The presidents of eight medical royal colleges have told the government that proposals for cutting one of the most harmful forms of air pollution did not go far enough.
Sir Andrew Goddard, president of the Royal College of Physicians, is the lead signatory of a letter that warns ministers that their suggested limit for a type of pollution called PM2.5 would “fall far short of the level required to improve health and save lives”.
PM2.5 is formed of airborne particles with a diameter less than 2.5 micrometres, about a twentieth of the breadth of a human hair. Sources include fossil fuels. It has been linked to increased risks of asthma, heart attacks, strokes and dementia. According to the World Health Organisation, it is the single largest environmental threat to health.
The government has proposed that two long-term targets be included in the Environment Bill, with a public consultation ending today. One would set an annual average limit for PM2.5 of 10 micrograms per cubic metre, to be met across England by 2040. The second would be a 35 per cent reduction in population exposure to PM2.5 by 2040.
The letter argues that the 10 microgram target should be brought forward to 2030. Signatories include Dr Katherine Henderson, president of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine; Professor Martin Marshall, president of the Royal College of GPs and Professor Maggie Rae, president of the Faculty of Public Health.
The Royal College of Physicians also argued that the government’s objective should be to reduce the mean concentration for PM2.5 to five micrograms per cubic metre, in line with WHO guidelines. The Times’s Clean Air for All campaign, launched in 2019, has also called for tougher limits based on the WHO recommendations. At present regulations set a limit that is five times greater, at 25 micrograms.
In 2016 a report from the Royal College of Physicians and Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health estimated that 40,000 deaths were attributable to outdoor air pollution each year.
In December 2020, following the inquest into the death of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah, air pollution exposure was listed as a cause of death for the first time in the UK. Ella, who lived next to the busy South Circular Road in Catford, southeast London, died aged nine in 2013 after a severe asthma attack caused a cardiac arrest. The letter has been signed by her mother, Rosamund Adoo-Kissi-Debrah.
The letter reads: “The targets currently proposed by government to reduce one of the most harmful pollutants — PM2.5 — by 2040 does not go far enough . . . waiting until 2040 falls far short of the level of ambition required to improve health and save lives.”
Rising fuel costs will solve this
So as this article is about PM2.5, it is important to note:
>Non-exhaust emissions (NEE) are particles released into the air from brake wear, tyre wear, road surface wear and resuspension of road dust during on-road vehicle usage. No legislation is in place to limit or reduce NEE, but they cause a great deal of concern for air quality.**NEEs are currently believed to constitute the majority of primary particulate matter from road transport**, **60 percent of PM2.5** and 73 percent of PM10 – and in its 2019 report ‘Non-Exhaust Emissions from Road Traffic’ by the UK Government’s Air Quality Expert Group (AQEG), it recommended that NEE are immediately recognised as a source of ambient concentrations of airborne particulate matter, even for vehicles with zero exhaust emissions of particles – such as EVs.
>**The Government should not aim to achieve emissions reductions simply by replacing existing vehicles with lower-emission versions.** Alongside the Government’s existing targets and policies, it must develop a strategy to stimulate a low-emissions transport system, with the metrics and targets to match. This should aim to reduce the number of vehicles required, for example by: promoting and improving public transport; reducing its cost relative to private transport; encouraging vehicle usership in place of ownership; and encouraging and supporting increased levels of walking and cycling.
With the U.K. government pushing a war that has sent fuel prices to the moon, and the shortage of drivers and goods meaning fewer HGV vehicles on the road, it’s quite likely that no one will be driving their polluting vehicles soon.
4 comments
Rhys Blakely, Science Correspondent
The presidents of eight medical royal colleges have told the government that proposals for cutting one of the most harmful forms of air pollution did not go far enough.
Sir Andrew Goddard, president of the Royal College of Physicians, is the lead signatory of a letter that warns ministers that their suggested limit for a type of pollution called PM2.5 would “fall far short of the level required to improve health and save lives”.
PM2.5 is formed of airborne particles with a diameter less than 2.5 micrometres, about a twentieth of the breadth of a human hair. Sources include fossil fuels. It has been linked to increased risks of asthma, heart attacks, strokes and dementia. According to the World Health Organisation, it is the single largest environmental threat to health.
The government has proposed that two long-term targets be included in the Environment Bill, with a public consultation ending today. One would set an annual average limit for PM2.5 of 10 micrograms per cubic metre, to be met across England by 2040. The second would be a 35 per cent reduction in population exposure to PM2.5 by 2040.
The letter argues that the 10 microgram target should be brought forward to 2030. Signatories include Dr Katherine Henderson, president of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine; Professor Martin Marshall, president of the Royal College of GPs and Professor Maggie Rae, president of the Faculty of Public Health.
The Royal College of Physicians also argued that the government’s objective should be to reduce the mean concentration for PM2.5 to five micrograms per cubic metre, in line with WHO guidelines. The Times’s Clean Air for All campaign, launched in 2019, has also called for tougher limits based on the WHO recommendations. At present regulations set a limit that is five times greater, at 25 micrograms.
In 2016 a report from the Royal College of Physicians and Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health estimated that 40,000 deaths were attributable to outdoor air pollution each year.
In December 2020, following the inquest into the death of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah, air pollution exposure was listed as a cause of death for the first time in the UK. Ella, who lived next to the busy South Circular Road in Catford, southeast London, died aged nine in 2013 after a severe asthma attack caused a cardiac arrest. The letter has been signed by her mother, Rosamund Adoo-Kissi-Debrah.
The letter reads: “The targets currently proposed by government to reduce one of the most harmful pollutants — PM2.5 — by 2040 does not go far enough . . . waiting until 2040 falls far short of the level of ambition required to improve health and save lives.”
Rising fuel costs will solve this
So as this article is about PM2.5, it is important to note:
>Non-exhaust emissions (NEE) are particles released into the air from brake wear, tyre wear, road surface wear and resuspension of road dust during on-road vehicle usage. No legislation is in place to limit or reduce NEE, but they cause a great deal of concern for air quality.**NEEs are currently believed to constitute the majority of primary particulate matter from road transport**, **60 percent of PM2.5** and 73 percent of PM10 – and in its 2019 report ‘Non-Exhaust Emissions from Road Traffic’ by the UK Government’s Air Quality Expert Group (AQEG), it recommended that NEE are immediately recognised as a source of ambient concentrations of airborne particulate matter, even for vehicles with zero exhaust emissions of particles – such as EVs.
Quoted from [here](https://www.emissionsanalytics.com/news/pollution-tyre-wear-worse-exhaust-emissions).
Non-exhaust emissions are one of the many problems caused by cars which *cannot* be solved with electric cars.
The priority should be placed on public transport and active travel. Cars of any kind are not the answer.
To quote [the science and technology committee](https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmsctech/1454/145408.htm):
>**The Government should not aim to achieve emissions reductions simply by replacing existing vehicles with lower-emission versions.** Alongside the Government’s existing targets and policies, it must develop a strategy to stimulate a low-emissions transport system, with the metrics and targets to match. This should aim to reduce the number of vehicles required, for example by: promoting and improving public transport; reducing its cost relative to private transport; encouraging vehicle usership in place of ownership; and encouraging and supporting increased levels of walking and cycling.
With the U.K. government pushing a war that has sent fuel prices to the moon, and the shortage of drivers and goods meaning fewer HGV vehicles on the road, it’s quite likely that no one will be driving their polluting vehicles soon.