News 21 October 2026
As the UK government consults on rolling back the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandate to replace polluting combustion engine vehicles with zero-emission alternatives at scale, new analysis shows that doing so would increase harmful air pollution, compared with maintaining existing targets.
Whilst the mandate is aimed at reducing carbon emissions, it is also one of the most significant current policies for reducing air pollution. Petrol and diesel-powered vehicles remain the largest single source of harmful nitrogen oxides in towns and cities, and one of the largest sources of fine particulate matter.
Poor air quality severely harms public health, placing additional financial and operational pressure on the NHS and social care system and failing to tackle health inequalities, especially for children living in areas with high levels of traffic.
The ZEV mandate is the most significant policy for reducing both carbon and pollution emissions over the coming years – but, following intense pressure from car manufacturers, the proposals under consultation threaten to water it down. This risks slamming the brakes on the vital progress we are making on both tackling climate change and improving people’s health. We have seen first-hand the positive impact that rapid, decisive action can have through the success of measures like the Ultra Low Emission Zone in London. We are calling on the government to apply the same commitment and urgency to the transition to electric vehicles, to protect our health and climate.
Nick Smith, Head of the UK Portfolio at the Clean Air Fund
The new research, commissioned by the Clean Air Fund and conducted by WSP, found that if the most significant rollback option went ahead, cumulative air-pollution-related damage costs would rise by £882 million between 2024 and 2050, while the additional pollution generated would be associated with more than 12,000 life years lost, almost 7,000 additional quality-adjusted life years lost, and 595 extra hospital admissions.
Even the smaller changes to the targets would carry significant health consequences, with additional damage costs ranging from £288 million to £561 million, depending on the option adopted.
We all have a right to breathe safe, clean air. Every time politicians water down the ZEV mandate, it means more toxic tailpipe emissions on our streets, permanently damaging children’s developing lungs and driving up hospital admissions that place an enormous burden on our NHS. We know that air pollution disproportionately harms the most vulnerable communities: those that Labour are supposedly committed to help. As an absolute minimum, the Prime Minister should keep the ZEV mandate as it is, or better still, speed up the uptake of electric cars and vans to make our air cleaner and safer for us all.
Dr Rosamund Adoo-Kissi-Debrah CBE
Clean air is not a luxury, it’s a public health necessity. Weakening the ZEV mandate would mean an uptick in the many health conditions that are connected to air pollution, including more children with respiratory conditions. This would add unnecessary pressure to an already overburdened NHS. The UK wants clean, affordable transport, not toxic tailpipe fumes.
Livi Elsmore, Senior Campaign Manager, Healthy Air Coalition
Alongside the research, a coalition of advocacy organisations and experts, from organisations including the Ella Roberta Foundation, Greenpeace UK, Mums for Lungs, the Royal College of Physicians and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, have published an open letter urging the Minister for Transport to resist calls to weaken the mandate’s targets, and ensure that sustainable transport policy plays its full part in cleaning the UK’s air and protecting public health.
