Aiming for the best case scenario for clean air in our Future Cities

Following the publication of a report which suggested that in a worst-case scenario, our cities could become unliveable within ten years, Paul Day goes in search of a more positive outcome.

The trope of futuristic citiscapes in the cinematic world tends towards one in which environmental contempt has won the day. People live in towering buildings and worrying gasses belch into the atmosphere. Why would people live in such places? Well, they probably have no choice.

Perhaps in those imaginary civilisations there was a moment such the one we are having here and now, where people questioned the direction they were heading and began to consider alternatives. But realising there is a problem does not mean it is easy to solve.

In their recent report ‘Shaping Successful Future Cities’ British property investment trust LandSec, speculated that in a worst case scenario, cities could become unliveable in as little as ten years.

Landsec’s Strategy Manager, Alex Beale told us: ‘This could happen if urban planning and construction do not effectively and urgently address environmental issues, or social inequality - deepening community divisions. This is a stark, but possible, reality that could come to fruition if those involved in shaping cities make the wrong decisions today.’

The report lists four possible future city scenarios, from Worst Case, through Probable and Possible, to Best case: ‘A city which acknowledges that in order for people to flourish, the environment around them must be protected to flourish as well.’

Ensuring that future cities are clean and safe is the point on the path we are now but doing this empathetically and inclusively is the challenge. London was quick off the mark in this respect by launching the world’s first ULEZ in 2016 but, despite its success in reducing air pollution, the rollout of the concept has stuttered slightly.

The Clean Cities Campaign, hosted by Transport & Environment is a European coalition of NGOs and grassroots groups which champions shared and electric mobility for a more sustainable urban future. Oliver Lord is their UK head: ‘In the UK we’ve still got a patchwork approach: some cities have introduced a clean air zone, some haven’t and some have delayed the process. I worry at the minute that there isn’t necessarily a national strategy on where we go next with CAZs.’

The innovation of the original ULEZ has not given the UK the impetus one would hope. Spain have passed a law decreeing that more than 100 cities have to introduce low emissions zones based on their size while in Manchester, £120,000 was spent putting ‘under review’ stickers on 1,200 CAZ signs.

The soundtrack to the UK’s CAZ rollout is one of vocal opposition from motorists, businesses, politicians and the media. Historically, also, positive moves to improve public safety or the environment have often drawn ire from some quarter – there is an incredible video on YouTube of drivers complaining about the introduction of the breathalyser in the 1960s– so how can this reluctance to accept necessary change be addressed?

Oliver Lord: ‘I think the most important thing is that we give people the notice and the timeline on how things will change. We know from research that the UK is very locked into car dependency which is a real problem and it is going to take us quite a while to undo it.’

This car dependency is a critical point. Of course, if everyone switched to EVs over the next decade that would be great news but it doesn’t reduce the number of cars on the road, which is something future cities will want to do. Will need to do.

The number of cars in Manchester has risen by 30% over the last ten years while the amount of road space has actually shrunk. There’s simply not enough space for cars, especially if we want to bring public transport up the standard it needs to be. And we are a long way off.

Oliver Lord again: ‘‘The cost of public transport in this country is outrageous. There’s been an increase in fares on trains across the country but at the same time they’re talking about freezing fuel duty. How does that give the right message? How does it give people affordable and convenient alternatives to using their cars?’

Shared transport infrastructure schemes (e-bikes, e-scooters etc) seem to be eternally locked into trial periods, vulnerable to cancellation at a moment’s notice when the wind of political expediency changes direction. They need to be targeted towards younger generations who, we are learning, feel less inclined to own cars in the first place.

Public transport needs to be driven by the cities themselves and despite the criticism aimed at Manchester mayor Andy Burnham following the delay in the Manchester CAZ scheme, this is an area he is targeting.

Another question is what comes after the ULEZ or CAZs. Oliver Lord worries about this: ‘The Government have already suggested that the Clean Air Zones currently in place, might be removed once the target for nitrogen dioxide is achieved, but the WHO targets are very different to legal targets, so we would argue for retaining clean air zones and then start to adapt and transition them to account for carbon emissions as well as air pollutants.’ decision to be made about whether to adopt an own-and-operate model or a concession one. Own and operating is a simpler procurement route and allows the placement of chargepoints in areas that aren’t commercially lucrative but charging technology is evolving rapidly so it might be prudent to leave that responsibility to a commercial partner. However, back in Olso, having achieved the first objective of filling the country with EVs, the second objective is to reduce the number of them

Putting the UK’s state of affairs into European context, The Clean Cities Campaign scores major cities in five categories that they hold to be of the greatest importance: Space for People, Safe Roads, Access to ClimateFriendly Mobility, Policies and Clean Air.

Norwegian Transport Minister JonIvar Nygard said: ‘Electric cars give us greener transport, but they also have a clear intermodal competition with public transport in urban areas. We must make it more attractive to travel by public transport, cycle, and walk.’ And of course, people are up in arms.

A safe, clean city needs to score well in all of them.

Oslo’s presence at the top of the table is little surprise given that Norway is in a league of its own in terms of EV adoption. Their enviable record in ridding the streets of combustion engines is down to policies that rewarded those going electric with free tolls, free parking and tax breaks. They also have a comprehensive EV charging infrastructure in place, with one charge-station per 267 people, compared with the UK’s one per 1,837.

In the UK, local authorities have been finding that the procurement of public chargepoints is not a straightforward process, with a

Finishing with Landsec, whose ‘worst case scenario’ began this discussion: How do cities achieve best case scenario?

Alex Beale again: ‘Predicting, understanding, and managing human impact on the environment is a huge and complex challenge but there is much that can be done today placing the ‘unknown’ risks at the heart of creating places will help us account for the complexity of the climate challenge. Cities must continue to explore potential future scenarios to prepare different routes of action and strive for the best possible climate outcomes and create places that are truly desirable.’