Welcome

We don’t want the South London Incinerator because it will damage our health and the environment.

Valuable habitat will be destroyed and wildlife lost. 

The toxic emissions cause cancer, birth defects and breathing problems.  Our health and our green spaces are worth fighting for.

Together we can make a difference.

103 thoughts on “Welcome

  1. The problem understanding the VERY WIDE RANGING effects of air pollution (lorries and chimneys) comes from lack of understanding and publicity about the recent explosion in knowledge of the immune system. One of the outstanding features is the issue of “memory” within it,another is the direct effect on nuclear DNA (via the AHR receptor),affecting cell proliferation,differentiation and protein synthesis.

    continued.

  2. The incinerator will cause serious health issues which we shouldn’t risk. Future generations and the planet are depending on us. Some things are worth fighting
    for. This is one of those things. Let’s get the word out – door to door, house to house,
    street by street.

  3. what a disgusting thing to build in the middle of a dense urban environment. If it’s not that damaging how about building it in a little corner of Green Park or near Hyde Park Corner – they won’t notice a thing!!!

  4. If campaigners in North London can succeed in convincing the North London Waste Authority to scrap their plans for an incinerator/ waste disposal facility in Pinkham Way, Bounds Green, then surely we have a case for scrapping the plans for an incinerator in South London?
    Jeff Lever, who represented members of the Pinkham Way Alliance commented ”
    “I have never known plans which are backed by seven north London boroughs to be stopped by a residents’ group so I think it’s quite a dramatic achievement.”
    It would seem our campaign has fallen on deaf ears and the health of the local community is considered a small price to pay for the profits of Viridor and their supporters.
    It is interesting that their Liberal Democrat MP supported their campaign and said
    “They should have been looking at ways to reduce wastage – not thinking of building huge incinerators in unsuitable places.”
    It was not so long ago that the residence of Putney came together to fight the plans to locate the proposed outlet for the super-sewer there and won their case.
    I so appreciate all the hard work our campaigners are putting in.

  5. Ask for the health and environment impact reports from the Cardiff incinerator
    thomas.harward@naturalresourceswales.gov.uk
    it shows this small incinerator will give off almost 1 ton of vaporized Lead and 2 hundred weight of Mercury every year !! . They also state that there will be extra Dioxin in the breast milk of nursing mothers living in the polluted area near the incinerator. What goes up must come down 300 tons per year get burnt 100 tons come back as toxic waste that cant go to ordinary landfill, the other 200 tones per year come out of the stack and poison you, sleep well P.S. google search the effects of lead in petrol ,( but then you wont be able to sleep )

  6. Air pollution kills – the EU have recognised this so why haven’t our local councils? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25431608 The latest information from Sutton Council is that the final plans will be submitted at the end of January. We will then only have 6 weeks to submit our legal case to the judge. This will cost us about £10,000. Stop people dying for profit and donate to our legal fundraiser.

  7. The Country Park connecting Mitcham Common with Beddington Park was promised around the year 2000. It was on the London evening tv news and everyone was excited about it. It was promised to be finished by 2010. For this reason I stayed living in Mitcham, taking regular walks to see the progression. I went to an open day by Land Rover where it was all explained what it would be like when finished. Nothing has been said about halting this project, it is as if had never been mentioned in the first place and now we will have an incinerator that nobody wants. Where is the tv publicity now about the country park that we never had? I do not want to live in this area if this goes ahead. It just goes to show that promises can change when it is down to money. There is obviously a great financial gain if this incinerator goes ahead, opposed to the gain of the quality of life for people living in and around this area.

  8. Exciting news! The first of what we hope to be a number of celebrity endorsements was confirmed this week. JB from the pop band JLS added his backing to our campaign. Coming from Croydon he was keen to help and wishes us luck. More news on this will follow soon.

  9. Writer and comedian Mark Steel has called our campaign “well thought out and informed” and is happy to offer his backing to Stop the South London Incinerator. Catch him at the Fairfield Halls on the 12th February in his latest stand up which includes commentary on the local area he’s performing in – you never know he might even manage to find something funny to say about the incinerator!

  10. Why have they been keen to shut down the air monitor that used to measure air pollution just outside the proposed incinerator entrance (the old Beddington north air station).
    During the recent particulate pollution peaks the monitor outside the SELCHP incinerator peaked at VERY HIGH…more recently this is what happened at ERITH (black 10):
    The rubbish of Hammersmith to Westminster is burned here after river transport.How Green is that ! ?

  11. This weekend we’ve been helping Shasha finalise the letter before claim which sets out the legal challenge to Sutton Council. We’ll keep you posted as soon as this is submitted.

  12. You know the big deal Sutton and Viridor made
    about closing the landfill site early? Well, having just read the new
    section 106 agreements, it appears that Viridor can go back on this if
    they don’t get ‘sufficient’ waste from the SLWP. Not only does this
    prevent waste reduction it also shows their promise to close the
    landfill site by 2017 was yet another piece of spin. Why am I not
    surprised!?

  13. There are very many things I could say,but a picture paints a thousand
    words.This is to scale,and the elevations are OS.When an inversion layer occurs
    the area under the dotted line would become very polluted.The council’s “expert”
    called this “relatively flat” and used the wind patterns from Gatwick airport,
    ‘nuf said.

  14. Hi everyone,

    The legal challenge has been in the news a lot lately. Most recently the Evening Standard carried a story about it: http://tinyurl.com/o9mv4yy

    Stop the Incinerator was supposed to be on a breakfast TV show this week along with Sutton Council, but the item was cancelled at the last minute because Sutton pulled out.

    They claimed they couldn’t talk about the incinerator due to legal reasons but I wonder if it’s more to do with the excessive pollution that is choking us all this week: http://tinyurl.com/klfugj3

    1. I’m sorry that you feel we only give one side. We think burning rubbish is wrong because it increases air pollution. If you have seen the news recently, air pollution is something we need to improve, not make worse. Have a look at our FAQ page to see the what the alternatives to burning rubbish are.

  15. The great thing about burning our rubbish is that it doesn’t even bring about an end to landfill. You have failed to mention what happens to all the ash that comes out and needs to be landfilled.

    There are more than two ways to deal with our rubbish. We are not saying that our rubbish should be landfilled rather than burned. Landfill or
    incineration are not the only two choices available. Both are bad for the
    environment and so we argue that the best way forward is to focus on waste
    reduction, re-use and recycling, that way there is no need for either
    landfill or incineration.

    The idea that the waste incinerator will heat any homes is a complete myth. Viridor, the company building the incinerator, have admitted that it will be several years before heating even becomes a possibility let alone a reality.

    With regards to lorry movements, there will be 666 of them a day and they will be coming and going from all over the country. So the idea that the incinerator will in some way reduce traffic is also untrue.

    85,000 tonnes of ash comes out of the incinerator and has to be driven elsewhere, 10,000 tonnes of this is hazardous waste and has to be buried in a specialist landfill site 100s of kms away.

    1. The population in the UK IS increasing and there will be more and more waste. The reasons why countries like Holland and Denmark use incinerators is that it causes the least environmental damage of all practical solutions. The South of England is becoming one of the most densly populated areas in Europe you cannot stop people generating rubbish. the idea that there would be 666 lorry movements per day is completely untrue. the plant will process 5300 tonnes of waste per week. assume a 5 day week thats 1060 tonnes per day. if there were 666 lorry movements per day each lorry would only carry 1.6 tonnes the capacity of a large van. the 6000 homes in Hackbridge will be heated by the plant.
      if you dont believe the population is increasing look at the UK census 2011

      1. I’m sorry to say it, but you are dangerously misinformed. All of the information on this website comes from verifiable facts.

        Incineration does NOT cause the least environmental damage of all solutions. What about Anaerobic Digestion and In Vessel Composting – both of these treat rubbish in a safer way and still produce energy.

        Just because Europe have incinerators doesn’t mean we should too. There is an over capacity of waste incinerators and we don’t need any more: http://tinyurl.com/ocdcybj

        I believe you that the population is increasing, but that doesn’t automatically mean the amount of rubbish we produce will also increase. 90% of all rubbish can be recycled or re-used so it doesn’t have to get burned or buried.

        The incinerator is capacity is much larger than is needed which means rubbish will have to be imported from all over the country from day one.

        You claim that 666 lorry movements per day is untrue. However this comes from official
        council sources. You can hear them confirm the figures on this recording taken from Croydon Council’s Strategic Planning Committee: http://preview.tinyurl.com/pe554at

        NO HOMES WILL BE HEATED – this is a fact. The Combined heat and power report submitted as part of the planning documents state in relation to heat that the “delivery
        of future phases is uncertain”. Look at Viridor’s web site and the best they can offer in relation to heat is: “We are currently exploring opportunities for exporting heat from the plant to nearby developments.”

        If they were able to provide heat why isn’t this happening from day one?

        If you care to point me towards where you are getting your information I will be happy to study it in more detail.

        1. The 666 Lorry movements are an impossible daily figure . If the plant runs 5 days a week it processes 1056 tonnes per day. if the average load is 15 tonnes which is less than 40% of the capacity of a 40 ton lorry that would be 70 lorries a day . The fact is the large Ferinox industrial estate in Hackbridge is being demolished right now. 6000 homes will be built the incinerator starts in 2017, the houses will be heated by the waste heat

  16. the only way that the amount of rubbish to reduce is for the population to shrink dramatically. many people are selfish and do not care about pollution or their carbon footprint. The carbon foot print of 1 quarter pounder with cheese is 2.5 KG of CO2. if you drive to pick it up its greater. You should ask people to alter their lifestyle if you are concerned about air quality. The damage done by people flying to holiday destinations in terms of greenhouse gases is horrendous.In a perfect world where every body cared about the environment there would be no need for incinerators. Unfortunately people want their takeaways their presents from Amazon, the furniture
    from Ikea. the incinerator at least will generate electricity that can be used to power trams and trains and buses.

    1. You are right that people need to change their lifestyle but that is a whole other issue and we can’t try to solve all the worlds problems in one campaign! Our campaign is focused on an incinerator that we know will increase pollution and so stopping it will make a difference. And by the way It will produce 300,000 tonnes of CO2 a year, not to mention all the particulates and other dioxins.

      1. The plant will not produce 300,000 tonnes of CO2 the real figure is .275,000* 0.85 =233,750 tonnes of CO2
        the electricity the plant generates would have to be generated by say gas goal from the grid. which would create
        90,000 tonnes of CO2 so the net CO2 without the saving in energy for the 6000 homes is 233750-90000=143,750 tonnes of CO2. . Then the CO2 saved by not having 6000 gas boilers in 6000 homes say 40,000 tonnes of CO2 Saved . which leaves 103,000 tonnes of CO2. which is equivalent to £10 million spent on budget flights

        1. This makes no sense! For a start the incinerator will be burning 302,000 tonnes of rubbish a year and not 275,000. No heat will be provided by the incinerator for at least the first several years of operation (most likely never) which means the 6000 homes you keep talking about will have to have their own boilers.
          Because the incinerator will not be providing any heat it will be less efficient and more polluting than a traditional fossil fueled power station.
          Once again I ask for the source of our figures, becaue they are quite simply wrong.

          1. my figures come from The Consulting engineers Fichtners who carried out the study on the plants performance . this is in the public domain. I also carried out calculations based on CO2 emissions from Municipal solid waste.

          2. If you have read the documents you will see that their performance figures are based on heat as well as electricity being used. The fact that heat will NOT be used, means the figures are completely wrong.

          3. I have discounted the heat and only used the figures for electrical power, the community heating can be factored in when it is used

          4. though incinerators stand up well against coal-fired power stations in terms of their
            CO2
            emissions, they certainly aren’t climate friendly. The Eunomia report
            ‘A Changing Climate for Energy from Waste?’ found that incinerators that
            only generate electricity emit 510 grammes (g) of CO2 equivalent (CO2e)
            for every kWh of electricity, which is
            better than coal-fired power stations (835gCO2e/kWh), but worse than gas-fired
            stations (383gCO2e/kWh) and doubtless dismal compared to other ‘renewable’
            sources.

            What’s
            more, in line with current practice, the figure for incineration omits
            biogenic carbon, in theory because biomass absorbs as much CO2 in its
            life as it emits in its destruction. AsFriends of the Earth’s Senior
            Campaigner on Resource Use Dr Michael Warhurst points out, though, this
            approach is problematic because “the atmosphere doesn’t know the
            difference between biogenic and non-biogenic carbon”. As we move into a
            world where carbon becomes the new currency, where, as Jones notes,
            “you’ll want to have the lowest exposure to carbon tradable permits or
            carbon taxation”, incineration’s carbon
            footprint will be a further black mark against it.”

          5. i have taken a worse figure than yours for CO2 emission per KWH of electricity generated by MSW I have used 850 grammes.. The real issue here is can this electricity be used wisely to reduce CO2 and NOx. the Croydon Tramlink uses 9KWHrs per 100 people per Kilometre . If the tramlink can be extended and powered by the ERF
            then the benefits to the community will be considerable. the electricity is a precious asset and tens of thousands of car journeys with their pollution can be removed. The tramlink is around 400% more efficient in moving passengers with less energy than a standard London Bus.

          6. Yes but! Energy can be generated from safer forms of waste treatment than burning it. What about anaerobic digestion and in vessel composting? Why haven’t we been given these as an option?
            The same amount of energy could be produced by about 6 off shore wind turbines.
            Viridor charge 4 times the amount per tonne for burning it than they do through AD or IVC.
            The incinerator is a treatment of the disease rather than a cure and until we address the problem head on and stop letting the waste industry dictate what we should do we will never solve the issue.

    2. The 666 lorry movements is stated in the documentation submitted with the planning application. If you can’t/won’t accept that basic figure I have to question all of your other comments.

      Have you seen what Southwark council are doing with their waste (http://www.veoliaenvironmentalservices.co.uk/Southwark/Integrated-Waste-Management-Facility/)? Have you seen what the Scottish government have made Viridor do in Glasgow (http://www.viridor.co.uk/news-blogs/show/viridor-signs-glasgow-residual-waste-contract)? Another solution might be to build 4 small pyrolysis plants, one in each borough, to deal with the waste. This would produce fewer emissions, be more flexible, as one or more plants could be mothballed should recycling rates improve in the future, reduce lorry journeys across the boroughs and prevent the concentration of pollution in one small area of the Wandle valley.

      Even if the incinerator were perceived to be the best or only solution, only a fool would place it downwind of one of the most densely populated areas of the whole country (as you make reference to yourself).

      Your comment about this site being one sided truly beggars belief! Did you not notice the name of the website? The four borough councils and Viridor have spent £100,000’s promoting this development, much of it public money. We have fought a campaign on no budget, with just the generosity of ordinary people whose time and effort have been given freely and willingly. We have friends and families whose lives will be literally put at risk by this development if it is allowed to go ahead. You are entitled to your opinions and we will argue them with you, but you are wrong – so wrong – in your beliefs and comments.

      1. Please listen to your recording it clearly states 666 vehicle movements. I have lived in Beddington
        for 35 years i go up and down Beddington lane Several times a week. At present with Landfill there are 700 Plus Vehicle movements a day. NOT LORRY MOVEMENTS. the incinerator will employ 40 staff if they all drive to work and back that is 80 vehicle movements a day alone. The point is if people told the truth and got the facts straight there could be an objective discussion.
        The carbon footprint of Ikea in Purley way is going to be close to that of the ERF. People are quite happy to drive there eat Swedish Meatballs and buy furniture shipped from China and around the world. Can you imagine the waste that is created by just that one store. We live under the flightpaths of Gatwick airport and Heathrow and people will on leisure flights create environmental havoc on aircraft high in the sky without any concern.. They become concerned when a lifestyle based on consumption and waste has to be accounted for. Why should the waste we generate be transported miles away to pollute other people land and water courses ? If you overeat at meal times you would not go next door and use your neighbours toilet ?

        We created the problem now we have do deal with the 5.5 million tonnes of waste we are going to generate locally over the next 20 years. hopefully If we use the electricity wisely for transport and the heat energy . we can reach a point where it becomes carbon neutral,
        the whole point of an ERF is to dispose of the waste in a controlled and environmentally safe way. People are dying because of uncontrolled emissions from Vehicle engines the ERF will reduce these,

        1. I’m not sure why you keep going on about people driving to Ikea and taking flights!? Our campaign is nothing to do with that. Just because we pollute the planet in other ways doesn’t mean we should just carry on doing so.
          You don’t seem to understand that the waste will NOT be dealt with locally. There is not enough local waste to go in so it will be imported from elsewhere. The ash that comes out the other end has to be driven elsewhere. 10,000 of hazardous ash will be driven 100s of kms elsewhere and buried. The emissions that come out the chimney will travel for many miles.
          This incinerator is going to create pollution that is spread far and wide, so it certainly isn’t a local issue being dealt with locally.
          Do you care to address this fact?

  17. My other web name is Alphaemitter…..that being the uncounted and under reported poison fallout from Hiroshima,Nagasaki,Bikini and Fukushima.If they ever burn radioactive waste at Beddington someone had better be adopting the old,tried and tested X-Ray film method of detection.If they do it they won’t tell you the results, for sure!

    Here is a clear film about how researchers have done it, and what they found, in Japan.

    Fairewinds is no scaremongering group,you can trust all it says,its just very,very unpopular with the “authorities”.

    http://vimeo.com/90655605

    and

    http://fairewinds.org/

    http://noincineratorforcroydon.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/alpha-emitters

    http://noincineratorforcroydon.blogspot.co.uk/2009/10/where-did-mushroom-clouds-go.html

  18. The trouble with the incinerator is that 85,000 tonnes of ash a year has to be driven elsewhere for processing. 10,000 tonnes of this is hazardous and has to be taken 100s of kms away to specialist landfill. This means incineration does not stop landfill! Incineration is not the only way to deal with our rubbish problem – 90% of all rubbish can be recycled or re-used – which means we don’t need to landfill or burn.

  19. Everybody was happy when the lorries came down Beddington lane and filled up a hole in the ground with rubbish.producing a mixture of 2 parts methane to one part CO2. Now there is an incinerator on the way there are a group of born again environmentalists. The Incinerator deals with the waste in a controlled way the electricity produced will power Tramlink and trains, plus supply houses we will all benefit.
    Each house generates around 250Kg on Non re-cyclable waste per year. and businesses a lot more.

    1. We are not all born again environmentalists; some of us have cared about the environment all along! Personally I do not own a car, I am a vegan and haven’t been on a plane in years. I bet my carbon footprint is lower than yours!

      I am astounded that you think we were happy with the lorries and the landfill. The local community have been against the landfill and against the industrialising of the area from the outset.

      And don’t forget that for decades now the council have been promising us an end to waste management on the site and that it would be turned in to a country park. Regardless of the merits or otherwise of the incinerator this represents 20 years of broken promises.

      And by the way, that recording clearly states 666 lorry movements a day, not vehicle movements. Please get your facts right.

      1. When I use the word “we” I am referring to some politicians who try and oppose the incinerator on environmental grounds while colleagues from the same party in adjacent boroughs are enthusiastic supporters. I also refer to people who drive everywhere fly and have a disregard for the environment. The problem for the council is that part of Beddington Lane is zoned as industrial and all applications for industrial applications have to be judged against planning laws.
        i admire you for not having a car, i try and walk or use public transport where ever possible.
        i have fitted solar panels and i help people reduce the energy they use. I am passionate about low carbon strategies and making public transport greener. I try and stick to Fish Fruit and Vegetables in my diet

        1. I agree with you that this matter has been used as a political football and that there has been no consistency from the main political parties. This campaign group is a non- political organisation so all I can say is that the local people are verhemently against this incinerator for a variety of reasons but mainly due to the impact it will have on our health.
          For me the fact that they have ignore a number of ‘legally binding’ section 106 planning agreements promising an end to waste treatment and the restoration of the land to a country park show how badly we are being let down by our elected representatives.

  20. Here is an interactive map that enables you to see air pollution deaths and life years lost,by borough

    http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/interactive/2014/apr/10/air-pollution-deaths-uk-borough-interactive-map?CMP=twt_fd

    Kind of ironic that the home of the overpowered “Chelsea Tractor” has the worst air…but I guess its also the flyover.

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/10/kesington-chelsea-most-polluted-air-uk-public-health-england-report?CMP=twt_fd

    Please remember that children,whose lungs are damaged irrevocably,walk through hotspot Peaks of Pollution to school…not average levels.
    Even more frighteningly nitrogen diffusion tubes placed at buggy height READ X3 STANDARD pollution levels.But I have never seen schoolchildren walking along pavements with their little brothers and sisters in buggies..have you?

  21. Hi this is a very interesting exchange of views. I am sorry that more people did not turn up to meetings or write in to voice their opinions. The landfill was producing a toxic mixture of Methane and carbon dioxide plus leaching chemicals into the soil. All the councils around Sutton knew what was going on but took no action. Hopefully people will start to take their responsibility for reducing waste seriously and the plant will no longer be viable and have to be downsized .We only have one planet but people think they can damage it and there will be no consequences. iIt is very disapointing that so few people post their views. I cannot see how there could be 666 lorry movements for the plant it is vehicle movements I will make some enquiries. In Germany some ERF facilities have closed for lack of rubbish but we are years behind Germany in environmental matters

    1. Everyone agrees we need to move away from landfill and that it is not safe. Except for Viridor who are still promoting landfill as a safe and viable form of waste treatment: http://tinyurl.com/pd82hqy

      When Viridor were asked in a public meeting which is safer, incineration or landfill, they said both were safe. How can we trust a company who says this? How can we trust that their out of date incinerator with relatively low furnace temperatures is any safer than landfill.

      Burning rubbish WILL increase air pollution at a time when we really need to be reducing it: http://tinyurl.com/pmkhtml

  22. While Sutton was watching Viridors magic tricks…just over the border Croydon had commissioned its own future air picture…just a teensy bit different !
    If you wonder why it bears no relation to Boris’ ” its all getting better” message,that’s because he uses manufacturer’s own ( tee hee!) emission figures in a computer, not real world measurements and he hides his own 2 million planned population growth (with cars etc and 60% increase in jams guaranteed).

  23. When you put the two together…decisions in one borough,effects in the other.
    That’s what I call “planning”.

  24. How to hide behind “average figures” of pollution exposure.Very real whole body immune system reactions are triggered by the sorts of exposures measured by modern,phone-app,individual sensors.Here are just two:

  25. Local councillors are trying to reassure residents that they don’t need to worry about metal residues from the incinerator “because the waste will go through very powerful magnets”

    Its really the battery,motherboard and “business waste” (specialist industrial) that will be a danger.New waste streams were a specific area of incinerator development.

    Here is an article from Australia about the populations subjected to poor air,and how pollutibg industries concenetrate in polluted areas. Did you know that there were three chimneys planned for the Wandle bowl?

    Australia’s dirty secret: who’s breathing toxic air?
    From The Conversation

    By Donna Green, Jayajit Chakraborty, University of South Florida, and Mark Patrick Taylor

    Australians living in poorer communities, with lower employment and
    education levels, as well as communities with a high proportion of
    Indigenous people, are significantly more likely to be exposed to high
    levels of toxic air pollution.

    These are the key findings from the first Australian study to assess
    the relationship between industrial air pollution and the communities
    most exposed to it, which has just been published in the international
    journal Environmental Research Letters.

    Our study evaluated industry-reported estimates of air emissions, which are available from the Australian government’s National Pollution Inventory (NPI), which details annual pollution from facilities like mines, power stations and factories. The NPI keeps track of more than 90 substances, including arsenic, lead and sulphur dioxide that can harm human health and the environment.

    We then combined the national air pollution inventory data with demographic information from predefined areas determined by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).
    For each area, we considered the proportion of Indigenous people, and
    several measures of social disadvantage, including levels of education,
    income and employment.

    The results revealed consistent national patterns: Indigenous as well
    as disadvantaged communities across Australia are being being
    disproportionately exposed to sources of industrial pollution, including
    higher amounts and higher levels of toxicity of air pollution.

    In the communities containing NPI-listed air pollution sites, the
    average percentage of Indigenous Australians was almost 1.7 times higher
    than those which did not contain such sites.

    These locations are also more likely to be associated significantly
    with communities that have greater socio-economic disadvantage, lower
    access to economic resources, and with lower levels of educational and
    occupational status.

    Living with dangerous pollution

    Port Pirie in South Australia is a good example of such a community.
    Located about 225km north of Adelaide, the town’s residents have long
    known that their town’s 125-year-old smelter – one of the largest in the
    world – produces harmful emissions.

    However, until this new study
    was done, people in communities such as Port Pirie have had no way of
    assessing how the air pollution they have been experiencing compares
    with other parts of Australia.

    Our findings show that Port Pirie, which has one of the lowest socio-economic disadvantage ratings in South Australia,
    falls into the top 10% of all communities in the country, in terms of
    total toxic air emissions and the toxicity-weighted emissions. (Toxicity weightings
    are based on the toxic equivalency potential, which determines the
    relative human health risk resulting from release of a chemical.)

    These findings are consistent with countless reports and inquiries
    that have revealed how lead poisoning has affected generations of Port
    Pirie children, including more than 3000 in the last decade.

    To limit exposure to environmental emissions, including at children’s playgrounds, the “Thumbs Up for Low Levels”
    campaign advises Port Pirie residents to use a wet mop rather than a
    broom to clean their homes; not to drink rainwater; to wash hands after
    play; while their children are told to brush their pets outside because
    of the contaminated dust risk.

    Lead is a neurotoxin: that is, a chemical causing irreparable nervous system damage. Yet the advice to local residents is not based on strong evidence. In fact, a recent Cochrane Review of 14 studies involving 2656 children concluded that:

    “educational and dust control interventions are not effective in reducing blood lead levels of young children.”

    Even low blood-lead levels affect a child’s mental and physical development, as shown in a recent study of Port Pirie children. So it is unfortunate, but not surprising, that children living in Port Pirie have been shown to be disproportionately developmentally vulnerable by comparison to the state or the national average.

    Interestingly, a similar pattern prevails for children in two of
    Australia’s other major lead mining and smelting cities of Australia: Broken Hill, NSW and Mount Isa, Queensland.

    Last year, the Port Pirie smelter – operated by Zurich-based company Nyrstar – breached agreed pollution limits. As The Australian newspaper reported
    earlier this month, South Australian Health Department data for 2013
    shows that more than 100 Port Pirie children — about 20% of those under
    five tested in the town — had blood lead levels above the ­nationally
    accepted level. The average blood lead level in all children had also
    risen to its highest level since 2010.

    Legal protection from pollution

    Unlike some other Western nations, Australia’s environmental
    protection laws do not adequately or equally protect all communities
    from the health effects of air pollution. That is in spite of a
    long-standing – though not legally-binding – agreement by the federal,
    state and territory governments that all Australians should:

    “enjoy the benefit of equivalent protection from air, water and soil pollution and from noise, wherever they live”.

    Pollution licences and the way they are enforced are a state
    responsibility. For large companies that provide a high percentage of
    employment for a town or region – especially in rural towns –
    significant flexibility is provided by state authorities when it comes
    to enforcing compliance with licence controls. Across Australia, and
    even within individual states, there are many interpretations of acceptable practice.

    Coming clean on the air we breathe

    Our new national assessment
    is not enough to conclusively state that industries have deliberately
    chosen to locate in specific areas with less well-off communities. In
    fact, sometimes people with less money, who are looking for work, may be
    attracted to living near cheaper land – including less desirable
    places, such as near mines or industrial sites.

    However, these new findings suggest that, at minimum, more research
    is needed to identify the specific trajectories and impact of industrial
    and economic development. It also points to the need to have
    independent measured emissions data to analyse, rather than having to
    rely on industry-provided estimations of emissions to the NPI.

    Without such data, it is inevitable that some Australian communities will continue to live with a disproportionate burden of pollution and adverse health impacts.

    This article was originally published on The Conversation.

    • Read the original article.

    About the author

    Donna Green and Jayajit Chakraborty were co-authors of the new research published in Environmental Research Letters. Mark Taylor was invited to be a co-author on this article because of his research on lead poisoning in Port Pirie.

    Donna Green, Jayajit Chakraborty and Mark Patrick Taylor
    do not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any
    company or organisation that would benefit from this article. They also
    have no relevant affiliations.

    This is from a recent US study:

    http://www.chemheritage.org/Downloads/Policy-Center/Projects/Diane-Sicotte-presentation.pdf

  26. The recently published Health Atlas has some interesting things to say about Croydon air pollution,particularly about Purley Way and the B272 and A236 junctions.
    http://www.envhealthatlas.co.uk/eha/environmental/PM10/
    Whatever Boris says things aren’t better and will get much worse,with planned population and traffic growth.
    The shenanigans with the N. Beddington air monitor need explaining too.Bear with…..
    the scientists at King’s were perplexed when their Marylebone Road (the worst in London)readings showed an unexpected fall….IT WAS A NEW BUS LANE MARKING !
    Only that much extra distance blew the figures’ accuracy.
    What is now called the Beddingon Lane site is far away from any road traffic and its readings bear no relation to those of the old site,which has now been closed.Exactly how that influenced the planning decisions I will leave you to guess !! ??

  27. Demo 7.15pm 07/05/14. Sutton Civic Centre

    We will be having a demonstration outside Sutton Civic Centre next Wednesday to mark the one year anniversary of the Incinerator plans being agreed.

    Sutton Development Control Committee will be having a meeting that night, the last one before the elections and so we want to remind them of their terrible decision.

    We will be meeting outside the main entrance of the building downstairs and we will provide banners and placards for people to hold. There are other things planned which we don’t want to go in to at this stage.

    Ironically enough, on the agenda for this meeting are two planning applications for extending waste treatment on 2 other sites on Beddington Lane – one application will result in 10 lorry movements a week and the other will increase waste processing on the Deadman Confidential Site to 50,000 tonnes a year.

    This is a reminder that the impact of the incinerator cannot be taken in isolation and how the council continue to ignore the plight of people living in this area.

    Together we can make a difference.

  28. VIRIDOR’S FLAWED AIR FUTURES:

    Boris Johnson’s transport
    planners forecast soaring London road congestion

    The Conservative mayor’s policies will do little to mitigate a 60% rise in traffic
    snarl-ups in the centre of the capital by 2031 according to Transport for
    London research

    Boris Johnson. Photograph: Chris Jackson/Getty Images for Invictus Games

    Boris Johnson’s transport policies will fail to prevent huge increases in road
    traffic congestion across London in the coming years according to research by
    his own transport agency.

    Transport for London has concluded that by 2031 congestion in central London will have
    worsened by 60% even if Johnson’s entire transport strategy investment
    programme is implemented and augmented with further short-term measures.
    Congestion in inner London is projected to rise by 25% and in outer London by
    15%….jams up 60%.

  29. Two important reports have come out over this last week.The National asthma deaths study is hitting the front pages today.Here is a link to the full report..whilst doctors don’t come well out of it..the continued failure to warn the whole population about “smogs” is scandalous.w.rcplondon.ac.uk/sites/default/files/why_asthma_stil
    A very recent Lancet article explores the links with air pollution:
    .thelancet.com/journals/lance
    pic.twitter.com/ZhPcL3jMHp

  30. This site should not be used by political parties to misinform. It should deal with facts . The Labour manifesto for Sutton says that “we will seek to withdraw the Council from related contracts and aim for quality green jobs instead” what does this mean what are the Labour plans to deal with 5.5 million tonnes of waste in the next 20 years and how can this create green Jobs?.
    . Viridor the contractor appointed by South London Waste Partnership is made up of four local councils (Croydon, Kingston, Merton and Sutton) . there are a large number of Labour councillors who have given this project
    the green Light,

    1. This site is NOT being used by political parties to misinform. No political party has access to amending any content of this site it is run entirely by the Stop the Incinerator Campaign which has no political allegiance. We are a non-political campaign group who are made up of people united by a single aim. Whilst our diverse group is made up of people with different political beliefs we do not support any political party.
      I would suggest you contact the labour party directly with regards to your comments.
      We don’t need an incinerator because 90% of all rubbish can be recycled or re-used and this creates 10 times more jobs than burning it.

  31. The South London Waste Partnership that signed the contract has got Labour Conservatives Lib Dems Ukips and independents involved in arriving at the decision. Not forgetting the Mayor Of London.
    what is important if it goes ahead is managing the vehicle flow and measuring air quality independently all around the site .

    1. And each party in its own way has broken their promise to serve the people who elected them. 1 in 12 deaths in London are linked to air pollution. The recent study by the Health Department confirmed there are no levels below which particulate matter becomes safe. In other words there are no safe levels of pollution. No matter how small they claim the increase in pollution to be, it is a simple fact this incinerator will kill people. If you believe air pollution causes no harm then you are right but sadly this is not the case.

  32. Link between air pollution and infant deaths:

    please note the “roadblocks” placed in the midwife’s way,just about inquiring about the most basic stats.

    After noticing more stillbirths and newborn deaths in Vernal, a midwife wondered if
    the premature deaths could be linked to the air pollution caused by the growth
    of oil and gas drilling in the area. Donna Young’s inquiry has caught the attention of the local health department,state public health experts and environmental activists.

    On Monday at 12:15 p.m., Dr. Brian Moench of Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment,
    Sam LeFevre of the Utah Department of Health and Tribune health reporter Kirsten
    Stewart join Jennifer Napier-Pearce to talk about the troubling observations
    and how researchers will set out to determine if the deaths are the result of
    pollution exposure, another cause or coincidence.

    http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/blogstribtalk/57924173-71/health-deaths-pollution-sltrib.html.csp

    What do teachers know about air pollution? what do they want to do about it?The Shocking Truth

    http://cleanairinlondon.org/wp-content/uploads/CAL-273-London-Schools-Air-Quality-Survey-2014_Published-by-Liberal-Democrats.pdf

    survey of 935 (of whom 43 responded!) London schools and nurseries (16,600 children) that are situated within 150 metres of a road carrying more than 10,000 vehicles per day
    reveals that just two per cent of schools are even aware of the airTEXT
    service which provides free daily air pollution forecasts for Greater
    London. This is despite the Mayor consistently claiming that airTEXT
    provides an adequate pollution alert service to vulnerable Londoners.

    The Aphekom Project, a European Commission-fundedstudy into the
    health impacts of air pollution in 25 major European cities found
    that living within 150m of high-traffic roads (carrying more than 10,000
    per day) could be responsible for between 15-30 per cent of new asthma
    cases in children:

    http://www.aphekom.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=5532fafa-921f-4ab1-9ed9-c0148f7da36a&groupId=10347 [see p.3 of the report]

    I don’t want to argue about a country park,I don’t want to choose the colour of the bricks its built from,I don’t want the lorries painted green,I dont want to do the research the governemnt has consistently refused to do despite many promises…I DON’T WANT AN INCINERATOR AND ITS LORRY TRAINS POISONING MOTHERS TO BE AND THE CHILDREN THEY ALREADY HAVE.

    pic.twitter.com/ifQx2thH5u

  33. Vested interests like to minimise an incinerator’s contribution to local pollution.This study shows how high it can be:
    http://www.londonair.org.uk/london/reports/PM10_from_waste_sites_Mercury_Way.pdf

    pic.twitter.com/T4Cw8wS8zs

    The industrial source increased the number of
    daily exceedances from 5 to 25 days compared to urban background AQMSs.When wind blew from the waste
    treatment sites it added on average 18.4μgm3 to urban background concentration.

    Swedish studies using very accurate Xray spectroscopy of the PM 2.5 particles found:

    http://senedd.assemblywales.org/documents/s6915/Prof%20Vyvyan%20Howard%20Paper.pdf

    Waste
    incineration and local sources 32%

    Oil Incineration 33%

    Biomass Burning 18%
    Long distance transport LDT)16%
    Traffic Emissions 1%

  34. Over the weekend someone captured a live “inversion” from a helicopter.You usually need a valley side.You can see the clear cut off point between the cold air below and the warm air above,with all the pollution trapped by the warm-air aucepan lid.London is a large bowl city,but you can guess how very many Wandle valleys you can fit into the area,and how dangeroues the valley concentration of pollutants will bewill be.

    pic.twitter.com/HY5L1S8EZx

  35. Defra covers-up #airpollution at 187 hotspots across London one day before election.
    See where

    bit.ly/1qSkz1h

    pic.twitter.com/gGJjEQP0Od

    169 South
    Croydon Norbury London Road

    170 South Croydon Thornton Heath Brigstock Rd/High St/Whitehorse Lane

    172 South Croydon Waddon Fiveways Corner

    173 South Croydon Thornton Heath Pond and London Road to StJames Road

    175 South Croydon Purley Cross

    174 South Sutton Wallington Manor Rd/Stanley Pk Rd/Stafford Rd

    176 South Sutton Sutton A232 Cheam/Carshalton Rd/High St/Brighton Rd

    177 South Sutton Worcester Park Central Road

  36. Hhmmm, now as a tourist, where would I like to visit & spend my money??? In a country/community that has clean air, cares about its citizens and environment? Or a country/community that treats the planet like a toilet and doesn’t listen to its citizens? The choice is clear…..garbage incinerators are bad for tourism! Are you listening British Columbia and Ontario Canada???

  37. I couldn’t possibly bore you with the numerous instances of governemnt and DEFRA cheating on air pollution measurement.The Harlington monitor is near Sipson and the Heathrow mess.

    Defra’s London Harlington monitor has gone offline after approaching EU Information threshold
    @BarryGardiner pic.twitter.com/vG5Ly5lvio

    You will know of the closure and renaming (further away)of the monitor
    nearest to the incinerator.Here is the 20/20 air pollution vision for
    the area.See anything suspicious for Croydon? If citizen science doesn’t do it,no one else will.

  38. http://www.howpollutedismyroad.org.uk/roads.php

    You can use this map to see the levels of pollutants emitted by vehicles
    on different stretches of road in London. Pan around the map, or put in
    your postcode, to find where you live, work or study. Click on any
    section of road to see the exact quantities of pollution emitted each
    year, and the numbers of vehicles that travel on that stretch of road
    every day.
    This sort of map often doesn’t include roadside monitoring results but is derived from models,please interpret in conjunction with the dreadful morning and pm rush hour peaks,with added ozone from 12.00pm onwards in the summer!

  39. MONITORING FLOUTED BY VIRIDOR/GRUDON/COLNBROOK

    http://www.colnbrook.info/fingers-point-at-grundons-incinerator-as-toxic-cloud-covers-colnbrook/
    http://www.colnbrook.info/toxic-cloud-over-colnbrook-still-no-public-comment-just-the-middle-finger/

    The trouble is…the monitoring rules have been made very weak after lobbying by industry:

    1
    Sutton closed the Beddington North air pollution monitoring site and
    renamed it to appear the same.It is 100 yards from the road.and
    measures sparrowfarts.

    2 The EU (2009)have diluted the old rules,and
    the limits (metals,gases,particulates,acids)are not the old fixed ones but are the equivalent of “the
    best we can manage”

    3 The industry does not have to use the latest technology.

    4
    The industry can legally fail to record switch off and start up
    pollution levels,which can put the euivalent of a years worth of rubbish
    into the air.

    5 The industry doesn’t have to tell you of a breach for 3 months

    6 The industry only has to measure twice a year.

    Do you know where to find those pollution levels online?

    Viridor’s Grundon plant put out 2,000% above acceptable levels last year:
    http://tinyurl.com/o58yrrw

    Outrageously all measurements from that incident have been emoved from the publicly accessible sites.
    IT NEVER HAPPENED !

    One of the tricks played by incinerator managements is to muzzle the local community:

    Grundon have failed to respond to Colnbrook Views and no statement has been forthcoming from either the Parish Council or Colnbrook Community Partnership, both of whom have direct relationships with Grundon.

    London University did a door to door survey of people living near SELCHP…their report found that the local management committee was “stuffed” with people who didn’t pass on residents numerous complaints,that the residents felt completely shut out and got no responses.

    HOW CAN YOU STOP THAT HAPPENING HERE?.

  40. What do these three pictures have in common?
    There is an incinerator hiding under the 10 (very high pollution level)
    Colnbrook lakeside
    Erith
    SELCHP

  41. Very serious Commons committee today…suggest you could devote all 1 3/4 hours to it….but if not…watch

    http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=15614&player=silverlight

    from 14:27:40 to 14:35:30

    in
    passing,a question from my paper was asked,and Dr Mudway said there was
    reason to believe that London’s results would be much worse than the US
    studies had shown! (if you can get past the technical reasons he discusses)
    the meeting can be embedded on this website (administrator please see) with

  42. YouScary #smog | VERY HIGH 10/10 #airpollution reported by @LondonAir at #Bexley #Erith tonight pic.twitter.com/dHLCOXVM95

    You all know what lives at Bexley and Erith,don’t you?

    Hammersmith’s,Fulham’s,Wandsworth’s,Chelsea’s and Westminster’s incinerator !

  43. Our web site has undergone a re-vamp. Check out our new environmental impact section and see how the diverse wildlife at Beddington Farmlands will be affected by the incinerator. Look out for regular updates from our local wildlife expert and member of the stop the incinerator campaign, Peter Alfrey.

  44. Stop the incinerator: taking the campaign to Boris

    Labour Hyprocrisy
    Labour goes quiet on the Incinerator once in power
    News From 2013

    Sutton Council, supported by Croydon’s Conservative Council, has approved Viridor’s planning application to build an incinerator at Beddington Lane on the border of Waddon. Waddon’s Labour Action team is calling on London’s Mayor to block the scheme.
    Households in Waddon have repeatedly told us that they do not want an incinerator on their doorstep. People are worried about the health risks from emissions and traffic congestion from lorries delivering waste to the site. They are also angry that increased levels of local recycling will be rewarded with waste being brought to the incinerator from elsewhere in London and the South East. In addition, the site proposed for the incinerator is metropolitan open land which should be returned to the community.
    For these reasons, Joy Prince, Andrew Pelling and Robert Canning have all been on the doorstep in Waddon in recent weeks to hand out letters to households to sign and send to Boris Johnson to ask him to stop the incinerator. The response has been huge with hundreds of letters sent to the Mayor. Labour’s shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, Caroline Flint MP, also spoke at a public meeting on 18 June where she heard first-hand how Viridor’s proposed incinerator is the wrong scheme in the wrong place. Caroline is pictured at the meeting with Joy, Andrew and Robert.
    Mayor Johnson’s decision around whether to approve the incinerator could come as early as July 2013 so any Waddon resident who opposes the incinerator and has not already written to the Mayor to ask him to block it should do so as quickly as possible. A draft letter can be downloaded from the Stop the Incinerator web site at: http://www.stoptheincinerator.co.uk/. This can be posted to the Mayor or e-mailed to him at: mayor@london.gov.uk. Please do make your views known to the Mayor if you have not already done so as he does have the power to stop the incinerator.In their manifesto for the 2010 local elections, Croydon’s Conservatives pledged that they would never support an incinerator in Croydon or on its borders. That promise now lies in tatters. Rather than honour their manifesto pledge and represent the wishes of local people, Conservative Councillors have recently been delivering a Viridor pamphlet which they claim addresses residents’ concerns. Households that have received this pamphlet will have noticed that it provides a good technical explanation of how energy is recovered from the incineration process but fails to provide any reassurance around the real concerns that people have with the proposed incinerator.

    Unlike the Conservatives, Waddon’s Labour Action Team promises to always put the interests of Waddon first and to stand up for our local community.

    Hypocrites

    1. Another Opinion – you complain about the political comments and bias that appear on this website but you post THE MOST consistently politically biased comments of anyone! The campaign has the support of all parties and we have striven to remain politically neutral throughout. This is not about scoring political points, it is about the quality of life for thousands of ordinary people.

    2. Wake up and smell the coffee. It was the Croydon Tories who signed Croydon up for the incinerator. There is nothing that the Labour Council can do. Its too late. The new Labour councillors in Waddon raised the issue in the Council Chamber and were told as much. The only hope left is the legal challenge.

  45. There are a number of new ways to check how polluted your
    road is, your school is and how much worse it’ s going to get. Without boring you
    with the details most roadside pollution is VERY SERIOUSLY undercounted, so that the 2020 figures are
    nearer to what it is now.

    HOW POLLUTED IS MY SCHOOL PLAYGROUND:

    Click on the white button of the blue arrow for the name, some
    schools are missed out of those at risk:

    http://www.howpollutedismyroad.org.uk/schools.php

    HOW POLLUTED IS MY ROUTE TO SCHOOL, INCLUDING BUS STOPS:

    http://www.howpollutedismyroad.org.uk/2020.php

    There has also been a deliberate policy of minimisation by
    DEFRA and Boris, which repeatedly means people are not warned. You have to be
    rich and media savvy to get the apps that warn.

    Here’s how they work the flag system for playgrounds in the
    US:

    http://buff.ly/1rxP2Pe

  46. How polluted is my road?
    How polluted is my school?
    How polluted sill it be soon?
    How is it undercounted>
    Boris prefers to use engine manufacturerers’ figures fed into a computer model called an inventory.THOSE FIGURES HAVE BEEN KNOWN TO BE WRONG FOR A VERY LONG TIME…because they are from a fast,unjammed journey on the testing track,not at the traffic lights near you! The filters never heat up to the right temperatures on local roads,SO ARE VIRTUALLY USELESS.

  47. Please come along to our next meeting where we will be updating everyone on the latest about the judicial review, discussing fundraising, demos and also plans for what the alternative to an incinerator could be.
    Come to Matthews Yard, Croydon (CR0 1FF) on Saturday 2nd August starting at 10:30.

  48. Dirty secrets of ‘cleanest yet’ diesel cars (The Times)

    Pollution from new diesel cars is six times greater than the official limit,
    according to “real-world driving” emissions tests that contradict results
    published by manufacturers.

    Some of the latest diesel models produce the same amount of nitrogen oxides
    (NOx) as older ones, which means they could face the same pollution
    penalties designed to improve air quality in cities.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/environment/article4166810.ece?CMP=SOC-Twitter-thetimes-28_07_2014-468-0-0-0

    As all figures for pollution come from models (including mortality and morbidity stats),just imagine how using the manufacturerers’ figures skews the WHOLE picture.

    pic.twitter.com/QR9ApMCzzM

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>