BY MR. JOSEPH MICHAEL LEVERMORE, RESEARCH ASSISTANT IN THE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON
Saw. Smelt. Tasted. Felt. Air pollution has a history that only a few are aware off. Seneca, Charles Dickens, John Evelyn and the like have all noted the relationships between air pollution, cities and poor health. Seneca in AD 61 wrote: “No sooner had I left behind the oppressive atmosphere of the city [Rome] and that reek of smoking cookers which pour out whatever pestilential vapours and soot accumulated in their core, than I noticed the change to my disposition”. But, at the time were such opinions disputed?
Coal smoke characterised nineteenth century urban living, and its impacts were felt by all. Unsurprising this “smoke nuisance” plagued all of Britain’s manufacturing centres. The 1819 Select Committee thought Birmingham and Manchester were already smokier than London as a result of nuisance smoke emitted by local factories. Yet, the Victorians loathing for dirt and filth did not always stretch as far as to include the nuisance of smoke. Smoke, generated by manufacturing activities, was frequently described as innocuous, with some suggesting it may even be beneficial. The benefits of smoke production were ascribed to the society. Smoke generation was commonly understood by citizenry as an indicator that said urban city was flourishing and enterprising. Reuben Spencer chairman of the board of Rylands & Sons wrote in 1897: “the incense of industry still floats in clouds above the tops of countless towering chimneys, the throngs of busy workers are more numerous than ever”. While, this was a narrative in the Victorian Britain it was not prevailing and can be typified by the cognitive dissonance between the sensory and such a line of thought. A cognitive dissonance that positioned few to question the legitimacy of economic and social progress was synonymous with smoke generation.
Community-based outcries with regards to the poor air quality or disputes on polluting activities received some recognition by governing officials. Britain’s Edward I in the 13th century banned sea coal use from lime kilns and domestic heaters in London. Unreported and little-known cases in the chemical field reveal the extent to which such legislation was enforced. Individuals found it difficult to attribute liability on individual polluters in industrial conurbations, thus allowing defendants [polluters], to exploit their safety in numbers. Sparking an active minority of influential reformers to lobby for political, social, and economic practises which attempted to champion environmental quality including damage to material possessions. Technological development throughout the industrial revolution brought about the common use of “cleaner” mined coal. The continued burning of mined coal led to emission profiles which were more acidic and longer lasting, resulting in the soiling of buildings and blackening of clothing. With Edward Carpenter describing the influence of Sheffield’s air on property as “sometimes [soot] showers down like rain in the streets of our great cities, or, at other times mixed with actual rain, paints our clothes, [and] our faces”. In such circumstances it was not uncommon for those in affluent positions in society to paint their homes on a triannual bias in an attempt to override the influence of nuisance smoke.
Physical examination of individuals involved in occupations continuously exposed to such nuisance smoke, gave clinicians the first evidence of the health impacts exposure to such pollutants can have. Embodied by Percival Pott’s discovery that chimney soot was related to the incidence of scrotal cancer in chimney sweeps. Edwin Chadwick emboldened by the research discoveries that nuisance smoke can cause poor health, laid the foundation for his environmentally centred fiscal arguments. Chadwick argued that should the British taxpayer continue to allow unbridled release of pollution that is so clearly associated with the appearance of preventable illnesses, it in-turn will result in fiscal impacts.
Should we “Fly the city, shun its turbid air; breathe not the chaos of eternal smoke…”? Or are there any lessons to be learned from the Victorians on how health can be balanced with economic success?
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/school-public-health/environmental-research-group
