• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo

Thinking of moving to London, concerned about air quality

air quality london

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Karl909

  • Guest
  • 37 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Bristol, uk

Posted 14 February 2015 - 05:11 PM


I'm thinking of moving to London from Bristol for many reasons but one worry, other then the chronic living costs, is there seems to be a lot of stories recently about the terrible air pollution in London and the effect of longevity!

Is this a legimate concern or overblown do people think? I mean the argument goes by Boris Johnson that London is simply just more honest about where it puts its monitors compared to other European cities... Though I trust Boris as far as I can thrown him so...

I ask as it seems a fair few people here live in London, is it something that bothers you? Or are there certain places people would recommend living that are safer in London?

#2 ceridwen

  • Guest
  • 1,284 posts
  • 93

Member Away
  • Location:UK

Posted 14 February 2015 - 10:58 PM

The west end is cleaner than the east end due to prevailing winds. That is why it is so very expensive

#3 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 51
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 14 February 2015 - 11:34 PM

From http://www.marklynas...exclusion-zone/

 

An equally useful comparison made by the author considers whether air pollution in city centres, passive smoking or radiation contamination from the Chernobyl accident are more dangerous. He finds that living in a polluted city (e.g. London, as compared to lightly-polluted Inverness) yields 2.8% mortality (28 per 1000), passive smoking 1.7% mortality, whilst radiation exposure of 100 mSv in the Chernobyl zone yields a mortality risk of 0.4% (4 per 1000).

 

It is based on the paper http://www.biomedcen.../1471-2458/7/49


Edited by Antonio2014, 14 February 2015 - 11:46 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#4 ceridwen

  • Guest
  • 1,284 posts
  • 93

Member Away
  • Location:UK

Posted 15 February 2015 - 08:42 AM

What's that got to do with London? Seriously though there is a nuclear power station at the mouth of the Thames to the East of the city. There are a he'll of a lot more power stations in the West country.
I think Bristol is more polluted

#5 Karl909

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 37 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Bristol, uk

Posted 15 February 2015 - 10:45 AM

Well looking at the stats londons defiantly looks the worst offender by quite a bit. Though it's hard to interpret them. It seems unclear to me if it means it's safe if you're fit and healthy or something that if you have health problems living in a city is what's going to make it worse or kill you!?

#6 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 51
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 16 February 2015 - 09:26 AM

What's that got to do with London? Seriously though there is a nuclear power station at the mouth of the Thames to the East of the city. There are a he'll of a lot more power stations in the West country.
I think Bristol is more polluted

 

Read the quote. It compares mortality increase caused by air pollution in London, by being a pasive smoker and by radiation in Chernobyl. All of this is compared to living in Inverness and not being a pasive smoker.

 

Well looking at the stats londons defiantly looks the worst offender by quite a bit. Though it's hard to interpret them. It seems unclear to me if it means it's safe if you're fit and healthy or something that if you have health problems living in a city is what's going to make it worse or kill you!?


Read the paper.


Edited by Antonio2014, 16 February 2015 - 09:33 AM.


#7 Julia36

  • Guest
  • 2,267 posts
  • -11
  • Location:Reach far
  • NO

Posted 07 September 2015 - 02:04 PM

popping extra Vit C compensates.

The polluted air is only from traffic, and thsi is being addressed without wrecking people's gfinances. eg by clean vehicle incentives.

Water powered busses are already run in some boroughs.

 


Edited by the hanged man, 07 September 2015 - 02:06 PM.

  • Ill informed x 1

#8 QuickTimothy

  • Guest
  • 6 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Cambridge

Posted 02 November 2015 - 03:57 PM

Avoid london at all costs, pollution is getting worse any borris is doing nothing to stop it!



#9 Karl909

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 37 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Bristol, uk

Posted 21 January 2016 - 08:53 AM

Ha, well live in London now! Not right bang on a main road though. not much choice, not many decent jobs outside of London, capitalism ah! Be the death of us all...

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#10 stombacher

  • Guest
  • 11 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Cyprus
  • NO

Posted 05 March 2016 - 11:57 PM

Both London and Bristol are from the top 10 green cities, but Bristol of course is  more eco friendly


  • Agree x 1





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: air quality, london

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users