New EAC report says government has given no guarantees that air quality targets will be met with Heathrow 3rd runway

The EAC has now published a follow up report to their November 2015 report, after the oral evidence given by Chris Grayling on 30th November. It is highly critical of the government on its assurances that the runway will not increase air pollution. The EAC says the government’s air quality analysis is over-optimistic. “The effectiveness of the Government’s new air quality plan will be integral to determining whether Heathrow expansion can be delivered within legal limits. We are concerned that the timing of the draft National Policy Statement consultation means the Government will be unable to carry out a comprehensive re-analysis of the air quality impacts, using the new air quality plan, before the [NPS] consultation process is complete.” … “The Government must publish such an assessment alongside the final NPS, it must work towards a scenario in which all road likes affected by expansion have predicted concentrations below the limit value. Whilst the health impact assessment is a step in the right direction, the Government must carry out work to reduce the significant health impacts identified, before construction of the third runway begins.” ….”Since the Government intends to withdraw the UK from the EU before April 2019, there is no certainty about what our legally binding air quality limits will be after 2019. We are disappointed that these limits are not clearly laid out in the Draft NPS.” And there is much more ….

.

New EAC report  Carbon Emissions, Air Quality and Noise Seventh Report of Session 2016–17

23.2.2017

The Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) in the House of Commons has been a key means of holding the DfT, Heathrow and the government to account on the environmental impacts of aviation expansion.

There are reports and associated evidence on all its inquiries, on the EAC website.

In November 2015 the EAC published an interim report on the Airports Commission’s recommendation for airport expansion in the South East of England. In October 2016 the Government announced its support for a third runway at Heathrow, in line with the Commission’s recommendation. The Government has since published a draft Airports National Policy Statement.

The EAC has now published a follow up report to their November 2015 report.  It deals with air pollution (including surface access), carbon emissions and noise.

The EAC heard oral evidence from Chris Grayling, the Transport Secretary, and Caroline Low of the DfT, on 30th November 2015.

In the summary of the new report, the EAC say:

“We have seen little evidence so far of the “step change” in the Government’s approach to environmental mitigation which we called for in our interim report. To inform the National Policy Statement process, the Government needs to set out new modelling on air quality following the High Court’s latest ruling and a new approach to air quality post 2019; an emissions reduction strategy that will allow the UK’s carbon budgets to be met and effective noise mitigation measures enforced by an Independent Aviation Noise Authority. The Government must not allow our air quality standards to be watered down as a result of leaving the EU.”

Below are just the sections from the February 2017 EAC report on air pollution.

 

The Airports Commission Report Follow-up: Carbon Emissions, Air Quality and Noise Seventh Report of Session 2016–17

23.2.2017

 

Air pollution

To inform the National Policy Statement process, the Government needs to set out new modelling on air quality following the High Court’s latest ruling and a new approach to air quality post 2019.

The Government must not allow our air quality standards to be watered down as a result of leaving the EU. On air quality, the Government must produce a new air quality strategy, following the latest High Court judgement, to determine whether Heathrow Airport expansion can be delivered within legal air quality limits. It should set out how it will avoid an increase in the number of serious breaches of EU air quality limits.

On needing the UK to ensure that the UK has an equivalent or better level of environmental protection after we leave the EU, the EAC says the UK’s air quality standards, which derive from EU legislation, are no exception, and the Government should set out in response to this report, and during the National Policy Statement process, how it plans to maintain or improve upon current air quality standards.


There is a long section on air quality – too long to copy here.

It can be seen at https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmenvaud/840/84005.htm#_idTextAnchor007


The air quality conclusion:

32.

The UK has already breached legal NO2 limits in London for 2017. The High Court has ordered the Government to produce a new plan to tackle air pollution by July 2017, the conclusions of both of the Government’s air quality re-analysis studies are based on the previous, over-optimistic plan. The effectiveness of the Government’s new air quality plan will be integral to determining whether Heathrow expansion can be delivered within legal limits. We are concerned that the timing of the draft NPS consultation means the Government will be unable to carry out a comprehensive reanalysis of the air quality impacts, using the new air quality plan, before the consultation process is complete. The Government must publish such an assessment alongside the final National Policy Statement, it must work towards a scenario in which all road links affected by expansion have predicted concentrations below the limit value. Whilst the health impact assessment is a step in the right direction, the Government must carry out work to reduce the significant health impacts identified, before construction of the third runway begins.

33.

Since the Government intends to withdraw the UK from the EU before April 2019, there is no certainty about what our legally binding air quality limits will be after 2019. We are disappointed that these limits are not clearly laid out in the Draft National Policy Statement. We encourage the committee scrutinising the NPS to consider this report and its recommendations, and urge the Government to clarify its position in its response to this report.

34. We are concerned about the Government’s apparent reliance on low emission technology to solve the problem of air quality. We do not consider encouraging people to buy ULEVs an adequate response to the significant health impacts of air pollution and we have no confidence that the Government will meet its 60% target. The Government should work with Defra on an air quality alert system for people who are especially vulnerable to the effects of short-term exposure to pollutants.


Conclusions and recommendations

Air Quality

1. The UK has already breached legal NO2 limits in London for 2017. The High Court has ordered the Government to produce a new plan to tackle air pollution by July 2017, the conclusions of both of the Government’s air quality re-analysis studies are based on the previous, over-optimistic plan. The effectiveness of the Government’s new air quality plan will be integral to determining whether Heathrow expansion can be delivered within legal limits. We are concerned that the timing of the draft NPS consultation means the Government will be unable to carry out a comprehensive re-analysis of the air quality impacts, using the new air quality plan, before the consultation process is complete. (Paragraph 32)

2. The Government must publish such an assessment alongside the final National Policy Statement, it must work towards a scenario in which all road links affected by expansion have predicted concentrations below the limit value. Whilst the health impact assessment is a step in the right direction, the Government must carry out work to reduce the significant health impacts identified, before construction of the third runway begins. (Paragraph 32)

3. Since the Government intends to withdraw the UK from the EU before April 2019, there is no certainty about what our legally binding air quality limits will be after 2019. We are disappointed that these limits are not clearly laid out in the Draft National Policy Statement. (Paragraph 33)

4. We encourage the committee scrutinising the NPS to consider this report and its recommendations, and urge the Government to clarify its position in its response to this report. (Paragraph 33)

5. We are concerned about the Government’s apparent reliance on low emission technology to solve the problem of air quality. We do not consider encouraging people to buy ULEVs an adequate response to the significant health impacts of air pollution and we have no confidence that the Government will meet its 60% target. (Paragraph 34)

6. The Government should work with Defra on an air quality alert system for people who are especially vulnerable to the effects of short-term exposure to pollutants. (Paragraph 34)

7. The Government has not yet published a comprehensive assessment of the infrastructure requirements of an expanded Heathrow, including an outline of costs, responsibilities and accountability. (Paragraph 44)

8. The Government must publish such an assessment and consult on it before publishing a final National Policy Statement. (Paragraph 44)

9.We reiterate that we foresee legal and commercial risks down the line if clear responsibilities and accountability for meeting air quality targets are not set out at the beginning of the process. For example, Heathrow have said there will be “no more cars on the road” as a result of expansion. (Paragraph 45)

10.There needs to be clarity over how this pledge will be delivered and monitored, the consequences if it is not met and the implications of that for local authorities’ responsibilities to deliver air quality compliance. (Paragraph 45)

.


And they say:

Surface access

Surface access is widely considered the main contributor to airport related pollution. There is no agreement about the costs of required access improvements between the Government, Transport for London and local authorities.

The Government must produce a fair assessment of the costs of expected transport improvements needed. We foresee legal and commercial risks if monitoring and responsibility for delivering measures such as Heathrow’s “no more cars on the road” pledge are not clearly set out.

Such measures will only have credibility if they are legally enforceable.

In our report, ‘The Future of the Natural Environment after the EU Referendum’, we called on the Government to ensure that the UK has an equivalent or better level of environmental protection after we leave the EU.


.

See the EAC report 

 


 

The Environmental Audit Committee, chaired by Mary Creagh, heard oral evidence from Chris Grayling, and Caroline Low (Dft) on 30th November.

“The Airports Commission Report: Carbon Emissions, Air Quality and Noise, HC 840 Wednesday 30 November 2016

Members present: Mary Creagh (Chair); Peter Aldous; Caroline Ansell; Glyn Davies; Caroline Lucas; Mr Gavin Shuker.

Questions 1 – 133 Witnesses: Rt Hon Chris Grayling MP, Secretary of State for Transport, and Caroline Low, Director of Airport Capacity, Department for Transport.

 

http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/environmental-audit-committee/the-airports-commission-reportcarbon-emissionsair-quality-and-noise/oral/44113.pdf

.

.

.