Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Make our voice heard - sick of Green Lanes charcoal air pollution? - Meeting 22 June
- Attachments:
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter
-
or residents now deciding that they don't like it
———
Samuel, I think you're suggesting that "residents" are somehow fickle, capricious or unreasonable.
I don't think that's the case. Improvements in the area of public health can take a long time, as with dealing with tobacco smoke.
In my view, it is reasonable that residents—and especially mothers—"don't like" air pollution.
While many residents may have long known or suspected there's a public health problem with the charcoal burning, not all are equally confident in dealing with a Local Authority that has often appeared over-mighty and dismissive.
And that's before facing the facing large wealthy, commercial interests.
The council has often appeared to be more sensitive to local business who regularly pay Business Rates, than to residents, whose health is an amorphous, long term consideration and who have a brief chance to change the council's direction, once every four years.
Leadership is not the sole province of elected councillors. Real leadership can spring from anywhere. Such as an electrician in a shipyard. Or a TV comedian.
Sometimes it takes just one resident, a person to inspire others in order to light a fire under complacent powers-that-be.
Alice may be the resident that makes a difference.
-
Permalink Reply by Samuel Hailstone
-
I think you are reading too much into my question. I'm simply asking what has changed. You seem to be saying that public health advice has changed. I think it is unlikely that a change in public health advice has driven this campaign.
That being said, there is an issue that is particularly prevalent in London, of people moving to an area which has strong characteristics and then wanting to change them.
If this campaign results in the loss of ocakbasi restaurants from Green Lanes, will that be a satisfactory outcome?
-
Permalink Reply by Domshaw
-
Agree. I am weary of residents moaning about 'another Turkish restaurant opening' when that's what made their house prices rise and what has fuelled the vitality of Green Lanes for years. Are all the Turkish businesses with grills to be set up as unengaged enemies without any of the campaigners actually talking to them? And does it include the Dusty Knuckle's wood fired pizza oven? Let's not leave anyone out if we're going to campaign against businesses without having a conversation with them.
-
-
I'm simply asking what has changed.
What appears to have changed is the willingness of residents to stand up to vested commercial interests, seemly protected by cosy, complacent council-conduct.
Change is often hard and has to be fought for.
On public health advice, little may have changed.
On the one hand, the council while Labour-run claimed that the GL restaurants were "compliant'. On the other hand, there is recent evidence that at times pollution exceeds WHO guidelines. Both can't be right.
Data, evidence and "advice" about the risks of smoking to cause cancer, emphysema or chronic bronchitis probably changed little over decades. However, what clearly did change, was the willingness of leaders to do something about it.
-
-
Fair enough. I don't think I agree with you but that's OK.
To your point about the restaurants being compliant and there being times when pollution exceeds WHO guidelines being mutually exclusive scenarios, obviously there are other sources of pollution such as road traffic. Is it possible the restaurants are compliant yet overall levels of pollution are above guidelines?
-
Permalink Reply by Alice B
-
A long response but hopefully this addresses the key questions raised. Where there has been a lot of discussion previously I've included the links to the HoL pages. Thanks!
What this is not
We are absolutely not about trying to shut the restaurants or change the character of the area. In talking with many residents, we love the food – we just want it to be in a way that creates better health outcomes for everyone. There are a range of technology solutions (e.g. electrostatic precipitation technology) available that can drastically change the emissions profile – both creating a healthier environment for customers, staff and residents. As the council are now engaged, we’d love to see how we can come together to support a healthier Green Lanes – that offers excellence food but delivered in a safe way.
It is also not about the smell – and trying to change the area. Smells might be annoying but they are not generally harmful unless they are accompanied by pollution – which we have the data that indicates these are.
A previous thread discusses what other councils are doing to promote a thriving but healthy food culture - We want Haringey Council to be equally engaged! https://harringayonline.com/forum/topics/worse-than-traffic-how-nei...
What are the health risks of PM2.5?
The dangers of pollution (incl PM2.5) are well known, including the higher impact on the most vulnerable members of our society – children and older people. Scientific studies have linked increases in daily PM2.5 exposure with increased respiratory and cardiovascular hospital admissions, emergency department visits and deaths. Studies also suggest that long-term exposure to fine particulate matter may be associated with increased rates of chronic bronchitis, reduced lung function and increased mortality from lung cancer and heart disease.
What has changed?
- Growth in number / size of restaurants – having lived here for over 13-years, I’ve seen the growth of the restaurants, both in terms of number but also the multiple fronted eateries. My perception has been that the amount of pollution has also increased quite dramatically over that time. The collective concentration of multiple, large charcoal burning restaurants is something that individual food safety regulations do not address – and we should have the conversation about what is safe for a residential area as part of our planning process.
- Increased awareness of the dangers of pollution (PM2.5 and PM10) – if we take the examples raised on this thread of (1) diesel car pollution, (2) smoking. Both represent excellent cases of things once considered safe, but science has identified dangers to human health. As such, measures were taken to protect the public – and these have shown great (and quite rapid) outcomes. We need to take a similarly progressive view with charcoal based cookery – using data / science to guide us and a willingness to change our approach.
- We have actual measurements – Looking back at HoL shows that concerns around the pollution levels go back to pre-2020. However, a number of people (me included) felt dismissed by the council as they might often respond to complaints a number of days later, during the morning, when the air was cleaner. We now have data that shows pollution levels – and they back up what our noses and bodies were telling us (I often get a headache and tight chest when the emissions are high). This really changes the conversation – as data can’t be dismissed anymore.
Engagement –
The council are absolutely best placed to run the engagement with all parties around this. Not least as they have a lot of resources at their fingertips. At least a lot more than a mum of 2!
Our previous councillor Anna reported on HoL that the council would be engaging with the restaurants individually. The meeting on Monday is to give similar voice to residents. This is a positive consultation process as it gives all parties an opportunity to discuss their concerns in a supportive environment. This is the start of an engagement process, so I suspect there will be a lot more discussion in the near future.
Specifically addressing the question about Harringay Gardens – I believe the invitation was sent out in an email and I’ve asked for it to be shared on street whatsapp groups. As a mum, I’m limited in time / engagement tools, so if there is a residents group missing, please share.
And finally, addressing other impacted groups, restaurant workers being mentioned a few times. A fantastic research paper shared with me by Haringey Council outlines the various different at-risk groups from charcoal-based cooking. This looks at restaurant workers, customers, and people living in the area. Unfortunately, I’m unable to share direct (would breach T&Cs of a paywall) but if you are interested, reach out to Haringey Council for the paper - Charcoal-based products combustion: Emission profiles, health exposure, and mitigation strategies. Alessio Mencarelli et al. 2023
Again, as a resident and mum of 2, I’m not equipped to run a professional engagement but this should be part of the council’s plan. I hope highlighting the health risks to workers, outlined in the paper, forms part of the engagement by our Director of Public Health.
And finally, citizen science…
We have some great citizen science on this thread - https://harringayonline.com/forum/topics/why-can-t-we-open-a-window...
Please take a look at the data and draw your own conclusions about the causes of the high spikes in pollution.
-
-
I thought it was just worth adding to this insightful thread that no one wants to change the character of the area or shut the restaurants. It's about flattening the peaks in cooking emissions by:
1. Ensuring adequate filtration
2. Frequent council inspections to ensure the filtration is properly maintained and that the correct fuel is being used
3. Thereby, flattening the health-impacting peaks in commercial fuel emissions
It's human nature to take shortcuts, and current inspections (rare as they are) focus more on what's inside the kitchen than on what's coming out of the chimney. Rules should apply to all the restaurants equally, of course. I've heard that the restaurants on old leases, with old grills, haven't had the same stringent requirements applied as those that have had to apply for planning permission recently. I can't fact-check this, but we should definitely ask the council about it.
It is worth noting that:
1. It's clear it isn't traffic. The time (dinner time) and nature (disconnected from the NO2 curve) of the emissions prove this.
2. Cooking emissions, especially those from fatty meat grilling, contain more problematic airborne particles than just PM2.5.
3. The population of Haringey alone has increased by 37,000 in the last 20 years, and takeaway has increased in popularity, fueled by delivery services, so it follows that commercial cooking emissions have increased accordingly.
The London Assembly and UCL (https://thelondoncleanairinitiative.org/projects/business-research/) recognise commercial cooking emissions are an issue, as do neighbouring councils: Westminster and Hackney.
Traffic emissions have been a success story, but commercial cooking emissions are a real and recognised frontier in urban pollution, which warrants the council's attention.
It would be great to include the Traders Association. I hope Haringey Council have extended an invite to them.
-
-
Thanks for the detailed responses — particularly the wind direction and NO2 analysis, which addresses the causation question I was raising. I'm reassured that the data is more robust than I initially assumed, and that the goal is better filtration and enforcement rather than changing the character of Green Lanes. The ocakbasi restaurants are part of what makes the area what it is, and it sounds like that's well understood by the people driving this. Good luck with the council meeting.
-
Permalink Reply by Dan77
-
I agree completely. I wouldn't want to see Green Lanes changed in character, but I think there are things that can be done relatively cheaply to make our air quality better. We can have both worlds - cleaner air for people who live here, and a thriving food scene
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2026 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
