The state could soon be condemned again for failing to act quickly enough against air pollution, this is the opinion of the Council of State. But the latter also notes a real improvement in Grenoble since 2017. Gladys Mary, regional correspondent for ATMO in Isère is a guest of France Bleu.
Will the French state still be condemned for failing to act quickly enough against air pollution? The public rapporteur of the Council of State – whose opinions are generally followed by the judges – asked this week for the payment of an additional 20 million euros, after a first conviction last year. On the other hand, in his opinion, the Council of State notes that the situation in Grenoble has improved a lot since 2017 ”.We have concentrations that have dropped significantly“, Confirms in France Bleu Isère Gladys Mary, territorial correspondent of ATMO in Isère, the body in charge of air quality control.
France Bleu Isère: The Council of State welcomes a real improvement in air quality in Grenoble in recent years. Is that so? Is that also what you measure?
Gladys Mary: So, this is what we actually measure on our stations, which are spread over the entire territory of the Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes region, on the Isère and in particular on the agglomeration of Grenoble. In particular for nitrogen dioxide, a pollutant on which we are in dispute in recent years. We have very low concentrations and therefore have fallen below the European regulatory threshold of 40 micrograms per cubic meter on an annual average.
Talk about nitrogen dioxide. Is it the pollutant that has decreased the most? More generally, which pollutants have decreased the most?
There are several pollutants that have decreased a lot over the past 20 years. There is an underlying trend of around 30-50% reduction in pollutants. So that’s good news. It shows that the actions taking place have an effect. The pollutants that have decreased the most are in particular sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and fine dust. But they are still pollutants on which we still have problems.
And on the contrary, what are the pollutants that persist the most then?
The same in fact. These pollutants have decreased but continue to persist. We are certainly at levels below the thresholds regulated by Europe. Instead, we remain above the thresholds recommended by the World Health Organization. We therefore remain on the concentrations in the air that have an impact on our daily health, on the air we breathe and which can have, for example, impacts on the development of tumors, cardiovascular diseases, fetal development. It is these pollutants – in particular nitrogen oxides and fine dust – that have the greatest effect on health compared to the concentrations we still breathe in our daily life.
And what are the sources of emission of these pollutants today? As you said, they have been significantly reduced, but they are still a number of them. Due to road traffic, wood heating?
Exactly. Nitrogen dioxide is emitted mainly by road traffic and then again partly by industry, despite the efforts made in recent years. And on the fine dust, this pollutant that we see in winter in Grenoble, this little gray cloud that everyone knows well – one of the few pollutants we can see with the naked eye – are emitted largely by inefficient wood heating: fireplaces, stoves old generation, etc. All of these equipment will emit a lot of fine particles during combustion, as well as having a fairly low yield. And when you also burn poor quality wood, not sufficiently dry or of a bad wood species, you will have a high rate of fine dust that will be emitted both in your internal habitat and also outside, and therefore will spread throughout the territory and have a impact on all populations.
The metropolis of Grenoble has put in place a plan to change the wood stoves. Is useful. Should we go further?
There is an “air-wood” fund brought from the country Voironnais, the metropolis of Grenoble and Grésivaudan, therefore over a fairly vast territory and which allows citizens to be supported in replacing their wood heating systems. It is a financially interesting support, of the order of 2,000 euros and which allows this support. To go even further, we still have to intensify this replacement of wood-burning appliances in order to continue heating with wood, because this remains a heating mode that is considered neutral for greenhouse gases. On the other hand, in the impact on local health, since it emits fine dust, it is necessary to continue to be able to heat “clean” with wood. This will still emit fine particles, but the idea is to emit as few as possible.
