London Calling

Key messages from the 13th IUAPPA World Clean Air Congress

Richard MillsSecretary General, NSCADirector General, IUAPPA

Scope

• Context: key conclusions from the

Congress

• Challenges for the further development

of the Air Quality Framework in Europe

• Meeting air quality targets in cities:

reviewing the measures and needs

Context: Old, New and Emerging Issues

• Air quality is improving, but not fast enough: In August 2003, up to 40% of 2045

additional “heat wave” deaths in the UK were due to poor air quality (Stedman et al). Many more in mainland Europe.

Was 2003 exceptional, or a sign of things to come?

Some evidence suggests that 2003 was more consistent with weather patterns than previous wet summers.

Context: Old, New and Emerging Issues

• Health impacts: support for impacts at lower concentrations WHO reports for CAFE:

• Clear health benefits of “going further”, esp. for PM and Ozone

• NO2 cannot be discounted and needs more research

• NO2 show linear relationship with ultra fine particle number (Ayers)

Particle toxicity:• Traffic generated particles significantly more toxic

than general particle load (Schwartz)• Some urban particles have a higher oxidative

capacity (I.e. more damaging) than ROFA (Kelly)

Context: Old, New and Emerging Issues

• Integrated assessment: climate change and air quality should be moved closer together Joel Schwartz – increased “dieselisation” on

climate grounds could prove a “public health disaster”

IIASA’s GAINS model work shows significant cost savings (-ve in some scenarios) when climate change and air pollution controls are combined

Need to ensure that CAFE and the NECD reforms don’t become separated:

• Revision of current ceilings• Inclusion of particles and other pollutants

Developing the Air Quality Framework

• Current system has two dominant features: Based on limit values; Focused on hotspots.

• Two questions: Is the system effective in delivering the best

overall health and environmental outcomes for available resources?

Is the system robust – will changes be needed to ensure it can survive and develop?

The Limit Value System: Emerging Issues

• Limit values the essential basis for any realistic system, but changes will be needed to keep the system relevant and effective: When are limit values appropriate? Everyone pays, but few benefit? The conflicting sides of equity The needs of regulation

The Limit Value System: Emerging Issues

• When are limit values appropriate as a control tool: Situation: widespread non-compliance (i.e.

when Framework Directive was developed)• Standards act as a spur to additional national and

international regulation• Actions to meet standard should benefit society

as a whole

Situation: widespread compliance (i.e. now)• Ensure that groups are not exposed to risks

considered significant• Actions tend to benefit few people• Little action on exposure below the value

The Limit Value System: Emerging Issues

• Everyone pays, but few benefit?

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

Population exposure above 20 µg

Population exposure from below 20 µg

The Limit Value System: Emerging Issues

• Equity: conflicting arguments Is it fair to leave some exposed to levels of

pollution above the limit values while the overall exposure is reduced?

Is it fair that the majority who live in areas below the limit values receive no additional benefit from reductions while they wait for the few more polluted areas to “catch up”?

The Limit Value System: Emerging Issues

• Criteria for good regulation: Equity (distribution of costs and benefits

across stakeholders)

Efficiency

Robustness

• Does the current system deliver this?

• Can other systems deliver this?

Some Possible Ways Forward

• Explore supplementary/alternative approaches: Gap closure Unified risk analysis Others?

• Change the compliance test? Highly undesirable Scrutiny of plans and programmes is the key

• Start review/research process for medium term change System change before thematic strategy clearly

impractical… …but Commission and Member States must start looking now at how system will evolve in medium term

Clean Air For Europe: Reducing the Compliance Gap

• Current situation in cities:

Common problems (particles, NO2) and

common sources (traffic)

Many good measures already being

pursued…

…but unlikely to meet limit values

Clean Air For Europe: Reducing the Compliance Gap

• Some current options – Transport Congestion charging: demand management

can work but charging needs to cover wider areas (London)

Low emission zones: issues of timing and implementation (Gothenburg)

“Intelligent Transport” (Rome)

Clean Air For Europe: Reducing the Compliance Gap

• Some current options – land use planning and industry Zoning and dispersal of industry – new

approaches

Planning framework – “material consideration”

Land use planning agreements (Greenwich)

Clean Air For Europe: Reducing the Compliance Gap

• Needs now: Strong political leadership at local, national and

European level (California) Stronger action by member states, particularly

incentivising the uptake of new Euro Standards (IV and V)

Empowerment by member states to take actions locally, making tools available

Integration of local actions and data into national and international plans

Information exchange Euro standards which reflect urban conditions

(doubts about Euro III performance)

Summary

• Air Quality in Europe needs to refocus on delivering: The best standard of health protection for

all A robust system for the long term Political, technical and financial support for

cities to achieve clean air locally full integration vertically (local, national

international) and horizontally (climate change, economic policy, other policy areas)