Air quality proposals under the microscope

Date: 15/05/1997

By Michael Mann

RECENT recommendations by the World Health Organisation will form the basis of EU air quality standards being drawn up by Environment Commissioner Ritt Bjerregaard.

Following months of consultation with both industry and environmental groups, Bjerregaard will put her draft plans to other Commission departments during the next few weeks in the hope that they can be agreed by the institution next month.

But the proposals, which are likely to have a marked effect on EU industry, are by no means guaranteed a smooth journey through the Commission, particularly in the Directorate-General for industry (DGIII) and the Directorate-General for energy (DGXVII).

Industry lobbies have welcomed the Commission's willingness to consult those who will be most affected, but believe it is too early to go ahead and set firm targets until more convincing data have been gathered.

Commission officials insist, however, that they are merely respecting undertakings already made in a framework directive agreed during 1996 and that the follow-up legislation is overdue.

The first four pollutants to be dealt with will be sulphur dioxide (SO₂), nitrogen oxide (NO₂), lead and poisonous dust known as 'particulates'. Other substances will be covered in proposals due during 1998 and 1999.

The plan is to set maximum limits for each of the pollutants to apply across the Union from 2005 in the case of SO₂, and from 2010 for the other three substances. This would allow EU governments to work out how far legislation already in operation was likely to achieve the requirements laid down and to introduce new measures where there were shortcomings.

“Some of the changes already in the pipeline, such as the 'Auto-Oil' proposals and the acidification strategy, will take most places a long way towards reaching the SO₂ and NO₂ standards we are looking at, although there are, of course, still pollution hot-spots in cities,” said one Commission official.

Exemptions might be possible in certain regions of the Union which are prone to high levels of natural dust, particularly in the drier southern member states.

The plans are based on the WHO guidelines adopted last year, but officials insist they have not simply taken these on board 'blindfolded'. “We have worked intensively with member states, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and industry, carried out cost-benefit analyses and modified the guidelines to achieve what is practical whilst ensuring the same level of protection,” said one.

When considering air pollution, much depends on natural fluctuations and the period of time over which pollution levels are measured. In some cases, the Commission found the WHO's measuring period was too short to reflect the European situation properly.

It has also elected to go its own way in setting levels for particulates. The complexity of measuring harmful dust means that health experts have yet to suggest reliable standards.

Until improved data are available, interim standards will apply before new standards are phased in over time.

While welcoming the role they have been given in the process, industrial groups feel a more phased approach should apply to all four pollutants currently under discussion.

Suzie Baverstock of CONCAWE, the oil companies' environment, health and safety organisation, believes that where data is lacking, “the Commission needs to set indicative standards, on a provisional basis, until more information has been gathered on which to base quality values”.

Industry feels that data from the WHO on the health effects of various pollutants have an important role to play in the development of air quality standards and policy decisions on how far the EU wants to go to reduce risks. But lobbies stress that the WHO values are guidelines, not standards.

“The WHO health experts advise about pollutants' effects. But the Commission should take decisions based on risk management. Could the money be spent more wisely on, for example, providing information or preventative medicines?” asked Baverstock.

Once agreed by the Commission, the proposals will be scrutinised by environment ministers in cooperation with the European Parliament.