| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Air pollution in Putney | |
| Posted by: | Tim Henderson | |
| Date/Time: | 14/05/13 08:35:00 |
| I guess the focus is on NO2 as the government argue that we are mainly meeting the EU limits for PM10 and the hanging sword of infraction fines for that is not evident. The concept of joined up thinking to holistically consider all air quality costs and health benefits is too far to go ! The emission savings numbers are rather crude and getting a bit old now. I haven't found the original Marginal abatement cost curve work but I think it dates back to 2010 and I suppose it looked at what was expected to be the national picture in 2015 at that time. If there were only expected to be that number of buses of that Euro category that could be replaced with hydrogen, then only that tonnage of NOx could be put in that box. The Impact Assessment for "A Low Emissions Zone framework for inclusion in the Time Extension Notification for compliance with the EU limit value for NO2" dated 13/1/2011 includes the comment : "The reasons outlined above are complex and underline the difficulties in both predicting the impacts of existing road transport abatement measures and in identifying additional measures that we can have confidence will bring about further emission reductions. Evidence is still emerging and our knowledge and understanding of NO2 road transport emission sources are not yet sufficiently well advances to be continue to develop, and with them, our understanding of the achievability of meeting the NO2 limit values." Hence the MACC was produced with a fairly primitive understanding of what real world NOx emissions were doing and it would be helpful to revisit it. It may also be needed to extend it to other vehicle types. |