London Environment Strategy consultation

Closed

1216 Londoners have responded | 26/07/2017 - 17/11/2017

London Environment Strategy consultation

Air quality monitoring technology

User Image for
Added by Talk London

Currently there are a limited number of air pollution monitors in London. Personal air pollution monitors can help improve accuracy by measuring more places and producing real-time data. It can also mean you as an individual can get better information and ensure that you avoid the most polluted places at the most polluted times.

Would you carry an air quality monitor when walking, cycling or driving? What concerns might you have about this?

The discussion ran from 10 August 2017 - 10 November 2017

Closed


Want to join our next discussion?

New here? Join Talk London, City Hall's online community where you can have your say on London's biggest issues.

Join Talk London

Already have an account?

Log into your account
Comments (97)

Avatar for -

I am very concerned about the air pollution, especially worried about how this might impact our coming generations. I drive hybrid car, which has battery and petrol combined engine, wouldn't class this as 100% pollution free. I would like...

Show full comment

I am very concerned about the air pollution, especially worried about how this might impact our coming generations. I drive hybrid car, which has battery and petrol combined engine, wouldn't class this as 100% pollution free. I would like to leave my car at home and use public transport, to commute to work, but by doing so it will increase my cost significantly. In fact, driving my car to work costs me almost £60 less a month, than compare to commuting by trains and buses. Travelling cost has been going up painfully for last few years. In some cases, large chunk of people's salary goes towards travel fare, which is not very encouraging. Something needs to be done soon.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

Yes, it should never be cheaper to drive to work than to use public transport. (Just as it shouldn't be cheaper to fly to Scotland than to take the train, but it is!)

Avatar for -

While I commend the efforts to reduce air pollution by addressing the cars on the road and by wearing monitors etc, what is the purpose of al those things when the MOST polluting thing - building a cruise terminal at Enderby Wharf is being...

Show full comment

While I commend the efforts to reduce air pollution by addressing the cars on the road and by wearing monitors etc, what is the purpose of al those things when the MOST polluting thing - building a cruise terminal at Enderby Wharf is being allowed? http://www.wharf.co.uk/news/local-news/enderby-wharf-campaigners-fail-l…

Did no one see the program on Channel 4 about cruise ship emissions?

One cruise ships emits as much particulates as a million cars, so 30 ships pollute as much as all the cars in the UK'
Daniel Rieger, environmentalist

Why are we only attacking car emissions and suggesting that people no longer get packages delivered at home or offices in central London? All these efforts to reduce air pollution seem like a half assed attempt at addressing the issue

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

My comment is on the use of wood burning stoves and their impact on air quality. Although the use of wood burners and their impact on air quality has been in the news recently, I believe another issue is that many people still use open...

Show full comment

My comment is on the use of wood burning stoves and their impact on air quality. Although the use of wood burners and their impact on air quality has been in the news recently, I believe another issue is that many people still use open fires to burn wood which is illegal. Modern wood burning stoves should minimize the level of emissions but only if the stove is used properly. A modern stove has two air supplies, primary air below the fire and secondary air above the fire. To minimize emissions only the secondary air supply should be used after the fire is established. Reliance on the secondary air supply, maximizes combustion of the exhaust gasses which otherwise would go up the chimney (in a open fire there is no secondary combustion of exhaust gasses). The difference in the level of emissions from 'correct' and 'incorrect' use of a stove can be as much as 20 times. Obviously the user also needs to burn dry wood only (not the stuff you see outside garages).

So recommendations: 1) Enforce the current ban on open fires; 2) Ban the sale of unseasoned wood; 3) Implement voluntary training of stove users - they would benefit as well by being to burn their wood more efficiently (more heat for less volume of wood).

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

I have concerns about the lack of information on the dangers of the more domestic side of air pollution, namely wood burning stoves, bonfires etc. Whilst some light has been shed on the serious detrimental effects on both health and the...

Show full comment

I have concerns about the lack of information on the dangers of the more domestic side of air pollution, namely wood burning stoves, bonfires etc. Whilst some light has been shed on the serious detrimental effects on both health and the environment, it seems the majority of people do not pay anywhere as close attention to these dangers compared to broader air pollution factors such as those focused on in your questionnaire. It should be treated in the same way as recycling, i.e. awareness should be increased to the extent that a conscientious approach should be paid to it in day to day life.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

Hi Kasia Drymer

We received the information below from our Environment Team:

"On the 29th of September, the Mayor wrote to the Secretary of State for the Environment, Michael Gove, setting out the changes to the law that he feels are necessary to control pollution emissions from a number of sources that have a significant impact on London’s air quality. This includes measures he thinks should be taken to control emissions from construction machinery and river traffic as well as solid fuel burning in London.

The Mayor asked for the Government to update the Clean Air Act to address pollutants, such as ultra fine particulates, that have the most impact on health and are currently inadequately controlled even for smokeless fuels and appliances. Additionally, he wants the Act to be amended to allow for the creation of zones where the burning of solid fuel is not allowed. These would complement his existing plans to create transport zero emission zones in small areas from 2025 onwards.

In terms of existing stove owners, we are working with Defra and the solid fuel industry to ensure that consumers are provided with the right information to make the best choices when they are investing in a new stove or purchasing fuel. For instance, good dry logs can emit up to 50 per cent less pollution than wet or green logs, and we are supporting the use of the “ready to burn” label which indicates the best logs to buy.

The Stove Industry Alliance and Woodsure, the UK’s woodfuel accreditation scheme, have recently launched their voluntary “ecodesign ready” and “Ready to Burn” labels for stoves and fuels to help consumers make the right choice in London and other smoke control areas. The Mayor believes that more should be done to empower consumers to make the right choice, including better information at the point of sale and mandatory labelling of products that are legal to use in smoke control areas."

Talk London

Avatar for -

Probably the biggest air polluter within London is buses and taxis that use the streets all day long with frequent stops where emissions continue.
I would like to see a programme started to gradually replace diesel/petrol buses with...

Show full comment

Probably the biggest air polluter within London is buses and taxis that use the streets all day long with frequent stops where emissions continue.
I would like to see a programme started to gradually replace diesel/petrol buses with either trolley buses or trams. These would only consume propulsion energy while actually moving and would eliminate their emissions within London's streets.
Taxis, hire cars and the like (including UBAR cars) should be required to be either all electric or petrol/electric hybrid with a cut off and out of service date for them to be replaced.
I often see buses at stops and standing in traffic hold ups with engines running and visiuble emissions from their exhausts. Taxis are regularly seen in ranks with engines running.
These two measures would considerably reduce a constant and considerable source of emissions.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

I'm having a serious problem with the fact that dirty diesel cabs and buses are still going to be in use AFTER motorbikes are not, that's just stupid and goes against the pollution argument totally

Avatar for -

We keep blaming car, buses and other means of transport for polluting the air and heating the atmosphere with green house effect. What about air conditioners? I work in a shop where we must keep the doors open all year long for the...

Show full comment

We keep blaming car, buses and other means of transport for polluting the air and heating the atmosphere with green house effect. What about air conditioners? I work in a shop where we must keep the doors open all year long for the "customers to feel welcome" as my boss says. We had to turn the thermostat to 30 degrees all winter to only get 12 degrees in the shop. It's insane ! It is completely inefficient, we waste too much electricity and the staff get ill. Totally counter-productive! What can we do? Closing the doors and running the risk of being fired?
According to the New York Times, shops will have to keep their doors shut if the air conditioner is on from next summer.
When will Sadiq Khan impose the same rules in London?

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

i was thinking the other day - surely if we said that NO polluting cars could enter the within the M25 except delivery vehicles between 9pm and 4am. This would mean any resident within this space would be entitled to the government -...

Show full comment

i was thinking the other day - surely if we said that NO polluting cars could enter the within the M25 except delivery vehicles between 9pm and 4am. This would mean any resident within this space would be entitled to the government - assistance to buy electric vehicles scheme.

This would mean the car manufacturers who would be willing to assist - would swap out ALL the vehicles with 35% contribution from the government - funded by the road tax!

35% would be from the owners of the new cars - funded with 0% interest free loan

30% subsidised by the car manufacturers who would get into the market of millions of cars - I am sure this large bulk order would be measurable by the amount of cars required for this which would reach the millions!

I think this is brilliant! would also create many jobs - even a scheme to convert to LPG

common Mayor of London - crank this up!
Happy to chair the scheme for you ;)

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

The Strategy is weak on two issues: pollution from wood burning stoves and garden bonfires.
Wood burning is promoted by Government as green option, which it isn’t. Wood burning chokes up London air and adds very alarmingly to high toxicity...

Show full comment

The Strategy is weak on two issues: pollution from wood burning stoves and garden bonfires.
Wood burning is promoted by Government as green option, which it isn’t. Wood burning chokes up London air and adds very alarmingly to high toxicity levels. Plus wood pellets are shipped over to UK from all over the world. Wood burning stoves are the next diesel scandal, also promoted by the Government. The ‘ready to burn’ labelling scheme Defra now set up to encourage consumers to burn only dry wood is going to do little to lower particulate emissions. GLA should take this opportunity and call for immediate moratorium on sale of wood burners, for the revision of what we actually burn and where we source it from, and call for limitations on use of word burners often used as fashion accessory rather than necessity.
Garden bonfires are left out of scope of the Strategy. Section 4.2.3e tackles commercial bonfires only. Garden bonfires release toxic particulate matter which spreads over wide geographical areas and lingers for long periods. They are a completely avoidable additional source of pollution. Garden waste would never qualify under ‘ready to burn’ scheme. We take action to limit harm to our health from wood burning in stoves but continue to allow green waste, including freshly cut wood, burning in open spaces without ANY measures to protect our health and limit resultant pollution. This surely does not make sense. Garden bonfires are not just a nuisance and the argument about them being carbon neutral is dangerously flippant. They are seriously toxic, yet we can light them anywhere anytime. GLA needs to ban garden bonfires outright and call for a review of outdated legislation on controlling garden bonfires.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

I would love to see current emission limits implemented more strictly.

I cycle, and I'm on the road at least 1 hour and a half each day. The number of vehicles and vans emitting thick clouds of black smoke is incredibly high. This cannot...

Show full comment

I would love to see current emission limits implemented more strictly.

I cycle, and I'm on the road at least 1 hour and a half each day. The number of vehicles and vans emitting thick clouds of black smoke is incredibly high. This cannot be legal. I try to inform drivers, and most of them claim they are not aware of any problems with their exhaust. Why aren't these vehicles stopped by Police and fined? Traffic Police should patrol the streets on bikes, so they would notice these problems more readily.

I would like to see more extensive plans to improve London's cycling infrastructure. I have two children (aged 8 and 10). They cycle regularly on the weekend, when the traffic is more relaxed, but I still cannot bring myself to allow them to go to school and to their various activities on their own bikes during the week. There is simply too little in terms of protected cycle paths, clear cycle pathways, and respect from car and taxi drivers. The only way car drivers can get used to sharing the road, is by encouraging as many of us to cycle as much as possible, and the best way to do this is to provide protected, or at least marked, cycle lanes. There is far too little of this.

Far too much of the existing road space is taken up by parking. If more public or privately owned dedicated parking buildings were built, this would free up space on the road for comfortable, wide cycling lanes.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

If the people with the authority to decline permission to build waste incinerators, which pump pollution into the air we have to breathe, do not stop these projects in their tracks, how are we supposed to believe that they are actually...

Show full comment

If the people with the authority to decline permission to build waste incinerators, which pump pollution into the air we have to breathe, do not stop these projects in their tracks, how are we supposed to believe that they are actually serious about reducing air pollution? Local residents fought for years to prevent just such an incinerator being built on Metropolitan Open Land in Beddington, right in the middle of a highly populated area. It even went as far as judicial review, but the then Mayor of London took the side of the company building the already out-dated facility.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

I was recently under the flight path of aircraft taking off/landing at London`s Heathrow airport.
I checked the intervals between take offs and at that time it was one every 45 seconds.
I checked this for one hour of large passenger...

Show full comment

I was recently under the flight path of aircraft taking off/landing at London`s Heathrow airport.
I checked the intervals between take offs and at that time it was one every 45 seconds.
I checked this for one hour of large passenger aircraft which gave the figure of 80.
Each aircraft carrying approx. 8000 gallons of fuel which in total makes 640,000 gallons of fuel in the air over a period of one hour, which in 24 hours equals 15,360,000 gallons.
Taking Londons airports of just Heathrow, London, and Gatwick, though there are more.
The figure could approach 46,000,000 gallons every 24 hours.
One cannot see it but there must be an enormous amount of carbon and other pollutants falling onto the city below until the aircraft gains some height, when it is spread over a wider area.
And some of the streets below do not allow cars because of their pollution !!
I have not checked the pollution content, ie. carbon but I believe there are other chemicals involved.
I know nothing will be said or done about this, but stop blaming the poor motorist.
A car exhaust is about ten inches from the road surface.
The mayor knows that many people cannot afford to buy a newer car, but have to drive into the city to get to work.
They will be a burden on the tax payer if they have to give up their jobs.
How can an extra tarriff stop this from happening if they have to carry on?

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

The environmental impact of aviation occurs because aircraft engines emit particulates, and gases which contribute to climate change. Aircraft emit particles and gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), water vapor, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide...

Show full comment

The environmental impact of aviation occurs because aircraft engines emit particulates, and gases which contribute to climate change. Aircraft emit particles and gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), water vapor, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, lead, and black carbon which interact among themselves and with the atmosphere.
Research shows that despite efficiency improvements there is no end in sight to a rapid growth in CO2 emissions from air travel and air freight.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

Just out of curiosity, why does the Mayor not mention aircraft at all ? Suspicious !

Avatar for -

Please would the questionnaires for expressions of Londoners' opinions and proposed remedies be expanded to include - for example -
1. The areas outside the central area/congestion charging area and in particular to include ALL...

Show full comment

Please would the questionnaires for expressions of Londoners' opinions and proposed remedies be expanded to include - for example -
1. The areas outside the central area/congestion charging area and in particular to include ALL areas with demonstrated high pollution levels. Even the 2020 proposals to expand the controls to the N/S circulars are not radical enough. In particular , I wonder if ,for example , people living and working around the major roads such as the M4/A4 - should be consulted about their concerns . In my area, the A4/M4 in West London is constantly bottle necked by stationary traffic belching out fumes. This seems worse since more traffic is piling in after the recent creation of additional lanes by eliminating the hard shoulders to the west. The situation is likely to be made impossible if and when Heathrow is expanded

2.Consideration of the reduction of traffic noise levels. Air pollution is not the only problem . Is there no way of reducing the constant noise of the A4 and other arteries though London. On newer motorways - there are noise barriers to make nearby residents' lives more bearable.outside the London areas.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

It has been proven time and again that the following are major contributors to air pollution - speed humps as they slow down traffic and concentrate the exhaust gases, other systems that cause traffic to stop start such as islands, traffic...

Show full comment

It has been proven time and again that the following are major contributors to air pollution - speed humps as they slow down traffic and concentrate the exhaust gases, other systems that cause traffic to stop start such as islands, traffic lights, road works. High built up areas that do not allow a good air circulation such as in London, you are the makers of your own destiny. Building contractors should take into account air flow when constructing new developments. The easy targets have been penalised yet again by fake news and scaremongering.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

Latest data from independent research:

NOx is the big one. And there is a clear winner: the diesel.

Although diesels are castigated for being the big offenders as regards NOx, it’s not that simple.

In fact a Golf 1.8 petrol emits three...

Show full comment

Latest data from independent research:

NOx is the big one. And there is a clear winner: the diesel.

Although diesels are castigated for being the big offenders as regards NOx, it’s not that simple.

In fact a Golf 1.8 petrol emits three times more NOx than the 2009 Skoda - 0.798 grams per kilometre as opposed to 0.260g/km.
The fact is that a well maintained, serviced diesel emits far less pollutants than a newer diesel model. The Mayor of London needs to get his facts right before imposing unjust penalties on cars with little to no scientific back up to support his claims. Personally, I think the T charge (Tax) is illegal and should be challenged.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

My husband is an electrical contractor who has to drive into London for work every day. He is constantly stuck in traffic mainly caused by the 40,000 Uber drivers circling around and parking up waiting for fares. He is driving for up to 5...

Show full comment

My husband is an electrical contractor who has to drive into London for work every day. He is constantly stuck in traffic mainly caused by the 40,000 Uber drivers circling around and parking up waiting for fares. He is driving for up to 5 hours a day simply trying to service his customers needs. Fine stick on punitive charges on the working man but when the Mayors toilet gets blocked he will have terrible trouble getting someone to come and sort it out for him

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

Really interesting reading comments. Our Council Harrow wants to install speed cushions and a 20mph limit in two roads, both of which are cul-de-sacs leading to a school. Their statistics show that the average speed in both roads is about...

Show full comment

Really interesting reading comments. Our Council Harrow wants to install speed cushions and a 20mph limit in two roads, both of which are cul-de-sacs leading to a school. Their statistics show that the average speed in both roads is about 24 mph with a 30mph limit. Parked cars from commuters ensure slow speeds for giving way to cars in opposite direction. They have a grant from tfl and intend to use even though all evidence points to increased air pollution for both the elderly residents and children. We are fighting them but....... time will tell.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

Obviously they don’t understand the concept of concentrated pollution and it’s causes, they are proposing to increase pollution by instigating these changes - People are so dumb when it comes to widely available data on the causes of road...

Show full comment

Obviously they don’t understand the concept of concentrated pollution and it’s causes, they are proposing to increase pollution by instigating these changes - People are so dumb when it comes to widely available data on the causes of road traffic pollution, their suggestions for improvement are the exact opposite. Get these idiots to do some research rather than a knee jerk reaction and a worse solution.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

I’m fed up hearing about pollution every week it’s getting boring and TFL are scaremongering people. Each picture you show about polluted London shows London through smoke and musts yet when I go to take pictures there’s none of this London...

Show full comment

I’m fed up hearing about pollution every week it’s getting boring and TFL are scaremongering people. Each picture you show about polluted London shows London through smoke and musts yet when I go to take pictures there’s none of this London is cleaner now than it’s ever been !! Taxing motorbikes and older cars won’t solve the problem either, it’s the Deisel buses and black cabs to blame tax them instead of motorbikes, TFL are exploiting this pollution to make revenue. I voted for khan and I have made a serious serious mistake!! Stop making vehicles go at 20mph too everyone knows it actually increases pollution what a stupid thing that was to do

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

the main problem is with the very small particulates - the ones you can see. these are the ones that are not filtered out by your body's defences and drawn deep into your lungs. the dirty air may look clean, but trust me it isn't

Avatar for -

Hear, hear Williewonka!! Well said. Its very clear that there are a few cars and vans that emit alot of pollution and black soot (not old ones) becasue they have not been maintained properly. Goodness knows how they get through MoTs but...

Show full comment

Hear, hear Williewonka!! Well said. Its very clear that there are a few cars and vans that emit alot of pollution and black soot (not old ones) becasue they have not been maintained properly. Goodness knows how they get through MoTs but nevertheless standing by the roadside everyone can see when this occurs. We need teams of police on the street to enforce the laws we alrady have and to get these cars off the streets. Its not the 99% its the lazy 1% where the pollution comes from.but currently they knpw they can get away with it because TfL can milk camera revenue and doesnt need to bother getting out and about.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

I think it would be to the benefit of many people if more London streets could be converted to be pedestrian and cycle only. It would reduce pollution, noise and danger, and give everyone a better living environment. In those streets we...

Show full comment

I think it would be to the benefit of many people if more London streets could be converted to be pedestrian and cycle only. It would reduce pollution, noise and danger, and give everyone a better living environment. In those streets we could plant more trees and bushes, and have seating areas that encourage people to enjoy the outdoor space.

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

Yes!

Avatar for -

Whilst I understand the need to monitor air of the quality I would prefer there to be concrete action to stop or significantly reduce the causes of air pollution.

Unsurprisingly there is only one Forum subject on Air Quality - its...

Show full comment

Whilst I understand the need to monitor air of the quality I would prefer there to be concrete action to stop or significantly reduce the causes of air pollution.

Unsurprisingly there is only one Forum subject on Air Quality - its measurement. I would like to see other subject areas.

One area that I am particulaly passionate about is the increasing installation and use of Wood Burners.

We have one neighbour who has installed one of these 'fashion accessories' to their ground floor kitchen extension.

I only discovered this about 4 weeks ago when every Friday, Saturday and Sunday evening we were / are subjected at bedtime to what can be best described as 'acrid smoke'. Whilst my wife and I can just about bear it, it has caused huge problems with our Daughter Kate's asthma.

Our neighbour said it was installed professionally and tested and will not stop using it, they like the Scandi Hygge!!!

The problem with a lot of these Wood Burners is that they the flues are at quite a low level - and living like we do surrounded by Terraced Housing, we in effect have an inversion which traps the smoke. Heaven knows what if it will be like if more are installed.

I know that no action will taken regarding this problem - just more Weasel words by the politicians who want to measure rather than take action.

At least I have said my piece!!

Show less of comment

Avatar for -

Hello, you are absolutely right to be very concerned about emissions from wood burning stoves. These emissions are highly toxic, noxious particulate matter which gets into lungs and other soft tissue. The Government supports and promotes...

Show full comment

Hello, you are absolutely right to be very concerned about emissions from wood burning stoves. These emissions are highly toxic, noxious particulate matter which gets into lungs and other soft tissue. The Government supports and promotes this 'green' way of heating your home and you can actually get a grant to install a wood burner! Your neighbours would be well advised to read up about the wood burning as it is killing them slowly..... and you mustn't give up on protesting against wood burning stoves madness. See my post as well. Regards.

Show less of comment