Saturday, 24 April 2010

£10,000 POUNDS...out of billions in the industry!..............??????

£10,000 ………..would you believe that that is the difference between knowing that incinerators are safe for the surrounding population, with some peace of mind…or knowing that they are a dangerous, though very profitable, irrelevance.

Experienced, very competent, scientific experts are ready, the relevant data has been collected, automatically, for decades. It just remains to be analysed appropriately.

I am sure that Professor Elliott, the pioneer of early British incinerator research, would be shocked that his work is being used to justify all sorts of safety around incinerators, when it only dealt with rare cancers. He would be the first to acknowledge, I am sure, that the extensive work around the damage that particulate air pollution does, since his papers were first published, means that more work needs doing.

In fact, as he is the head of the SAHSU at Imperial College, where all these statistics are collected, he must be very frustrated that somehow a roadblock has occurred over this business. SAHSU must be independent of DEFRA, the EA and the HPA, surely, and cannot tolerate the dead hand of authority preventing the vital development of knowledge in this field.

This is the link to the appeal for money…and to an excellently prepared objection to an EA permit for incineration, from very senior scientists.

Monday, 12 April 2010


Slip of the tongue or a new strategy? Who is the lucky newcomer? If its got too hot to handle in the four boroughs,is it the fifth borough that's going to get know ...that thing that burns,smokes and ashes like a duck....!

What are the new democratic structures that are supposed to have an oversight of this very very murky process...what ?...none at all?

Piecemeal,salami sliced hazardous waste burner strategies.Perhaps the election should be a referendum on this patronising,secretive, oh so profitable rubbish!

Thursday, 8 April 2010


I am going to devote this blog to the developing investigation of low impact loopholes.As more info comes in from different sources it will be added in chronological order.


It would most likely be cheaper in both the immediate and longer term -
immediate as EA permit applications cost money to process and to complete (consultancy fees, etc.)
and in the longer term they might avoid reporting and inspection costs, etc.

of course there may be more to it, as all of these costs are relatively marginal (UKWIN,6.4.10)