Just a few air pollution hotspots? The reality is no one knows….

Havering Friends of the Earth today have shared their latest news with the Havering Daily:

Havering Friends of the Earth is demanding accurate information about air pollution and its damaging effects on the health of young children and the elderly.

Havering Friends of the Earth, as a part of Havering Climate Coalition, met recently on 27th September, with Councillor Keith Darvill and Corporate Projects Manager Nick Kingham. We were disappointed with the response to our questions on air pollution in the borough, and therefore decided to make a statement to council leader Councillor Ray Morgon.

1. We are concerned that air pollution in Havering is not being adequately monitored, and we are campaigning for accurate information.

2. We are worried about young children breathing polluted air when schools are located adjacent to main roads and places like Gallows Corner – known hotspots.

3. We are asking for the figures regarding childhood asthma and respiratory diseases (especially among the elderly) so the true picture of the public health impacts of air pollution in Havering can be assessed.

4. We suggest that the council draw on other sources of information if the council is, as we have been told, unable to increase its monitoring owing to the costs involved, especially at a time when the council is in financial difficulties.

Statement.

1. Inadequate monitoring. 

Council leader, Cllr Ray Morgon, has said more than once that air quality in Havering is not too bad, apart from a few ‘hotspots’. We think this is a worryingly complacent attitude, and we are asking how Cllr Morgon knows this given the – in our view – inadequate monitoring.

As can be seen from the Air Quality Annual Status Report for 2022/2021 (link below) there is only one monitoring site for PM2.5, the most dangerous type of air pollution. This is HV1 at Rainham, and it is 10 metres from the nearest kerb.

There are also only 2 sites monitoring PM10:  HV1 and HV3 at Romford. 

Both these sites also measure NO2, and although there are many other monitoring sites – numbered up to 66 – they all only measure NO2. There are no monitors measuring SO2 or other pollutants. 

In our view this is inadequate!  

2. Schools located near busy roads.

The other issue that concerns us is the number of schools that are located near busy roads such as Gallows Corner which the council acknowledges is a ‘hot spot’. It is pretty obvious that there is a danger of very poor air quality when schools are located near busy roads – though given the lack of monitoring, and the fact that only 12 of the boroughs 96 schools are monitored, there are, we believe, not enough figures available. 

This is very serious, as we know that when Elly Kissi-Debrah’s mother managed to get air pollution put onto the death certificate it was only possible because precise measurements were made of the pollution levels on the street where she lived! 

We appreciate that the council may not want to scare people, but on the other hand unless reliable figures are produced, to back up the general picture that all the experts give us, there will continue to be the sort of denial we see in the reaction to the extension of ULEZ, and our children will continue to suffer. 

Statistics also need to take into account peak levels when parents are delivering or picking up children in their cars. The measurements in the various Air Quality Action Plans average out the levels over the year, which is misleading.

3. Public Health.

We have asked several times for statistics on the health impact of air pollution. We have been through Air Quality Action Plans going back to 2013, but we have found only one document which mentions public health: Air Pollution Monitoring in Havering for HOSC LD (undated, but saved Nov. 2020, Authors: Dr. Mark Ansell, Acting Director of Public Health. Louise Watkinson, Public Protection Manager. Marie-Claire Irvine, Environmental Protection & Housing Manager).

This document shows how bad Havering is for lung disease, compared to other parts of the country: 

In Havering, there are 61 deaths per 100,000 for COPD – London: 49.9 – England: 52.6

In Havering, 5.1% of all-cause mortality is attributable to pollution –England: 4.7%

The same document points out that we have more elderly people than other London boroughs, and that a large part of our population consists of families with young children. A large number of children live in income-deprived households, and these are known to be more vulnerable to health problems.

30-33% of children in Havering live in poverty 

There are 8,800 children in Havering living in income-deprived households, especially in: Gooshays, Heaton and Brooklands wards.

4. Reliability of information, other sources, and other standards. It is difficult to have much confidence in the figures we do have from the council for air pollution, for several reasons:

(i) Other monitoring bodies produce different readings, also covering different times and places. For example, Imperial College, at: www.addresspollution.org – which enables searches to be carried out by address, gives figures that appear to be far higher than those used by the council. We don’t understand this discrepancy, and we don’t understand why the council doesn’t draw on this information to inform its residents.

The London Air Quality Network, at: https://www.londonair.org.uk/LondonAir/Default.aspx also has detailed maps covering this area.

Breathe London, at https://www.breathelondon.org/ gives regularly updated figures: if the council is, as we believe, in favour of keeping residents up-to-date, perhaps it could investigate this source with a view to drawing on its information? Perhaps residents could be encouraged to get involved here and do some ‘citizen science’!

We understand, following the recent Geen Forum meeting (27th Sep 2023) that monitors are very expensive to purchase and maintain, but we are suggesting that there are other ways of getting information on air pollution that the council should explore.  

There are also cheaper monitors, especially for PM10 and PM2.5, which could be used in schools perhaps, or as part of a ‘citizen science’ project such as: https://sensor.community/en/.    

(ii) The World Health Organisation (WHO) has far stricter limits, and, while appreciating that the council is only obliged to adhere to national limits, we would like to see these beingadopted.

The WHO limits reflect expert knowledge held by world authorities.

For NO2, WHO regards 10mcg/m3 as the safe limit, as against 40mcg/m3 used in LBH calculations. 

For PM10, WHO recommends 20 mcg/m3, as against 40mcg/m3 used in LBH calculations. 

For PM2.5, WHO recommends 5mcg/m3, as against 25mcg/m3 used in LBH calculations. 

Note: the difference is particularly significant for PM2.5 as this is highly dangerous. Hence our concern (above) about lack of PM2.5 monitors!

The European Union, at this moment, is considering adopting these levels.

Stay up to date with all of our latest updates and content by following us on our social media accounts!

We have created community pages where we will share our up-to-date stories happening in the area. Add the area closest to where you live.

Support Local Journalism
We at The Havering Daily appreciate your support of quality journalism. Your generous donation, no matter the size, allows us to continue bringing unbiased and informative news to the community. Your contribution helps us maintain our independence and allows us to continue providing high-quality journalism. Thank you for valuing the work we do and for supporting our mission

Thank you