This document summarizes a presentation by Simon Birkett, the Founder and Director of Clean Air in London, given on September 6, 2011. The presentation outlines the major public health issues caused by air pollution in London and the UK. It discusses the health impacts of both short-term and long-term exposure to air pollution, citing estimates of thousands of premature deaths per year. It also examines the sources of air pollution in London and legal standards. Finally, it proposes 10 practical steps that can be taken to improve air quality and public health.

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. 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 priorities
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 2

3. 10 practical steps for Clean Air in London
1. Investigate: find out about air pollution near your home, work or
places you visit
2. Adapt: protect yourself from the dangers of air pollution
3. Mitigate: reduce air pollution for yourself and others
4. Research: find out more about air pollution
5. Lobby: for full compliance with air quality laws
6. Arrange a group meeting: and invite Clean Air in London to speak
7. Support Clean Air in London
8. Spread the word
9. Fight: oppose local developments if they will result in breaches of
air quality laws
10. Feedback any better ideas to Clean Air in London
With relevant weblinks: http://www.cleanairinlondon.org/blog/_archives/2011/2/23/4756818.html
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 3

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 2011
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 4

5. National Audit Office report on Air Quality
Responsibilities for improving air quality in London
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 5

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 1956
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 6

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. Health impact: Percentage of residents by borough identifying
pollution 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. Bromley
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 8

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, 2011
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 9

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 years
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 10

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. Health impact in London and nationally
Short-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 months
National range
• 29,000 to 53,100 premature deaths attributable to air pollution
London
• 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. 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 4
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 13

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. 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. 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.pdf
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 16

17. London schools within 150m and 400m of busy roads
Roads carrying over 100,000 vehicles per day
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 17

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. 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. 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. Concentration and trends: Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy
Annual average trends in PM10 in London since 2005
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 21

22. Concentration and trends: Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy
Annual average trends in NO2 in London since 2005
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 22

23. Concentration and trends: Transport for London
Predicted annual mean NO2 in 2011 in Central London
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 23

24. Concentration and trends: Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy
NO2 annual average concentrations for 2008
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 24

25. Concentration and trends: Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy
NO2 annual average concentrations for 2015
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 25

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 NOx
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 26

27. Air pollution trade-offs: Diesel versus petrol emissions
Analysis by Ed Townes, Researcher, of Government emissions database
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 27

28. Legal framework: European Union legal standards
compared to World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines
Pollutant Legal standard WHO guideline
Short term Annual mean Short term Annual mean
Fine 1. 25 µg/m3 annual mean to 25 µg/m3 10 µg/m3
particulate become limit value in 2015 24-hour mean
matter (PM2.5) 2. 20 µg/m3 exposure
concentration obligation
based on 3-year average
3. Exposure reduction target
in percentage by 2020
Particulate 35 days over 40 µg/m3 50 µg/m3 20 µg/m3
matter (PM10) 50 µg/m3 24-hour mean
Nitrogen 18 hours over 40 µg/m3 200 µg/m3 40 µg/m3
dioxide (NO2) 200 µg/m3 1-hour mean
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 28

29. Legal framework: Concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in
micrograms per cubic metre (µg/m3) over time
120
100 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 2015
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 29

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 term
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 30

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 2015
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 31

32. Solutions and opportunity: “The London Circles”
Transport measures address Congestion and/or Emissions
Road LEZ(s)
pricing
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 32

33. Inner low emission zone(s) in London
What can we learn from Berlin?
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 33

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 NO2
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 34

35. Solutions and opportunity: “The London Matrix”
Air quality Climate change
London London 2012 spotlight
Rest of world
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 35

36. 10 practical steps for Clean Air in London
1. Investigate: find out about air pollution near your home, work or
places you visit
2. Adapt: protect yourself from the dangers of air pollution
3. Mitigate: reduce air pollution for yourself and others
4. Research: find out more about air pollution
5. Lobby: for full compliance with air quality laws
6. Arrange a group meeting: and invite Clean Air in London to speak
7. Support Clean Air in London
8. Spread the word
9. Fight: oppose local developments if they will result in breaches of
air quality laws
10. Feedback any better ideas to Clean Air in London
With relevant weblinks: http://www.cleanairinlondon.org/blog/_archives/2011/2/23/4756818.html
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 36

37. Next steps and priorities
1. Follow www.twitter.com/CleanAirLondon for news updates
2. Spread the word locally and build pressure for change and action
3. Build detailed understanding of local pollution hotspots and sources
4. Identify keys issues, pressure points and priorities
5. Engage actively with local, London, national and international media
6. Consultation on UK’s time extension application for NO2 proposes legal
breaches in London until 2025. Others must be lodged by 30 September
7. Rejecting UK’s temporary and conditional exemption on PM10...
8. Ensuring PM10 annual mean and daily limit values are enforced
9. Ensuring air pollution is a ‘Top 5’ issue for London elections in 2012
10. Clean Air Zone needed for the 2012 London Olympics and thereafter
Top priority is to ensure health-based air quality laws are complied with in full
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 37

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 priorities
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 38

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. Estimating the National Public Health Burden
Associated with Exposure to Ambient PM2.5 and Ozone
London: 6 September 2011 Clean Air in London 40