Ridicule Boris by all means, but the chemistry/science behind the idea is actually interesting and not to be dismissed so lightly.

So long the idea is well implemented (and honestly implemented) and possible side effects well researched and accounted for who is to say that this isn’t a good idea?

Particulates are damaging when they are breathed in. If they are removed from the air they cannot enter the lungs. What’s the problem?

Well to be fair, if you want to find out if something works in reducing something or not then using it close to devices that measure air pollution, so you can observe if there’s a drop-off or not is probably a good idea.

Course, it does depend on if once proven, he rolls it out where there ain’t no measuring devices…

@ Sunny

“London Mayor Boris Johnson has come up with a sure-fire way to reduce pollution across the city: to glue the pollution to roads.

No, seriously, that’s an actual policy. ”

…And? The fact that something sounds amusing doesn’t make it a stupid idea. You’ve not presented any reasons why this is a bad policy. What’s your basis for assuming it’s ineffective?

Ridicule? No, it’s a typical Tory trick – deploy the tactic around the measuring devices.

Given how bad the readings have been anyway – remember that the government is being taken to court over them – what must it be like in MOST of London?

You’ve not presented any reasons why this is a bad policy. What’s your basis for assuming it’s ineffective?

If you actually watch the video – Jenny Jones explains why it’s a silly idea.

But since so many of you people are bloody lazy, here is half the problem: roads have to be sprayed twice a day for this to work. ACROSS LONDON. ALL ROADS.

Is is dawning on you now? But guess where Boris has focused on? Spraying areas near air quality checks.

YOU SEE THE PROBLEM?

if it does work, it’ll be used in westminster, the city and all the richest gated communities, not the whole of london, especially not areas like hackney & tooting, he’ll claim it’s not cost effective for those areas. pmsl at the naivety of the first posts of jc & cherub!!!

And? The fact that something sounds amusing doesn’t make it a stupid idea. You’ve not presented any reasons why this is a bad policy. What’s your basis for assuming it’s ineffective?

I’d be interested to know how much energy is involved in the manufacture and application of this solution. Presumably the pollutants have to be removed eventually?

Nah, we can just glue more pollution on top of the existing layer of pollution.

What could possibly go wrong?!

This story is London. Does it matter where you live?

This story is London. Does it matter where you live?

That’s the question isn’t it – is it just one giant externalisation scheme?

I’m not naive, thanks.

London has one of the best public transport systems in Britain, yet there is still a problem with pollution. Motor vehicles are the main culprit, with 10 micron range particulates especially causing significant health problems especially in disadvantaged populations, many of whom have to live close to busy roads.

How could one tackle this? Reducing motor vehicle use will help, but there will still be many thousands of vehicle movements every day in the worst areas. Without risking damaging London’s economy it would be very hard to eliminate the problem, so mitigation makes sense. As a proportion of total journeys the extra movements of spraying vehicles may not count for much, though I’m sure they will cost plenty. The public health saving could be significant.

Of course, how any treatment is applied is important. Perhaps it’s reasonable to assume Boris will only treat areas that make his policy look good, but that doesn’t mean that the technique is rubbish, it just shows how political cynicism can devalue a practical idea.

What practical proposals do the Greens have? I’d like to be able to support them and it’s interesting to see what they are doing in Brighton. (Notably they are trumpeting a new pay policy for lower paid council workers, something Unison in particular had been pushing for ages based on a strong argument: If Boris can do it in London, why can’t we do the same in Brighton?) My problem is that sometimes the Greens seem to have a certain Schadenfreude about the problems we have, and would only be happy if our population was reduced to a mud-hut dwelling, guilty remnant. I want better. I want a feasible economic policy not some NEF wishful thinking and I want a party that makes sense nationally. The Greens aren’t there yet.

13 – If by best you mean “rapid becoming one of the most expensive”. Worse, people are trapped paying the prices, which is going to very rapidly drive poorer people from the capital when combined with other hits the Tories are piling on. Quite deliberate, of course.

@14

Public transport has been badly degraded nationally. I grew up with a public bus service that even in my rural home in Gloucestershire meant many people did not need cars. Tory (and New Labour) policy has been to remove such a system for reasons of “economy” and “efficiency”. That this is not a huge political issue says a lot about how effective the propaganda have been.

London may be getting worse, it’s still better than many other places.

@15 – Again, rubbish. See my example of Southend up-thread.

The bus system is fine. There WAS a deacent coach service until National Express were allowed to buy up the trains…

London’s sharp rise is not unique, but it’s not universal either, and in many cases bus companies deserve to keep operating. The train companies do not.

Its Calcium Magnesium Acetate which is used as an alternative to salt to de-ice roads. It doesn’t corrode metal like salt does and its biodegradable. It costs a lot more than salt and has to be applied by jet washing the road surface with a modified road sweeper and the using a modified gritter to apply the solution with a fine sprinkler. This has to be done several times a week. The estimated reduction in particulate pollution is 10-20% and how it will actually perform in real conditions with rain, heat, snow and wind is anybody’s guess. Sounds like a lot of buggering about to achieve very little beyond a publicity grabbing gimmick for Boris. The only solution is the long term one, produce less pollution which requires less polluting cars and better public transport

The reason we have got to this situation is clear. As the Guardian recently reported
‘London was ranked low because of the “backward steps” it has taken to address air pollution since 2005. It has tightened its low emission zone for heavy goods vehicles and promoted some cycling and walking, but it has halved the size of its congestion charging zone, scaled back plans for new hybrid buses and sharply increased public transport fares.’
I like chemistry like a lot of people but the idea that road pollution merely hangs around the ground is ludicrous. Firstly it is blown about by traffic and moved around through convection,but perhaps most importantly it is being continually replenished.
Spraying chemicals will only be effective while the spray is in the air. Sadly, by reversing Ken Livingstones congestion charge policies for entirely populist reasons, some of the damage to the air and consequently peoples lives could have been averted. Who would have known when Boris was elected, that voting for an idiot would result in idiotic policies. Not the great British public that’s for sure!

I like chemistry like a lot of people but the idea that road pollution merely hangs around the ground is ludicrous. Firstly it is blown about by traffic and moved around through convection,but perhaps most importantly it is being continually replenished.

I was just about to post something similar – once this stuff biodegrades (into water and carbon, apparently) surely the particulates laying on the road would be kicked up by the friction and heat, or is that the point of the repeated spraying?

Sounds like he’s just to trying to get around the EU fine.

No need to watch the vid to know it’s a damn stupid idea, not least because anything sprayed onto the road surface will be carried away on the wheels of traffic in very short order. And what about pollution from the “glue” itself contaminating vehicles?

@ 7

Actually, many of us read this site at work and thus can’t watch videos without getting strange and annoyed looks. But thanks for explaining, even if you did feel the need to shout your grumpy little head off while doing it.