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

View report page

Richmond upon Thames 1972

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Richmond upon Thames]

This page requires JavaScript

3. ATMOSPHERIC POLLUTION

The last of the Smoke Control Orders became operative on the 1st July, 1972 and details are as follows :—

Order.Acreage.Number of DwellingsNumber of Other Premises
Twickenham No. 105385778600

The whole of the Borough is now subject to 31 Smoke Control Orders which govern
68,055 premises and cover 13,454 acres. It is most satisfying to report the conclusion of
a programme which was begun on the 20th November, 1959 when the first Order was
made and which had given the community such great benefits. It is hard to believe that
twenty years ago 4,000 people in Greater London died in December 1952 as a result of
smog and that again in 1956 a thousand Londoners died in the January smog. As late as
December 1962, 750 persons died as a result of another smog incident and now thanks
largely to the smoke control programme in Greater London few of the younger generation
have experienced smog.
The cost of the programme to the community has been met by proportional charges
of 30% to the applicant, 30% to the Council and 40% to the Government in respect of
approximately £440,000 worth of grant aided works. In addition it is conservatively
estimated that at least a further £500,000 will have been spent in heating alterations
which were not in any way eligible for grant purposes.
The total cost of Air Pollution in this country was estimated in November, 1972 to
be £1,190,000,000 per annum. This was stated in the Government Report "An Economic
& Technical Appraisal of Air Pollution in the United Kingdom" which included in this
sum £410,000,000 for direct costs of pollution, £510,000,000 for health and £100,000,000
for amenity losses. In considering these figures there is little to be complacent about and
the need for vigilance remains.
Now that smoke emissions from chimneys are only permitted under strict conditions,
smoke from other sources has become far more conspicuous. In particular, smoke, grit
and dust from open site burning behind business premises and on demolition sites and
the black smoke arising from the "burning off" of roads prior to resurfacing, give rise
to many complaints. In addition some householders are unaware that it is an offence to
allow smoke from bonfires to be a nuisance to the inhabitants of the neighbourhood. In
the case of demolition contractors, many seem unaware that they should not burn rubber,
flock or feathers and that additionally they should only burn permitted waste matter if
there is no other reasonable method of disposal. The burning itself must be carried out
so as to minimise the emission of dark smoke and under direct and continuous supervision.
These two latter conditions are frequently ignored.
Burning off of public roads prior to resurfacing is unfortunately wholly exempt
from the provisions of the Clean Air Acts. Technically this process can now be carried
out without smoke emissions, and with up-to-date equipment becoming more readily
available it is to be hoped that the road surfacing contractors will now modernize their
equipment and play their part in reducing pollution.
Despite the foregoing problems the overall picture for the future is bright, with
further reductions in pollution levels envisaged. For example the smaller industrial and
domestic boiler is now generally fired by natural gas, a sulphur free fuel, and in this
Borough oil is becoming a less-used fuel for furnaces notified under the provisions of
Section 3 of the 1956 Act. It would be most unfortunate if the change to sulphur-free
gas should loose its impetus, for it is the reduction of the SO2 level in the atmosphere
which is now proving intractable.
50