Forum Topic

A few quick points. PM10 pollution target for the number of day of high level (no more than 35 in a year) has already been breach (58 to date). Environment Agency is planning to putting monitoring equipment on the Shamrock car park which will allow it to identify the source of pollution (lack of good information has allowed each business on the site to say ‘not us’ with no way of effectively challenging this). But three months of data is required and it will take one month to analyse report on it. Aggregates (formerly Yeoman Aggregates) were keen to have particles analysed to identify their constituent parts (presumably confident it’s not their materials). Not clear if this can be done – to be discussed with the EA.Hansons said they have accepted all the noise abatement measured recommended by the Council as part of the assessment of their retrospective planning application. They said they could implement most of these measures within one month.Gowing and Pursey were not there, not clear why.Don Kelly did a stirring job demonstrating to the businesses that they didn’t understand the difference between gross and net weight limits for lorries crossing the Acton Main Line bridge. Aggregates said they had a three strikes policy for drivers breaking rules (warning, severe warning, sack). I reminded them that the traffic order going through re the bridge meant if the Council enforced it, they might start receiving fines through the post. The lack of Council officers was odd, especially as Hansons said they’d met the council officer leading on pollution earlier in the afternoon to discuss their planning application – it’s difficult to believe it was his decision as he’d attended previous meetings about the industrial site.

Vlod Barchuk ● 4747d

The Horn Lane pollution monitor records levels of PM10 that are among the highest (and sometimes the highest) in London. I have a 2008 study undertaken by King’s College London that points to Gowing and Pursey and/or Hansons as the major cause of particulates. But you don’t need an academic study to see the cause of the problem. Got to the Ealing Air Quality site (http://www.ealingair.org.uk/AirQuality/Graphs.aspx?SiteCode=EA8&SiteName=Ealing - Horn Lane&Period=Seven_day) and plot a graph or download the quarterly hour readings for at least one week. A pattern quickly emerges: pollution is highest between 7am and 4pm weekdays and 7am and 1pm on Saturday. If the railway or road traffic were the major cause of pollution there wouldn’t be readings so high so early and the high readings would extend into early evening rush hour on weekdays; they certainly wouldn’t be so high on Saturday mornings. The hours of highest PM 10 levels correspond all too closely with when businesses on the industrial estate are open. There is a pollution monitor near the railway line in Southall. For 2013 to date, the average concentration of PM10 levels recorded has been 23 micrograms per cubic metre; at Horn Lane the average is 40 (right on the target for maximum levels). At Southall, there have been 6 days this year when average PM10 levels have exceed 50 microgrammes; at Horn Lane there have been 58 (the target is no more than 35 days exceeding the level in a year).Working out causes with any precision has always foundered on the inability of anyone to produce good comprehensive data, although there is measuring equipment all other the Horn Lane site.

Vlod Barchuk ● 4745d

Vlod,We are not saying that the industrial area doesn't contribute towards the PM10 readings, but that the railway, and the major roads near-by also contribute. I know the pollution levels are unacceptable, and I am against expansion of the industrial site, but a 'witch - hunt' against just those companies does not help resolve the issues.The pollution monitor at Southall near the railway line does not have the other factors near it, and so will record less PM10, also by this point the HSTs are generally up to speed and so not accelerating. Southall doesn't have the same 'goods yard' as Acton Main Line. The description of the Southall one is 'roadside', the Horn Lane one is 'industrial', so not really a fair comparison, the areas are very different.The pollution is a mixture of factors and that has to be addressed. None of us want the industrial sites to expand, but it seems unfair to put the blame totally on to Hanson/Gowing and Pursey. Their pollution output is a contributing factor, but not the only one.To improve the air quality at the Horn lane site, we need the railway to be fully electrified (which is going to happen), for there to be less in the way of diesel emissions from lorries/cars/buses, and for Gowing and Pursey/Hansons to clean up their act. If the latter can be achieved by the site meetings, then that is a big step forward.As you say, producing good comprehensive data is a problem and always will be, as there is always going to be other factors affecting the readings from the surrounding area.Sorry, but this is the way I see it!. It is probably not a popular view, but so be it!

Amanda Knights ● 4745d