Welcome

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

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.

  • http://www.stoptheincinerator.co.uk/?p=193 Dr. S. Prokop

    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.

  • regine

    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.

  • Louise Holmes

    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!!!

  • Liz

    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.

  • philip watkins

    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 )

  • Stop The Burn

    Find out what happens if the South London Incinerator exceeds carbon emission targets.
    https://soundcloud.com/stoptheincinerator/incinerator-carbon-emissions

  • Stop The Burn

    Environmental vandalism – read what BBC presenter & wildlife expert David Lindo thinks of the South London Incinerator: http://www.stoptheincinerator.co.uk/?p=254

    For a satirical look at the this subject see the latest rant from Dog with a bone: http://youtu.be/2OdkSCjYel0

  • Stop The Burn

    See our festive protest video, thanks to a little help from Santa Claus: http://www.stoptheincinerator.co.uk/?p=258

  • Stop The Burn

    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.

  • Stop The Burn

    Thank you very much for all your donations so far. We have managed to
    raise enough money to proceed to the claim before proceedings. The next
    step is to get to permission stage, where our case will be sent to the
    High Court and Sutton Council. Every pound helps us reach are next
    target.

    http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/Campaigners-launch-legal-challenge-Croydon-Sutton/story-20410133-detail/story.html?ito=email_newsletter_croydonadvertiser

  • Stop The Burn

    Local wildlife expert explains why Beddington Farmlands needs saving.
    http://youtu.be/c0T6B-E6gAI

  • Gwen Martin

    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.

  • Stop The Burn

    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.

  • Stop The Burn

    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!

  • Stop The Burn

    Listen to Clr Hoare lie his way through a radio interview and hear the lies given to Croydon Council about what comes out of the incinerator: http://www.stoptheincinerator.co.uk/?page_id=212

  • Stop The Burn

    Who is the mystery yarn bomber? Can you work it out from the clues in their cross stitch?
    http://www.stoptheincinerator.co.uk/?p=391

  • smogbad

    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 ! ?

  • Stop The Burn

    Mark Butcher adds his name to our campaign: “When I heard about the incinerator I couldn’t quite believe what I was hearing. It seems every week news reports indicate that London’s air quality is appalling”. For the full story go to our news page: http://www.stoptheincinerator.co.uk/?p=408

  • Stop The Burn
  • Stop The Burn

    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.

  • Stop The Burn

    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!?

  • Stop The Burn

    See the details of the legal challenge to the incinerator by local resident, Shasha Khan: http://www.stoptheincinerator.co.uk/?page_id=212

  • smogbad

    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.

  • Stop The Burn

    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

  • another opinion

    i think this is not a very useful site as it only gives one side of the argument

    • Stop The Burn

      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.

  • Stop The Burn

    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.

    • another opinion

      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

      • Stop The Burn

        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.

        • another opinion

          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

  • another opinion

    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.

    • Stop The Burn

      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.

      • another opinion

        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

        • Stop The Burn

          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.

          • another opinion

            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.

          • Stop The Burn

            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.

          • another opinion

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

          • Stop The Burn

            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.”

          • another opinion

            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.

          • Stop The Burn

            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.

    • Broad Greener

      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.

      • another opinion

        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,

        • Stop The Burn

          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?

  • smogbad

    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

  • Stop The Burn

    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.

  • another opinion

    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.

    • Stop The Burn

      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.

      • another opinion

        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

        • Stop The Burn

          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.

  • smogbad

    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?

  • another opinion

    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

    • Stop The Burn

      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

  • smogbad

    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).

  • smogbad

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

  • smogbad

    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: