Supreme Court hears ClientEarth case on getting faster UK action to comply with legal NO2 limits
Monday, 20 April 2015
The Supreme Court in the UK heard ClientEarth’s case against the UK Government over its failure to meet legal limits for air pollution, for the final time on 16th April. This is the culmination of a 4-year battle in the UK and EU courts. The UK has been in breach of EU NO2 limit values in 16 areas. The Supreme Court case follows the 2014 ruling by the ECJ which held that the UK must have a plan to achieve air quality standards in the ‘shortest time possible’. The UK Government’s current plans will not meet legal limits for NO2 until after 2030 – almost a quarter of a century after the original deadline. ClientEarth is calling on the Supreme Court to order the Government to produce a new plan to rapidly deliver cuts to NO2 emissions in towns and cities across the UK. The plan will need to target pollution from diesel vehicles, which are the main source of NO2 pollution. That is particularly the case around Heathrow. ClientEarth wants Defra to produce the plan within 3 months. Defra’s lawyers suggested the plan might be produced before the end of 2015, but there is no indication when all areas would be compliant. As one of the five Supreme Court justices, Lord Carnwath, commented: “Here we are 4 years on without any idea when the Secretary of State thinks it will achieve compliance.” Judgment will probably be given one to three months after the hearing.
.
Tweet
What does the ClientEarth case mean for UK air quality?
20.4.2015 (Air Quality News)
Editor’s blog, by Michael Holder
After a fortnight which saw high air pollution levels, a Defra website hacked by an Islamist group and political party manifestos launched, the UK government was once again in the dock over its failure to meet nitrogen dioxide limits. It’s hard to think of a more high profile period for the Supreme Court to hear a case about our air quality.
But amid the complicated legal wrangling over often convoluted wording in EU legislation – namely the Ambient Air Quality Directive – it was a little harder to unpick more precisely what the case is about, and most importantly, what it might mean for the air we breathe.
We know that the UK has been in breach of EU nitrogen dioxide limit values in 16 areas – the Supreme Court said so in 2013.
But while Defra drafted its current air quality plan aimed at meeting these limit values in 2011, it then conceded last year that this plan will not see legal air quality until sometime after 2030 in several UK zones.
So, as it stands, it is unclear when people in several densely populated parts of the country will be able to breathe lawful air, but we are told that it will be at least another 15 years in the likes of London, the West Midlands and West Yorkshire, and more than 20 years after the original EU deadline.
To its credit, Defra has more recently announced that it would be revising its air quality plan “to reflect recent action so we can be compliant as soon as possible”, and indeed Kassie Smith QC made regular reference to this revision process in the Department’s defence to the Supreme Court on Thursday (April 16).
But while the QC suggested the plan would be likely to surface before the end of 2015, there was no indication as to when the plan would aim to have all UK zone compliant with the EU Directive beyond ‘as soon as possible’.
And this issue is at the crux of the matter, as while Defra is drafting a new plan on its own timescale, ClientEarth demands that the Supreme Court order Defra to produce a new plan “within three months” that is as detailed and rigorous as possible.
So a major question is whether the Supreme Court deems it necessary to give a mandatory order for Defra to produce a new air quality plan.
And, if the Court does order a new plan, what kind of detail must such a plan contain? And how tough or ambitious must the plan be in seeking to meet the EU limit values?
It is now four years since ClientEarth first launched legal action against Defra over the NO2 breaches, and it will be hoping for answers to these questions.
As one of the five Supreme Court justices, Lord Carnwath, commented during last week’s hearing: “Here we are four years on without any idea when the Secretary of State thinks it will achieve compliance.”
.
ClientEarth braced for final UK air quality court hearing
16.4.2015 (Air Quality News)
By Michael Holder
The government faces its final hearing in the Supreme Court today (April 16) in a case brought by environmental lawyer group ClientEarth over the UK’s failure to comply with EU air pollution limits.
The UK Supreme Court’s final hearing in ClientEarth’s case against the UK government will takes place today – April 16 2015 (Photo – UK Supreme Court)
However, a final judgement in the case may not be handed down by the Court until July 2015, 12 weeks after today’s final hearing and around two months after the General Election on May 7.
The case is the culmination of a four-year battle for ClientEarth in both the UK and EU courts and follows last year’s ruling from the European Court of Justice (CJEU) that the UK can be ordered by national courts to draw up a plan to meet EU NO2 limits in the ‘shortest possible time’.
This was the CJEU’s first ever ruling on the effect of the EU’s Air Quality Directive, which establishes a set of legal limits and target dates for reducing air pollutants, including nitrogen dioxide.
Under current government plans, the UK is not expected to meet legal limits for nitrogen dioxide in three zones – Greater London, West Midlands and West Yorkshire urban areas – until after 2030. This is 20 years later than the original EU legal deadline.
Current government projections, revised last year, show that 5 of 43 UK zones will be compliant by 2015, 15 zones by 2020, 38 by 2025 and 40 out of 43 by 2030.
Plan
In today’s hearing, ClientEarth will call on the Supreme Court to order the government to produce a new plan to meet the EU limits.
And, according to ClientEarth, this plan will need to target pollution from diesel vehicles, which it says is the main source of nitrogen dioxide pollution.
Ahead of the hearing, Alan Andrews, ClientEarth lawyer, said: “We all have the right to breathe clean air and ClientEarth has spent the last four years fighting to uphold that right in Court.
“The government’s current plans won’t achieve legal limits for decades. Every year that goes by, thousands more people will die or be made seriously ill from heart attacks, asthma attacks, strokes and cancer. We need to get the most polluting diesel vehicles out of city centres as soon as possible for the sake of our health and our children’s health.”
Since ClientEarth first brought the long-running case against the UK government, the European Commission has also separately launched legal proceedings against the UK over its ‘failure to cut excessive levels of nitrogen dioxide’, as well as against 16 other EU Member States (see AirQualityNews.com story).
However, Defra has said it is “investing heavily” in measures to improve air quality and to comply with EU law, including £2 billion since 2011 on initiatives to increase the uptake of ultra-low emission vehicles, sustainable travel and green transport.
.
.
UK Government in Supreme Court over illegal air pollution on Thursday 16 April 2015
13 April 2015 (Client Earth)
The Supreme Court will hear ClientEarth’s case against the UK Government over its failure to meet legal limits for air pollution for the final time on Thursday (16 April 2015).
The culmination of a four-year battle in the UK and EU courts, the hearing follows last year’s ruling from the European Court of Justice which held that the UK must have a plan to achieve air quality standards in the ‘shortest time possible’.
The Government’s current plans will not meet legal limits for the harmful pollutant nitrogen dioxide until after 2030 – almost a quarter of a century after the original deadline, despite the fact that scientists estimate at least 29,000 people die early in the UK each year as a result of air pollution.
ClientEarth will call on the Supreme Court to order the Government to produce a new plan which will deliver urgent cuts to the illegal levels of air pollution in towns and cities across the UK. This plan will need to target pollution from diesel vehicles: the main source of nitrogen dioxide pollution.
Alan Andrews, ClientEarth lawyer, said: “We all have the right to breathe clean air and ClientEarth has spent the last four years fighting to uphold that right in Court.”
“The Government’s current plans won’t achieve legal limits for decades. Every year that goes by, thousands more people will die or be made seriously ill from heart attacks, asthma attacks, strokes and cancer.”
“We need to get the most polluting diesel vehicles out of city centres as soon as possible for the sake of our health and our children’s health.
ENDS
Notes to editors
Any court order will be binding on the office of Secretary of State as representative of central government, regardless of what political party or parties form the next government. Judgment will probably be given one to three months after the hearing.
Air pollution health impacts
• Around 29,000 people die early in the UK each year as a result of air pollution – more than traffic accidents and passive smoking combined.
• Air pollution has been linked to coronary artery disease, heart attacks and strokes.
• Studies have shown that traffic-related air pollution affects lung function in children.
• Diesel vehicles emit far more of the dangerous pollutants than petrol vehicles.
The case concerns 16 cities and regions including London, Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham and Glasgow. Government plans show that these areas will suffer from illegal levels of air pollution long after they were obliged to comply with limits.
.
.
.
via Airportwatch http://ift.tt/1FZY4t8
Monday, 20 April 2015
Gatwick Airport, keen to show up all the problems with a new Heathrow runway – attempting to promote its own scheme instead – has commissioned a study by ERM (Environmental Resource Management) on Heathrow air quality. The pollutant and averaging period of most relevance around Heathrow is the annual mean limit value for NO2, which is 40 μg/m3 of air. The Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010 say the Secretary of State must ensure that NO2 annual mean level is not over the limit value of 40 μg/m3 anywhere. Heathrow and the DfT predicted 10 years ago that diesel vehicles would emit much less NO2 by 2015 than they in fact do; diesel emissions from road vehicles have not fallen as fast as was expected. Heathrow is therefore not likely to meet the air quality standard, even without a new runway, till perhaps 2030. The Gatwick-funded ERM report is critical of modelling submitted by Heathrow to the Airports Commission that continues to use outdated emission performance of vehicles. The report says no detailed air quality impact modelling has been conducted since the DfT study 10 years ago. The Airports Commission has also not yet done adequate work on this, and said it would do “more detailed dispersion modelling”. This will probably not be available before the Commission’s (June?) announcement.
Dodgy figures are the basis of Heathrow’s air quality claims, says report
17.4.2015 (Colnbrook Views)
Modelling supplied by Heathrow as part of its submission to the Davies Commission last year was based on emission figures which the airport would have known to have been out of date.
Predictions for Nitrogen Dioxide levels in 2030 prepared for Heathrow by AMEX last year (above) are remarkably consistent with forecasts prepared in 2007 indicating “that AMEC have used assumptions on emissions similar to those used … which subsequently proved to be erroneous.”
The Gatwick-funded report published yesterday [by ERM, Environmental Resources Management – a company with an OK reputation ….] says that Heathrow’s figures are based on ten-year old data on diesel emissions that has subsequently been discredited in the light of actual results. Heathrow, it concludes, would have known better.
Modelling carried out ten years ago by the Department of Transport prior to the last expansion attempt had concluded that air quality would be reaching compliance by 2015.
The Project for the Sustainable Development of Heathrow (PSDH) had got its sums wrong because many diesel-fuelled vehicles still do not comply with new EU standards which continue to emit NOx at higher rates than expected.
“The situation has improved at some of the locations close to the airport itself, but many residential areas close to the M4, for example, are exposed to NO2 concentrations in excess of the Limit Value. The contribution to NO2 concentrations from the road network has clearly not reduced as expected.”
Those living adjacent to the M4 are expected to suffer most from the increase in road traffic during construction and once the new runway is open
The report, by environmental consultants Environmental Resources Management is critical of modelling submitted to the Airports Commission in June last year that continues to use outdated emission performance of vehicles.
“… AMEC have used assumptions on emissions similar to those used for PSDH which subsequently proved to be erroneous.”
It is critical of Heathrow Airport’s submission which is “without evidential foundation” and “may well not prove to be correct”.
It concludes:
“There is significant evidence available that establishes that even without a Heathrow scheme coming forward the attainment of the limit value in the Heathrow area will not occur until after 2025 and will be difficult to achieve.
“The construction and operation of a Heathrow scheme would thus introduce additional sources of NOx into an area that is already struggling to attain the limit value.”
The study is also critical of the Airports Commission’s own analysis.
It says that no detailed air quality impact modelling has been conducted since the Department for Transport’s study a decade ago. (See link).
“To date, none of the documents submitted to the Airports Commission, or produced by the Airports Commission, quantify the effectiveness of the suggested mitigation measures and the question of their efficacy is still uncertain.
“As a result it is difficult to understand how the Commission can have reached the conclusions that it has in its Sustainability Assessment.”
Related links
Read more analysis of the report on Colnbrook Views:
Heathrow’s pollution strategy will “transfer air quality problems to other areas”
Road pollution would make a Colnbrook Runway undeliverable and illegal
Or read the full report here.
or the dumbed down version (Gatwick infographic, pushing Gatwick) here.
.
The Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010 say the Secretary of State must ensure that NO2 annual mean level is not over the limit value of 40 μg/m3 anywhere.
The pollutant and averaging period of most relevance around Heathrow is the annual mean limit value for NO2, which is 40 μg/m3 of air.
The report states:
“WHY EMISSIONS HAVE NOT REDUCED AS EXPECTED
The Euro emission standards for motor vehicles have become increasingly stringent for total oxides of nitrogen (NOx, which includes NO2 and nitric oxide which can go on to form NO2). The most recent set of standards is Euro 6 for cars and Euro VI for heavy duty vehicles. It is now clear, however, that NOx emissions from vehicles with diesel engines have not have not reduced in line with these progressively stringent Euro standards. Many diesel-fuelled vehicles do not comply with the standards in practice and are emitting NOx at higher rates than originally expected – and hence higher than previously modelled. Consequently, overall emissions in NOx are not reducing as might be expected and this explains, at least in part, why NO2 concentrations at many locations have not also declined, as was expected a decade ago.”
and
“Equivalent reductions were not achieved for other vehicles classes. Notably, diesel engines continued to be higher emitters. Not only do diesel engines emit at greater rates than a petrol equivalent with a three way catalyst, but some of the vehicles manufactured in the last decade have been shown to emit at significantly higher rates ‘on the road’ than implied by the type approval limit – which is to say that even when new, they are emitting certain pollutants at rates higher than the maximum allowable under the Euro standard.”
and
“The ‘Project for the Sustainable Development of Heathrow’ (PSDH) in 2004- 2007 was a major undertaking by the Department for Transport and included a review of techniques to model air quality around Heathrow. In the latter stages, a modelling study was carried out that examined the compliance issue, for both baseline (i.e. two runway) and third runway scenarios.”
….
“The modelling carried out as part of PSDH in 2007 indicated that the NO2 concentrations around Heathrow would be approaching compliance with the NO2 limit value by 2015. However, measurements now show that this is not the case. The situation has improved at some of the locations close to the airport itself, but many residential areas close to the M4, for example, are exposed to NO2 concentrations in excess of the Limit Value. The contribution to NO2 concentrations from the road network has clearly not reduced as expected.”
.
Report conclusions
These are the conclusions of the:
(Gatwick Airport Limited funded)
“Current and Future Air Quality around Heathrow Airport – Implications for its Further Development Report”
19 March 2015
Prepared by: Roger Barrowcliffe (Clear Air Thinking) Gavin Bollan (ERM)
For and on behalf of Environmental Resources Management
via Airportwatch http://ift.tt/1O7vsbh
Heathrow to give free advertising space to North East companies for 6 weeks
Wednesday, 15 April 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)