Written evidence submitted by Bristol City Council
The Core Cities work closely together on Air Quality issues.
Compliance with air quality objectives for annual mean and hourly mean nitrogen dioxide is still several years away. EURO VI engines may reduce emissions but their effect will not be realised for several years. Uncertainty remains about their effectiveness in real – world driving conditions.
Analysis of health impacts of air quality has been conducted in Bristol using the Public Health Framework risk factors for exposure to PM2.5. This analysis estimates 188 annual deaths from air pollution, 24 of which arise from road traffic emissions. Around seven people a year die in Bristol from road traffic accidents.
Political interest in air quality is increasing, with a stated commitment from the elected mayor to improve air quality in the city. The award of European Green Capital to Bristol in 2015 has increased pressure for improvements in air quality.
Bristol is investing heavily in improvements to public transport infrastructure and supporting sustainable travel modes. A major investment in MetroBus has recently been approved and we continue to build on high rates of cycling stimulated by Bristol’s Cycling City award in 2008.
Bristol is also innovating to secure infrastructure which will support growth in the use Electric Vehicles (EV) in the city by installing charging points and ICT systems to support EV drivers.
Interventions to further address air quality in the city will be included in a Place Strategy to be consulted on in 2015.
Addressing air quality through Low Emission Zones has been proposed by Defra since 2011 and has also been promoted in Bristol. Bristol City Council would welcome further research to indicate the effectiveness of this approach in Bristol, and nationally. We have already commissioned research on LEZ’s but feel that further work is needed. In particular we would welcome guidance on a national framework for LEZ’s to give clarity to inter city freight and bus operators. We feel that this could be an activity where the core cities could add value.
Bristol understands the need for greater control of some aspects of public transport in order to control emissions. While mechanisms exist to regulate bus emissions through Quality Bus Partnerships and the Traffic Commissioner, we feel that this route is cumbersome and inefficient. Direct control over minimum emissions standards for buses in specific geographical zones would offer a much more powerful incentive for bus operators to improve vehicle fleets and deploy clean vehicles in polluted areas.
Similarly we understand the need to support smaller bus operators, who often run fleets of older, relatively polluting vehicles. Currently, funds to improve bus fleets are subject to bidding processes, e.g. OLEV, the green bus fund. There is considerable overhead in the bidding process for local authorities, which is becoming difficult to service in these times of austerity. We feel that a simpler allocation of funding to cities, based on their local air quality needs would be a fairer and more efficient mechanism, freeing up council officers to focus on delivery rather than bidding. The overall size of the funds for improving buses is low and the opportunities for accessing them are sporadic. A higher level of funding with greater accessibility would enable faster introduction of clean buses.
We recognise that freight is an important contribution to economic growth, but also to pollution in cities. There are significant uncertainties around the demand for freight services from retail, industrial and personal sectors. Bristol has a freight consolidation centre, as do most other core cities, and there is potential for expansion and further consolidation, but without understanding the existing patterns it is difficult to plan ways of reducing unnecessary freight movements. Government could usefully commission research in core cities that could inform strategic decisions to support further efficiencies in freight movements in cities.
Incentives for “dieselisation” exist at a national level, in pursuit of understood benefits for fuel efficiency and consequent carbon emissions. However it is now well understood that the shift to diesels has significantly contributed to non compliance with NO2 and PM10 objectives. Policy interventions to reverse these incentives would begin to reduce emissions of these harmful pollutants.
Recent changes in planning policy have begun to negatively impact the planning authorities’ ability to reduce exposure to harmful levels of pollution. Prior approval for change of use from offices to residential means that the conversion from offices to residential is no longer subject to planning permission, and hence the requirement for an air quality assessment. In Bristol we are seeing large numbers of offices being converted in the city centre and hence the introduction of new exposure to high levels of pollution with no mitigation. This policy should be risk assessed for health impact with a view to reinstating the requirement for planning permission if the applications are within air quality management areas.
The current Review and Assessment process for air quality works well and delivers local accountability for air quality in cities. Resource pressures have meant that we have had to reduce monitoring in Bristol in recent years and the limited funds that are available through air quality grants only enable relatively insignificant actions to be taken to improve air quality. A higher level of funding for monitoring, reporting and improving air quality would assist local authorities in tackling poor air quality and consequently improving this important aspect of public health.
17 October 2014