Air Pollution

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27400, 13 July 1954, Page 10

Air Pollution

Though the increased output of gas from the Christchurch works to supply the Cashmere Hospital may not add greatly to the pollution of air over Christchurch, there will be general sympathy with the complaints of Miss Howard in the House of Representatives about the damage already done by smoke and sulphur oxides. The trouble is not confined to her electorate of Sydenham'. From the Port Hills much of the city can often be seen under a blanket of “ smog", to use the expression adopted by the United Kingdom Committee on Air Pollution. Because climatic conditions are better and because the density of population is much less, this “ smog ’’ is not the obvious danger to health that it is in London. It does not produce death rolls comparable with the total of 4000 who died from this cause in London in December, 1952. The smoke is, however, injurious to health; it cuts sunlight and warmth and keeps harmful gases close to the ground. The material damage to stonework, bricks and mortar, metals and fabrics is more apparent. It would be gooct business to spend much money to reduce this material damage, and the damage to health as well. The setting up of the British committee and various other actions taken in the United Kingdom show how seriously this problem is viewed there. The problem is different in New Zealand only in degree, and not in as great a degree as might be imagined. The British committee, in its interim report, fixed the population density above which air pollution could become lOOO to the square

mile. The population density in Christchurch is several times that figure. Measures being taken in the United Kingdom include increased conversion of bituminous coal into coke, gas, and electricity; the replacement of old-fashioned grates by improved appliances in which smokeless fuels can be burnt; and the promotion of greater fuel efficiency in industry. The abatement of spaoke has a direct return in the more efficient use of fuel. Both the committee on air pollution and the Anglo-American Council on Productivity have emphasised the importance of skilled stokers, whose value is not generally recognised. The productivity council noted that “ a boilerman can waste more coal “ in a day than a miner can raise “ from the pit ”. The wasted coal goes up in smoke. The United States has made more progress than the United Kingdom in the abatement of smoke; and large smokeless zones have been achieved at such big industrial centres as St. Louis and Pittsburgh. In these zones industrial users have to use appliances that burn without smoke; and the same efficiency is required of domestic fires, which elsewhere are the biggest single source of smoke. In the United States the use of diesel shunting engines has greatly reduced the concentrated nuisance from shunting and stationary railway locomotives. Of the 17 local authorities in the United Kingdom that have obtained special powers for the purpose, only two, in Coventry and Manchester, have so far created statutory smokeless zones. In Christchurch, the difficulties of making the whole city a smokeless zone are much smaller, although they are steadily growing. This is largely a local question; and the City Council should not hesitate to seek any necessary special powers. Not much good can be achieved by directing attention to the smoke from some of the most efficient users of fuel while hundreds of smaller chimneys are pouring out their smoke, a formidable volume in total. Though it would take some time to make any marked reduction in the smoke over the city, even a slow improvement is much to be preferred to a possibly more rapid deterioration.