CyclingUKs Air Quality Strategy

Post Reply
Blazo
Posts: 4
Joined: 1 Nov 2009, 3:30pm

CyclingUKs Air Quality Strategy

Post by Blazo »

Last year at the AGM I put forward a motion for CyclingUK to update their long winded and car centric Air Quality policy

Motion here:
https://www.cyclinguk.org/sites/default ... f_2019.pdf

It was overwhelmingly passed with the board response:

"Our air quality briefing has been highly commended by Professor Martin Williams, one of the UK’s foremost air pollution
experts. See https:kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/en/persons/martin-williams(f06f73e6-795c4b3f-a750-a6c6771c95f6).html. However, we recognise that it could be strengthened by saying that air quality can be improved not just by promoting ‘cycling’ but also specifically by building ‘protected cycle facilities’. This proposer has provided good evidence to substantiate this point, which we shall cite in revising this briefing. Our air quality briefing is downloadable from (and summarised at): www.cyclinguk.org/camp"


Yet nothing has happened. In the meantime hundreds of millions of pounds is being spent on encouraging people to

This is what tax payers money is being spent on. According to the AIR index (which carries out real world emissions testing) both cars have the same NOx and CO2 emissions.
https://airqualitynews.com/2021/05/26/f ... ge-scheme/

In London the first stage of the cycle superhighway network passes two of only around 600 reference standard Air Quality monitoring sites. The only cycle superhighway standard infrastructure to pass such sites in the country. This realtively small intervention caused roadside NO2 levels to drop by 20% - as soon as work began (they closed a lane of traffic). Bristols CAZ is predicted to reduce roadside NO2 by between 8 and 12% over the couse of 5 years.

The change in CO2 emissions has not been modelled in any of the plans. New car CO2 emissions have been steadily increasing year on year, yet we are paying people to make a change that will, if anything increase their carbon footprint and does nothing to enable people to cycle.

Had active travel been pushed instead of CAZs 5 of so years ago when they were first mooted, we would have had cycle infrastructure being rolled out across the country just in time for the COVID pandemic. Instead most local authorities are talking about cancelling CAZ plans (that have already lined the pockets of air quality modelling consultancies (the same people who came up with the 'fastest route to compliance' models that don't incldue cycling or 20mph)).

What is CyclingUK doing about this? Nothing.

If this concerns you please write a letter to the Cycle magazine. I wrote one 6 months ago that was ignored.
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14649
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: CyclingUKs Air Quality Strategy

Post by gaz »

Blazo wrote: 22 Jul 2021, 10:32pm... Our air quality briefing is downloadable from ...
https://www.cyclinguk.org/sites/default ... 1e_brf.pdf (2017)
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
Blazo
Posts: 4
Joined: 1 Nov 2009, 3:30pm

Re: CyclingUKs Air Quality Strategy

Post by Blazo »

Yes that's the strategy.

Barely a mention of cycling and where it is mentioned it says 'promoted'. That's the language councils use when they have no intention to build cycle paths.
Pete Owens
Posts: 2442
Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am

Re: CyclingUKs Air Quality Strategy

Post by Pete Owens »

Are there any such enlightened places? Pretty much everywhere I go I see farcilities being installed by segregationist councils intent on clearing us off the roads to make space for the all important motors. Every new road scheme comes complete with signage directing us elsewhere.
Blazo
Posts: 4
Joined: 1 Nov 2009, 3:30pm

Re: CyclingUKs Air Quality Strategy

Post by Blazo »

Any approach has to be evidence based.

Segregated cycle paths and 20mph have good evidence in their favour, not just for air pollution, but for every aspect of urban life.

CAZs rely on car manufacturers doing what they say they will. The evidence is they aren't and they won't.
Post Reply