A single smoke control area will restrict what can be burnt – and how – across most of Brighton and Hove after senior councillor agreed to extend existing restrictions.
Brighton has had a number of smoke control areas since the 1970s. The five existing areas mainly cover the centre of Brighton, Lewes Road, Hanover, Bevendean and the Montpelier estate.
Now, Brighton and Hove City Council’s cabinet has approved the creation of a single zone covering the built-up area and the “urban fringe”.
A cabinet report said that Brighton and Hove had one of the highest densities of wood-burning stoves in the country – about 7,500 or roughly 88 stoves per square kilometre.
In the winter months, Brighton and Hove has high levels of “small particulate matter” known as PM2.5 which is linked with heart and lung health problems.
Labour councillor Tim Rowkins, the council’s cabinet member for environmental services and net zero, said that it was the council’s fundamental responsibility to protect residents’ lives and health.
He said that figures from Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) in 2023 found that domestic burning of solid fuel was the latest single source of PM 2.5 pollution in the country.
A year later, real-time air quality measurements started in Brighton and Hove and found pollution from solid fuels was a problem across the area.
Councillor Rowkins said: “I don’t believe you can look at this data and not feel compelled to act.”
He added: “It is not a ban on wood burners. It is also not a ban on barbecues – in fact SCA (smoke control area) legislation applies only to buildings and so doesn’t cover any form of outdoor burning.
“The aim of an SCA is to ensure that any burning that does happen is as clean as possible.
“That means either only burning fuels on the DEFRA approved list or using an approved appliance.”
Green councillor Kerry Pickett said that she had previously called for such action because air pollution was costing the country £27 billion a year and was linked to asthma, cancer and dementia.
She called for more education on the issue and some form of enforcement and penalties to ensure that people complied with the restrictions.
Councillor Pickett said: “I have been working closely with some great local campaigners, many of whom are consultants at our hospitals, who see first-hand the effects of airborne pollutants on people.
“In particular, on children’s and older people’s health, especially in areas such as the Lewes Road.
“The evidence of the harm caused by dirty air, even at low levels, has risen rapidly and scientists now think it damages every organ in the body.”
Councillor Rowkins replied by saying that it was important to be led by the evidence and not to act “off the cuff”.
Having the data from the 54 sensors across Brighton and Hove, with live readings, had provided the evidence – and people had better awareness of the concerns linked to solid fuels.
DEFRA awarded the council almost £90,000 over four years, with £40,000 still to come, to tackle smoke pollution.
The council said that the cost of the new smoke control area communications and enforcement patrols were expected to cost £8,000 in the current financial year and £6,850 in 2027-28.
If they, and the Government, want to get rid of solid fuel they need to drive down the price of electricity to below the cost of those fuels and gas………
You clearly haven’t read the article as you would read that no one wants to get rid of solid fuel burning
Strangely, bhcc have gone ahead with VG3 in the full knowledge that this will create more congestion and pollution. Could cllr Rowkins explain?
Good point. Every road layout change BHCC makes leads to increased traffic congestion and therefore emissions, yet they ignored all professional advice not to go ahead with VG3.
It would be helpful if a link was available to the report they are basing this action upon. Gone are the days that the claims of councillors can be relied upon. It would not surprise me to see a council report claiming that light pollution causes asthma and cancer.
The report:
https://www.rcp.ac.uk/news-and-media/news-and-opinion/air-pollution-linked-to-30-000-uk-deaths-in-2025-and-costs-the-economy-and-nhs-billions-warns-royal-college-of-physicians/#:~:text=The%20RCP%20has%20warned%20that,than%20%C2%A327%20billion%20annually.
But is this claim that “any pollution is bad” agreed by the UK government, or is this the council just jumping on a bandwagon that does not reflect an issue across all of the city?
Thank you for the link. It is an interesting read but I was referring to one based upon actual readings taken in the Brighton area. As we all know it can be disingenuous and sometimes dangerous to assume a universal size fits all.
Although AI is not always accurate, the extract below is worth consideration:
The Inland vs. Coastal Reality:
The Greater South East: Inland hubs, particularly across the Greater South East and Greater London, persistently experience the highest background levels of PM2.5 in the country, worsened by emissions from continental Europe.
Coastal Pockets: Coastal locations in regions like the South West of England (e.g., Devon or Cornwall) boast some of the lowest pollution levels nationwide. Similarly, areas like Brighton and Portsmouth have seen dramatic reductions in air pollution and are recognized as clean-air champions.
Do ‘clean air champion’ areas like Brighton really need new, excessively restrictive regulation when we are among the least affected areas in the country?
So, basically Brighton should be allowed to pollute, because the prevailing winds will disperse it and send it elsewhere?
You are aware that sources of PM2.5 include dust pollen and wind blown salt? Have you a plan de de-salinate the sea?
You must of missed this part of the article that you obviously not read
‘ In the winter months, Brighton and Hove has high levels of “small particulate matter” known as PM2.5 which is linked with heart and lung health problems.’
You must HAVE missed the bit where I said I would like to see actual figures as opposed to a sweeping, unverified council statement.
It’s a seaside resort. People come here for the “sea air!”
Poor children and old citizens, hard winter next year.
There is growing concern amongst us rural and semi rural dwellers around more and more restriction on wood burning (proper seasoned stuff). If you need us out in the sticks to change how we heat our homes, be prepared to pay for that through taxation. Heating oil is through the roof, solar panels are expensive and heat pumps don’t grow on trees.
Good.
In other words. WHO updated it’s AQG guidelines lowering the targets of PM2.5 micrograms/cubic meters down from 10 to 5. So does the Royal College of Physicians so does the BHCC even though the last year readings from 6-7 readers (where they got 50+ readers figure from?) said the city was within healthy range (8) as the report states https://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/environment/noise-pollution-and-air-quality/2025-air-quality-annual-status-report-asr#tab–3-air-quality-monitoring-data-and-comparison-with-air-quality-standards-and-national-compliance
And that, my friends, is how people loose their rights without understanding much how it happened. C ya.
It’s interesting that WHO currently recommend a mean PM 2.5 level of 5ug/m3 over a year, but a mean PM2.5 level of 15ug/m3 over 24 hours. I wonder how precise or selective the ‘mean’ data BHCC presents is?
Will the council be paying to upgrade non defra compliant wood burning stoves then ?
I’ve got an AQI/PM2.5 sensor in my back garden and it rarely gets above 6micrograms/m3 and it rarely goes above 6. That’s in BN1
Wait till VG3 Mick’s in!
#kicks# !
So residents who can’t afford to pay their mafia-sized gas and electricity bills are expected to freeze to death this winter, because they can’t burn solid fuel either? Thank you BHCC. The gift that keeps on giving.
You will appreciate the clean air when you are suffering from pneumonia in the cold.