Consultation outcome

Summary of responses and UK government response

Updated 9 February 2023

1. Consultation overview

First published in 2019, the National Air Pollution Control Programme (NAPCP) is a largely technical document which assesses the emission reduction (abatement) potential of a range of policies and measures that could be deployed in order to limit emissions with a view to complying with the National Emission Reduction Commitments (ERCs) set under the National Emission Ceilings Regulations (NECR).

In the revised draft NAPCP, UK government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive outlined the policies and measures which could be considered further in order to reduce emissions of the 5 pollutants in accordance with the ERCs, and those not to be considered further at this stage. These pollutants include: fine particulate matter (PM_2.5), sulphur oxides (SO_x), nitrogen oxides (NO_x), ammonia (NH₃) and non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs).

The revised draft NAPCP was subject to a 6-week consultation, that ran from 25 July to 4 September 2022.

The consultation sought views on the revised draft NAPCP, in particular the balance of measures across the 7 NAPCP packages as set out in section 2.6.1 for each of the 5 pollutants. It also provided the opportunity to submit views on the format of the NAPCP and to suggest further measures to help achieve the ERCs most effectively.

The consultation received 55 responses, 35 online responses via citizen space and a further 20 responses via email.

UK government, the Scottish Government, the Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive are grateful to all those who took the time to respond to the joint public consultation. All the consultation responses have been carefully considered.

2. Overview of respondents

Questions 1 to 5 were general questions about the respondent, including name, email address, organisation location and confidentiality information. Annex 1 to this consultation summary lists all organisations that responded, who did not request their response to be confidential, but does not include personal names, addresses or other contact details.

Question 5 asked the 55 respondents which category best described them. 13 individuals, 11 industry bodies, 7 local authorities, 6 non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and 18 others, including farmers, trade associations, academics and membership organisations responded to the consultation.

Question 4 asked the 55 respondents their location. The consultation received 32 responses from England, 2 from England and Wales, 5 from Wales, 1 from Northern Ireland, 14 UK wide and 1 from Spain.

3. Responses to the policy questions

Question 6. Do you agree or disagree with the balance of measures across the 7 NAPCP packages as set out in section 2.6.1 of the NAPCP document, for the abatement of fine particulate matter (PM_2.5)?

Response	Number of responses
Agree	13
Disagree	24
Neither agree or disagree	6
Don’t know	0

This question had a set of closed response options: Agree, Disagree, Neither agree or disagree and Don’t know. There were 35 online responses to this part of the question and 8 of the email responses indicated their closed response. The remaining 12 did not indicate their closed response to this question however their views have been interpreted and represented in the summaries below. Of the 43 respondents who provided a closed response: 13 agreed, 24 disagreed and, 6 neither agreed or disagreed.

Respondents who agreed with the balance of measures for the abatement of PM_2.5 included: individuals, local authorities and industry bodies. In general, respondents who agreed showed support for measures that remove harmful solid fuels from the marketplace and for those that make it easier for the public to choose the cleanest source of fuel. Respondents also noted the importance of additional information for residents on the risk of domestic burning and welcomed UK government’s proposals to look at further educational campaigns.

Respondents who disagreed with the balance of measures for the abatement of PM_2.5 included: individuals, local authorities, industry bodies and NGOs. Respondents who disagreed with the balance of measures did so for various reasons. These included views that the package of measures is not ambitious enough, with some suggesting that measures to ban both indoor and outdoor domestic burning should be considered. Alternatively, a few respondents who disagreed with the balance of measures felt that the domestic measures were too ambitious and raised concerns regarding exacerbating fuel poverty and placing additional pressure on those who rely on wood burning to heat their homes. Some respondents disagreed with the balance of measures as they felt that too high a proportion of PM_2.5 reductions were expected from domestic combustion compared to other sectors, notably industry and transport. Concerns regarding the level of detail provided with respect to the policies and measures were also raised.

Respondents who did not indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with the balance of measures provided a range of additional comments. A number of responses noted the difficulties many people, particularly those in rural areas, will face in meeting their heating, hot water and cooking requirements. Others highlighted the importance of increasing awareness, behaviour change initiatives and support to manufacturers, retailers and consumers when switching to cleaner fuels.

UK government response:

We have carefully considered all the responses received as part of this consultation. After due consideration UK government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive have not made any changes to the package of measures to be considered further to reduce PM_2.5 emissions. The NAPCP outlines a list of wide-ranging action across a number of sectors including domestic combustion, industry and transport to drive reductions in PM_2.5 emissions. Our analysis shows that the NAPCP outlines a pathway to meeting the 2030 emission reduction ceilings for PM_2.5 for 2030 and we believe does so in a pragmatic way.

UK government is not considering a ban on domestic burning at this time. UK government recognises that some households are reliant on solid fuel burning as a source for heating, hot water and cooking.

With regard to abatement contribution from the industry sector, there is a robust regulator-led approach to industrial emissions, where industry and regulators work together collaboratively to raise standards and reduce emissions over time. This supports business confidence and so innovation and growth. The long implementation timescales and particular sectors currently being reviewed mean that the estimated emissions savings by 2030 are limited but pollution reduction will continue beyond 2030 as standards for industrial emissions from additional sectors are set.

Further information on the levels of abatement and appropriate impact assessments for each of the policies and measures will be provided as each of these policies are developed.

Question 7. Do you agree or disagree with the balance of measures across the 7 NAPCP packages as set out in section 2.6.1 of the NAPCP document, for the abatement of ammonia (NH₃)?

Response	Number of responses
Agree	15
Disagree	15
Neither agree or disagree	7
Don’t know	3

This question had a set of closed response options: Agree, Disagree, Neither agree or disagree and Don’t know. There were 34 online responses to this part of the question and 6 of the email responses indicated their closed response. The remaining 14 did not indicate their closed response to this question however their views have been interpreted and represented in the summaries below. Of the 34 respondents who provided a closed response: 15 agreed, 15 disagreed, 7 neither agreed or disagreed and 3 didn’t know.

There was an even split on responses that agreed with the balance of measures for abatement of NH₃ and those who disagreed. Of those who disagreed, there was an even split on those who felt the level of ambition was either too high or too low.

Respondents who agreed with the balance of measures for the abatement of NH₃ included: individuals, local authorities, industry bodies and membership bodies. Respondents who agreed with the balance of measures showed a good level of support for the high-level policies and measures outlined, and made particular mention to the low cost, productive measures, such as more efficient diets and better use of genetics. A large amount of support was received from a wide range of respondents (including farmers, industry bodies and individuals) for tree planting and tree shelter belts, in order to mitigate the impact of ammonia pollution on the environment.

Respondents who disagreed with the balance of measures for the abatement of NH₃ included: individuals, farmers, industry bodies and NGOs. Respondents who disagreed were split between those who felt the ambition was too low, and those who felt the ambition was too high. Those who felt that the ambition was too low noted the need for quicker progress in delivering the actions set out in the 2019 Clean Air Strategy. NGOs in particular drew attention to the impact that NH₃ has on sensitive habitats, including native woodlands across the UK. Those who felt that the ambition was too high raised concerns over the impact that regulatory measures may have on farming and the UK’s food production and urged that ammonia reductions should be achieved without impeding productivity.

Respondents who did not indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with the balance of measures provided a range of additional comments. Some points were raised in relation to individual measures listed and respondents highlighted the need for full regulatory impact assessments in the development of the policies and measures set out. Some respondents also suggested further action should be taken to reduce NH₃ emissions from road transport.

UK government response:

We have carefully considered all the responses received as part of this consultation. After due consideration UK government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive have not made any changes to the package of measures that will be considered further to reduce NH₃ emissions. Our analysis shows that the NAPCP outlines a pathway to meeting the 2030 emission reduction ceilings for NH₃ and we believe it does so in a pragmatic way.

In the consultation document published alongside the draft NAPCP it was outlined that the UK had submitted its adjusted inventory to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) for scrutiny. This adjustment takes into account new science and new sources of ammonia emissions, in particular the spreading of non-manure digestate, that was not included in inventory reporting at the time the ERCs were agreed and has increased in recent years. This adjustment has since been scrutinised by the CLRTAP and accepted. Applying the adjustment to the 2020 inventory reduces NH₃ emissions by 12.75 kiloton (kt). Projecting this to 2030 reduces NH₃ emissions in scope of the ERC by over 20kt. This reduces the risk of the UK exceeding the 2030 ERC for NH₃ in both lower and upper scenarios.

Although the adjustment reduces the risk of exceeding the 2030 targets, UK government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive are not, at this point, proposing to remove any of the policies and measures to be considered further in order to reduce ammonia emissions. As outlined in the consultation document, emission projections are subject to change and significant levels of uncertainty. It would be premature at this point to remove any of the policies and measures listed for further consideration.

As stated in the NAPCP, each measure will be subject to further policy analysis (including cost-benefit analysis), development, consultation, and government decision processes. UK government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive are keen to work closely with industry, farmers and NGOs as measures are taken forward.

Question 8. Do you agree or disagree with the balance of measures across the 7 NAPCP packages as set out in section 2.6.1 of the NAPCP document, for the abatement of nitrogen oxides (NO_x)?

Response	Number of responses
Agree	14
Disagree	14
Neither agree or disagree	8
Don’t know	6

This question had a set of closed response options: Agree, Disagree, Neither agree or disagree and Don’t know. There were 35 online responses to this part of the question and 7 of the email responses indicated their closed response. The remaining 13 did not indicate their closed response to this question however their views have been interpreted and represented in the summaries below. Of the 42 respondents who provided a closed response: 14 agreed, 14 disagreed, 8 neither agreed or disagreed and 6 didn’t know.

Respondents who agreed with the balance of measures for the abatement of NO_x included a range of individuals, local authorities and industry bodies. Respondents did not specify why they agreed.

Respondents who disagreed with the balance of measures for the abatement of NO_x included a range of individuals, local authorities, industry bodies and NGOs. Many of the respondents who disagreed with the balance of measures in general did support the measures to help local authorities tackle air pollution in the transport decarbonisation and net zero strategies. However, some suggested there was a lack of detail in the Net Zero strategy, and recommended UK government sets out a clear indication as to the timing and uptake of the measures. A few respondents commented that they would like the Net Zero strategy and Decarbonisation strategy to be clearer about its implied requirements for traffic reductions, particularly in towns and cities.

Some respondents raised detailed points on specific measures including in regard to uptake of electric vehicles, PM_2.5 emissions from electric vehicles and caps on generator operating hours.

UK government response:

In preparing this NAPCP the policies and proposals relating to road transport and decarbonisation have been taken into account from the following strategies: The Net Zero strategy (UK government), The Transport Decarbonisation Plan, The Reducing Car Use for a healthier, fairer and Greener Scotland, the Clean Air plan for Wales and the Net Zero Wales: Carbon budget 2.

The UK continues to lead the world having been the first G7 country to commit in law to net zero carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. Further, UK government has launched a 3-month independent review of the Net Zero strategy. The review will seek to make sure that our energy transition happens at the same time as maximising the economic opportunity for businesses and households across the country, providing huge opportunities for innovation, investment, exports and jobs.

Projecting future emissions is inherently uncertain, and technology, behaviour and policy development will continue to evolve. As such, the Department for Transport (DfT) have committed to regularly review progress against its net zero targets and publish progress and review the pathway at least every 5 years.

Question 9. Do you agree or disagree with the balance of measures across the 7 NAPCP packages as set out in section 2.6.1 of the NAPCP document, for the abatement of non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs)?

Response	Number of responses
Agree	12
Disagree	10
Neither agree or disagree	8
Don’t know	10

This question had a set of closed response options: Agree, Disagree, Neither agree or disagree and Don’t know. There were 35 online responses to this part of the question and 5 of the email responses indicated their closed response. The remaining 15 did not indicate their closed response to this question however their views have been interpreted and represented in the summaries below. Of the 40 respondents who provided a closed response: 12 agreed, 10 disagreed, 10 didn’t know and 8 neither agreed or disagreed.

Very few specific comments were made regarding the balance of measures set out for the abatement of NMVOCs. One respondent raised concerns about the impact of indoor VOCs getting into outside air and another respondent raised that abatement estimates need to be cautious if based on UKBAT.

It was noted by one individual that the emission reduction ceiling for NMVOCs had been met and that measures proposed in the NAPCP would help further reduce the risk of exceeding this ceiling in 2030.

UK government response:

We have carefully considered all the responses received as part of this consultation. After due consideration UK government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive have not made any changes to the package of measures that will be considered further to reduce NMVOC emissions. Our analysis shows that the NAPCP outlines a pathway to meeting the 2030 emission reduction ceilings for NMVOCs for 2030 and we believe does so in a pragmatic way.

Question 10. Do you agree or disagree with the balance of measures across the 7 NAPCP packages as set out in section 2.6.1 of the NAPCP document, for the abatement of sulphur dioxide (SO₂)?

Response	Number of responses
Agree	14
Disagree	9
Neither agree or disagree	9
Don’t know	8

This question had a set of closed response options: Agree, Disagree, Neither agree or disagree and Don’t know. There were 35 online responses to this part of the question and 5 of the email responses indicated their closed response. The remaining 15 did not indicate their closed response to this question however their views have been interpreted and represented in the summaries below. Of the 40 respondents who provided a closed response: 14 agreed, 9 disagreed, 9 neither agreed or disagreed and 8 didn’t know.

This question received few additional comments. Of those who agreed with the balance of measures, one respondent suggested that there should be further legislative measures to prevent the sale and use of ‘high’ sulphur fuels and promote the installation of cleaner forms of heating. A further respondent suggested that there should be exceptions for historic craft boats and that they should not be required to meet a modern standard.

Respondents who disagreed with the balance of measures did not provide any substantive comments regarding the abatement of SO₂ . However, several respondents disagreed with the balance of measures as they had needed further granular detail provided in respect to the policies and measures to be considered further.

UK government response:

We have carefully considered all the responses received as part of this consultation. After due consideration UK government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive have not made any changes to the package of measures that will be considered further to reduce SO₂ emissions. Our analysis shows that the NAPCP outlines a pathway to meeting the 2030 emission reduction ceilings for SO₂ for 2030 and we believe does so in a pragmatic way.

Further information on the levels of abatement and appropriate impact assessments for each of the policies and measures to be considered further will be provided as each of these policies are developed.

Question 11. After the publication of this NAPCP, UK government and devolved administrations will continue to develop our policy measures and approaches. Please inform us of any further measures you think we should consider to help achieve the UK’s ERCs most effectively.

This was an open question and received 29 responses. Responses were received from individuals, industry bodies, local authorities and membership organisations. Respondents informed us of further measures in the following areas: domestic burning, agriculture and transport sector.

Additional proposals relating to domestic burning included: more restrictive measures in smoke control areas, tighter restrictions on outdoor burning and exploring Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil (HVO) as a domestic heating fuel.

Additional proposals relating to the agriculture sector included: slurry acidification as a funded measure for larger farms, assistance to farmers to support the shift to cleaner practices and strategies that promote healthy diets with reduced meat consumption or reduce food waste.

Additional proposals relating to the transport sector included: accelerating existing proposals included in the Net Zero strategy (such as the deployment of zero exhaust emission vehicles), making a legally binding commitment to end the sale of new petrol, diesel and hybrid vehicles by 2030, and a shift towards hydrogen-fuelled solutions.

UK government response:

We have carefully considered all the responses received as part of this consultation. After due consideration UK government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive have not added any additional areas for consideration at the current time. Our analysis shows that the NAPCP outlines a pathway to meeting the 2030 NECR emission reduction ceilings for all 5 pollutants set out in the Regulations.

4. Responses to the technical questions

Question 12. Do you agree or disagree with the scale of the potential emission reductions for each of the 7 packages of policies and measures as set out in table 2.6.1 of the draft NAPCP?

Response	Number of responses
Agree	9
Disagree (too high)	11
Disagree (too low)	4
Neither agree or disagree	8
Don’t know	10

This question had a set of closed response options: Agree, Disagree (too high), Disagree (too low), Neither agree or disagree and Don’t know. There were 35 online responses to this part of the question and 7 of the email responses indicated their closed response. The remaining 13 did not indicate their closed response to this question however their views have been interpreted and represented in the summaries below. Of the 42 respondents who provided a closed response: 9 agreed, 11 disagreed (too high), 4 disagreed (too low), 8 neither agreed or disagreed and 10 didn’t know.

Those who agreed with the scale of potential emission reductions for each of the 7 packages of policies and measures did not outline why they agreed. Those who disagreed were split between those who felt that the scale of the potential emission reductions was too high and those who felt that it was too low. Those who felt that the scale of potential emission was too high included those who felt that the policies and measures outlined were not sustainable and could have impacts on certain individuals and specific industries. Those who felt that the scale was too low, suggested that measures considered were not ambitious enough and commented that additional measures are needed in order to reduce the risk of missing the 2030 targets.

A number of respondents requested further granular detail on how the abatement projections set out in section 2.6.1 were reached.

UK government response:

We have carefully considered all the responses received as part of this consultation. The NAPCP outlines measures to be considered further at this point. Our analysis shows that the NAPCP outlines a pathway to meeting the 2030 NECR emission reduction ceilings for all 5 pollutants set out in the Regulations.

Further information on the levels of abatement and appropriate impact assessments for each of the policies and measures to be considered further will be provided as each of these policies are developed.

Question 13. We have outlined the uncertainty of projections in the ‘UK NAPCP additional factors’ above. Please provide any additional information on potential changes over the next 8 years that may impact emission projections. Please also select the category that your information relates to.

Section 1.4 of the consultation document outlined the uncertainties when it comes to estimating future emission reductions. This includes:

• additional policies not accounted for that are likely to provide further abatement, including but not limited to the regulator-led process for setting Best Available Techniques (BAT)
• the potential adjustment to emissions of ammonia in the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (NAEI) to account for emission source categories which were not accounted for at the time when the emission reduction commitments were set - this is with reference to Regulation 4 of the NECR
• uncertainties in calculating the emission projections themselves
• the impact of the implementation of the Net Zero Strategy on emissions of air pollutants
• further research and development that will update and improve the emission factors and reduce uncertainty

We asked consultees to provide any additional information on potential changes over the next 8 years that may impact emission projections. The main categories selected were environmental, economic and technical or scientific.

Environmental - A significant number of respondents commented on the potential impact of climate change on air quality in the UK, by influencing emissions, atmospheric processing, and transport of many pollutants.

Economic - Respondents raised concerned over the current economic climate, which may negatively impact the cost of fertilisers, decreasing its use and the deployment of organic materials. This may have the potential to significantly disrupt the assumptions outlined in the NAPCP. Additionally, others noted that the current global energy challenges could result in more people, particularly those in rural areas and on low incomes, being less able to afford to retro-fit or convert to renewables or lower emission fuel.

Technical or scientific - A number of stakeholders noted the uncertainties and difficulty of projecting future emissions of emission projections. A number of respondents raised uncertainties regarding scientific understand behind the impact of non-exhaust emissions from transport for example brake and tyre wear PM_2.5.

UK government response:

UK government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive welcome all views on the uncertainty of projections in the NAPCP. Circumstances change year to year, and emission projections represent a snapshot in time. In light of future uncertainties, UK government acknowledges that in order to reduce the risk of missing the 2030 emission ceilings, wide ranging action needs to be taken across the UK to reduce emissions.

We are continuously improving the evidence base - including the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory - to ensure that the data reported is based upon the best available evidence. As part of our continuous programme of improvement, we have recently commissioned a measurement project to further develop our understanding of real-word emissions from solid fuel burning in domestic stoves. We are also running improvements looking at impacts of local policy on road transport and on reducing uncertainty in our projected emission estimates. It is likely that this information and the results of other improvement projects will feed into the inventory reporting in future years.

The UNECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) has scrutinised and accepted the UK’s adjustment to its NH₃ adjustment. This adjustment takes into account new science and new sources of ammonia emissions, in particular the spreading of non-manure digestate, that was not included in inventory reporting at the time the ERCs were agreed and has increased in recent years. This adjustment has been applied to the NAPCP published alongside this response. Applying the adjustment to the 2020 inventory reduces NH₃ emissions by 12.75kt. Projecting this to 2030 reduces NH₃ emissions in scope of the ERC by over 20kt.

Further information on the levels of abatement and appropriate impact assessments for each of the policies and measures to be considered further will be provided as each of these policies are developed this will include more detailed information on the level of uncertainty and sensitivity analyses developed to account for them.

Question 14. In revising the NAPCP the UK has followed the format set out in EU implementing decision 2018/1522. Do agree or disagree that the format of the NAPCP could be improved?

Response	Number of responses
Agree	12
Disagree	3
Neither agree or disagree	19
Don’t know	8

This question had a set of closed response options: Agree, Disagree, Neither agree or disagree and Don’t know. There were 35 online responses to this part of the question and 7 of the email responses indicated their closed response. The remaining 13 did not indicate their closed response to this question however their views have been interpreted and represented in the summaries below. Of the 42 respondents who provided a closed response: 12 agreed, 3 disagreed, 19 neither agreed or disagreed and 8 didn’t know.

In revising the NAPCP the UK has followed the format set out in EU implementing decision 2018/1522. We asked consultees for views on whether the format of the NAPCP could be improved, whether this be presentational (the format or content required) or effectiveness or usefulness of the document.

Of the responses that agreed that the NAPCP format could be improved, there was consensus that the format was too lengthy and technical. Respondents highlighted that the NAPCP would benefit from a more structured format including an introduction, index, glossary and clearer titles. Other suggestions included following a more logical presentation that follows a sector specific intervention format.

It was also suggested that the NAPCP include information on how the measures will be implemented, for example whether they will be implemented through legislation or regulation versus more voluntary incentives.

Those who disagreed felt that following the format set out in EU implementing decision allows for a more straightforward comparison with EU member states.

UK government response:

In revising the NAPCP, the UK has followed the requirements and format set out in the National Emission Ceilings Regulations 2018 (SI 2018/129) and EU implementing decision 2018/1522. These Regulations are retained EU law.

UK government agrees that the format of the NAPCP could be improved. UK government recently introduced the Retained EU Law (Reform and Revocation) Bill (the ‘REUL Bill’) to the House of Commons on 22 September. Under the provisions of the Bill, the National Emissions Ceilings Regulations 2018 (SI 2018/129) and Decision 2018/1522 will be sunsetted on 31 Dec 2023. UK government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive will review the provisions of these Regulations which apply to the preparation and format of a National Air Pollution Control Programme (NAPCP). The purpose of this review is to make sure the legislation continues to deliver the UK’s policy objectives and ambition for clean air. We want to make sure we are taking the most effective and ambitious action across each part of government, across the UK to tackle air pollution.

5. Alternative points raised in the consultation

Several respondents made points not related to the above questions. This included that:

• the NAPCP did not provide sufficient clarity on the policies and measures included in the NAPCP, specifically a timeline for consultation, adoption and implementation
• the NAPCP did not set out specific details on how the levels of abatement were estimated for each individual policy and measure to be considered further.
• for PM_2.5 and NH₃, at the lower end of the range of potential abatement, there remained a risk that the UK would miss it’s 2030 emission reduction commitments.

UK government response:

UK government, the Scottish Government, the Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive have revised the NAPCP in line with the format set out in the annex to the Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1522.

The NAPCP is a strategic document prepared on the basis of current projections and as such is subject to a large amount of uncertainty. It is not appropriate in this document to set out detailed implementation dates and abatement estimates at a granular level. The policies and measures listed in the NAPCP are not government policy and remain subject to further policy analysis, development, public consultation, impact assessment and government decision processes. Further detailed information including implementation dates and abatement estimates alongside impact assessments for each of the policies and measures set out for further consideration will be provided as part of the process for developing these measures.

The policies and measures currently adopted and included in the emissions inventory and those that will be considered further as set out in the NAPCP could reduce emissions in accordance with the 2030 ERCs for all pollutants in the upper scenario and for all pollutants except PM_2.5 in the lower scenario. As stated in the NAPCP consultation document there are a number of additional policies in the pipeline that have not been accounted for in the NAPCP.

6. Next steps

Alongside this response, UK government has published a revised NAPCP. The policies and measures listed in the NAPCP will be considered further by UK government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive, in order to reduce the risk of the UK failing to achieve its 2030 emission reduction commitments.

Under the UK Air Quality Framework, Defra, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive will review the aims and requirements of the NAPCP to consider the best approach for achieving the UK’s ambition for clean air. We want to ensure we are taking the most effective and ambitious action across all administrations within the UK to tackle air pollution. For England, greater coherence with new national review and monitoring obligations, such as those contained in the Environment Act, will enable us to drive action to tackle air pollution in a more integrated and strategic way and avoid duplication of reporting and reviewing obligations.

Annex A: List of consultees

The following consultees responded to the consultation online:

Academic - University of Reading

Consultancy - Pollution Solution - Roadvent

Individual

Individual

Individual

Individual

Individual

Individual

Individual

Individual

Individual

Individual

Individual

Individual

Individual

Industry body

Industry body

Industry body

Industry body - Chartered Institute of Environmental Health

Industry body - Chemical Industries Association (CIA)

Industry body - the Stove Industry Alliance

Local authority

Local authority - Conwy County Borough Council

Local authority - Lisburn and Castlereagh City Council

NGO - Royal College of Physicians

Other - AHDB is a non-departmental public body and reports to the UK Parliament through Defra Ministers.

Other - Farmer

Other - Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and Neighbouring Authorities Air Quality Forum

Other - Historic Narrow boat Club

Other - Institution of Civil Engineers

Other - Ltd company representing 70 free range egg farmers

Other - Pollution Solution -(Roadvent)

The following stakeholders sent their views via email:

UKPIA

National Bargee Travellers Association

Natural England

Royal Town Planning Institute

The Environment Agency

Sustrans

Clean Air London

Local Government Association

National Farmers Union (NFU) and the National Pig Association (NPA).

Country Land and Business Association (CLA)

Client Earth

The Woodland Trust

AMP clean energy

Asthma and lung UK

Energy UK

Mineral Products association

UK lubricants association

Newport local authority

NFU Cymru Response