Saturday, April 22, 2006


Is it better to breathe in tyre fumes, or coal dust? Petcoke, or sand and clay?

In Rugby we have no choice - it is all compulsory!

And now we present: let's pretend air quality monitoring. RBC are to spend another £500,000, not apparently to monitor air, but to merely to "reassure local residents". "It was generally felt that any reduction in the Council's air quality monitoring programme would be criticised by sections of the community, and especially by specific campaigners. This would be likely to increase the concerns of local residents about air quality issues."

Well thank you RBC, but we do criticize, and Rugby residents are NOT convinced by your propaganda. It is not necessary for the "specific campaigners" to explain to the populace how they are being polluted - they can see it easily for themselves, everywhere they look. Seen a plume anywhere? Noticed a thick layer of dust? Smell anything? Seen a convoy of polluting orange lorries?

While RBC sniffs the air, Buffs can click here to find out more about particulate matter, and why RBC is misdirected to be shutting down all the PM2.5 monitors for the health-damaging smaller particles.

1 comment:

Lilian said...


Judge criticises Agency's withholding of air quality data, and now the Public have to pay £1 million to monitor air, because of the unlawful Agency actionS!

This cement plant has NO LAWFUL planning permission, (thanks WCC/RBC); nor IPC operating permit; nor IPPC permit. The EA, along with RBC, colluded to hide the applications; in the case of the IPC application they hid it completely, and in the case of the IPPC they "mislead and misinformed" the public telling them this was an application "only about tyre burning", and hid the actual IPPC application. They only gave out tyre burning related application, and NOT the IPPC application.

The Agency are very slow learners, and have a very thick skin and are carrying on like the KGB despite the High Court Judgement against them over the Rugby case. These leopards certainly cannot change their spots. As the Judge said, in the case of Edwards versus the Agency, as he criticised the way the Agency had deliberately and maliciously hidden the air quality assessment so that the public and the Rugby Cement Forum would not know how polluting the plant was to become:

Consultation, said the judge, should "... be on a reasonably informed basis on both sides and not some courtly charade concerned more with the appearance of discussion and interplay than real dialogue". That says it all! That is what this is about - how they can hide the truth, and how we can dig it out. The more we dig the more muck we unearth - and worms!

The Agency HID and MISLEAD everyone about the dispersion models, and about the low level sources and the fugitive emissions that are uncontrolled and uncontrollable - and that have NO LIMITS! That is why different parts of Rugby are covered almost daily in visible sand, grit, dust, chalk, clay, and adsorbed toxic pollutants. Not to mention the 24/7 covering which we cannot see.

Then they say "the plant is operating within its authorised limits", but NO LIMITS apply on any of it on startup, and shut down, and during malfunction and from places where they cannot, or do not, monitor, or measure, or even estimate, the damaging pollution. The Permit is unlawful, and is health-damaging.

WHO most does not want the air quality monitoring to reveal the pollution in Rugby? Defra, EA, RMC/Cemex, WCC or RBC? And the DTI, and HSE? All of these have a vested interest in HIDING EVEN MORE THE FACTS. The public are paying the majority of the costs, but Defra are paying part towards the monitors and so are RMC. DEFRA decide whether to accept the Air Quality Assessments from RBC, and they REFUSE to answer any questions and in particular about why the monitors have "not been operated in a standard way as per the NETCEN regulation and the Turnkey manufacturer's method." Now Defra are to be asked to fund (again) part of the monitoring programme in which they have a vested interest, as they are trying to defend the Agency which is part of their QUANGO. Defra joined in against Rugby people in the High Court, and in the Appeal.

These Authorities will stop at nothing to hide the TRUTH about what they have done in Rugby. They just keep on throwing more and more public money at it, in a desperate attempt to STOP THE TRUTH coming out.

Rugby in Plume only tell the TRUTH. The others have lied so much, and hidden so much, that they have tied themselves in knots. All the claims of unreasonable and unlawful behaviour against the above parties can be justified, and verified, and all the documentation can be provided.