Movement for Liveable London Street Talks - Simon Birkett 6th September 2011

2,587 views
2,471 views

Published on

September 2011 Street Talk by Simon Birkett, Founder and Director, Clean Air London. Brought to you by Movement for Liveable London -
movementforliveablelondon.com

Published in: Health & Medicine, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,587
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1,623
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Movement for Liveable London Street Talks - Simon Birkett 6th September 2011

  1. 1. A breath of fresh air – exposing one of the biggest public health failings or ‘cover-ups’ by a Government in modern history Street Talk: Movement for Liveable London London: 6 September 2011 Simon Birkett, Founder and Director Clean Air in London www.cleanairinlondon.org www.twitter.com/CleanAirLondon
  2. 2. Summary• 10 practical steps for Clean Air in London• Is air quality a problem? Why?• Health impact of air pollution• 1,148 schools within 150 metres of London’s busiest roads• Other health issues and communicating the health impact• Air pollution concentrations and trends in London• Sources of air pollution in London• Legal framework• Solutions and opportunity: adapt and mitigate• 10 practical steps for Clean Air in London• Next steps and prioritiesLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 2
  3. 3. 10 practical steps for Clean Air in London1. Investigate: find out about air pollution near your home, work or places you visit2. Adapt: protect yourself from the dangers of air pollution3. Mitigate: reduce air pollution for yourself and others4. Research: find out more about air pollution5. Lobby: for full compliance with air quality laws6. Arrange a group meeting: and invite Clean Air in London to speak7. Support Clean Air in London8. Spread the word9. Fight: oppose local developments if they will result in breaches of air quality laws10. Feedback any better ideas to Clean Air in LondonWith relevant weblinks: http://www.cleanairinlondon.org/blog/_archives/2011/2/23/4756818.htmlLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 3
  4. 4. Is air quality a problem?• “Air pollution is currently estimated to reduce the life expectancy of every person in the UK by an average of 7-8 months with estimated equivalent health costs of up to £20 billion each year.” Foreword to Defra, Air Quality Strategy 2007. Annual cost of £18 billion (range £9 billion to £20 billion). Clean Air in London emphasis• “Air quality is much better than it was in 1990. It’s good across 99% of the country. An average impact of 7-8 months.” Letter from Government Minister to Sunday Times, 15 March 2009• “Air pollution shouldn’t harm you if you’re healthy.” Some health alerts• “Average reduction in life expectancy is now 6 months and the annual cost £15 billion, within the range £8 billion to £17 billion.” Defra, Air Pollution: Action in a Changing Climate, 2010.• No smog alert media release from Defra between June 2009 and April 2011London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 4
  5. 5. National Audit Office report on Air Quality Responsibilities for improving air quality in LondonLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 5
  6. 6. Health impact: 1952 Great Smog• 5-8 December 1952: Great Smog. Estimated 4,075 premature deaths (and perhaps up to 12,000 in total)• Government’s initial response was to deny it had any responsibility in the matter• Churchill Government appointed Sir Hugh Beaver as Chairman of the Committee on Air Pollution to make recommendations• Sir Hugh Beaver called for “a national effort” of “costs and sacrifices” to combat “a social and economic evil which should no longer be tolerated”• In 1955 it fell to Eden’s new administration to enact the Committee’s findings. – Civil servants were bothered by their practicality – The Federation of British Industry was concerned about costs – Libertarians argued that it was no business of Whitehall what burnt in an Englishman’s hearth and home. Some argued the poor would freeze without coal – Treasury said it didn’t have the money and was rumoured to be blocking change – Ministers worried there was insufficient smokeless fuel to replace coal• But the public clamoured to go smoke-free• Sir Gerald Nabarro tabled a private Members Bill which was withdrawn when the Government agreed to legislation. The Clean Air Act came into force in 1956London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 6
  7. 7. Is air quality a problem? Yes!• Great Smog: 4,075 premature deaths attributable to short-term air pollution. No understanding (then) of impact of long-term exposure• March 2010: Mayor Johnson estimates there were 4,267 premature deaths in 2008 attributable to long-term exposure to PM2.5• Air pollution has been broadly unchanged since the late 1990’s. Using the same ‘language’ used for alcoholism, obesity and smoking, the average loss of life is 11.5 years. We live in the ‘1%’...• “We now need Mayor Johnson and the Government to play their part in tackling an invisible public health crisis with as many early deaths attributable to air pollution in London in 2008 as we thought occurred during the Great Smog in 1952.” Simon Birkett, TIME.com, April 2011 London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 7
  8. 8. Health impact: Percentage of residents by borough identifyingpollution level as something most in need of improvement 2008/09 Source: oneplace http://oneplace.audit-commission.gov.uk/pages/default.aspx London boroughs in descending order of concern 1. City of London 2. Westminster 3. Kensington and Chelsea 4. Camden 5. Islington 6. Hounslow 7. Hammersmith and Fulham 8. Richmond 9. Lambeth 10. Haringey 11. Newham 12. Merton 13. Tower Hamlets 14. Hillingdon 15. Greenwich 16. Hackney 17. Kingston 18. Lewisham 19. Bexley 20. Brent 21. Wandsworth 22. Ealing 23. Southwark 24. Waltham Forest 25. Barnet 26. Redbridge 27. Croydon 28. Enfield 29. Harrow 30. Sutton 31. Havering 32. Barking and Dagenham 33. BromleyLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 8
  9. 9. Health impact of air pollution: ‘Epidemiology 101’• “Since 1900, the average lifespan of persons in the United States has lengthened by over 30 years; 25 years of this gain are attributable to advances in public health”, Journal of the American Medical Association, 1999• “Public health experts agree that environmental risks constitute 25% of the burden of disease.” WHO, 2011London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 9
  10. 10. Health impact of air pollution: ‘Epidemiology 101’• Public health risks – “There are between 15,000 and 22,000 alcohol-related deaths every year in England. Most of these deaths are premature: on average, every man in this group loses 20 and every woman 15 years of life compared with the average.” DoH, June 2008 – “Obesity is responsible for 9,000 premature deaths each year in England, and reduces life expectancy by, on average, 9 years.” DoH, September 2007 – “Smoking is responsible for 87,000 deaths in England each year.” DoH, December 2008. “Men who quit smoking by 30 add 10 years to their life.” NHS, July 2010• 2,222 people killed in road accidents in GB in 2009. DfT, 2010• Using the same ‘language’, there were 29,000 premature deaths in the UK in 2008 attributable to long-term exposure to anthropogenic (i.e. manmade) PM2.5 at an average loss of life of 11.5 yearsLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 10
  11. 11. Health impact of air pollution: ‘Epidemiology 101’• Several ambient air pollutants - Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) - Tropospheric ozone (O3) - Particulate matter: ultrafine (PM0.1), fine (PM2.5), coarse (PM2.5-10) and PM10 - Sulphur dioxide (SO2) - Others e.g. benzene• Mortality (death) and morbidity (sickness). Acute (short time) and chronic (long time)• Size matters. Smaller particles penetrate deeper into lungs and bloodstream• Toxicity matters. So don’t just worry about PM2.5• Time scale matters. ‘Time series’ studies to assess short term. ‘Cohort’ for long term• Unknown degree of overlap between pollutants and time scales• Anthropogenic (manmade pollution) versus non-anthropogenic• Population-weighted exposures based on residency not personal exposure• Concentration response function is not linear. Impact on those aged 30+. Children• Relative risk (hazard rates); best estimates; ranges; total mortality and by ‘type’• Attributable deaths; years (of life) lost; average years per victim; and average nationally London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 11
  12. 12. Health impact in London and nationallyShort-term exposure• COMEAP 1998 (based on 1995/1996 pollution) – 8,100 GB urban ‘deaths brought forward’ annually due to PM10 (using +0.75% per 10 µg/m3, 24 hour mean) – 3,500 GB urban ‘deaths brought forward’ annually due to SO2 (using +0.6% per 10 µg/m3, 24 hour mean) – 700 to 12,500 urban and rural GB ‘deaths brought forward’ during summer only due to O3 (+3.0% per 50 µg/m3, 8 hour mean)Long-term exposure• COMEAP 2010 – 29,000 premature deaths in the UK in 2008 attributable to long-term exposure to anthropogenic PM2.5 (6% per 10 µg/m3 increase in [annual mean] PM2.5) – 36.5 million life years over next 100 years. Average across new births of six monthsNational range• 29,000 to 53,100 premature deaths attributable to air pollutionLondon• 4,267 premature deaths in 2008 attributable to long-term exposure to PM2.5. Ave 11.5 yrs• Range 756 (1%) to 7,965 (12%). Assumes population weighted exposure of 15.34 µg/m3 London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 12
  13. 13. Mayor’s health study: average concentrations of PM2.5 and premature deaths attributable to long-term exposure to PM2.5 by borough London boroughs ranked by average concentration of PM2.5 (µg/m3) (2006) London boroughs ranked by estimated premature deaths per year (2006/08) 1. City of London 17.6 1. Bromley 217 2. Westminster 16.6 2. Croydon 205 3. Camden 16.2 3. Barnet 201 4. Kensington and Chelsea 16.2 4. Havering 182 5. Tower Hamlets 16.0 5. Enfield 178 6. Islington 15.9 6. Ealing 167 7. Waltham Forest 15.9 7. Bexley 161 8. Southwark 15.8 8. Hillingdon 154 9. Hammersmith and Fulham 15.8 9. Lewisham 153 10. Hackney 15.7 10. Redbridge 153 11. Lambeth 15.7 11. Greenwich 150 12. Wandsworth 15.6 12. Wandsworth 148 13. Newham 15.4 13. Lambeth 139 14. Enfield 15.4 14. Southwark 136 15. Ealing 15.4 15. Brent 133 16. Brent 15.4 16. Waltham Forest 129 17. Haringey 15.3 17. Sutton 124 18. Lewisham 15.3 18. Newham 121 19. Hounslow 15.3 19. Hounslow 121 20. Greenwich 15.2 20. Barking and Dagenham 120 21. Merton 15.2 21. Harrow 119 22. Redbridge 15.1 22. Camden 107 23. Barnet 15.1 23. Merton 107 24. Richmond upon Thames 15.0 24. Tower Hamlets 102 25. Barking and Dagenham 15.0 25. Islington 100 26. Kingston upon Thames 15.0 26. Haringey 99 27. Croydon 15.0 27. Richmond upon Thames 97 28. Sutton 14.9 28. Westminster 96 29. Hillingdon 14.9 29. Hackney 96 30. Bexley 14.8 30. Kingston upon Thames 91 31. Harrow 14.8 31. Hammersmith and Fulham 86 32. Bromley 14.7 32. Kensington and Chelsea 75 33. Havering 14.6 33. City of London 4London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 13
  14. 14. Health impact – COMEAP 2009 “Our recommendations for the individual coefficients that express the relative risks associated with a 10 µg/m3 increase in PM2.5 are [for all-cause mortality]: “Best estimate 1.06 with 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.11. “Our representation of the uncertainty regarding the coefficient linking the relative risk of death from all-causes to long-term exposure to PM2.5 is given in the figure. “For the purposes of conducting impact assessments regarding all-cause mortality and assessing policy interventions designed to reduce levels of air pollutants, we have recommended that the full distribution of probabilities be used as an input into Monte Carlo analysis, the approach we favour. Alternatively, we suggest that the plausible ‘low’ and ‘high’ values of 1.01 and 1.12, respectively, based approximately on the 12.5th and 87.5th percentiles of the overall range of plausibility, could be used in sensitivity analysis. “We also recommend that the wider interval of 0 to 15% (relative risk 1.00 and 1.15) be included in any report on quantification of risks from long-term exposure to particulate air pollution represented by PM2.5.”London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 14
  15. 15. Health impact – COMEAP 2010 “We conclude that: a) Removing all anthropogenic [PM2.5] could save the UK population approximately 36.5 million life years over the next 100 years and would be associated with an increase in UK life expectancy from birth of six months...” b) ... c) The current (2008) burden of anthropogenic [PM2.5] is... an effect on mortality in 2008 equivalent to nearly 29,000 deaths in the UK at typical ages and an associated loss of total population life expectancy of 340,000 life years. The burden can be represented as a loss of life expectancy from birth of approximately six months d) The uncertainties in these estimates need to be recognised: they could vary from about a sixth to double the figures shown.” AND LATER: “It is not known how this population-wide burden is spread across individuals in the population, but we can speculate between various possibilities. Our results are consistent with an average loss of life ranging at one extreme from 11½ years if air pollution was solely responsible for 29,000 deaths to, at the other extreme, six months if the timing of all deaths was influenced by air pollution. We believe both of these extremes to be extremely unlikely. Given that much of the impact of air pollution on mortality is linked with cardiovascular deaths, it is more reasonable to consider that air pollution may have made some contribution to the earlier deaths of up to 200,000 people in 2008, with an average loss of life of about two years per death affected, though that actual amount would vary between individuals. However, this assumption remains speculative.”London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 15
  16. 16. Health impact: Example calculation for PM2.5 in London in 2005• Choose a year for deaths and population-weighted PM2.5• UK average anthropogenic PM2.5 of 10.144 µg/m3 in 2005. Note: Defra estimated non-anthropogenic PM2.5 was 3.37 µg/m3• Inner London population-weighted exposure +50%• 52,995 deaths in London in 2005. 1.9% of deaths <30 years. So 51,988 deaths in 2005 aged 30 and above• 17,315 deaths in Inner London; 34,673 deaths in Outer London >=30• Use COMEAP’s 6% relative risk (range 1% to 12% and/or 0 to 15%)• Log linear relationship i.e. it’s a curve not a straight line!• AD6%= 17,315 x (1 – 1.06-15.216/10.000) + 34,673 x (1 – 1.06-10.144/10.000)• 3,459 premature deaths attributable to long-term exposure to anthropogenic PM2.5 in London in 2005 (using 6%) Attributable deaths: AD6% = 3,459 AD12% = 6,508 AD15% = 7,900• Mayor’s health study estimated (2008) AD6% = 4,267 AD12% = 7,965• Note: PM2.5 is typically = 65-70% of PM10 For more details see: http://www.cleanairinlondon.org/_attachments/4404538/CCAL%20075%20Letter%20to%20EAC% 20131209%20Final%20V2.pdfLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 16
  17. 17. London schools within 150m and 400m of busy roads Roads carrying over 100,000 vehicles per dayLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 17
  18. 18. Other health issues• Inequality: Non-white British 17% more exposed; Black British 29%*. Defra PM10• Two types of health impact: – Impact on lung size and long-term health of young children – WHO says some 80% of attributable deaths are among those aged 60 and over• Care4Air conference (September 2010): – 89% attendees said they would like to see an estimate for the number of premature deaths attributable to long-term exposure to fine particles for their area (i.e. like London) – 93% attendees said they would welcome official guidance on the careful interpretation of health impact metrics such as ‘premature [or ‘attributable’] deaths’ and ‘years [of life] lost’• Impact may be greater in the last year or two of life• Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) – email from Dr Michal Krzyzanowski, April 2007 – “...achievement of the guideline level for one pollutant should not be done with an increase of other pollutant concentration above its guideline value.” – “...besides the independent effects of NO2, the guideline for long-term NO2 average intends to protect people from adverse effects of complex mixtures of combustion-related pollutants.”• Alert bands are being updated. Low all year round and still breach limit value• Media seems to have most interest in health impact and legal breaches* Average PM10 concentration exposure from road sources relative to White-British London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 18
  19. 19. Communicating the health impact of air pollution• Previous Government ‘covered-up’ and/or failed to communicate the health risks• We are in a communications ‘battle’ with those seeking delay “We agree with your objective but disagree with the timescale to get there”• We must use health metrics that relate to those well established for alcoholism, obesity and smoking etc. We must speak the same ‘language’...• People want and deserve to understand the risks they face. Children and the elderly• Different metrics for different audiences. Simple and powerful for the public. Complex for policy makers, economists and scientists – Risk metrics: Premature deaths in 20XX attributable to long-term exposure to PM2.5 at an average of 11.5 years. Deaths at ‘typical ages’ i.e. not very young or very old – Economic and scientific metrics: money, total years (of life) lost, average months lost for the whole population• Public health metrics require careful interpretation• Advise people to protect themselves (adaptation) and reduce pollution for themselves and others (mitigation)• No other environmental limits breached like this. £24 billion co-benefits available by 2050• Great opportunity. London matrix. The politicians need to speak up and so do we London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 19
  20. 20. Health impact – key messages (early deaths)• Using the same language used for alcoholism, obesity and smoking, the best estimate is that 4,267 deaths in London in 2008 were attributable to long-term exposure to anthropogenic and non- anthropogenic fine particles (PM2.5) at an average loss of life for these people of 11.5 years.• Following the clarifications in COMEAP’s ground breaking and excellent recent (2010) report on how to express the mortality effects of air pollution, CAL proposes new phrasing to improve the communication of public health risks in general and air pollution in particular. In essence, the estimate of 4,267 deaths in London in 2008 attributable to long-term exposure to PM2.5 at an average loss of life of 11.5 years is calculated after eliminating the effect of dozens of other possible risk factors (e.g. educational status as a surrogate for income and smoking) to produce a pure number assuming air pollution is the sole cause of those deaths.• The estimate of 4,267 extra or excess deaths is a good one for comparing the effects of air pollution with the effects of other causes such as alcohol, active or passive smoking, obesity, diet etc which are calculated in the same way. However, because in practice individuals experience multiple risks, including air pollution, almost certainly air pollution played some part in shortening the life of a much larger number of individuals in London. It is not possible to estimate that number reliably but given that much of the impact of air pollution on mortality is linked to cardiovascular deaths, it is more reasonable to consider that air pollution may have contributed to all 15,800 deaths due to cardiovascular causes in London [in 2009] (i.e. one in three of all deaths) at an average additional loss of life for these people of some three years (at typical ages for cardiovascular deaths e.g. 15% of which are before age 65). London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 20
  21. 21. Concentration and trends: Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy Annual average trends in PM10 in London since 2005London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 21
  22. 22. Concentration and trends: Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy Annual average trends in NO2 in London since 2005London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 22
  23. 23. Concentration and trends: Transport for London Predicted annual mean NO2 in 2011 in Central LondonLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 23
  24. 24. Concentration and trends: Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy NO2 annual average concentrations for 2008London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 24
  25. 25. Concentration and trends: Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy NO2 annual average concentrations for 2015London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 25
  26. 26. Sources of air pollution in London Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy 2010• Emissions (not concentrations). Based on 2008 estimates• PM10 (Central London) – Road transport 79%. Cars 23%; taxis 20%; LGVs 10%. Buses <10% – Tyre and brake wear 35%• PM2.5 (Greater London) – Road transport 80%; industrial and commercial gas combustion – LGV, cars and taxis 20% each. Buses 5%. – Tyre and brake wear 25%• Oxides of nitrogen (NOx) (Greater London) – Road transport 46%; domestic gas 22% – Commercial gas, industry, airports and rail 7-8% – Cars 35%; HGVs 30%; buses 21%• DfT 2005: Diesel versus petrol cars (g/km): 16.9x PM10; 1.84x NOxLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 26
  27. 27. Air pollution trade-offs: Diesel versus petrol emissions Analysis by Ed Townes, Researcher, of Government emissions databaseLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 27
  28. 28. Legal framework: European Union legal standardscompared to World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelinesPollutant Legal standard WHO guideline Short term Annual mean Short term Annual meanFine 1. 25 µg/m3 annual mean to 25 µg/m3 10 µg/m3particulate become limit value in 2015 24-hour meanmatter (PM2.5) 2. 20 µg/m3 exposure concentration obligation based on 3-year average 3. Exposure reduction target in percentage by 2020Particulate 35 days over 40 µg/m3 50 µg/m3 20 µg/m3matter (PM10) 50 µg/m3 24-hour meanNitrogen 18 hours over 40 µg/m3 200 µg/m3 40 µg/m3dioxide (NO2) 200 µg/m3 1-hour meanLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 28
  29. 29. Legal framework: Concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in micrograms per cubic metre (µg/m3) over time120100 Actual NO2 80 EU limit value for NO2 60 from 1 January 2010 40 EU limit value plus margin of tolerance for 20 NO2 from 1 January 2010 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 29
  30. 30. Solutions and opportunity• Campaign to build public understanding of the dangers of poor air quality with advice on adaptation and mitigation• One or more additional inner low emission zones• 20 mph speed limit in residential areas• Clean up buses, taxis and HGVs. Euro VI• Some local HGV bans• Modal shift e.g. from cars to cycling, walking and public transport• Planning controls and boiler scrappage scheme Note: abatement in short-term (‘cheapest’ legal compliance); invest now to deliver electric in medium and longer termLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 30
  31. 31. Solutions and opportunity: “The London Principle”A practical approach to air quality/climate change trade-offs• Foolish to constrain solutions by ‘no-negative impact on air quality or climate change’• Managing air pollution trade-offs by accepting a 1% ‘cost’ for a 10% ‘benefit’• Comply with air quality and climate change obligations including timetables• Diesel emissions in the countryside not cities• Diesel and petrol standards will not begin to be air quality/climate change neutral until 2015London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 31
  32. 32. Solutions and opportunity: “The London Circles” Transport measures address Congestion and/or Emissions Road LEZ(s) pricingLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 32
  33. 33. Inner low emission zone(s) in London What can we learn from Berlin?London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 33
  34. 34. Inner low emission zone(s) in London What can we learn from Berlin?• Some 40 German cities had LEZs by January 2010• A national framework sets the emissions classes and main rules to be used by cities. 5 billion euro ‘scrappage scheme’• Three types of sticker: red, yellow and green from January 2008• All vehicles (with exceptions): targets diesel emissions; petrol Euro 1 with catalytic converter gets Green sticker• 5-15 euro sticker and 40 euro fine plus one penalty point• Based on ‘whole’ Euro standard not just PM• Retrofitting enables upgrade by one level• Access to LEZs restricted in stages• Warns that LEZ may be tightened more quickly if concentrations do not fall sufficiently• Inputs proportional to outputs: 60% to 95+% compliance through local enforcement (not cameras)• Initial results show 3% fall in PM10 and 10% fall in NO2London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 34
  35. 35. Solutions and opportunity: “The London Matrix” Air quality Climate changeLondon London 2012 spotlightRest of worldLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 35
  36. 36. 10 practical steps for Clean Air in London1. Investigate: find out about air pollution near your home, work or places you visit2. Adapt: protect yourself from the dangers of air pollution3. Mitigate: reduce air pollution for yourself and others4. Research: find out more about air pollution5. Lobby: for full compliance with air quality laws6. Arrange a group meeting: and invite Clean Air in London to speak7. Support Clean Air in London8. Spread the word9. Fight: oppose local developments if they will result in breaches of air quality laws10. Feedback any better ideas to Clean Air in LondonWith relevant weblinks: http://www.cleanairinlondon.org/blog/_archives/2011/2/23/4756818.htmlLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 36
  37. 37. Next steps and priorities1. Follow www.twitter.com/CleanAirLondon for news updates2. Spread the word locally and build pressure for change and action3. Build detailed understanding of local pollution hotspots and sources4. Identify keys issues, pressure points and priorities5. Engage actively with local, London, national and international media6. Consultation on UK’s time extension application for NO2 proposes legal breaches in London until 2025. Others must be lodged by 30 September7. Rejecting UK’s temporary and conditional exemption on PM10...8. Ensuring PM10 annual mean and daily limit values are enforced9. Ensuring air pollution is a ‘Top 5’ issue for London elections in 201210. Clean Air Zone needed for the 2012 London Olympics and thereafterTop priority is to ensure health-based air quality laws are complied with in full London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 37
  38. 38. Summary• 10 practical steps for Clean Air in London• Is air quality a problem? Why?• Health impact of air pollution• 1,148 schools within 150 metres of London’s busiest roads• Other health issues and communicating the health impact• Air pollution concentrations and trends in London• Sources of air pollution in London• Legal framework• Solutions and opportunity: adapt and mitigate• 10 practical steps for Clean Air in London• Next steps and prioritiesLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 38
  39. 39. A breath of fresh air – exposing one of the biggest public health failings or ‘cover-ups’ by a Government in modern history Street Talk: Movement for Liveable London London: 6 September 2011 Simon Birkett, Founder and Director Clean Air in London www.cleanairinlondon.org www.twitter.com/CleanAirLondon
  40. 40. Estimating the National Public Health BurdenAssociated with Exposure to Ambient PM2.5 and OzoneLondon: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 40

×