Help us to Keep The Lights On for another decade! Back the Cable
The Bristol Cable

Cutting Bristol’s air pollution could help citizens’ mental as well as physical health

Evidence increasingly suggests that traffic pollutants can adversely affect the brain, impact cognitive function, and increase the risk of mental health problems. Bristol’s Clean Air Zone cannot come too soon.

Illustration: Joe Watson-Price

Fight For Fair Air

In July, Bristol’s much-anticipated Clean Air Zone (CAZ) – which is intended to reduce population-level exposure to nitrogen dioxide by charging older, more polluting vehicles to travel through the city centre – was pushed back from autumn 2021 to summer 2022. 

The news came weeks before the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued their starkest warning yet about the climate disaster facing us. As well as causing ecological harm, air pollution’s health effects are well documented and pervasive, including cardiorespiratory illnesses and lung cancer. It is estimated air pollution causes 300 deaths annually in Bristol and seven million excess deaths each year worldwide. 

But growing evidence now suggests air pollution may also adversely affect the brain, impact cognitive function, and increase the risk of experiencing mental health problems. 

Evidence points to traffic pollution’s mental health impact

Recently, I was part of a research team that conducted a study to examine whether air pollution exposure leads to more severe illness in people experiencing first episodes of psychotic disorders (such as schizophrenia) and mood disorders (such as depression). These conditions affect about 3% and 17% of people over their lifetime, respectively.

Our study used anonymised electronic health records of 13,887 people living in South London and receiving care from one of Europe’s largest secondary mental healthcare providers: South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLaM). 

Using a state-of-the-art air quality model spanning 2008-2012, we estimated how much exposure to nitrogen oxides, and PM2.5, and PM10 particulate matter (particles 2.5 or 10 micrometres or smaller) people had experienced at their home address over a three-month period when they first had contact with SLaM. We then measured how much they used inpatient and community-based mental health services over seven years. 

We found that for every 15 micrograms per cubic metre increase in nitrogen dioxide, risk for inpatient and community-based service use increased by 18% and 32%, respectively. 

For every three micrograms per cubic metre increase in PM2.5, meanwhile, risk for inpatient and community-based service use increased by 11% and 7%, respectively. 

These associations persisted over the full seven years and were not explained by other variables such as deprivation, population density, age, season, marital status and ethnicity. The findings add to a growing body of evidence that air pollution adversely affects mental health, from mild to severe problems. 

All the pollutants in our study strongly correlate with road traffic. The strongest evidence was for nitrogen oxides, which are produced abundantly by slow-moving diesel engines – one of the key types that would be charged to enter Bristol’s CAZ. 

In short, our study points towards traffic-related pollution negatively affecting mental health. 

London’s air pollution concentrations, which increase from the outer to inner city in line with traffic congestion and population density, are typical of most UK cities, meaning our findings are probably relevant to Bristol. 

Being observational rather than experimental, our study does not prove cause and effect. Further research is needed to demonstrate exactly how air pollution might contribute to mental health problems (inflammation is a likely candidate). 

Reducing air pollution could save millions and alleviate suffering

Assuming the findings are causal, we calculated that reducing PM2.5 levels by just a few units to the World Health Organisation’s recommended health threshold (10 micrograms per cubic metre) would reduce mental health service use in UK urban areas by about 2%, saving tens of millions of pounds each year in healthcare costs. 

If so, reducing air pollution exposure would also improve NHS capacity and waiting times, improve population-level mental health and clinical outcomes, and alleviate the suffering caused by long-term chronic mental illness.

London has achieved considerable success in reducing nitrogen dioxide levels, which were cut by a third, less than a year after the 2019 introduction of the Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ). The ULEZ is due to be expanded further in October 2021. 

Bristol’s CAZ will bring similar, much-needed reductions to Bristolians, the most vulnerable and disadvantaged of who often breathe the most polluted air. Further delays would be inexcusable – and given the clear, wide-ranging benefits, hopefully Bristol will soon follow London’s example and expand its CAZ. 

In five or ten years we may look back on pollution in cities as we now view smoking in pubs. Air pollution and mental health are among the 21st century’s biggest global challenges. Factoring mental health into the impacts of air pollution – and adjusting economic evaluations and health thresholds accordingly – could tip the scales in favour of steps forward, not back.

Join 2,500 Cable members redefining local media

Your support will help the Cable grow, deepening our connections in the city and investigating the issues that matter most in our communities.

Join now

What makes us different?


Report a comment. Comments are moderated according to our Comment Policy.

  • You’re deluded Joanne if you believe the NHS will last much longer.


  • Is the current CAZ proposal going far enough?
    The Clean Air Fund states that,
    “18% reduction in NO2 in the city centre estimated to prevent at least 20 deaths each year”
    Given that 300 deaths per year are attributed to Bristol’s illegal levels of air pollition, this is less than a 7% reduction. And it still leaves 280 people each year to die from that pollution.


  • i think that the people reading this should read the bristol air quality report to see that only 37% of the airborne pollution comes from the internal combustion engine and the vast majority of PM pollution in this and most other cities comes from woodburning stoves. Bristol is a smoke free zone so the council has the authority to police this but chooses not to and instead chooses to punish the car owner .
    Incidentally the report mixes the standards ofwhat they report against, currently they should be reporting against th eu levels prescribed in law but instead elects to report against WHO levels which,as you might guess, are lower.
    One of the issues that cause pollutants to build up is high rise buildings which impede the flow of air around the city and good ol marvin has committed to build more . Another issue causing the problems is traffic flow, or lack of, which the councils have deliberately slowed to almost a standstill so engines are not operating efficiently at slow speenand this is borne out by the places where all the hotspots are.
    In short the CAZ is not about public health it is all about bcc making money from it’s citizens and the issues could be solved faster and cheaper by bcc doing what they are supposed to do


Post a comment

Mark if this comment is from the author of the article

By posting a comment you agree to our Comment Policy.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Related content

Government piles pressure on mayor over dirty air

A Clean Air Zone that includes charging private cars must be considered, said Therese Coffey MP.

Lawyers are threatening action over council’s “seriously flawed” clean air plans

Environmental lawyers say timescales to tackle illegal pollution are unacceptable

Wood-fired pizza ovens release as much of a deadly pollutant into Bristol air every hour as hundreds of diesel cars

Data analysis finds pizza restaurants are emitting significant amounts of dangerous particulates – should they be regulated?

Campaigners dial up pressure on Mayor in day of clean air protests

  Rees promises action but little in the way of detail and timeline

Voices: Clean air for Bristol is taking too long

An open letter from non-partisan group Bristol Clean Air Alliance, who have been campaigning for improved air quality through political action by the council.

Join our newsletter

Get the essential stories you won’t find anywhere else

Subscribe to the Cable newsletter to get our weekly round-up direct to your inbox every Saturday

Join our newsletter

Subscribe to the Cable newsletter

Get our latest stories & essential Bristol news
sent to your inbox every Saturday morning