Dangers of current levels of air pollution in the UK

[malumbu]

Smokeless still allowed.  Wood should also be appropriately seasoned.  I expect far more issues with people burning dodgy wood.  

[Sue]

 

1 hour ago, malumbu said:

Smokeless still allowed.  Wood should also be appropriately seasoned.  I expect far more issues with people burning dodgy wood.  

I have an open fireplace in my living room.

I burn those smokeless log type things, but it's not my main source of heat (gas central heating).

They are ok but very heavy, and bulky to store.

But it's nice sitting opposite a real fire occasionally on a dark Winter night and watching the flames.

[Sue]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jun/29/england-air-pollution-gp-visits-for-asthma-attacks-rise-45-per-cent?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

[Nigello]

Does air pollution reduce significantly when schools are on holiday? Congestion does, so I’m guessing it does go down but I’d like to see evidence. 

[Earl Aelfheah]

"Parents driving children to private schools is associated with a 27% increase in air pollution and congestion in a south London street, according to campaigners who are calling for private schools to make greater use of sustainable transport":

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2025/jan/14/private-school-run-in-south-london-linked-to-27-per-cent-rise-in-air-pollution#:~:text=Private school run in south London linked to 27% rise in air pollution.&text=The analysis by Solve the School Run,when only local state schools were open.

More detail on the campaign group who did the research (I haven't looked at it that closely, so can't comment on how robust it may be): https://www.solvetheschoolrun.org/dulwich-wards#:~:text=We found that there is a 50%,term time compared with the school holidays.&text=Our research for Herne Hill Junction%2C Dulwich%2C,school term time compared to school holidays.

Edited June 30 by Earl Aelfheah

[Earl Aelfheah]

Would make sense that increases in term time traffic worsen local air quality.

Edited June 30 by Earl Aelfheah

[rjsmall]

Seems to be a very divisive article title with the area cherrypicked to to provide the class warfare angle.

I'm pretty sure if similar pollution measurements were taken at the Friern Road / Etherow Street junction (near St Anthony's) or Whatley Road / Landcroft Road junction (near Harris East Dulwich) the results would be about the same.

[Rockets]

The interesting thing about that article is Imperial College commenting on it because the source of the data supposedly comes from Breathe London which is a monitoring group set-up by.....wait for it......Imperial College....

 

And when you go onto the Breathe London site there is a map showing their monitoring locations and I can't find one anywhere near the area the increase is supposed to have been seen. Does anyone know how they came to this number?

[Earl Aelfheah]

6 hours ago, rjsmall said:

Seems to be a very divisive article title with the area cherrypicked to to provide the class warfare angle.

I'm pretty sure if similar pollution measurements were taken at the Friern Road / Etherow Street junction (near St Anthony's) or Whatley Road / Landcroft Road junction (near Harris East Dulwich) the results would be about the same.

Don't know about the title of the article, but yes, I suspect it's the same around a number of schools / the area generally. Like I said, it makes sense that increases in term time traffic worsen local air quality.

[heartblock]

The private schools are the main issue, so JAGs and Alleyns due to wide catchment. Kids coming to and from Harris EDG seems to be on foot, bike, scooter, bus and train. However I have witnessed a car parking (in a resident zone) and two kids pile out to go to JAGs … and cycle about 10 metres. I imagine when they fill in the ‘how did you here today’ questionnaire they put down - by bike. Just as an observation, ED Grove feels and smells like the old days during Private School holidays and a nightmare for pollution at school run during the term. It’s not ‘local’ traffic.

[SE22_2020er]

@heartblock - completely agree.   Utterly ridiculous that children are being driven to school.  It's bad for people living on the roads, bad for the children and bad for everyone.  The schools should do more.

That said - the 'old days' were back-to-back tailbacks from JAGs and Alleyn's to the Melbourne Grove church.   Thank goodness those days are gone.

[heartblock]

I have lived in the same place for 35ish years.
 

The tailbacks were created when the crossing traffic lights on the near Alleyn’s 4 -way was redesigned by the ‘planner’ who messed up IMO about 20 years ago.

Then it was bad…but then became worse after more recent events. I would love EDG to be buses, bikes, registered taxis, emergency vehicles and residents only up to the health-centre and small shopping parade - from the Lordship Lane end,  with some drop off and trade parking places - it is a school road after all.

Encourage active travel and reduce pollution, which is at its height when kids are walking to school… also,  if the person who keeps burning stinky wood on their wood burning stove in Melbourne Grove could stop this Winter I would be most grateful, it exacerbates my asthma. 

[beansprout]

All you are doing if that was to happen is diverting car drivers into or onto side roads.

I am a car driver but hardly use b my car st all when zi am in ED - buses and train is so convenient and reliable. Having said that, not pleasant in heat with sweaty people, bo etc but that is life.

Without doubt my breathing is worse when I am in London -Dockland and canary wharf  is bearable and fresher. Not even with  inhaler does it get sny better

 

[heartblock]

Many people live on ‘main roads’, it is cheaper accommodation, than side roads, so less wealthy people live on them. Also usually more densely populated. Granted in ED “cheap” is 400k - 600k, however my neighbours are cheaper in rentals and some ‘council’ housing stock.
 

I’m sure the young lungs of my neighbours are just as affected by pollution as young lungs on side roads.

Anyway… it’s important that traffic is reduced, I can’t think of any reason apart from physical or psychological impairment for anyone to drive locally. ED is a great place to walk or cycle in. It’s the non-local traffic from private school children parents&guardians and ‘staff’ that mess up my road.

[SE22_2020er]

@heartblock - I think it's everyone that drives along EDG that is messing up your road, but yes, there will be noticeably less traffic next week with the private schools on holiday.

Do you know what happened to the proposal to put a cycle lane along EDG?

[heartblock]

I think where the buses pass it’s too narrow and removing street parking (that residents pay for) in an area with no private parking for 70% of the road, would not be something that the council would approve one thinks, however they could have been creative using the back of the Dutch Estate and maybe widening the pavement for parts of the road to make a cycle path on one side. People cycle on the pavement anyway, so having a designated cycle ‘lane’ would make it safer.
 

The pavement and the road surface have not been improved for over 15 years, unlike many of the side streets off EDG that have had huge amounts of money thrown at them. It would be nice to see the council to show it a bit of love….as a major route for school kids, patients and residents - I don’t think there is any political will though.

[SE22_2020er]

@heartblock - thank you for your post.   Yes - I'm sure that a cycle lane would necessitate the removal of parking to make it work, which is probably a step too far.   

[march46]

Good to see the Mayor’s policies on air pollution in London are working! 

https://www.london.gov.uk/london-meets-legal-limits-toxic-no2-pollution-first-time-almost-200-years-earlier-predicted

[Earl Aelfheah]

Wow, that's amazing! Great news.

[malumbu]

The 200 years is rather exaggerated but great that the ULEZ together with sustainable streets, better emissions standards and move to EVs has delivered.  Ironic that more effective emissions standards was due in part to VW cheating.  It's world, not EU or UK standards.

[ianr]

The answer will doubtless be documented somewhere, but does anyone know offhand why the three named exceptional 'non-AURN' London measuring sites (including Loampit Vale and Brixton Road) could be  excluded from the figures?

Edited October 1 by ianr

[Earl Aelfheah]

21 hours ago, malumbu said:

The 200 years is rather exaggerated but great that the ULEZ together with sustainable streets, better emissions standards and move to EVs has delivered. 

Yes, agree about the headline, but the fact that air pollution has dropped so dramatically is fantastic. It will save many lives.

[Rockets]

The news that this has dropped is good news indeed but very interested to understand why they have excluded the only 3 sites that failed to reach the threshold. they seem to mention the siting of the monitors.

Also the headline in the press release is ludicrous - 200 years earlier than predicted just dilutes the impact of the story and I am sure makes people question whether the Mayor is just doing a bit of showboating. Of course, will the same high bar be reached for other pollutants (PM2.5 etc) that were also said to be addressed by Ulez etc?

The Defra report does cover those other pollutants but the Mayor's press release makes no reference to them.

[malumbu]

https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/the-truth-about-londons-ultra-low-emission-zone/

Interesting report by LSE on the ULEZ debunking some of the myths and fake news.

Focus is on NO2 as this is primarily due to transport emissions.  Particulates come from numerous sources including domestic burning of coal and wood.  Even before the ULEZ most road vehicles came with particulate filters (diesel) and three way cats (petrol) that dealt with larger particles of soot.  Age constraints on taxis and retrofitting older buses, was an important step 

Greater focus on finer particulates now.

[malumbu]

Academic paper referred to here published in 2019, I haven't seen the paper so can't comment on why it would have taken 200 years to reach legal street level ambient levels of NO2  https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2019/03/11/193-years-for-london-to-be-rid-of-the-invisible-killer-that-paris-will-banish-within-two-decades/

Simplistically the calculation should be:

No interventions to improve air quality beyond turn over of vehicles and improved technology as emissions standards improve

vs additional measures this Mayor brought it (and last one proposed).

The 200 years could only refer to a small section of the London road network.