cleanairbh.com - Clean Air for Brighton & Hove - Air Pollution - Air Quality

Clean Air Day Walk

2025-06-22T00:00:00Z

A successful clean air walk took place on Clean Air Day.

It was lovely to see a number of doctors and other health care professionals join the walk from the Royal Sussex hospital to Brighton Town Hall.

Dr Gary Fuller, Clean air champion for UK joined us too!

Open Letter to Councillors - Royal College of Physicians 2025 Air Pollution Report, Traffic Plan, Council is Failing its Own Air Pollution Targets, Bus Only ULEZ Cancelled?

2025-06-20T00:00:00Z

Good Afternoon All Councillors

I write this letter as I cannot seem to get any questions approved in the cabinet system anymore; either there is too long a wait between opportunities or my emails are not responded to or are forgotten. It seems like there is some breakdown of the public question system.

Royal College of Physicians 2025 Air Pollution Report on Health

There is a new up to date report from the Royal College of Physicians on air quality that shows poor air quality costs the UK £27 billion pounds and 30,000 deaths (2025 figures). Some of you, especially the Labour councillors, I believe are pretending air quality is not an issue anymore; that is wrong and dangerously misleading people as I have repeatedly warned you; here is more proof.

Lewes Road is one of the most polluted spots in the UK and the RCP document is very relevant to it. When the report says "the gains that have been made have not been the same everywhere" and "people living in the 20% most deprived areas experienced 8% higher average PM2.5 concentrations than those in the 20% least deprived" they are talking about our city Brighton and especially locations such as Lewes Road.

https://www.rcp.ac.uk/media/0yia2peh/rcp-summary-for-policymakers-a-breath-of-fresh-air-responding-to-the-health-challenges-of-modern-air-pollution.pdf

Traffic Plan

I have recently read the proposed transport plan. I was surprised it doesn't sufficiently tackle air pollution on the very polluted roads such as Lewes Road, North Street and Preston Circus. Labour councillors, you are all responsible for providing a safe and healthy environment to your constituents and you are currently failing them; a ten year plan that fails to address this is very concerning.

The plan needs to include a clean air zone as this is the most effective way to reduce the cost and health burden associated with Brighton's very polluted road traffic.
The most polluted roads such as Lewes Road must be higher on the priority list for improvements; I couldn't see anything in the ten year plan.
Reaffirm the promise to meet local air quality targets as set out in the 2022 air quality plan and voted on by all parties. Currently Labour councillors, you are failing badly to meet your targets.
A comparison between electric buses and an urban tramway seems to be missing. Urban trams are more cost effective than electric buses over perhaps a ten year period, more popular, they would also require 3x less energy to run them (quicker to carbon neutral). It seems suspicious that there is no mention of urban trams in a ten year plan. All three hustings I attended for the last local elections I heard Labour councillors talking about how important trams were to them. An entire fleet of electric buses will leave a legacy of dirty tyre based particulates that will be impossible to meet WHO guideline levels.
There is a lack of acknowledgement of the tyre and brake particulates from road traffic that now comprises 60% of road traffic toxic particulates.
There is no acknowledgement that reducing road space will cause a worsening of air pollution and CO2 and more importantly there is no sufficient mitigating action. As demonstrated by the figures below, Cllr Trevor Muten's strategy of hoping that air pollution will go away with a couple of red routes is farcical; Lewes Road is still severely polluted many months (a year) after they were painted.
There is no mention of a need to end polluting diesel. This was in the Brighton & Hove manifesto and is key to improving air quality and should be reaffirmed.
The plan doesn't make make it clear enough that 50% of vehicles on the road will remain non-electric - cities like Oslo have reached that goal already. Nor does it suggest how the city themselves will use a carrot and a stick to encourage people.

My summary of the transport plan is that it completely lacks enough action on improving air quality in the city, doesn't propose any action on the most polluted sections of roads and adds a legacy of tyre particulates for us all to breathe.

The Council is Failing its Own 2022 Daily NO2 Air Pollution Targets

On Lewes Road the latest data shows that 25% of days violated local daily targets. More stringent World Health Organisation levels show safe levels violated on 82% of days. The poor environment of the city is a major factor in why your loved ones, children, relatives, yourselves and your constituents suffer disease. The targets were a promise to constituents and that promise is being broken.

Labour's manifesto promised an end to polluting diesel. A clean air zone is the only way to solve this. It should have been implemented five years ago so significant harm has already occurred. A clean air zone would be better late than never as it would still be relevant in ten years (the Labour plan suggests around 50% of vehicles would still be non-electric in 2035; it would be helpful if that 50% were not the most polluting diesels).

There are two bus routes I've been informed of that will be electrictrified in the next 12 months but these won't run on the most polluted road in the city with the highest levels of deprivation; Lewes Road. Why is the most polluted road not a priority for clean air in the city?

Generally Labour need to stop misleading their constituents that air pollution is safe.

Stats from the sensors and uploaded into google sheets. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15D4smWYWz7ij_OBD8gyZllbWD711EpdwBLXi6DmH00o/

You must demand interventions as a matter of urgency and you must demand a clean air zone if you are serious about looking after one another's health.

Has the Bus Only ULEZ on North Street Been Cancelled

My last survey suggested around 20% of the buses on this stretch were non compliant. Compared to London's ULEZ where only 3% were non compliant. Why such disparity? There are no ULEZ signs either and most of the literature seems to have been removed by the council. It certainly isn't working. Why is it not working? Why has it still not been extended to taxis? Labour you really need to do more!

Air Quality question put to Health Overview & Scrutiny Committee

2024-11-21T00:00:00Z

We asked whether better information on air quality and how to minimise exposures could be provided as part of asthma management plans.

Fourteen Months on Have the Pledges in the 2023 Local Labour Manifesto Been Honoured?

2024-06-17T00:00:00Z

My first impression of Brighton & Hove Labour Party’s 2023 local manifesto looked promising in terms of improving air quality. Strong pledges included statements such as “bring an end to noisy and polluting diesel vehicles” and creating a “healthy environment”. Listening to the 2023 election hustings Labour councillors also promised to make air quality a top priority.

So, fourteen months later, have the Labour Party prioritised clean air, is there any improvement and have these pledges been honoured?

Well the situation is not so rosy; while other cities have seen large improvements, the pollution in our city has largely stagnated. Our most advanced air pollution monitor now tells us that we have some of the worst particulate pollution levels in the UK. On our overly congested and busy narrow roads, nitrogen dioxide sensors tell us we suffer some of the worst pollution in the country which violates the World Health Organisation guidelines by more than four times!

This doesn’t look good but our city has many unused tools in its tool belt. So, what action is being taken to mitigate this very serious health related issue?

Work is being taken to upgrade the monitoring network. Better monitoring can provide residents with additional information about when and where the pollution is most harmful and helps vulnerable people, such as those with respiratory illnesses and young children, to avoid the worst pollution and reduce their exposure levels. It looks likely we will see this soon but the project has been delayed and more importantly it won’t actively lower pollution.

There have been some improvements that should reduce emissions. The biggest improvement is how the council helped the private bus companies apply and secure funding from central government. Some of the local buses have now been upgraded to diesel Euro 6 which are ULEZ compliant and emit lower levels of harmful pollution.

However even in our small bus only ULEZ zone, 10 to 20% of the buses still don’t meet these ULEZ standards and the private bus companies are a long way away from moving all the buses in Brighton to the cleanest diesel vehicles. I would prefer the bus companies to upgrade the rest of their fleet to electric buses instead of diesel. Or alternatively move to trams which are far more efficient compared to electric buses and don’t emit brake, road or tyre particulate pollution.

The most effective and most meaningful way to reduce harmful Nitrogen Dioxide pollution from vehicles is to declare a Clean Air Zone and this should be the priority if providing clean air really is a serious intention. A Clean Air Zone would allow our council to make an application for a slice of the £900 million in government funding to help low income drivers switch to cleaner vehicles and alternative transport. A Clean Air Zone would help regulate the most polluting vehicles and help those whose health has been harmed by pollution. The worst off in our society are surely those with poor health.

With such strong words in Labour’s 2023 manifesto and the promise to “bring an end to noisy and polluting diesel vehicles” it came as a shock when Cllr Muten, chair of the transport committee, ruled out a Clean Air Zone soon after taking control of the Transport committee. It would have been much fairer for Labour to have admitted their intentions before the election; especially as Cllr Miller specifically told a hustings in 2023 that a Clean Air Zone would remain an option.

Brighton & Hove Labour have been supportive of interventions that support personal freedoms. However one person’s freedom shouldn’t curtail another person’s freedom. The freedom to pollute curtails a more fundamental right; that to live in a healthy environment.

The government somewhat listened to air quality professionals and strengthened the regulations around Smoke Control Areas in 2021 and 2022. These areas are the only meaningful intervention available to regulate excessive smoke from wood and coal fires. Unfortunately Labour blocked expanding the area in 2022 leaving the majority of the city unprotected. Cllr Rowkins, head of the Environment committee, said there is “little point in expanding” the existing small area reiterating Labour’s continued intention to rule out the most effective clean air initiatives. Incredibly in 2023 Cllr Rowkins blamed the Green Party for not taking action when it was Labour who used their veto powers to block improvements. Labour’s Cllr Appich went one step further in the wrong direction when she told the committee that “people should be able to burn what they want”; this is a potentially illegal activity and the comments were extremely disappointing.

Air pollution at the levels Brighton & Hove experience are a direct cause of asthma, heart disease, cancer and many other diseases.

Cllr Muten has consistently told us that Labour have been developing and implementing a plan with “targeted interventions” and a “data led approach”. Cllr Rowkins has told his committee he “believes in preventative healthcare” and air pollution needs to be “treated as a priority”. These words sound good but after fourteen months without any meaningful action our patience and trust is waning. We need clean air to be made a priority like Labour promised.

Despite their words Labour seem to support the right to pollute over the right to a healthy environment.

In order to regain our trust, the Brighton & Hove Labour Party must be more explicit and detail exactly how and when action on air quality will be taken and how they will end polluting diesel in our city. Failure to act on air pollution will cause ill health.

An election is a great time to renew their pledges and we call on Labour to tell us exactly how they will bring an end to polluting diesel in the city.

The Labour controlled council must start implementing the most effective interventions such as emission zones and smoke control areas so that we can indeed experience a healthy environment.

A Full Smoke Control Area Is Better Than a Tiny Smoke Control Area

2024-05-16T00:00:00Z

Brighton & Hove suffered the highest background particulate pollution in 2023 in England according to DEFRA monitors and our city is the largest without a full Smoke Control Area (SCA). However Brighton's Labour group seems to continue to delay, block and object to an expansion of our small SCA. Their recent defence is that it might not be effective enough to reduce pollution due to the low level of previous enforcement. This is certainly an improvement to Cllr Appich's shocking justification for blocking the expansion in 2022; "people should be able to burn what they want" but this latest response still falls short as it ignores the 2022 update of the Clean Air Act that improves enforcement and the fact SCAs, even when not enforced, act as a deterrent.

An alternative to a SCA is to begin phasing out wood & coal as fuels for domestic heating nationally and I agree. A complete phase out would be easier to enforce and would be justified. In doing so we could reduce pm2.5 emissions by some 20 or 30% which in cities could mean even larger reductions to exposure levels where it can hang around on cold windless evenings. However neither Labour nor Conservatives support phasing it out and have failed to suggest any alternative plan to reduce PM2.5 from domestic solid fuel burning.

Poor Air Quality continues to be the biggest environmental risk to human health (EIC 2023) and contributes to poor health. Improving our health and avoiding unnecessary suffering should be the goal. We must reduce the amount of smoke we emit in order to reduce the amount of pollution we breathe in.

The government admitted that enforcement of SCAs was almost impossible and have finally acted. The 1993 Clean Air Act and the wording on SCAs was updated substantially in 2022 in order to tackle this exact problem and to make it easier for councils to improve air quality and enforcement through SCAs.

The reason SCAs were not enforced in the past is because there was no clear legal framework to enforcement. In the 2022 update, the act provides a much clearer framework to enforcement, moving the offence away from criminal and making it a civil debt. This I understand makes it easier to issue and recover fines. The update creates a framework with good detail that specifies how to deal with liablilty, objections, notices, appeals and recovery. It might take a while for councils to get the best out of the new legislation and make use of it but I believe we should help in that effort and encourage councils to use this new framework.

SCAs I agree are not strict enough but they have been made more strict in the 2022 update, for example one of a number of improvements reduces the maximum allowed output of a stove from 5 to 3 grams of smoke per hour. This is still too much but currently, in Brighton where the majority of us are not protected by a SCA, there is no limit at all!

In order to improve health, a complete phase out of wood & coal burning should be the ultimate and urgent goal but as neither Labour nor Conservative parties have indicated they want to phase out wood & coal the only intervention we have is to expand and properly enforce our SCAs. Currently Labour and Conservative councillors seem to be blocking this intervention.

Even if the political will was there it would take a long time for the legislation to pass, for example the 2022 update I believe took over three years.

In the short term, especially in Brighton where only a tiny portion of the city is covered by a SCA (https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/data/sca/), it is the only serious intervention available to our council.

I expect Labour's next delay would be to suggest that we should wait to see if the new legislation works before expanding SCAs. I don't understand what this would achieve other than provide further delays. People generally obey laws; if a full SCA was brought in, the majority of people would obey that law and stop burning in the most polluting ways and one would expect that emissions would be reduced. A minority would continue but the situation overall would be improved and we do have the new enforcement framework to assist.

Even if the SCA didn't work for the whole city it might provide assistance to vulnerable individuals who are suffering a steady stream of smoke entering their property. This I believe is justification enough to expand the SCA.

An expanded Smoke Control Area to cover the whole of Brighton would be more effective than a tiny one and I urge our council to take the action required without any further delay. We will support them in this. I do agree SCAs won’t completely solve the problem but they will surely help.

If the Labour and Conservative councillors who voted down SCAs in the past won’t introduce a full SCA they must provide a clear and workable strategy that will reduce wood & coal emissions; currently they are failing on this and have been failing for nearly five years since our original question was put to them at committee.

My strong opinion is that in the short term, locally, as well as raising awareness, there is no other option but to expand and enforce the smoke control area.

Good health to you all!

The Necessary Interventions to Improve Air Quality - Local Election 2023

2023-04-24T00:00:00Z

My need to campaign for clean air began when I accepted the evidence that my asthma is made worse and even caused by the poor air quality I have been exposed to. The medical evidence for this link is well documented by organisations such as the World Health Organisation, British Medial Association and Public Health England.

The seriousness of my own lung disease has placed me in hospital a number of times with my life put at risk. Obviously I need and want clean air for myself but I also want it for the thousands of others whose health is adversely affected by poor air quality. Fortunately our city can make changes that will improve our air quality.

Diseases that are known to be caused, worsened or linked to air pollution include dementia, asthma, complications in pregnancy, mental health, lung cancer, diabetes, heart disease, respiratory infections and shorter lives. These are common diseases of course that can affect us and our loved ones.

City walkers, bus passengers, those waiting at taxi ranks, cyclists, residents, city workers and even motorists with young children on board are exposed to levels of pollution that can cause significant harm.

I try my best to focus less on party politics and more on the mechanisms that can improve air quality and spread awareness. However it is now local election time and it is important our new and re-elected councillors understand the best ways to improve air quality.

The key principles to improving air quality are: Reduce - emissions, Extend - the distance between the source of pollution and us & Protect - vulnerable people.

Air pollution is above World Health Organisation guideline levels everywhere in our city. On the most polluted roads pollution remains at illegal levels and over four times WHO guideline levels for health despite the latest data available (2021) having lower levels of traffic due to covid restrictions.

The worst performing measurements include Lewes Road, Hollingbury Road and North Street; all violating UK legal limits. Many of these roads are not just central ring roads like in other cities with the odd home but these are key active travel routes, the main walking routes for pupils making their way to school, locations for clinics and pharmacies and are homes to thousands of residents.

It will not be an easy task to improve air quality to the level the WHO recommends; it would require a reduction on these worst performing roads of over 80%. My feelings though are clear that every effort should be made to improve air quality quickly and effectively.

What can be done in our city to improve air quality?

A ULEZ (Ultra Low Emission Zone) is one of the most effective ways to improve traffic related air quality and only affects a small percentage of vehicles whilst avoiding an outright ban. London’s air quality improved by up to 44% after just a few years in central London and is currently expanding its zone from central and inner London to the whole of the city. I don’t want their dirty vehicles sold on the cheap to our city polluting us further; I want the same protection. Without a ULEZ our city will continue to be a polluted one.

The residential burning of wood and coal has increased over recent years. Solid fuel burning is now responsible for 17% of total UK particulate emissions. B&H is the largest city in England without a full Smoke Control Area to protect its residents. Not having a full area is a very unique position for a city with the population density of Brighton & Hove. Labour and Conservatives recently voted to delay expanding to a full zone even though a zone would continue to allow residents to use their burners but only require less polluting types of fuels.

Electrifying the public transport network should also be a key focus. All the city’s double decker buses are fueled exclusively by diesel (contrary to misinformation, none can be plugged in to charge; even the newest double deckers are fueled only by diesel). Less than 1% of taxis are fully electric, 75% of taxis are diesel with around 20% of those diesels non ULEZ compliant. As Sir Chris Whitty said in his annual report; harmful pollution from tyre and road wear would persist even with a fully electric transport network. Trams are three times more efficient than electric buses with hydrogen being the least efficient.

Cycling and walking are effectively pollution free modes of travel; it should be made safe and the routes pollution free. One way of achieving this is to build out the pavement to increase the distance between us and the source of the pollution.

New homes have been built on the most polluted roads in the city exposing new residents to harmful levels of pollution and restricting air dispersal (Hollingbury Road, London Road & Lewes Road developments). Some developments have replaced nature lined clean air walks, with car parks and roads (Moulsecoomb Hub) or have not taken advantage when straightforward opportunities to improve walking and cycling routes exist (Moulsecoomb Place). Is it time to strengthen the city plan to ensure developers better meet their clean air and active travel responsibilities?

Surely, the right to an environment that does not harm us should be a priority. In 2022 Green, Labour, Conservative and Independent councillors did agree to reduce air pollution in the latest five year air quality plan which was encouraging but without the necessary interventions required we in Brighton & Hove will continue to breathe polluted air.

Is it Time for Clean Air Taxi Incentives?

2023-02-22T00:00:00Z

23% of all the taxis in our city are of the age, manufacturer and fuel type (diesel) associated with the VW emissions scandal. As a result, these vehicles are much more likely to emit more pollution than other vehicles. The more pollution we are exposed to, the more damage it will do to our health. Even though these vehicles may be newer and have the euro 6 standard stamp of approval, they will likely perform worse than intended; these vehicles are defective.

The good news is that owners who have been mis-sold these poorly performing vehicles can claim large amounts of money back from the manufacturer. The manufacturers agreed to settle a group claim and pay compensation to the owners of these vehicles. Almost £200 million has already been paid out. If a product causes harm we cannot reasonably expect the product to remain in use, especially when those who are harmed by the defective product are not able to avoid the harm. This is a shame for both those exposed to poor air quality and the drivers but the drivers have accepted a compensation settlement. Some recent studies have shown that somewhere between a third and a half of all childhood asthma cases in cities are caused by being exposed to high levels of pollution. It is absolutely vital to improve the air quality.

Taxi drivers on average drive around 20,000 miles per year with some reaching up to 40,000. Those miles will usually be driven inside the city right next to the places where we spend long periods of time. These locations, where we spend the majority of our time, are the areas that we need to concentrate on most in order to clean up our environment. Vehicles that fail emission testing shouldn't be driven next to our schools, bus stops, hospitals, doctor's surgeries, pharmacies, homes and parks.

Some european countries have banned these vehicles in parts of their cities. They deemed the harm they cause unacceptable. However I feel our city will continue to be slow to react to the health harm these vehicles cause. While we continue to wake up to our slow acknowledgement these vehicles do cause us ill health, in the meantime, I feel we should at least provide incentives to drivers to clean up these vehicles. Grants and reduced licence fees for cleaner vehicles could easily be rolled out by our local council.

In Cambridge (and other cities), the incentives are provided by cheaper license fees. The different categories being electric, euro 6 and older vehicles. To preserve council financial accounts, when reducing license fees, some of the lost revenue could be switched to those with older vehicles. Cambridge actually offers their electric vehicle licenses for free. It is my opinion we could do this in Brighton & Hove right now.

The council could go further still by awarding grants to upgrade vehicles. In fact Uber corporation help drivers save money for vehicle upgrades by automatically creating a savings pot by taking a small percentage from their taxi fares.

Taxi drivers are exposed to some of the highest levels of pollution of all city workers because they spend hours in traffic, waiting regularly at taxi ranks near idling engines and rarely spend time away from these polluted environments. When talking about cleaning up the air we often talk about protecting the most vulnerable such as children, the elderly and those with existing health conditions. However it is also important to think about reducing the exposures of those who likely breathe in the most pollution; taxi drivers themselves.

Bus operators have been forced to upgrade their fleet due to the ULEZ on North Street and Western Road. The ULEZ applies to only buses with taxis unaffected. Many of the upgrades to the bus fleets will have been paid for by passenger fares. If the poorest and more efficient transport users can afford to upgrade to cleaner vehicles and taxi drivers in other cities (and countries) continue to upgrade at a faster rate, surely it is time to introduce some incentives as a matter of priority.

Air pollution causes significant ill health to tens of thousands of Brighton & Hove residents and it is time we took the steps to improve lives. People should walk, cycle, e-cycle, take a train or possibly a bus to get around the city but, now that drivers have settled on compensation, the remaining taxis still in demand inthe city should be upgraded as quickly as possible to avoid causing any more harm to the drivers themselves and those others around the city.

SCA Extension - Question Posed at ETS meeting on 17th of January 2023

2023-01-17T00:00:00Z

On this latest ETS meeting I asked again about an extended Smoke Control Area. A Labour Group amendment, backed by the Conservative party, voted to delay (or possibly prevent) an extended SCA. What is the impact of this?

14% of the city suffer asthma.

Between 1/3 and half of all childhood asthma is caused by poor air quality (Bradford & Barcelona studies). Air pollution also causes heart disease, COPD, lung cancer, low birth weight, premature birth, dementia, organ damage and developmental problems.

38% of particulate emissions (UK) are from solid fuel burning (DEFRA)

Particulate pollution increased in Preston Park the last three years (AQASR).

A Labour Group amendment was submitted to the recent AQAP delaying a SCA extension and denying residents protection against the worst solid fuel pollution offences; will research into SCA extension be made a priority?