone covering greater London which would operate on similar terms to the current Low Emission Zone but would enforce tighter emission standards on vehicles entering greater London. 


.        5.49.  Though it is uncertain as yet how this will come forward on a London wide basis, the LTTS would support the introduction of a borough-wide low emission zone. This would give Brent Borough Council control over implementation and therefore the ability to mitigate any potential negative impacts on local residents. Further research would be required to take this forward should the opportunity to gain funding arise. 


Avoidance

.        5.50.  It has been shown that for particulate matter distance from the source of pollution makes a significant difference to the level of exposure suffered. Therefore, increasing the distance and introducing barriers could help to reduce the exposure of residents to this type of pollution. 


.        5.51.  In some areas this may not be achievable due to the constrained nature of the network. However in new schemes and in particular schemes that incorporate a strong element of place making, enabling a greater distance between the road surface and shop fronts and footways would be of benefit to the health of local workers and visitors. 


.        5.52.  In some areas is may also be possible to introduce barriers such as plating, that constrains the particulate matter and reduces the amount that reaches the footway and frontages. 


London Green MEP urges support for tomorrow's 'Space for Cycling Big Ride'

London Green MEP Jean Lambert has urged cyclists to support candidates who have pledged improvements to London's cycling infrastructure in this week's council elections.

Speaking ahead of  Satuurday's  'Space for Cycling Big Ride' , she said:

A sustainable transport policy means more facilities for cyclists and pedestrians.

We know that if more people get around the city by bike or on foot it's better for everyone – both in terms of improving London's appalling air quality, and the direct health benefits enjoyed by the people concerned.

I am proud that all the Green Party candidates asked by the London Cycling Campaign support local measures to make cycling safer and easier in their boroughs – and I hope all the suggested measures can be put in place soon.

Meanwhile, I hope many thousands of Londoners get out and support tomorrow's event, which takes place between 11 and 2pm tomorrow across the capital.

London deaths from air pollution: the shocking truth

Public Health England has released statistics today on the number of people dying because of air pollution.

Across England it is estimated that 25,002 people died because of air pollution in 2010. In London alone it is estimated that nearly 3,400 died.

Jean Lambert, the Green Party's MEP for London and a clean air campaigner, said:

These new statistics, which show that thousands of people are dying because of air pollution, make it clear that urgent action is needed to clean up our air.

The fact that thousands are dying because of air pollution each year should be a source of shame for Ministers. Yet, despite the mounting evidence of this major public health threat, the Government is doing far too little to reduce air pollution.

David Cameron, who last week flippantly blamed the smog entirely on Saharan Dust, should be ashamed of himself. The Government knows that the smog last week was in part caused by the high levels of pollution we have in this country, yet, shamefully, they refuse to accept responsibility. Now that these stats reveal thousands of deaths are caused by air pollution, it is time for Ministers to take this issue seriously and take urgent action to protect people's health.

In Ms Lambert's London constituency 3,389 deaths in 2010 were associated with air pollution.
Public Health England's report estimates that 7.2% of deaths in London were attributable to air pollution.
Ms Lambert, who is a founder supporter of Clean Air in London (2), went on to say:

With almost one in 12 deaths in my London caused by air pollution it is abundantly clear that action is needed.

We need to radically rethink the way they are dealing with air pollution. To protect people's health we need both the UK Government and the Mayor of London to be bold in tackling air pollution - and stop trying to water down the rules.

We need a 'very low emissions zone' for central London, cleaner buses, a strategy to reduce pollution from taxi exhaust, 20mph speed limits as standard in residential areas, and more steps to encourage walking and cycling.

It's time we recognise that air pollution is a political issue. We can clean up our air, but we need to force politicians to take the issue seriously.

The Public Health England report is available here.
Jean's latest report on London's Air Quality is here .
 More information about Clean Air in London is available here .

Park Royal fire reignites Harlesden's safety concerns

The bio-chemical fire earlier today at Midland Road, Park Royal, highlights residents' concerns about the issue of air quality in the area and the dangers posed by some of the local industrial facilities. The  Kilburn Times report is HERE  As the heavy smoke spread across parts of Ealing and Harlesden and residents were told to close their windows, questions were again being asked about the safety of plans for an incinerator in the Harlesden area. Ealing Council are due to consider the planning application again after postponing a decision in the summer. The plans have been opposed by Brent Council.

The photographs of the scene (below) were contributed by a local resident:

Organise for upcoming decision on Harlesden Incinerator

It's funny isn't it, how crucial decisions affecting the lives of local people are often made in the dead days of the summer school holidays? Following Barnet Council's go ahead for the controversial tower block city on the edges of the Welsh Harp, Ealing Council will decide on the equally controversial 'Harlesden Incinerator' on August 14th. DETAILS

The plans for yet another waste facility in an area which borders Brent but where the decision is made by a different local council (as with the Welsh Harp), has met widespread opposition, not just for the impact on air quality in an area devoid of any 'green breathing spaces' but also in terms of the numbers of heavy trucks that will come trundling through the local streets.

It appears likely that the intention is to rubber stamp plans which did not even figure in the options outlined in the grand West London Waste Authority plan.

There is a Harlesden Town meeting on Monday August 12th and perhaps that will be an organising opportunity for a vociferous Brent presence at the meeting on the 14th.

Brent Greens oppose Harlesden incinerator plans

The site

Brent Green Party has joined opponents of the Energy Recovery Plant (locally known more directly as the Harlesden incinerator)  proposed for the Willesden Junction site on the borders of Brent.  They have sent the following objection to Ealing Council Planning Committee  LINK

CONTEXT

Brent Green Party is concerned about the negative environmental impact of the major part of the planning application, relating to the pyrolysis plant. We do not have equal objection to the anaerobic digestion part of the plant, since we recognise the potential benefit of utilizing CH4 released by biomass for energy rather than putting it in landfill, where it would be released anyway, contributing to climate change.

However, we cannot support the application taken as a whole and state our OBJECTIONS here:

AIR QUALITY

-         Insufficient modelling of potential air quality impacts and their assessment and foreclosure of the need for additional health impact assessments in line with Environmental Agency stipulations.

-         Insufficient assessment of the need for appropriate mitigation measures in light of potential air quality impacts at the planning application stage in line with EA stipulations.

CO2

-         Pyrolysis produces bio-oil and syngas which when combusted for energy, produce vast amounts of CO2, wholly inconsistent with the achievement of EU emission targets.

WATER COURSES

-         Contamination of London canals from run off pollutants during construction, not sufficiently mitigated by drainage measures.

-         Region is water stressed in terms of supply of mains water and site water demand will exacerbate this, in excess to the rainwater-harvesting techniques designed to reduce onsite mains water demand.

PEDESTRIANS

-         During construction, adverse effects on users of playground in Harley road, residential properties and pedestrians in Old Oak Lane Conservation Area, users of the Grand Union Canal and pedestrians walking through Metro Multi Trading Estate.

CONSTRUCTION

-         Adverse noise pollution during construction.

-         Medium to low risk impact of dust generated during construction.

-         Potential for ground contamination during construction period.

-         Potential for ground contamination from storage/handling of oils, chemicals & waste materials from the new plant, not met by proposal to place in storage facilities.

For these reasons we strongly object to the proposal in its current form.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Shahrar Ali, Spokesperson for Planning and Environment
Brent Green Party, PO Box 54786, London NW9 1FL
Contact shahrar.ali@greenparty.org.uk

New plan to attack Brent's air pollution problem

The Green Party tried to make air pollution an issue at the GLA election with limited success - perhaps because it is what is often called an ' invisible menace'. Its impact on health occurs at an individual level and over the long-term so it is often not seen as an urgent issue. More visibly air quality and air pollution became a worry as a result of several big fires recently in the borough that released noxious smoke.

However, Brent Council recognises the seriousness of the problem and an Air Quality Action Plan 2012-2015 is on the agenda for Monday's Executive.

The accompanying report notes that levels of nitrogen dioxide and particulates continue to exceed national air quality objectives in some areas of the borough and will not meet future targets. The aim of the new AQAP is to reduce levels of Nitrogen Dioxide and fine particulate matters (smaller than 10 microns) which are the key pollutants in Brent.

It is proposed that the Council should lobby the government over the relationship between licensing of waste sites and the achievement of air quality improvements reflecting the air pollution association with waste sites around Neasden Goods Yard. Air quality there breaches the daily mean air quality objectives and as one of the few in the country reporting such excesses could lead to sanctions from the European Union.  Brent has worked with waste operators and the Environment Agency to enclose the majority of dust generating activities on the site but they admit that a significant proportion of waste handling and transfer operations there still take place in the open air.

The Council estimate that fine particles have an impact equivalent to 133 premature deaths across the whole of Brent. They are unable to estimate the local impact around the Goods Yard as the standard estimating methods are not applicable to smaller populations.

The report notes that the most economically and socially deprived areas in the borough, the south of the borough as well as Stonebridge, Neasden and St Raphaels suffer the poorest air quality.

Worryingly DEFRA will no longer fund air quality monitoring and as a result Brent has reduced the number of its monitoring stations from six to three. The Council warn that there is a significant risk that DEFRA may not fund the costs of intensive cleaning and application of dust suppressants at Neasden Lane once the Olympic Games is over.

The 2012-15 Plan lists 15 actions and can be found HERE .  It includes integrating air quality improvements into local health plans, increasing the planting of trees in new developments, reviewing planing policies to safeguard against environmental impacts of new and existing waste facilities, reducing car use and congestion, a 10% reduction in business energy use, a 20% decrease in energy use in council housing stock and 25% in council emissions and a 10% reduction in emissions from major commercial fleet operations in the borough.

The aim is to have a holistic approach that fits with the framework of Brent's Climate Change Strategy.

I welcome these measures and hope that national and local government cuts will not prevent their effective implementation.  Air pollution apart from causing premature deaths also condemn some of the young and the vulnerable to regular occurrences of respiratory illnesses.

Children at Risk

• Children are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution for several reasons related to their physical development and behaviour.
• Children’s respiratory organs are not fully developed and thus are more vulnerable to toxic substances in the air.
• Children have narrower airways that are more severely affected by the tissue inflammation that occurs due to air pollution.
• Children have weaker immune systems that are more vulnerable to the foreign substances found in air pollution.
• Children inhale more air (and more air pollution) per pound of body weight than adults.
• Children often breathe through their mouths, rather than their noses. This route bypasses the cilia and mucous found in the nose that trap foreign particles in the air and stop them from entering the lungs.
• Children do not recognize or acknowledge the effects of air pollution as quickly as adults. This may exacerbate the effects of air pollution, because symptoms are not treated as quickly.