Heathrow Expansion was temporarily derailed by the Judicial Review (JR) in February, ruling the Airports National Policy (ANPS) illegal through its non-compliance with the existing UK Climate Change Act, and by extension, the Heathrow expansion plans that relied on it. By law, the Climate Change Act commits the UK government to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 100% of 1990 levels (net zero) by 2050.

Heathrow expansion 2019

There have been many setbacks to the Airport’s expansion plans over the years from Terminal 5 onwards: claims that several top politicians would stop expansion, elongated planning enquiries, and many anti-expansion campaigns, but like the addict it appears to be, suffering Compulsive Shopping Disorder, Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL) keeps coming back for just one more hit, claiming that it will then be satisfied.  Like it’s maniacal namesake in Stanley Kubrick’s epic 2001 – a Space Odyssey, to accept this would be to seriously misjudge the machine.

HAL’s public response to the JR is “10,000 quality apprenticeships by 2030, New Routes and 180,000 new Jobs”, plus the inevitable appeal against the judgement.  While new routes could be created easily with a new runway, they could also be created by displacing cargo and short-haul flights onto greener options, such as rail or electric vehicles (remembering that Heathrow is actually the UK’s largest cargo destination, with 1.8 million tons in 2018: up 20%, matching passenger volume increases since T5 opened).  The other two claims stretch credibility beyond reason, given that Heathrow currently employs 76,000, the expansion would represent a more than doubling in size.  Or perhaps that gives a clue as to the full plan ? 

Heathrow doesn’t appear to be addressing the issues that most of us care about – the effect on the environment, surface transport, and the lives of residents in large parts of the South-East – all the more so having recently become used to not being woken at or before 6AM with fewer flights during the Coronavirus pandemic; Heathrow has temporarily reduced to single runway operation.   In the new Greta-inspired world, HAL makes additional claims regarding sustainability, but it again stretches reason that the discredited greenwash baked into last year’s consultation could have been warmed over sufficiently to pass muster this time round.

Committee and several members attended the recent Climate Change event at the Lyric to hear what the recently formed commission has been discussing, and to provide input.  Sian Alexander, the Director of the Lyric, opened the meeting making the following points:

• The H&F commission is a residents’ working group engaged in a ‘public facing campaign’.
• The Commission started in 2019 and is one of a number of a H&F Residents’ Commissions.
• The Commission is chaired of local architect Paul Beaty-Pownall, and consists of twelve local members.
• Its purpose is to advise and help H&F Council achieve zero carbon emissions by 2030.
• Its first formal meeting took place in December 2019.
• We all need to be prepared for major changes.

Fehinti Balogun

We were then presented with a personal story of the effects of climate change from actor Fehinti Balogun, making an informative and entertaining presentation. He touched on how climate change affects not only himself but his wider family here and abroad, highlighting that the issue is about eco, not ego. He’s been giving a similar presentation to schools in recent months.

He noted that the Commission is believed to only need 3.5% direct support from the population for success to be guaranteed by influencing all those connected.

Paul Beaty-Pownall

Paul Beaty-Pownall summed up and introduced the workshop sessions that followed. The audience were invited to participate and circulate through four separate discussion groups in order to gain ideas and recommendations from the participants.

We hope to see the report from the commission in the coming months to inform the Council’s progress in accelerating our local responses to Climate Change.

To visualise the extent of the problem, the UK’s current emissions of thousands of tonnes of CO₂ per hour caused by electricity generation can be seen here

Along with others, the Society’s activities have been severely curtailed during the government’s enforced lockdown. We’ve found a little solace in the popular Zoom video-conferencing application (used with appropriate security precautions), and on Monday this week, keeping to schedule, managed our first online committee meeting – with 75% attendance.

Online committee meeting

The committee decided that the Society should use some of its limited funds to make a donation of £1000 to Hammersmith residents in need of support at this difficult time, via our local charity and affiliate Hammersmith United Charities which represents an excellent model of giving relatively small grants to local groups which know what practical help is needed and target it accordingly. The donation will be distributed through their Community Coronavirus Appeal, which is run in conjunction with the Council. 

We have inevitably decided to postpone this summer’s AGM until government rules allow us to convene again. We’ll announce a new date when rules change.   The Spring Newsletter, which would normally be posted out in April, will be published on this website, as a series of articles released over the coming weeks, with summaries and links emailed to members as usual.

We hope to be in a position to at least make nominations for the 2020 Environment Awards by reviewing what material is available to us via photos, and we encourage you to submit nominations by email if you have a suitable development in mind.  We may not be able to visit them, or make a formal award until later in the year, but expect to be able to publish and consider the suitable nominations.

Julian Hillman

As a trustee of United in Hammersmith & Fulham (charity no. 1187649) and a long standing committee member of The Hammersmith Society, I wanted to say something about the Appeal, which has so far raised £65k including gift aid. Firstly thanks to The Hammersmith Society for making a donation.

United is working in conjunction with the Council. We hope to raise more money as different phases of need emerge. We provide grants directly to groups supporting borough residents. This includes those particularly focusing on the extra needs of at-risk groups, including people who are:

• At risk of complications severe enough to require hospital care
• At risk of being unable to cope with isolation
• At risk because they’re living in poverty

So far we’ve been one of the fastest in London getting grants out to grass roots groups. Currently we have supported 21 organisations, awarded £20,450 and estimate we have reached 17,200 people in some way. Demand is increasing and we hold regular grant giving panels.

If you know groups doing good work who might benefit from the Appeal ask them to contact the Programme Manager Savraj Kaur – . If you would like to donate or know others who would want to help please go to: https://unitedhf.org/appeal/

We attended the Policy and Accountability Committee (PAC) meeting on 9th September which quickly deteriorated into a pro/anti cycling stooshie.  The two extremes expressed were roughly “build it now and just get on with it”, reflecting a populist mantra du-jour, and on the other side “they don’t ride safely or follow the Highway Code…”  Significant climate change, anti-car and pro-air quality assertions were also made.  Despite all of us being pedestrians at some point, and there being around 1000 cyclists per day compared with up to 1000 bus users per hour along King St, there were few speaking for the overwhelming majority.

These arguments serve to polarise the debate, create heat, yet shed little light.  Our view is one of the practicality and evidence regarding safety and air quality that doesn’t support the existing plan.  The evidence shows that the Broadway and Fulham Palace Road (the nearest analogy/datapoint to King St.), have higher NO₂ levels than Talgarth Road, and far more than any side road. Adding a cycle lane wouldn’t reduce pollution according to TfL’s own AQ report but would slow buses to walking pace through removal of bus lanes, particularly on Hammersmith Road. 

CS6 with accident hotspots 2018

TfL’s 2018 data from their exemplar CS6 built outside their HQ, Palestra, shows that most serious accidents still happen at junctions, for which despite all the cost, environmentally damaging concrete, and negative effects on other road users shown, this type of segregated path is ineffective in protecting the cyclist.  ROSPA analysis shows that 75% accidents occur at or near junctions, and a peculiarity of London are the 20% of fatal accidents with HGV’s, often turning left into cyclists, for which the mayor is making new provisions.

As shown, minor accidents are also recorded at bus bypasses, which is unsurprising.  Those complaining that cars are ‘the problem’ may note that at the time this photo was taken (lunchtime, June 12th 2019) after a meeting at TfL’s HQ, only buses and commercial vehicles were causing pollution and being delayed.  We all still need bin collection lorries, the post, deliveries of items that won’t fit on cargo bikes and so on.  The overwhelming majority, especially elderly, very young, disadvantaged and vulnerable people need buses and bus lanes (removed for CS6 above, and planned for removal as part of TfL’s CS9).  We don’t relish King Street or Hammersmith Road looking anything like this.

Many journals have pronounced that London’s ‘filthy air’ is killing thousands, and we note that all candidates standing for Mayor of London this year quote Air Quality as a pillar of their campaign. Here, taking the long view, we look more closely at the claims and wider issues, and how they apply to Hammersmith, public transport and cycleways. 

According to King’s College, the reference for air quality measurements, London is the 2,516th most polluted city in the world

We think that climate change is the key issue here, and which if properly addressed, would deal with many of today’s air quality issues. The reference work ‘Mortality Effects of Long-Term Exposure to Particulate Air Pollution in the United Kingdom’ (A report by the Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants [COMEAP], updated 2018), says clearly in its executive summary ‘As everyone dies eventually no lives are ever saved by reducing environmental exposures – deaths are delayed resulting in increased life expectancy.’

Air quality in London started deteriorating about 400 years ago, and for the entire time the Georgians and Victorians were painting the globe pink, sulphur dioxide was around 40 times the current WHO guideline level of 20 µg/m³. It was in fact raining sulphuric acid AKA ‘acid rain’, the effects of which can be seen on the Palace of Westminster or in Turner’s paintings.  The Great Smog of 1952 that killed perhaps 12,000 appears as a peak on the graph, and created a level over 10 times the level it is now, but our nonagenarian, and in one case centenarian parents survived and are still here with us, begging the question what effect it had on long term life expectancy.

The answer from COMEAP is around six months if you could (unrealistically) remove 100% of all air pollution from all sources, or more realistically 20 days per µg/m³ removed, plus you have to live to those grand old ages otherwise healthy.  Not as much as the headlines or Twitterati would have it.

Of course this isn’t a complete list of pollutants, there’s PM2.5, PM10, NO₂, and Ozone which have differing WHO thresholds as shown here, and those with respiratory conditions are much more affected than others, explaining most of the 1952 deaths.

The Council’s Disability Forum Planning Group (DFPG) provides advice to Hammersmith & Fulham Council on making sure that planning applications create new buildings that are accessible and inclusive, and that work for everyone. The group will use the Social Model of Disability and a human rights way of working in all its work.

The group is looking to recruit new members from the local disabled community with interests in planning.  The council will provide training and access to relevant expertise.

The publicity flyer is shown here, click on its image to open the full invitation in pdf and for further information or to apply, follow this link to the council website

Closing date for applications: Friday 28 February at midday.

Cycling in Copenhagen, 2015

The CS9 saga has been running for a couple of years now, and we’re finally beginning to achieve some clarity in the plans for Hammersmith.

CS9 has been renamed CW9 “CycleWay 9” to distance it from existing Central London Superhighways, and provide a facility serving a wider demographic than those installed to date.  The image being promoted is shown in TfL’s Walking and Cycling Commissioner’s Tweet, left, although we feel obliged to point out that despite the wording, the photo is not London at all – this was Copenhagen in 2015.  Nevertheless we believe this more inclusive vision is an appropriate aspiration for our borough’s roads.

Together with other members of the community, we have been successful in persuading H&F Council that TfL’s CS9 plans were flawed, now two different cycle routes are planned:  a fast commuter route using the somewhat underused paths alongside the A4, and something closer to a “Quietway“ plus urban realm improvements (greening) in King Street and Hammersmith Road. More on the council website, where an online debate has started.

We expect to be part of the planned residents consultation as we are concerned about potential negative impacts on pedestrians and retailers, significantly slower buses/traffic/increasing pollution, for which there is evidence from schemes such as Winchmore Hill and Waltham Forest.  TfL’s own CS9 Air Quality Report predicts only walking-speed traffic along Hammersmith Road at Olympia, and no overall improvement in air quality.  A council meeting is planned for 9th Sept, which you should attend if you are interested in this scheme (see our diary)…

Water Fountain outside Pallingswick House / WLFS

The Mayor of London has recently announced a scheme for Thames Water to install fountains to help reduce single-use plastic consumption, a sentiment we obviously endorse.  You may have noticed refill stations appearing in TfL locations recently, such as Hammersmith Bus Station.

We, along with the media, are rather less enamoured of the Thames Water-designed fountain, and hope not to see that particular design appearing on our streets.

We think it far more appropriate and greener to repair and revitalise the long-disused and pet-friendly Victorian fountains already on our streets, such as this fine but sadly non-working monument, dating from 1887, the same year Hammersmith Bridge was opened, conveniently and appropriately located adjacent to 3 local schools.  It was erected in memory of S.L. Swaab Esq., and bears the inscription: 

His knowledge like a spring of refreshing water flowing ever during life for the relief of suffering

Happily the Council has agreed with our view, and plans to include refurbishment of this one as part of the King Street Cycle path scheme, CW9.  Not far away, the fountain on Turnham Green Terrace is being refurbished, and should be operational next month, alongside some significant urban realm improvements in the form of seating and planting, which we would similarly welcome in Hammersmith.