Air quality on London Underground

[BostonGeorge]

Apologies if I am raking over old ground.

The Mayor of London, love him or hate him, has taken a firm stance on air quality on the streets of London. Depending entirely on your political position, you will likely have formed your own conclusions for his motives. He has even written Breathe: Tackling the Climate Change Emergency - a book that demonstrates the Mayor's obvious commitment to a greener future. There's plenty of focus on public health, as there should be, but this leads me to the following question...

If you're a member of staff for London Underground, particularly drivers or customer service staff who can spend up to two hours performing their SATS duties in some of the most hideous conditions imaginable (thinking about the heat on Central line platforms during the summer, for example), surely they will be questioning where is the duty of care being shown towards them? It's becoming increasingly obvious, as much as TFL want to suggest otherwise, the air quality, especially on the deep level line platforms, is appalling.

What can be done to improve the air quality on London Underground? And if the Mayor is accepting of the detrimental effects of air quality on London's streets, when will he accept there is an equally serious problem occurring beneath our feet? Or, because Tube air quality isn't really affecting the climate outside (to my knowledge), is it simply not important?

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's more of an issue for staff who have to work in it than for passengers who typically don't spend very long in it. Not sure of how it could be fixed - rheostatic braking is already used to reduce brake dust for instance. For drivers the best bet is probably an air conditioned cab with HEPA filters on the intakes, and they're the ones most exposed to it. For other staff it's more difficult, I guess the best you could do is an FFP3 face mask, but those of course pose other issues.

 

[BostonGeorge]

It's more of an issue for staff who have to work in it than for passengers who typically don't spend very long in it. Not sure of how it could be fixed - rheostatic braking is already used to reduce brake dust for instance. For drivers the best bet is probably an air conditioned cab with HEPA filters on the intakes, and they're the ones most exposed to it. For other staff it's more difficult, I guess the best you could do is an FFP3 face mask, but those of course pose other issues.

It's worth noting, for years staff were strongly discouraged from wearing masks on the platform because of the fear it may have caused the public. COVID has changed all that, so it now looks like staff are merely protecting themselves from the dreaded lurgy, when in reality there is likely something far most toxic lurking in the air.

 

[185143]

When I do a Travelcard, I'll inevitably end up spending a bit of time on LU, more so in winter months when the heat of deep level tube isn't unwelcome.

I will literally arrive at Euston fairly early in the morning and spend the whole day on the rail+tube network (aside from 2 or 3 visits to 'Spoons, partly for PNB purposes). There's usually a visible blackness to snot if I blow my nose on the train home or the following morning. That only ever happens after spending a while on London Underground, nowhere else. Not even Merseyrail's tunnels.

I'm not particularly concerned for myself as I'm relatively rarely in London, but that cannot be doing the staff down there any good at all.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Merseyrail is far less intensively worked and far damper, which will mean a lot less dust in the air.

 

[PGAT]

Would PEDs be the solution again?

 

[Blindtraveler]

This is a really interesting one. Something that might bring it to a head eventually is the stark difference in air quality between l u and Elizabeth line at the three deep level major interchanges, namely bond Street, Paddington and Tottenham Court road. You certainly noticed the difference in temperature as you walk the stairs or ride the escalators and if you travel in the lift between TCR Elizabeth line and Northern Line platforms when the doors open at the latter you are hit by a great wall of heat and indeed at huge change in air quality from the air conditioned loveliness above

I'm also more aware of it now that I'm not routinely wearing a face covering on the tube where I was for quite some time and find I'm breathing less easily or some of the deep level stuff. Might start wearing a mask again if using deep level stations regularly as I currently seen to be doing

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would PEDs be the solution again?

They aren't workable because the trains moving through the tunnels provide the ventilation on older stations. It'd be possible (other than on steeply curved stations) to have half-height ones but they'd do nothing for this issue.

 

[zwk500]

They aren't workable because the trains moving through the tunnels provide the ventilation on older stations. It'd be possible (other than on steeply curved stations) to have half-height ones but they'd do nothing for this issue.

Shoulder height PEDs might be a reasonable compromise because they'd stop the crud being kicked up from track level spilling onto the platforms but still leave room for the airflow of the piston effect. However the cost of rebuilding every platform for a consistent height and curvature won't bear thinking about at TfL HQ.

 

[Egg Centric]

Is there any evidence of lower life expectancy / increased respiratory distress (right term?) in operational/formerly operational TfL staff than comparable Londoners?

On the assumption the concerns raised in this thread are credible it seems like something that should be relatively easy to do a quick study on and a reasonable argument it should be funded by TfL. The results of that study should then inform what, if anything, is done.

 

[mrmartin]

I actually think this is a somewhat existential threat for TfL. All it is going to take is one illness/related death from poor air quality to have a court order or union action that staff can only spend x hours a day/week on deep level platforms/track without "safe" air quality, which is going to be difficult if not impossible for TfL to implement.i could easily see mass closures of stations and lines while the PPM count is too high in the near future, for example.

There's also the potential for huge settlements to former workers (and passengers?) If there is some link between illness and spending a long time underground.

Have there been any studies of TfL workers and a link between time spent underground and premature mortality for example?

 

[Egg Centric]

Another thing that occurs to me is how the increased risk from these particles compares to the increase in risk for your average office worker from the practically enforced sedentary lifestyle of sitting in front of a computer all day.

My suspicion is that this is far worse and the cost to an employer of giving everyone a standing desk and treadmill (and before you say this is ridiculous, I have actually got my employer to buy me both, albeit by charm and alcohol rather than threats) is far less than any combo of brake particulate and air quality matters for underground staff. But that is just intuition and we really need to know the science.

 

[mrmartin]

Another thing that occurs to me is how the increased risk from these particles compares to the increase in risk for your average office worker from the practically enforced sedentary lifestyle of sitting in front of a computer all day.

My suspicion is that this is far worse and the cost to an employer of giving everyone a standing desk and treadmill (and before you say this is ridiculous, I have actually got my employer to buy me both, albeit by charm and alcohol rather than threats) is far less than any combo of brake particulate and air quality matters for underground staff. But that is just intuition and we really need to know the science.

Not really the same. You can still be very athletic and healthy etc if you have an office job (go to the gym outside work for example), whereas there is nothing you can do to reverse COPD etc from terrible air quality exposure.

If these readings are right of terrible air quality I would be astonished if there wasn't significantly increased mortality in TfL workers. Or to put it another way, if there isn't significantly increased mortality then we surely have got the impacts of air pollution on health wrong?

 

[BostonGeorge]

Not really the same. You can still be very athletic and healthy etc if you have an office job (go to the gym outside work for example), whereas there is nothing you can do to reverse COPD etc from terrible air quality exposure.

If these readings are right of terrible air quality I would be astonished if there wasn't significantly increased mortality in TfL workers. Or to put it another way, if there isn't significantly increased mortality then we surely have got the impacts of air pollution on health wrong?

It seems to be widely accepted air pollution can have serious health implications. Unfortunately, it would appear Transport for London are moving in the opposite direction when it comes to the wellbeing of their staff. A friend of mine works at Finsbury Park. All locations are implementing changes to their rosters because of the 600 job cuts. This friend sent me Finsbury Park's revised schematics, and I was amazed to read the plan is for the southbound Victoria line platform to have SATS duties from 07:00 to 22:00 on Saturdays and Sundays, which is a complete shift from NO weekend SATS whatsoever on the current schematics. As far as I am concerned, and I have stated as much to this friend, that is a serious dereliction in terms of duty of care towards staff. There is simply no need to be sending people into that environment on a zone two station, at weekends, with a train frequency of two minutes. Serious questions needs to be asked, and I hope the RMT and TSSA are asking those questions.

 

[Taunton]

It's an interesting reversal of perception, because a generation ago working in Underground stations was known to have the best health record and lowest sickness days of any London Transport employees. It was attributed to not being exposed to the outdoor climate, more consistent temperatures, etc.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is there any evidence of lower life expectancy / increased respiratory distress (right term?) in operational/formerly operational TfL staff than comparable Londoners?

On the assumption the concerns raised in this thread are credible it seems like something that should be relatively easy to do a quick study on and a reasonable argument it should be funded by TfL. The results of that study should then inform what, if anything, is done.

I'm sure I recall reading that life expectancy among Tube drivers is quite poor. I don't know about others.

 

[Dstock7080]

I'm sure I recall reading that life expectancy among Tube drivers is quite poor. I don't know about others.

Thanks for the comforting words!

 

[Egg Centric]

Not really the same. You can still be very athletic and healthy etc if you have an office job (go to the gym outside work for example), whereas there is nothing you can do to reverse COPD etc from terrible air quality exposure.

If these readings are right of terrible air quality I would be astonished if there wasn't significantly increased mortality in TfL workers. Or to put it another way, if there isn't significantly increased mortality then we surely have got the impacts of air pollution on health wrong?

What are "these readings"? I don't see any in the OP and I'm not particularly au fait with ths subject in general.

 

[matt_world2004]

Would PEDs be the solution again?

The dust at some el platforms is terrible so PEDs doesn't prevent it

 

[SynthD]

There are many other factors for tube worker lifespan. Off the top of my head - lack of sunshine, the dangers of rail work, the mental effects of passenger suicides and shift work.

The measurements of air pollution on the tube may be high, but might not be in every category. Eg brake dust is sub 10nm particles? But it’s not CO, CO2 or NOx?

 

[endicomark69@g]

TfL (and before that when they were LT) have commissioned (and taken part in joint studies suggested/prompted by outside Bodies) studies on atmosphere quality - I believe it was with Imperial College for at least one - and surprise surprise the results that become public tended to err on the side of World Health/UN limits for particulates/metals/hydrocarbons.

What they didn't do was highlight to conclusions that said long term health measurements for lung-condition and disease would be "advisable" and that these hadn't really been conducted scientifically for more than a generation - references were made to fairly ancient studies that had been conducted around the time of the Clean Air Act which covered Steam Trains, which was not an acceptable baseline for any current study.

Having worked Deep-Level Stations all the way from ticket barriers to Station Management over 20 years of my career I've certainly felt the long term effects of "eating" brake-dust and all the other associated crud that infested various bits of the Picc/Vic and Northern Line on a shift basis. Black Nostril was very much a thing if you spent any appreciable time down on a platform, and susceptibility to URT and lung infections was always THE biggest cause for staff absence - this was a known thing going back into the mid-90s when the Unions first/last made a fuss about air quality for drivers on the Picc and Central.

I've experienced long-term damage to the mucosa and septum as well as a 10/15% reduction in lung capacity that my Specialist "feels" is more than likely attributable to my Career, however this isn't the USA - and the idea that a lone ENT Specialist will stick their neck out and write me a golden-ticket opinion that I could use to actually "claim" anything against my former Employer is naive in the extreme - it doesn't happen. Plus there is all the other air-quality issues involved in above-ground regular life that contribute to lung damage that at present would be impossible to filter as distinct from what's been "likely" down to LUL only.

The poster that mentioned the "existential" nature of this issue to TfL is correct, if what I "suspect" the health impacts of a Life on the Tube actually are then some future generation is going to look back on the current poorly monitored, poorly understood and unscientific "guestimates" of the safety (or otherwise) of Tube air as cavalier at best, and downright criminal at worst.

But literally every aspect of this issue (from scientific study, to health monitoring to remediation) would involve far bigger buckets of money than UK HMG - let alone TfL on its own - will ever be able be able to come up with. Like historical Coal Mining, I'm sure the Treasury is quite happy to consider the issue one of those unfortunate, but necessary costs of doing business in an urbanised, mass-transit industry. Of course it's always easier to do that when you aren't the one doing Platform Duties at Bank on a stifling summer evening, day in, week out.

 

[Egg Centric]

however this isn't the USA - and the idea that a lone ENT Specialist will stick their neck out and write me a golden-ticket opinion that I could use to actually "claim" anything against my former Employer is naive in the extreme - it doesn't happen. Plus there is all the other air-quality issues involved in above-ground regular life that contribute to lung damage that at present would be impossible to filter as distinct from what's been "likely" down to LUL only.

We do however now have class action lawsuits, a relatively new innovation borrowed from the states. In those circumstances perhaps it could indeed happen (if there is anything in this - you may have personally just been unlucky as you also point out - but you would think that a study is possible in principle given how many people TfL employ and have employed). I wouldn't know where to begin but maybe try with the lawyers suing GTR for overcharging on Gatwick Express?

 

[HSTEd]

Short of switching from conventional friction-based technology to something resembling the linear motor-based Innovia metro, not much can be done about brake/wheel dust. (That wouldn't totally fix it, but you could totally fix it if you went for an outright maglev system, assuming it could be made to fit!)

There is one technology, that dares not speak its name, that would prevent large numbers of drivers from being exposed to the air in the tunnels long term.........
But I don't want to have an argument about that again!

Ultimately ventilation in the tunnels is not really adequate and without massive reconstruction little can be done to improve it. Perhaps you could convert old tube stock to carry huge blocks of ice and park them in the stations overnight to deal with the heat issue though......

 

[zwk500]

There is one technology, that dares not speak its name, that would prevent large numbers of drivers from being exposed to the air in the tunnels long term.........
But I don't want to have an argument about that again!

(GoA4 is pricey to retrofit to the tube though)

Ultimately ventilation in the tunnels is not really adequate and without massive reconstruction little can be done to improve it. Perhaps you could convert old tube stock to carry huge blocks of ice and park them in the stations overnight to deal with the heat issue though......

Best suggestion I've seen is to use the heat from the tube to provide district heating to replace the need for boilers/heat pumps.

 

[computerSaysNo]

Don't most Tube trains now use rheostatic or regenerative braking instead of friction braking down to about 3mph anyway?
Or do the friction brakes still engage at higher speeds but just at a lower pressure?

 

[Dstock7080]

On S and 2009 Stock dynamic braking, a combination of rheostatic and regenerative operates over 10mph and doesn’t have an initial application of friction brake.
In CBTC areas certain stations are designated ‘friction only’, (currently Upton Park) these are rotated regularly, this cleans the brake blocks otherwise little used.

 

[Thirteen]

Let's be real, the chances of the entire Underground network being shut down is pretty low

 

[321over360]

The tube network air quality is far more toxic than any air at street level, contrary to what Sadiq Khan says, as there is more evidence proving the tube has seriously harmful air quality yet nothing is being done.

 

[Mawkie]

The tube network air quality is far more toxic than any air at street level, contrary to what Sadiq Khan says, as there is more evidence proving the tube has seriously harmful air quality yet nothing is being done.

If we're adding our own completely unfounded anecdotes, I spoke to a King's College (or maybe Imperial) researcher who told me the air quality at Great Portland Street street level (where the CSA hangs out on the gateline) was far worse than the track level air (where the Supervisor's office is) due to the heavy traffic on the road outside and the traffic lights holding cars, buses, and lorries for long periods.

We have the evidence, although none of it appears to have made it into this thread. The problem as I understand it is that although they can measure the air particles, they don't yet know the effects of the very smallest particles (those that can enter the blood stream via the lungs).

Independent, peer reviewed, research is ongoing.

 

[boiledbeans2]

Open Access journal paper:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969722064142

Press Release for above paper (including layman's summary of findings):

Tube air quality worst at rush hour

A Surrey-led study finds London Underground air quality dips most during evening rush hour, pointing to a need for better ventilation. Find out more.

www.surrey.ac.uk