- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Stop Killing Cyclists #PollutionProtest Die in Live by a busy road? You could struggle to get a mortgage if insurers decide to "disrupt the market"
People living on the most polluted roads could find it harder to get insurance, pay inflated prices for policies, or even struggle to get a mortgage, according to one actuary.
At a recent protest against dangerous levels of air pollution, actuary Andrew Smith said insurers could see those most exposed to air pollution as a higher risk because of the known effects of toxic air, responsible for an estimated 40,000 premature deaths per year in the UK. Smokers are charged higher life insurance premiums for the same reason.
Meanwhile this week London’s new Mayor, Sadiq Khan, announced new measures, including an extended Ultra Low Emissions Zone, to restrict the most polluted vehicles from entering the capital in a bid to tackle toxic air believed to be responsible for an estimated 9,400 premature deaths per year.
Cabbies and cyclists unite against air pollution
Smith, a partner at Deloitte, who has authored 40 research papers, said at the pollution protest: “When you buy life insurance insurers like to work out how likely you are to die.
“If a few insurers can work out areas of high and low pollution, they can disrupt the market by offering special deals for people in low pollution areas and you’ll soon find the people living in the most polluted areas can’t get life insurance - or only at inflated prices.”
Smith said although air pollution does not appear on any death certificate, it is possible to compare deaths from cancer, heart attack and lung disease between more and less polluted areas and, controlling for variables such as income, estimate the effect of air pollution on mortality. In the UK it is estimated around 40,000 people per year die prematurely due to the effects of air pollution.
“This has knock on implications, for example if you’re trying to get a mortgage, or if you own a house and you’re trying to rent it out, or you’re trying to move house; anywhere near a busy road you’re going to see this effect,” he said.
This may sound like bad news, but Smith believes the insurance market could act as a stimulus for positive change – particularly if there is a financial impact on individuals.
He said: “Just as people fit smoke alarms and window locks to benefit from cheaper house insurance, I believe we’re going to see momentum in campaigns to exclude fossil fuel burning vehicles from roads in order to get cheaper life insurance.”
Could it be that people living beside cycle superhighways will see favourable insurance premiums compared to those on roads without cycle infrastructure?
Call for emergency London air pollution restrictions
On Friday Sadiq Khan proposed a raft of new measures to tackle air pollution in London, including a “T-Charge” for vehicles with the most toxic exhaust fumes, which would be applied on top of the existing Congestion Charge, according to the Evening Standard.
Khan also proposed an extension of the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ), which is planned for the city centre in 2020, but only covers zone 1 under current plans. It could now cover the area between the North Circular Road and South Circular Road, and be brought in earlier. Those whose vehicles don’t comply with ULEZ standards would pay £12.50 to enter the zone.
Other proposed measures, as reported by the Standard, include:
- Transport for London to work on costs and challenges of a scrappage scheme for dirty diesel vehicles, stressing it would be for the Government to introduce it as a nationwide move.
- Introducing ULEZ standards for heavy vehicles London-wide from 2020.
- Clean bus corridors to tackling the worst pollution hotspots by concentrating cleaner buses on the dirtiest routes.
- Bringing in ULEZ standards a year earlier for TfL double decker buses
- Expanding the ULEZ retrofit programme to 3,000 buses outside the central zone (up from 2,000)
- Buying only hybrid or zero-emission double-decker buses from 2018.
Khan pledged before his election to pedestrianise Oxford Street, and revive plans to pedestrianise Parliament Square, through which the new East-West Cycle Superhighway runs.
Latest Comments
- BIRMINGHAMisaDUMP 1 sec ago
isreal has been brutally killing children for 6 months. Over 14000 children have been burnt, crushed, bombed, shot in the head, killed by missiles,...
- marmotte27 4 min 8 sec ago
The change in running shoes has come in the last five years or so, the TdF alanlysis goes until 2010, so before, as I pointed out above....
- Rendel Harris 50 min 30 sec ago
At the given time of day on that date (8:15 am August 22nd) in that location the sun would be at 53° north, so you'd have to be driving at least...
- hawkinspeter 6 hours 35 min ago
It's not censored if you just pirate it
- stonojnr 7 hours 40 min ago
an example of Kesgraves "best cycling infrastructure in the country" https://maps.app.goo.gl/GsCMbzDUTPdq59qS9
- wookey 7 hours 48 min ago
It turns out that that is national police policy. We found out from this process that there is national 'secured by design' policy which causes...
- mtbtomo 8 hours 27 min ago
Been available for quite a while, full GRX mechanical 12 speed. Probably around the same time as 105 mechanical 12 speed if I were to guess.
- TheBillder 8 hours 33 min ago
Less harmful citrus degreaser is easy to find at £8 or less for 5 litres. Works ok for me, even diluted up to 4:1. Both paraffin and white spirit...
- Veganpotter 8 hours 39 min ago
Nope, it's to keep your straps down and quieter. Plus most sunglasses are polycarbonate and aren't going to shatter like glass anyway
- Steve K 9 hours 10 min ago
And, more seriously, where's the coverage of the closure of the cycle lane which forces you to cycle on the Totton bypass.
Add new comment
11 comments
That's a bit glass half empty - higher life insurance, sure, but think of the excellent pension annuities for those of us on Sooty Street!
So, making the people who live in an area pay and/or be penalised for a problem (probably) not of their making...
Yes, it certainly doesn't sound fair. However, people living in an area should (in theory) be best placed to effect the changes needed.
It'd probably be better if the pollution could be addressed by increasing taxation on polluting fuel although that's not likely to be a popular move.
It is maybe not nice, but it is completely fair, as it is trying to reflect the risk of your likelihood of dying being increased by the pollution. In the same way that if you've got a serious illness or a family history of cancer, then it's not your fault, but it will increase your life insurance premiums.
On the whole this would be excellent news. People don't think that air pollution is important, as the effects aren't immediate. If they are shown the cost as a monetary amount then they might support efforts to actually improve things.
That already happens with other insurance products. Home contents insurance costs might be high because of burglaries, but the people paying those costs probably aren't burglars.
They already are by higher disease and death rates and stunted lung development for their kids!
And yet the government is making things WORSE instead of better - cutting taxes on dirtier vehicles, raising taxes on cleaner vehicles, reducing taxes on polluting fuels (diesel/petrol) at EVERY budget since they were elected, slashing tiny cycling budget and spending billions more on roads....
This has got to Stop which is why Stop Killing Cyclists staged our Die-In last month outside the Department for Transport.
They already are by higher disease and death rates and stunted lung development for their kids!
And yet the government is making things WORSE instead of better - cutting taxes on dirtier vehicles, raising taxes on cleaner vehicles, reducing taxes on polluting fuels (diesel/petrol) at EVERY budget since they were elected, slashing tiny cycling budget and spending billions more on roads....
This has got to Stop which is why Stop Killing Cyclists staged our Die-In last month outside the Department for Transport.
They already are by higher disease and death rates and stunted lung development for their kids!
And yet the government is making things WORSE instead of better - cutting taxes on dirtier vehicles, raising taxes on cleaner vehicles, reducing taxes on polluting fuels (diesel/petrol) at EVERY budget since they were elected, slashing tiny cycling budget and spending billions more on roads....
This has got to Stop which is why Stop Killing Cyclists staged our Die-In last month outside the Department for Transport.
They already are by higher disease and death rates and stunted lung development for their kids!
And yet the government is making things WORSE instead of better - cutting taxes on dirtier vehicles, raising taxes on cleaner vehicles, reducing taxes on polluting fuels (diesel/petrol) at EVERY budget since they were elected, slashing tiny cycling budget and spending billions more on roads....
This has got to Stop which is why Stop Killing Cyclists staged our Die-In last month outside the Department for Transport.
Sure, I understand that, I agree with everything you're saying, and I support what SKC are doing.
But what I'd meant was that the residents in an area don't generally have much power to stop a road being busy (they can argue to council to block off rat runs, but even that is not as easy as it should be as all the neighbouring areas which use that rat run then complain about it to stop it happening (ref. Mini Holland); and if they all start walking or cycling, it's not going to change anything if all the neighbouring areas can still drive through in their diesel Volvos or whatever).
And it wouldn't be easy to sell up and move away, as your house doesn't move so would still be flagged up. So you end up with a whole new form of property blight.
Rather than hitting the residents of an area with an expensive insurance premium, I still think it might be better to hit society-as-a-whole through higher fuel taxes, to gradually raise the cost of motoring (OTOH, doing that would simply affect the poorest harder, and those that could afford to drive still would, because now all the plebs would be off the road... Hmm
).
They wouldn't be. They would be reducing the premiums of those who live away from the polution.
Small point maybe, but anything highlighting the issue has to be good news. Most people have no idea of the damage being done.