Many of our readers will have seen the recent news that London has already exceeded annual air pollution limits just weeks into the new year. The EU rules in question state that sites are only allowed to breach hourly limits of 200 micrograms of NO2 per cubic metre of air 18 times in a year. However, last Friday saw Putney High Street pass that number, with Chelsea and Kensington following closely behind.
Oxford Street – to which Engineer Towers is adjacent – is presumed to have breached the limits even earlier, but its monitoring station has malfunctioned (rumours that it choked to death have yet to be confirmed). At the beginning of 2015, when the equipment was operational, it took just four days for annual limits to be breached on the capital’s main shopping thoroughfare.
Diesel fumes are the primary culprit for the proliferation of NO2 particles at street level. Long-term exposure to these particles at the levels seen in many parts of London is associated with decreased lung function and respiratory problems. Car manufacturers rigging their diesel emission tests certainly hasn’t helped matters, but that is an area of discussion for a different day. According to Simon Birkett, founder and director of campaign group Clean Air in London, the failure to reduce the number of diesel vehicles in the capital is contributing to a massive public health crisis. “Put simply, diesel exhaust is the biggest public health catastrophe since the Black Death,” Birkett said recently.
While the comparison with the Black Death may be a touch dramatic, air pollution in London and other congested cities across the UK is undoubtedly killing thousands of people each year. A problem for campaigners like Birkett is that, unlike the Black Death, air pollution is not something that captures the public imagination, spurring those in power to act. It’s something city-dwellers encounter every day, an often invisible threat that many simply shrug-off or ignore. For the situation to change, a higher level of public awareness must evolve. People need to know how bad the air they breathe really is, and be better informed about its impact on their health. Only when the public outcry reaches critical mass will real changes be made.
One company that could help achieve this is Drayson Technologies. Its CleanSpace system uses a smartphone app that tracks your journeys and shows your exposure to polluted air, rewarding you for ‘clean miles’ travelled on foot or by bike. But what really enhances the app’s functionality is the CleanSpace Tag, which takes personal air quality readings and communicates back to your phone via Bluetooth. The tag is about the size of a smartphone and can easily be carried around in a pocket or bag. It’s powered using Drayson’s own Freevolt technology, which harnesses residual WiFi and cellular energy, meaning the tag never has to be charged. Rather than NO2, it measures carbon monoxide, generally accepted as a good indicator of overall air pollution.
Having attended the launch of Freevolt and CleanSpace last year and registered my interest, I received a tag to test out last week. It’s designed to take readings about once every hour when you’re stationary. However, when you’re on the move it takes much more frequent readings, using different intervals depending on your mode of transport. This means you get a personalised picture of the air you’re breathing as you walk, run or cycle through the streets.
Venturing through the badlands of Oxford Street two or three times a day, I was keen to see just how much pollution I was exposed to. Unfortunately, my battered smartphone hasn’t been playing ball, as it appears it can no longer detect when I’m in motion. After an extremely helpful call with a member of the tech team at Drayson, we reached the conclusion that a damaged accelerometer or gyroscope was likely to blame. The upshot is that the air quality readings I’ve been getting have only been hourly, so I’m not getting a very detailed picture, and my sorties on to the mean streets of London have been almost entirely unrecorded.
I’ve been told that a future release for the app is likely to include the ability to take readings on command, so my gormless phone might yet be able to make proper use of this clever piece of kit. But even without the tag, the CleanSpace app is worth checking out on its own. It provides a good overview of air quality, updated with readings from the network of people who currently do have tags. That number is still relatively low, but as it increases, so too will the accuracy of the air maps. Overall, the whole system can only improve awareness of air pollution. And when enough people can see just how bad the air quality is in London and beyond, we will perhaps reach a tipping point where stronger action is finally taken. But don’t hold your breath.
“Put simply, diesel exhaust is the biggest public health catastrophe since the Black Death,”.
Even with the Engineer’s weak disclaimer, such absurd comments are one of the reasons that the general public treats science with such contempt.
We have a problem and it can be fixed – hyperbole doesn’t help
Diesel vehicles are mostly used for transport – of people and goods. Switch transport to other means or reduce the need for transport and you have reduction of diesel vehicles in the city.
It would also help to switch off diesel engines while waiting in railway stations. Cross Country Trains usually run all the time.
I must agree with Mr.Lederman that statements that are unfounded, or only partially true, must be qualified. There is considerable uncertainty about the health implications of ground level NOx and fine particulates: some parties believe that the dangers are well proven, other doubt the science behind it.
It is very difficult to prove or disprove most public health related science, which lays the subject open to charlatans. As a recent example, you can accept the 14 units per week of alcohol limit or be sensible, Cheers!
A few months ago I sat in on the Sureme Court Hearing: Some group of Environmental lawyers were suing HMG for not at least having a ‘plan’ (as required by Brussels) to deal with problems, let alone actually start the cure! Their Lordships decision? A slap on the wrist and do it when you can get round to it! Please. Small wonder the ‘rules’ have been breached within a few days of the start of the year. A solution: put a few in goal, have the PM fined or imprisoned for contempt “cos they said the same last year, and the year before and ….? No, that would never do, these are our seniors, betters and the Establishment and if nothing else they look after each other. Well don’t they?
Readers might be interested in the most recent report from KCL’s Environmental Research Group on this matter:
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/lsm/research/divisions/aes/research/ERG/research-projects/UnderstandingtheHealthImpactsofAirPollutioninLondon.aspx
This report is fascinating but very difficult to decipher as it uses much jargon from the medical life calculation field. It certainly needs very careful assessment, for instance it shows that PM2.5 is mainly from outside London, while NO2 is from within and accepts that the two are not additive.
It was pleasing to note that the most polluted area in London was Westminster!
The article arrives at the fact that total removal of NO2 and PM2.5: not possible of course, would theoretically increase the longevity of future Londoners by between 9 and 16 months, with a considerable level of uncertainty in that increase.
An article examining the evidence about NO2 and PM10 / PM2.5 on human health would be very welcome as there is a risk that hyperbole will exceed science again.
I believe there have been numerous laboratory studies by the KCL group and others on the health impacts of high concentrations of NO2. The question is whether local atmospheric concentrations are high enough to have a similar impact. The concentrations of NO2 in particular are extremely high in certain parts of the capital.
Such debates as this one are difficult to get worked up about when the same media goes on about the NHS and Pension problems of people living longer than ever. I speak as an 82 year old.
If the number of vehicles overall in London was reduced then essential vehicles could travel around much more freely and minimise engine running time and emissions.
“Diesel fumes are the primary culprit for the proliferation of NO2 particles at street level”
Just to be pedantic NO2 is a gas not a particle.
WHO chief calls air pollution “one of the biggest public health issues we have ever confronted.”
http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/air-pollution-one-of-worlds-biggest-health-crises-who-11364034061812
A WHO report in 2013 stated that a reduction of 2.5microg/m3 PM2.5 particulates reduced mortality by 3.5% and that considerable health benefits add to the need to reduce this. They also noted a 5 month increase in longevity in 6 USA cities.
However, it must be noted that most of the PM2.5 in London came from elsewhere, so the benefits of draconian regulation in the UK may not be good economics. Also, London is second lowest on the WHO city list, only Stockholm was better.
A good point was also that the human condition improves very rapidly when PM 2.5 is reduced.
Obviously sensible efforts to reduce both NO2 and particulates are desirable and should be part of all engineers consideration. But, care must be exercised (judicious cost / benefit assessments) in setting expensive regulation, such as the LCPD now being extended to medium-sized plant: very commendable objectives but potentially ruinous for the many under-invested industries in the UK.
The power industry and large energy users have been decimated by the CCA for little benefit in UK or EU.
I’ve just noticed an error in the intro to the article “The EU rules in question state that sites are only allowed to breach hourly limits of 200 micrograms of NO2 per cubic metre of air 18 times in a year. ”
The current regulations allow 200 mg/Nm3 or more from stationary plant: (currently about to be reduced). The mix-up is over ground level concentration values. Large stationary plant stack heights are based on glcs in the area of the chimney and the concentration emitted.
I do not know what the regulations are for vehicle emissions as they are actually at ground level!
PS. I’ve looked a little into vehicle emissions: it’s no wonder that VW fiddled their tests, there is no policing or realistic control of vehicle emissions beyond weasel words and codes that mean little as they are virtually un-measurable.
The current regulation for cars and diesel is called Euro 6. It specifies the allowable emissions for petrol and diesel engines in mg/km: 80 mg/km for diesel, 60 for cars. These can be converted using average speed and fuel consumptions, I get an emission figure of about 1 mg/Nm3 exhaust, a very difficult level to achieve with high temperature combustion – probably not achievable at all, even with SCR and recycle.
It is noteworthy that measured values for cars and diesel seem to lie between 400 and 1,800 mg/km using on-board metering. There ought to be proper investigation into this ridiculous situation: either NOx and PM2.5 are really dangerous (as per WHO reports), and action taken; or the hype should be reduced.
The problem with vehicle emissions is that they are at ground level, while power stations and factory chimneys produce far lower glcs.
Pollution health risks are in the news again this week with domestic products killing us or pollution causing thousands of deaths (Royal College of Surgeons).
It is right and proper that pollutants should be regulated and controlled, probably much more than is presently the case: however, hype and sophistry are not good as bases for decisions. We need testing and proving not hypotheses that may be correct but equally may not.
This could become the new “Global Warming armaggedon” for the pseudo-science press: I hope that the Engineer can ensure a balanced approach with a sensible eye on the benefits of technology as well as the penalties.