HomeClimate Change BoardCoventry Climate Change Board finally created

Comments

Coventry Climate Change Board finally created — 2 Comments

  1. Hi, This sounds like a good move although I may have my reservations at present, although I’m be optimistic for the moment.

    In the comments I’ve heard nothing reflect the most pressing issue which is to save the lives of Coventry residents due to NO2 and other emissions from vehicles (as defined by Department of Environment and Central government who have placed Coventry under a legal directive to reduce NO2, UNICEF, WHO and other independent bodies). Thx.

    I have been in dialogue with John Seddon and Emma Spandley on a number of occasions (letters on ‘Save our Air -Coventry’ Facebook page for ref). Based on their refusal to alter their views I feel the only way forward is legal action.

    In an extensive study by Springer Research entitled:

    Greater nitrogen dioxide concentrations at child versus adult breathing heights close to urban main road kerbside

    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11869-015-0370-3#Tab1

    They concluded:

    “Measurements by passive diffusion tubes at differing distances from main roads in Edinburgh, UK, have shown NO2 concentrations at 0.8 m above the ground to be significantly greater than NO2 concentration at 2.0 m above the ground”

    In another report entitled ‘CITY AIR
    QUALITY AT HEIGHT – Lessons for Developers & Planners’ used by Camden Council’

    “Air dispersion models predict a rapid improvement in air quality with height”

    I have written confirmation that the passive diffusion tubes that used for these readings are over 3 meters and therefore the data that the Planning Committee are basing their decisions on are incorrect.

    I shared the funding of these two extensive, independent reports with the Planning Committee that “..NO2 concentrations are considerably higher..” lower to the ground (say at the height a child breathes) The company who wrote the Air Quality report saying that there are minimal causes for concern, refuses to say at what height the air samples were taken. One of the members of the planning committee, at this meeting, asked Emma Spandley, essentially whether the data in the Air Quality report for the housing proposal on Sphinx, was correct Emma’s reply was “yes”.

    I’m appalled that decisions made by CCC, which directly increase NO2, by approving inner city developments and that directly affect the well-being of thousands of children in Coventry, are beginning made based on data that has no integrity.

    There’s no point in dialogue need on this. Emma and John and even the Planning Committee have made their position clear. Not a single person has said “Hey, maybe we should look into this!”

    If any other profession were to copy this format, criminal charges would be pressed. “Excuse me Captain, when I was getting on the plane one of the tyres had a big nail sticking out of it” “Oh, don’t worry, it’ll be fine!” You’d never hear the end of it!! “Ah, yes, gas customer service person, yes, I’m smelling gas outside my house” “Ah, don’t worry, probably a cow was passing by!”

    Minimal reductions of NO2 will be achieved by the suggestions of improving good road systems. The issue is the quantity of traffic! Plain and simple. By approving multiple inner city developments hundreds of additional vehicles are brought into the city. Almost all these additional vehicles, if they belonged to people living on the outskirts of the city, would go to local shops on the outskirts of the city or drive around (not through the city) using the major roads – it’s just faster and easier.

    Reports prove that the cheapest way to permanently reduce NO2 and other air pollutants, is by having green areas with large trees. Instead of using the £30 million on roads, buy some land and have them as parks. The council can increase the well beginning of residents by having recreation areas and walks. Let community groups name them to save upkeep costs.

    Therefore, I would like to hear: 1) what urgency your board makes of this issue and 2) whether you will advise the CCC Planning Committee to stop the approval of hundreds of inner city developments, which is the fastest, cheapest and most logical solution to halt the increase of NO2 poisoning.

    Housing that is approved on the outskirts of the city will meet the needs of the growth of the city whilst alleviating the high concentrations of NO2 along the main routes through the city, thereby reducing deaths and increasing the week being of residents.

    With kind regards
    Steve Smith

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>