Editorial by Guest Contributor: Alan Andrews, ClientEarth

London traffic (Image by: Andrew Nesbitt)

On the 29^th September the government submitted its official report to the European Commission on levels of air pollution in the UK for 2010. It makes for pretty grim reading. The report confirms that 40 of the 43 air quality zones in the UK breached the annual limits for nitrogen dioxide. No other EU country has a higher proportion of non-compliant zones.

EU directives set legal limits on levels of harmful air pollutants in the air we breathe. One of these pollutants is nitrogen dioxide – a harmful gas emitted by burning fossil fuels. Road traffic fumes are the main source of this pollutant, with emissions from domestic boilers and industry also playing a significant part.

The situation is particularly bad in London, where an area of 91 km² breaches the annual limit, exposing nearly 700,000 people to illegal levels of air pollution. The air pollution monitoring station at Marylebone Road, just opposite Madame Tussauds, recorded over 500 breaches of a short term hourly limit. However, by not including data from other worse sites in the official report, the government are hiding the true severity of London’s air quality crisis. Data from the excellent London Air Quality Network, run by King’s College London, show that Brixton Road recorded a staggering 2,683 breaches of the hourly limit in 2010, closely followed by Putney High Street, with 2,481.

For those of us who work in the field of air quality these figures come as no surprise. In fact, ClientEarth threatened the government with legal action in November 2010 over breaches of the limits in London. The government assured us that it was in the process of producing air quality plans for each zone which would show how the limits would be achieved by 2015 at the latest. However, when these plans were eventually published for public consultation in June this year, they revealed that for 17 zones, the limits would not be achieved until well after 2015. In the case of London, it could be as late as 2025.

ClientEarth therefore issued judicial review proceedings against the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. We are calling on the High Court to order Defra to draw up new plans which will achieve compliance by 2015, as required by law. On the 16^th September the High Court gave us permission to proceed, and we expect a full one-day hearing before Christmas.

So why are we so concerned by nitrogen dioxide? First and foremost, this is a health issue. In high concentrations nitrogen dioxide can irritate the eyes, nose and throat and cause shortness of breath. But for children, older people, or those with pre-existing health conditions, the effects can be far more damaging. A study published last week concluded that breathing in high concentrations of traffic fumes, including nitrogen dioxide, can trigger heart attacks. Another recent study has shown that living near busy, polluted roads could be responsible for some 15-30 per cent of all new cases of asthma in children; and of diseases such as bronchitis, emphysema and heart disease in adults over 65.

The European Commission will almost certainly launch enforcement proceedings against the UK for these breaches, probably in early 2012. Facing legal action at home and from Europe, the government has to start taking this problem seriously.

Alan Andrews is a health and environment lawyer for ClientEarth, an organisation of activist lawyers committed to securing a healthy planet.

This article originally appeared on ClientEarth and has been reprinted with permission. See the article in its original form.

Rendering of US city under water – by TERRA-Dreams (SoftPIX_Techie)

According to a recent Gallup Poll, an increasing number of Americans believe that the threat of global warming is exaggerated. In the 2009 poll, Gallup surveyed 1012 adults by fixed and mobile phone. The results found that forty-one percent of Americans doubted the severity of global warming as reported by the mainstream media. In addition, the environmental poll found a record-breaking 16 percent of Americans reported that they believed the effects of global warming will never occur.

Gallup Analyst Lydia Saad comments that, “Americans generally believe global warming is real (but) most Americans do not view the issue in the same dire terms as the many prominent leaders advancing global warming as an issue.”

Americans ranked global warming last out of eight environmental issues to be concerned about in the poll. Of highest concern to Americans surveyed was the pollution of drinking water – pulling in 84 percent of the votes. While Americans tend to believe that global warming is real, only 34% surveyed felt that they worry “a great deal” about the issue.

The annual environmental poll shows this drop in public concern across several measures. Global warming not only ranks last among the percentage of Americans concerned either a “great deal” or a “fair amount”, global warming is the only issue to have seen a significant decrease in public concern over the past year.

What could have caused such an increase in global warming doubters?

Global warming has received a great deal of attention this past decade due to debates regarding the Kyoto Protocol and former Vice President Al Gore’s Oscar-winning documentary “An Inconvenient Truth”. However, in this past year, the global warming message may have lost some of its ground with Americans. Given the economic downturn, it is possible that some of the public concern for global warming has turned toward pressing economic issues. Additionally, other factors may also be contributing to the dampening of the global warming message.

The recent elections in the United States could have had some effect on issue. The number of Republicans to believe that global warming media coverage is exaggerated has continuously increased since 1997. However, the 2009 environmental poll also reveals an increase in independent voters agreeing with the Republicans doubters.

Heightened politicization of issues leading up to the elections – including the concern over global warming – may have altered American beliefs on the subject. Additionally, an abundant number of debates over drilling in Alaska, renewable energy and the necessity for climate change legislation may have increased public fatigue over topics related to global warming. Therefore, next year’s survey will be of further importance to determine whether the increased number of global warming doubters in America is a reaction to unique circumstances or a trend that will continue into the future.

The Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) was launched by the Indian government in 2005 to fund urban renewal projects in Indian cities. As part of this initiative, the EPCA (Environment Pollution (Control and Prevention) Authority), the Supreme Court’s pollution monitoring body, met representatives from eight major (and ‘critically polluted’) cities to discuss the conditions stipulated by the JNNURM. The economic package in question would allow cities to avail of JNNURM funds in order to promote public transport and decrease urban pollution.

As of now In India, most cities suffer from ineffective public transport. Apart from the Mumbai local train network and the Delhi metro system (which are very overcrowded) most cities rely on taxis or autorikshaws which, although expensive, are the popular choice of transport. Most people, as soon as they can afford to, get around on their own car or two wheeler : don’t forget that around 1000 cars are added to the streets of New Delhi everyday and the cheap Nano is all set to hit the Indian streets soon. The Centre for Science and Environment in New Delhi offers astounding statistics: out of 73 million vehicles in India in 2004, only 768,000 were buses, despite them accounting for over 50% of the journeys.

 It is interesting, therefore, that the government is attempting to aggressively overhaul the public transport system. The EPCA views the JNNURM’s funds as “an opportunity to reinvent mobility” as they demand cities increase the number of buses plying the streets and that they conform to strict environmental standards.

Delhi has been fairly successful in the past at improving the environmental standards of its transport system. Most autorickshaws and buses use CNG these days, and there has been a marked reduction in the city’s pollution levels. More difficult to change will be the tax system that disincentives public transport. The CSE and the EPCA point out the strong disparity between taxes on public and private transport: the tax burden on public buses is two and a half times greater (per km) than the burden on cars. They strongly urge shifting the burden onto private transport, but with the motor industry flagging during the recession, will the government be able to push through such reforms?