Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air pollution

[Wanlock Dod]

...a balance between what is achievable, what the other impacts are and what the costs might be...

I wonder if society could still exist if using cars to travel short distances in urban areas was made inconvenient? I wonder if we could have a park and ride where it was more convenient than driving and parking in town? I wonder if we could afford public transport in urban areas the same kind of priority that private transport currently attracts.
The only solution that requires a complete switch of fuel as soon as possible is the one which maintains the status quo as much as possible. The main benefactors of improved public transport and cycling are probably society in general, whereas the main benefactors of electric cars are probably the corporations selling all the new cars. I wonder which option we will go for?

[Psamathe]

.....
I cannot stress enough that world population levels are critical to our sustainable future. Every mouth brought into this world and it's knock on effect, extra crops, extra cows and their methane output, extra land clearance, extra effluent+pollution, finally extra goods and vehicles. We have serious problems to address and our impact in the UK stretches out into places we may never see or even have heard of.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzVHjg3AqIQ

Ian

[Mick F]

The Lancet.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-41678533

Ban diesel vehicles.

[reohn2]

The Lancet.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-41678533

Ban diesel vehicles.

You're being too simplistic,the answer in real world terms is to have good public transport system,ban all ICE powered vehicles in high popularion areas and promote healthy living,among other steps to curb private vehicle use.

[Mick F]

Cost.
Getting rid of diesel cars is cheaper than providing public transport for everyone. If you live in a city or a town, fair enough.

Some of the most polluted roads aren't in a town or city.

[Psamathe]

Cost.
Getting rid of diesel cars is cheaper than providing public transport for everyone. If you live in a city or a town, fair enough.

Some of the most polluted roads aren't in a town or city.

But maybe providing better public transport for everybody has a number of other advantages (e.g. lower greenhouse gas emissions, lower pollution from other ICEs, slower use of carbon based resources, fewer vehicles on the roads, lower road maintenance costs).

If (big if) we are going to be spending money maybe make sure we get best value and sometimes spending a bit more can give massive direct and indirect benefits.

Ian

[Mark R]

Trouble is, you can (and many do) argue that providing a more busses is automatically a good thing. In the real world many of these vehicles are horribly polluting diesel engines which bring their pollution right into the heart of towns and cities where most other vehicles are not allowed.

The problem would be a lot simpler to sort out if the diesel option was taken off the menu altogether; it's not like we lack alternatives.

Another example round here is the private taxi. They are granted special access and parking rights yet most firms seem to favour desperately polluting VAG group diesels. Why wouldn't they? i'm sure they give great service and are profitable to run....the taxi firms don't have to factor the external costs of pollution into their business models and neither do the bus companies.

Better just to legislate the worst polluters off the road, because at the moment, those who run the dirtiest vehicles enjoy a competitive advantage.

Slightly off topic but what was actually wrong with trams and trollybusses? They worked well enough didn't they?

[Psamathe]

.....
Slightly off topic but what was actually wrong with trams and trollybusses? They worked well enough didn't they?

I don't know about the UK but when I lived in France (8 years ago) local city was building a new tramway through outskirts-centre. So they are being built.

Ian

[pwa]

Trouble is, you can (and many do) argue that providing a more busses is automatically a good thing. In the real world many of these vehicles are horribly polluting diesel engines which bring their pollution right into the heart of towns and cities where most other vehicles are not allowed.

The problem would be a lot simpler to sort out if the diesel option was taken off the menu altogether; it's not like we lack alternatives.

Another example round here is the private taxi. They are granted special access and parking rights yet most firms seem to favour desperately polluting VAG group diesels. Why wouldn't they? i'm sure they give great service and are profitable to run....the taxi firms don't have to factor the external costs of pollution into their business models and neither do the bus companies.

Better just to legislate the worst polluters off the road, because at the moment, those who run the dirtiest vehicles enjoy a competitive advantage.

Slightly off topic but what was actually wrong with trams and trollybusses? They worked well enough didn't they?

(I'm not a fan of VAG, but they are among the least polluting diesels. There are far worse offenders.)

[Mark R]

I struggle to imagine anything much dirtier than a 10 year old high mileage Skoda Octavia minicab, they are literally eye-watering

Actually the 10 year old Stagecoach 'Enviro400' busses probably are much worse..

[Mark R]

Time to start legislating these gross polluters off the street - it needs to happen now - people are paying with their health

[old_windbag]

Actually the 10 year old Stagecoach 'Enviro400' busses probably are much worse..

But everthing can be bad when viewed in hindsight, luminous clock dials were a great idea until years later the people painting them died from various mouth cancers etc. The enviro400 10yrs ago probably had redeeming design features that set it ahead of others at that point in time. They have since released the enviro400h hybrids which there are quite a number in my city. But to replace a fleet of perfectly serviceable vehicles is expensive.

Also to design such a vehicle in the first instance takes several years, huge investment, and lots of brainpower. So many new transports appearing on the market may well have been in the design-production process for several years. So give things a little time and you will see changes coming in but not simply overnight. I certainly can see it in my city, london definitely has no excuse with the investment it sees relative to the poor north.

[pwa]

I struggle to imagine anything much dirtier than a 10 year old high mileage Skoda Octavia minicab, they are literally eye-watering

Actually the 10 year old Stagecoach 'Enviro400' busses probably are much worse..

Did you see the BBC report a few days ago in which a (admittedly privately owned) Skoda Octavia diesel (circa 2009) was tested for real world pollution and found to produce much less NOX than a brand new Nissan Qasqi? (excuse spelling) Not saying the old VAG engine is clean but it's not as bad as most. Any badly maintained or totally shagged engine can be very dirty, of course.

[Mark R]

Yeah I saw it.

I doesn't really have any wider implications other than one knackered old VW golf (which did not have a working catalyst and would have failed the UK MOT) happened to have higher level of specific pollutants than the diesel.

I don't know what else can be read into it??

Does the article excuse diesels somehow?

Stinky old gross polluting petrols cars are out there, just in much smaller numbers than the now ubiqutous TDI.

[Mark R]

As I have said many times. the problem with diesels is not limited to NOx. It is the NOx plus the Partially burned hydrocarbons, plus the PM. Altogether a public health nightmare.