London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Richmond upon Thames 1971

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Richmond]

This page requires JavaScript

Householders continue to have freedom of choice for grant purposes in the selection of replacement appliances. Listed below are the percentages of the appliance types selected during the year compared with previous years.

Appliance Selected196619671968196919701971
Gas Room Heaters51%66%69%65%57%67%
Open Fires33%19%14%19%22%20%
Solid Fuel Heating Stoves14%10%12%9%8%5.5%
Electric Storage Heaters2%5%5%5%11%5.5%
Electric Fires2%2%2%

These figures confirm that people much prefer the radiant heat given off by the Gas
Room Heaters and Open Fires and that of the two they choose the gas appliance which is
more convenient and cheaper to run.
The cost of solid fuel has in fact gone up so much that even the benefit arising from
the use of the high efficient stove has now disappeared and fewer are now being installed.
The electric storage heater which in 1970 was the cheapest appliance to run is now only
3p a week less costly than a gas room heater. In addition, it does not have the advantage
of an immediate turn down in heat output and consequently it has again fallen out of
favour.
During the year The Clean Air (Emission of Grit & Dust from Furnaces) Regulations,
1971 and The Clean Air (Measurement of Grit & Dust from Furnaces) Regulations
1971 came into operation. The first Regulations set out standards of emissions from
furnaces having an input of over 1.25 million B.Th.Us. per hour and the second enables
the emissions to be measured. The effects of these Regulations are being brought to the
attention of persons who will be responsible for compliance and it is anticipated that in
future there will be a closer control of the grit and dust from the larger furnaces in the
area.
The Smoke Control Areas (Exempted Fireplaces) Order, 1971, was another significant
piece of legislation made during the year. It permits a specially designed fireplace to
burn coal in smoke control areas on condition that it is installed, maintained and operated
in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. If these are not adhered to, noticeable
smoke can result. In view of this, it is unfortunate that the proposed installation is not
notifiable to the local authority, as it is most difficult subsequently to demonstrate that
the appliance has been incorrectly fixed. Consequently, excessive smoke might have to be
tolerated.
Five applications were made for approval of proposed chimney heights as required
by Section 6 of the Clean Air Act, 1968 and two were refused because the height was
inadequate having regard to the amount of SO2 which it was intended to discharge from
the chimneys. Five occupiers of buildings in smoke control areas were found to be emit'
ting smoke through burning coal or incorrectly operating an oil-fired furnace. All
offenders complied upon informal requests.
On three occasions the owners of newly-purchased incinerators were found not to
be complying with Section 3 of the 1956 Act which requires that all incinerators must
be so designed that they are capable of being operated continuously without emitting
smoke. These incinerators had been installed without proper notification to the Council
and it was alleged in all instances that the salesman had failed to give information on these
provisions of the Act.
The burning of materials in the open continues to cause concern to many people and
gave rise to the majority of the 119 complaints of nuisance from smoke. All the nuisances
were abated on an informal approach. A warning letter was sent to a demolition contractor
who had caused dark smoke to arise in contravention of Section 1 of the 1968 Act.
The fact that no prosecutions were necessary indicates the very strong public support
for cleaner air.
55