UN threatens to act against Britain for failure to protect Battlefield (well why not?)

Unesco may put buildings on endangered list
New legislation to address concerns, say ministers
Severin Carrell, Scotland correspondent The Guardian,
Monday September 8 2008

Stonehenge
The UN is threatening to put the Tower of London on its list of world heritage sites in danger after its experts accused the UK of damaging globally significant sites such as Stonehenge, the old town of Edinburgh and the Georgian centre of Bath, the Guardian has learned.
Unesco, the UN's cultural agency, has told ministers in London and Edinburgh that it wants urgent action to protect seven world heritage sites which it claims are in danger from building developments, and said in some cases the UK is ignoring its legal obligations to protect them.
Their complaints range from decisions to approve new tower blocks in central London, such as the 66-storey "shard of glass" at London Bridge, to the failure to relocate the A344 beside Stonehenge despite promising action for 22 years, to a proposed wind farm which threatens neolithic sites on Orkney.

'UK is too keen on prestige development'
For all seven sites, it has asked the UK to write detailed progress reports replying to its concerns by February.
Unesco's world heritage centre in Paris is also sending two teams of inspectors to Edinburgh and Bath this winter to investigate its concerns that new buildings in both cities will damage their "integrity" and their "outstanding universal value."
In its strongest criticism, Unesco's world heritage committee has said it "deeply regrets" the decision by Edinburgh city council to press ahead with a hotel, housing and offices development called Caltongate next to the Royal Mile, despite expert evidence it will ruin the medieval old town's unique form.
In the committee's final report after its annual meeting in July in Quebec, which has just been released, it also accuses the UK of breaching world heritage site guidelines by failing to warn it in advance about the Caltongate scheme. Last month, Koichiro Matsuura, Unesco's director general, told the Scotsman there was growing concern about Edinburgh. "It is crucial that its outstanding features are preserved and protected," he said.
Leading architects and conservationists, including Sir Terry Farrell and Marcus Binney, chairman of Save Britain's Heritage, have said they share Unesco's anxieties. Farrell, appointed Edinburgh's "design champion", told the Guardian the city urgently needed a proper urban design masterplan. "I'm very supportive of Unesco's position," he said.
Binney said: "Heritage has taken a back seat to Cool Britannia and encouraging everything modern, and we're now uncomfortably in the limelight for failing to have proper policies to protect our world heritage sites, and timely criticisms are now being made."
In potentially its most serious conflict with ministers, Unesco has said it could put the Tower of London on its "world heritage in danger" list next year if ministers fail to honour promises to strengthen planning guidelines for the area.
Unesco is worried that the "iconic" Norman Tower and its 13th-century walls will be overshadowed by Renzo Piano's London Bridge tower, the so-called "shard of glass", and a 39-floor tower on Fenchurch Street in the City. It accepts that a new management plan for the area is being drafted but is angry that the new towers are still being approved.
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport, which has lead responsibility for protecting the UK's 27 world heritage sites, says it is introducing a heritage protection bill which will give all sites in England the same legal protection as a conservation area.
It said its delegation to the Quebec meeting had successfully challenged some criticism from Unesco by showing that planners were acting to draft guidelines on protecting several sites and their skylines. "The tone of the meeting was very positive and our delegates came away with a very positive feeling about the likely final outcome," it said. "Nothing has been said or received subsequently to alter this impression."
The UK overturned a proposed warning that the Palace of Westminster world heritage site, which includes the abbey and St Margaret's church, could also be added to the "in danger" list next year if Unesco's concerns were ignored, by citing the heritage protection bill and planning guidelines. But Unesco still "regrets" that the UK has failed to put in a "buffer zone" to restrict damaging developments and draw up a proper "skyline study" to allow planners to rapidly assess development proposals. It accuses the UK of a "lack of clarity" in assessing the conflicts between conservation and development.
Of the seven sites examined by Unesco, Liverpool had the greatest success: the city council was praised for acting on Unesco's fears about the damage to its Georgian buildings from building plans.
In advance of the inspectors' visit to Bath, DCMS officials have said they are "extremely concerned" about the accuracy of claims in Unesco's report about the damage that could be caused by proposals for seven-storey flats and a college to its Georgian centre.
John Graham, chief executive of Historic Scotland, said he shared Unesco's anxieties about plans for high rises in Edinburgh's Leith docks and a tower to replace the St James' centre, a 70s concrete shopping centre in the New Town due for demolition.
But he had no fears about the Unesco inspectors' visit in November.
"The judgments we've reached are sound and defensible; that is the stance we will be taking when the mission arrives," he said.

Heritage sites under threat:
Stonehenge and Avebury
Site The neolithic stone circle and avenues, and the associated megalith circles at Avebury, were listed in 1986.
Problem A cause of anxiety for 22 years, Unesco is angry that plans to reroute the A344 with a tunnel and build an offsite visitors' centre have again been scrapped. It "regrets" the continued delays and "urges" ministers to act quickly.
[Battlefield, Shrewsbury
Site Site of the Battle of Shrewsbury and historic Battlefield Church
Problem A 90,000-ton proposed incinerator as part of a planned 27-year waste contract between Shropshire County Council and the waste company Veolia. The incinerator would visually obliterate the site and would inundate it with toxic chemicals every time there is a temperature inversion or a SW (prevailing) wind] added by Safe Waste Shropshire!]
Neolithic ruins, Orkney
Site Skara Brae, Maeshowe and the Ring of Brodgar were among the ancient sites listed in 1999.
Problem Three planned wind turbines will be visible and Unesco wants the project stopped. Historic Scotland agrees they will damage it. A public inquiry will report soon.
Edinburgh
Site The "remarkable" medieval Old Town and Georgian New Town of central Edinburgh were listed in 1995.
Problem Unesco fears several building projects in the city centre and Leith docks will damage the site's architectural heritage. It "deeply regrets" the city has approved a hotel, office and housing complex by the Royal Mile, and is sending inspectors to visit.
Bath
Site The city's grand neo-classical Georgian crescents, terraces and squares were listed in 1987.
Problem Unesco fears plans to build 2,000 flats in buildings up to nine storeys, and an engineering school sponsored by James Dyson, will damage the site's setting. It is sending inspectors and wants the schemes blocked until its committee has studied the plans.
Liverpool
Site Its maritime mercantile city, with its churches and Georgian warehouses, was listed in 2004.
Problem Unesco is happy the city swiftly acted on concerns that a new museum, a 24-storey tower and a new conference centre threatened the site's setting and integrity. Unesco wants further action to protect it.
Westminster, London
Site The Palace of Westminster, Westminster Abbey and St Margaret's Church were listed in 1987.
Problem Unesco believes several new tower blocks, including the 170-metre Beetham tower in Southwark and a 144m tower at Doon Street, will affect the site. It is annoyed its demands for a buffer zone and a detailed study of the skyline have been ignored.
Tower of London
Site The Norman tower and its 13th-century walls were listed in 1988.
Problem New buildings, such as the 66-storey "shard of glass" tower and a 39-floor tower at Fenchurch Street, will dominate the skyline. Unesco "regrets" the UK has failed to implement a robust buffer zone or an effective local plan. It is threatening to put the tower on its "world heritage in danger" list.

The Story of Stuff

Here’s a 20 minute brilliant video “... fact-filled look at the underside of our production and consumption patterns.” with Annie Leonard:

http://www.storyofstuff.com/

After you’ve watched it, you can look this short home made music video someone made in response to it:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdAuSNYV-tM

Another Way - 10 ways to act on what you've just seen
Many people who have seen The Story of Stuff have asked what they can do to address the problems identified in the film.

Each of us can promote sustainability and justice at multiple levels: as an individual, as a teacher or parent, a community member, a national citizen, and as a global citizen. As Annie says in the film, “the good thing about such an all pervasive problem is that there are so many points of intervention.” That means that there are lots and lots of places to plug in, to get involved, and to make a difference. There is no single simple thing to do, because the set of problems we’re addressing just isn’t simple. But everyone can make a difference, but the bigger your action the bigger the difference you’ll make. Here are some ideas:

10 Little and Big Things You Can Do

Power down! A great deal of the resources we use and the waste we create is in the energy we consume. Look for opportunities in your life to significantly reduce energy use: drive less, fly less, turn off lights, buy local seasonal food (food takes energy to grow, package, store and transport), wear a sweater instead of turning up the heat, use a clothesline instead of a dryer, vacation closer to home, buy used or borrow things before buying new, recycle. All these things save energy and save you money. And, if you can switch to alternative energy by supporting a company that sells green energy to the grid or by installing solar panels on your home, bravo!

Waste less.
Per capita waste production in the U.S. just keeps growing. There are hundreds of opportunities each day to nurture a Zero Waste culture in your home, school, workplace, church, community. This takes developing new habits which soon become second nature. Use both sides of the paper, carry your own mugs and shopping bags, get printer cartridges refilled instead of replaced, compost food scraps, avoid bottled water and other over packaged products, upgrade computers rather than buying new ones, repair and mend rather than replace….the list is endless! The more we visibly engage in re-use over wasting, the more we cultivate a new cultural norm, or actually, reclaim an old one!
Talk to everyone about these issues. At school, your neighbors, in line at the supermarket, on the bus…A student once asked Cesar Chavez how he organized. He said, “First, I talk to one person. Then I talk to another person.” “No,” said the student, “how do you organize?” Chavez answered, “First I talk to one person. Then I talk to another person.” You get the point. Talking about these issues raises awareness, builds community and can inspire others to action.

Make Your Voice Heard.
Write letters to the editor and submit articles to local press. In the last two years, and especially with Al Gore winning the Nobel Peace Prize, the media has been forced to write about Climate Change. As individuals, we can influence the media to better represent other important issues as well. Letters to the editor are a great way to help newspaper readers make connections they might not make without your help. Also local papers are often willing to print book and film reviews, interviews and articles by community members. Let’s get the issues we care about in the news.

DeTox your body, DeTox your home, and DeTox the Economy. Many of today’s consumer products – from children’s pajamas to lipstick – contain toxic chemical additives that simply aren’t necessary. Research online (for example, http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/) before you buy to be sure you’re not inadvertently introducing toxics into your home and body. Then tell your friends about toxics in consumer products. Together, ask the businesses why they’re using toxic chemicals without any warning labels. And ask your elected officials why they are permitting this practice. The European Union has adopted strong policies that require toxics to be removed from many products. So, while our electronic gadgets and cosmetics have toxics in them, people in Europe can buy the same things toxics-free. Let’s demand the same thing here. Getting the toxics out of production at the source is the best way to ensure they don’t get into any home and body.

Unplug (the TV and internet) and Plug In (the community).
The average person in the U.S. watches T.V. over 4 hours a day. Four hours per day filled with messages about stuff we should buy. That is four hours a day that could be spent with family, friends and in our community. On-line activism is a good start, but spending time in face-to-face civic or community activities strengthens the community and many studies show that a stronger community is a source of social and logistical support, greater security and happiness. A strong community is also critical to having a strong, active democracy.

Park your car and walk…and when necessary MARCH!
Car-centric land use policies and life styles lead to more greenhouse gas emissions, fossil fuel extraction, conversion of agricultural and wildlands to roads and parking lots. Driving less and walking more is good for the climate, the planet, your health, and your wallet. But sometimes we don’t have an option to leave the car home because of inadequate bike lanes or public transportation options. Then, we may need to march, to join with others to demand sustainable transportation options. Throughout U.S. history, peaceful non-violent marches have played a powerful role in raising awareness about issues, mobilizing people, and sending messages to decision makers.

Change your lightbulbs…and then, change your paradigm.
Changing lightbulbs is quick and easy. Energy efficient lightbulbs use 75% less energy and last 10 times longer than conventional ones. That's a no-brainer. But changing lightbulbs is just tinkering at the margins of a fundamentally flawed system unless we also change our paradigm. A paradigm is a collection of assumptions, concepts, beliefs, and values that together make up a community’s way of viewing reality. Our current paradigm dictates that more stuff is better, that infinite economic growth is desirable and possible, and that pollution is the price of progress. To really turn things around, we need to nurture a different paradigm based on the values of sustainability, justice, health, and community.

Recycle your trash…and, recycle your elected officials.
Recycling saves energy and reduces both waste and the pressure to harvest and mine new stuff. Unfortunately, many cities still don’t have adequate recycling systems in place. In that case you can usually find some recycling options in the phone book to start recycling while you’re pressuring your local government to support recycling city-wide. Also, many products – for example, most electronics - are designed not to be recycled or contain toxics so recycling is hazardous. In these cases, we need to lobby government to prohibit toxics in consumer products and to enact Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) laws, as is happening in Europe. EPR is a policy which holds producers responsible for the entire lifecycle of their products, so that electronics company who use toxics in their products, have to take them back. That is a great incentive for them to get the toxics out!

Buy Green, Buy Fair, Buy Local, Buy Used, and most importantly, Buy Less.
Shopping is not the solution to the environmental problems we currently face because the real changes we need just aren’t for sale in even the greenest shop. But, when we do shop, we should ensure our dollars support businesses that protect the environment and worker rights. Look beyond vague claims on packages like “all natural” to find hard facts. Is it organic? Is it free of super-toxic PVC plastic? When you can, buy local products from local stores, which keeps more of our hard earned money in the community. Buying used items keeps them out of the trash and avoids the upstream waste created during extraction and production. But, buying less may be the best option of all. Less pollution. Less Waste. Less time working to pay for the stuff. Sometimes, less really is more.

Say no to a huge expansion of incineration - write to Joan Ruddock MP

http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/waste/press_for_change/13841.html read full article and view sample letter to Joan Ruddock, MP - the minister responsbile for waste.

Help stop dozens of new incinerators, which will waste valuable resources and contribute to climate change.

Incinerator map
A new interactive map of the UK shows the location of current and proposed incinerator sites.

It shows 150 sites being considered, in order to build around 80 new facilities.
Incinerators contribute to climate change by:
Releasing large amounts of carbon dioxide.
Wasting energy that could be saved through recycling.

Misspent taxes
£2 billion of Government funding is helping councils to pay for many of these incinerators.
At the same time, the Government has cut funds for promoting recycling by a third.

Climate friendly solutions
Maximising recycling and composting rates would be much better for the climate than incineration.

We should deal with the left over waste by using more sustainable alternatives to landfill and incineration, such as mechanical biological treatment.

Please take action by asking the Minister responsible for waste - Joan Ruddock MP - to stop wasting taxpayer's money on subsidising incinerators and instead invest in green alternatives.

Veolia - a silent and deadly neighbour?

Today, Safe Waste in Shropshire members visited Chineham near Basingstoke. Chineham has the same kind of incinerator as is planned for Shrewsbury and which Veolia hopes will burn Shropshire's waste.

The residents we met described the incinerator as their 'silent and deadly neighbour'. Pictured here is the Chineham incinerator. The sheer size and ugliness of this plant in a rural setting is a real shock. Imagine what it might look like at the Battlefield site proposed for it.

The Chineham residents told us about the processes which had led up to their losing the battle against the incinerator. The 'done deal', the manipulated 'consultation', the railroading of the planning process and the assumption of compliance among both residents and elected representatives has left a legacy of bitterness and cynicism in an area of the country not noted for dissent.

It is time for Shropshire people to wake up and realise what is being done under their noses before it is too late and we, like the people of Chineham, find ourselves with a 'silent and deadly' neighbour.

Here is a reminder of the sort of company we are dealing with. Veolia is a global, multi-billion dollar mega-corporation which has not grown so rich on caring about people's health or well-being. They have many incarnations, of which Veolia ES Shropshire is just one of the latest. Look at one of their American cousins and what they are getting up to in Texas, USA:

http://www.ohiocitizen.org/campaigns/dayton_vx/dayton_vx.html

The Army's deadly VX waste is burning in Port Arthur Smokestacks at Veolia Incinerator Facility near Port Arthur, Texas. PORT ARTHUR, TX -- "Once again an impoverished Texas neighborhood, in this case in the town of Port Arthur, has become the disposal point for hazardous waste, only this time the waste is potentially so lethal that a drop the size of a pinhead can kill. A chemical-weapons facility in Indiana is destroying obsolete weapons containing VX nerve agent, producing caustic wastewater that the Army is shipping to Veolia Environmental Services for incineration. The Army has claimed the waste is no more dangerous than kitchen cleaners. But when environmental scientists began looking at the disposal process, they found scary scenarios. The 'neutralized' waste still contains some VX, and the incinerators might not destroy all of it. There are no monitors on the incinerator smokestacks to sound the alert if it isn’t eliminated. And VX components in the water could reconstitute in shipping tanks under certain conditions, endangering lives along the transportation route," Rusty Middleton, The Texas Observer.

AN INCINERATOR IN THEIR BACK-YARD

Alternative trip to Veolia’s 'flagship' incinerator

Safe Waste in Shropshire has organised a ‘fact-finding mission’ to meet residents in Chineham - home of Veolia's 'flagship' incinerator and to hear directly from them what life is really like with a Veolia incinerator towering over your neighbourhood.

Veolia Environmental Services, who will be applying to SCC at the end of 2008 for permission to build a 90,000 ton incinerator at Battlefield, Shrewsbury, has been taking elected representatives, journalists and residents on tours of the ‘flagship’ Chineham incinerator since 2007 as it is the same size as the one projected for Shrewsbury. There, they are given a tour of the incinerator, a free lunch and plenty of soft-soap about how clean the incinerator is. No mention is ever made of how small particulates are not monitored or the embarrassing leaks in 2003 when black smoke poured out of the chimney. Neither are visitors ever introduced to any local people. Our regular readers will remember Veolia's embarrassing over-reaction when we published a picture of the smoke issuing from the incinerator chimney on this site i.e. they accused us of lying when of course what we had reported was genuine!

The new breed of incinerators, branded 'Energy Recovery Facilities' (referring to the fact that they function as expensive power stations) are claimed to be much cleaner. They are not supposed to emit black smoke anymore. Incinerator salesmen never mention that the invisible, unmonitored, tiny particulates - PM1s and PM2.5s - are the ones that cause real health damage. What looks 'clean' can actually be deadly and the UK government at the moment is doing nothing to change this situation.

When Chris Tomblin, the Chair of Chineham Parish Council, told Safe Waste in Shropshire, ‘Having had one of the "first" new plants we can share a lot of the truth of living with one and it is also frustrating when people tour the Chineham plant and we, the local community, are never invited to meet and give our views’, the group decided that they would give Chineham residents the hearing Veolia denies them. The visit will be fully documented with photographs and recordings and we will share our findings when we get back!

Read more at:

http://safewasteshrewsbury.blogspot.com/2008/03/veolia-seeks-information.html

http://www.netpark-ltd.co.uk/bbac/Incidents.shtml#BBAC-Systems-crash-at-Chineham-Burner-causes-concern

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/07/1895&format=HTML&aged=1&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

ENERGY FROM WASTE NOT AS GREEN AS IT'S PAINTED

Waste-to-energy not climate friendly, research shows

Source URL: http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=11395

Mountains of rubbish: the Government is currently reviewing the UK's long-term waste strategy Waste companies' claims that incineration produces green energy are false, new research has found. Getting energy from burning waste in incinerators produces 33% more greenhouse gases than burning coal in power stations, according to research published by Friends of the Earth on Wednesday. Despite this, waste companies and Government alike promote it as a "green" way of dealing with rubbish.

FOE's waste campaigner Dr Michael Warhurst said: "The Government and waste industry must stop peddling the myth that waste incineration is green energy. Incinerators can generate electricity, but they produce more climate emissions than a gas-fired power station." The environmental group released the report entitled A changing climate for energy from waste as the consultation period on the Government's long-term waste strategy (see related story) comes to a close. While the strategy aims is to "reduce the impact of waste on climate change," it proposes an increase in the proportion of waste incinerated from 9% to around 27% by 2020. As we get better at recycling and the proportion of burned plastics decreases, fossil fuel-derived CO2 released from burning waste is likely to fall. But the report estimates that by 2020 incinerators will still be almost as polluting in CO2 terms as new coal-fired power stations, and 78% worse than gas-fired ones, taking changes to technology and recycling into account. "The Government must make it clear that they will not support the building of such polluting plants. Using these incinerators to produce energy will undermine Government attempts to tackle climate change. Ministers must back truly renewable energy sources instead," said Dr. Warhurst.

The report says the Government should invest in greener waste-to-energy methods instead, such as anaerobic digestion, a process by which methane is produced from kitchen and commercial food waste, and burnt as fuel to produce energy. The full report commissioned by FOE from Eunomia Consulting can be accessed here.

INCINERATOR FIRE - COULD THIS BE SHREWSBURY IN A FEW YEAR'S TIME?

News in from USA: a second fire at an 'energy recovery facility' (i.e. waste to energy incinerator). Note that the county officials 'still have full confidence in the operators'. That would be because there is no health risk, of course. For those of you still seeking 'a balanced view', perhaps you need to read this report very carefully, especially those of you with responsibility for the health of the people of Shropshire.

Inferno at the incinerator - Second fire at facility this year

June 12, 2008 - 7:50PM By Ryan Burr News Herald Writer

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1184417205/bclid1171892348/bctid1604920039?src=mrss

http://www.newsherald.com/news/bayou_4414___article.html/george_incinerator.html
BAYOU GEORGE — A large fire erupted on the tipping floor of the Bay County waste-to-energy incinerator on Thursday, the second blaze to break out there since late March.

County spokeswoman Valerie Lovett said a dump truck emptied trash that contained a small fire, and it quickly worsened once on the tipping floor, where garbage is deposited before it is sent up a conveyor belt to be burnt.

Twenty-three firefighters were called to the scene, the first at 10:40 a.m., and fire crews still were hosing down the flames into the evening Thursday. Lovett said she expected them to be at the site through Friday to ensure nothing reignites.

A damage estimate could not be immediately determined. The blaze, which produced a thick plume of black smoke because of tires in the garbage, scorched the inside of the tipping room, melting away some of its plastic walls. The facility's conveyer belt also caught fire, but that was extinguished with the aid of a sprinkler system in that area.

The administrative building, which is partially connected to the tipping floor, was not damaged. No employees or firefighters were injured, Lovett said. "Because of the design of the building, the fire is not expected to spread anywhere else," she said.

Mark Bowen, the county's chief of emergency services, said the strategy employed Thursday was no different from the handling other large fires.

David Creamer, owner of nearby Creamer Cabinets Inc. on Bay Line Drive off U.S. 231, suspected the county, which owns the incinerator, was putting too much garbage inside.

But Lovett said less garbage than normal was in the tipping area because of upcoming maintenance at the facility. The dearth of garbage could have been menace, Lovett said, because more air can aid the flames of a small fire.

Still confident
Despite the two recent fires, Lovett said the county had not lost confidence in the operator's ability. At the end of last year, Joe Tannehill Jr. and his father Joe Tannehill Sr., of Engen LLC, took over management of the business. The Tannehills were out of the country and not available for comment Thursday, but Lovett said county officials will be talking with them about ways to reduce risk.

The threat of fire sparking in an incinerator cannot be eliminated, Lovett added. "It's an issue that comes with operation of an incinerator." The first fire, on March 25, also occurred in the incinerator's tipping room but was smaller. It caused minimal internal damage, amounting to less than $6,000, Lovett said. Incinerator officials said in March that the fire was likely started by spontaneous combustion.

Dump truck fires are not uncommon and can occur simply by friction of charcoal or other combustible material as the garbage shifts around during travel. Lovett said the county is not planning to hold the dump truck driver or the driver's employer accountable for the damage.
Thursday's fire drew onlookers from several businesses, who avoided smoke because easterly winds were steering it away.

"It will be smoking for a few days probably. I'll dread coming to work tomorrow if that wind shifts and we have to brief that in," Creamer said. By late afternoon Thursday, Lovett said the smoke had almost entirely dissipated. "There is no health risk."
The tipping room still is usable, but operations at the incinerator will be shut down until the fire is out,