pinkladybird

I've attached the New Scientist article about defra-approved wood burners copied as a document (couldn't link as you need to sign in to read it).

Jaywalker:maybe the marketing spiel says defra-approved stoves are efficient - but they have actually been tested and found to be highly polluting (New Scientist): 'Even modern stoves described as ?low emission? are highly polluting. And in an echo of the diesel car emissions scandal, measurements during actual use in homes show that the stoves produce more pollution than lab tests suggest. In the ?smokeless? fumes coming from the chimney of a house with a modern ?eco-friendly? wood burner, K?re Press-Kristensen of the Danish Ecological Council has measured 500,000 microscopic particles per cubic centimetre. The same equipment finds fewer than 1000 particles per cm3 in the exhaust fumes of a modern truck. The wood stove was certified as meeting Nordic Swan Ecolabel emission standards, which are stricter than the ones stoves in the UK have to meet.' Yes sure london's main problem comes from diesel and that will take some time to sort out. But 50% of the last pollution episode was attributed to wood burning!

If it's legal then you shouldn't be smelling any smoke - that's the point of the clean air act. Only smokeless coal in an open fire or a DEFRA-approved stove with seasoned wood which shouldn't give any visible smoke or smell. Look up and see if it's coming from a chimney. It is an offence to emit smoke from any chimney. I saw plumes of smoke coming from a chimney opposite me the other day and could smell woodsmoke and it was hurting my throat - so I knocked on the door and told the owner. She didn't seem to realise it was illegal and said she would stop and I haven't seen the smoke again :) Council officers are legally obliged to act and serve notice if they find out and the homeowner risks a 1000 pound fine.

Yes, public information on this is really sparse: Open Fire: NO WOOD Only smokeless coal (this still produces some smoke but less than normal coal) Log Burning Stove: Banned in London unless DEFRA approved. Marketing terms such as "clean burn", "clean heat" and "low emission appliance" are used by some appliance manufacturers but DO NOT mean that they are DEFRA-approved. This link give DEFRA-approved models: https://smokecontrol.defra.gov.uk/appliances.php?country=england Only seasoned wood with a moisture content below 20% should be burnt in an exempt appliance. Note that even with an exempt appliance and even more without, the stoves release particles into the house - not great, especially if you have kids. I think a lot of people just don't realise the harmful effects (I never) - and would stop if they knew. My sister had an open fire and stopped as soon as I told her. The effects aren't just for the vulnerable - all of us are at risk... I think there should be a public information campaign. Links below list what is and isn't allowed. https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/environment/air-quality/smoke-control https://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/environment/air-quality-and-pollution/air-quality/guidance-on-wood-burning-stoves/

I bought an air pollution (particulates pm2.5) monitor and kind of wish I never... I live on a quiet residential Dulwich road, but I have learnt NOT to open the windows! Particulates are linked to respiratory issues, cardiovascular (strokes, heart attacks), dementia, cancer - The WHO pm2.5 threshold for short-term harm is 25 ug/m3 daily average (10 ug/m3 annual average for long-term harm). Last night and today London's levels peaked at 100. It has been like this on and off all winter. Two weeks ago we got a warning when it was 100. It has been found that a large portion was due to people's wood burners and open fires. I think this is quite an issue in Dulwich and we could significantly improve our air - literally overnight if people just stopped burning wood. It's illegal to burn wood. It's incredibly polluting - even more than cars (although most of Londons air pollution is from cars). Even the Defra-approved burners give off significant fumes and have been found to fail tests (see links below). 'Few people who install wood stoves are likely to understand that a single log-burning stove permitted in smokeless zones emits more PM2.5 per year than 1,000 petrol cars..' (from BMJ journal below). The air this morning - pm2.5 - peaked at 100 (london highest) and has been around 40-50ish in my house. That grey outside - well I think it's smog. It's cold and people are lighting up their stoves : ( There was recently a good new scientist article - have attached it as a doc as you have to sign in to see it. British Medical Association article link below: http://www.bmj.com/content/350/bmj.h2757/rr-1 https://www.newscientist.com/article/2119595-wood-burners-london-air-pollution-is-just-tip-of-the-iceberg/

Hi James, Thanks for your reply. Sorry I think my post got a bit long-winded and unclear. I'm not asking that Southwark council ban glyphosate, just that they don't spray it on our pavements. The points I was trying to make were: - 'Both products contain glyphosate as an active ingredient but have been shown not to be carcinogenic in tests.' How can Southwark council say this considering the recent WHO announcement? - As for there being no practical alternatives - then how do other European cities such as Paris and Amsterdam manage? With regards to water contamination - as far as I know UK water boards don't test for glyphosate.

'Both products contain glyphosate as an active ingredient but have been shown not to be carcinogenic in tests.' Are they not going to be pulled up on this considering the recent WHO announcement which they should be aware of? Long term effects are incredibly difficult to determine, nevertheless there seems to be an awful lot of research linking glyphosate with various disorders (endocrine disruption, DNA mutation)- not just cancer. I saw a guy spraying North Cross Rd today. There were hardly any weeds on the road as it was. But for every tiny little weed a good square metre of pavement was sprayed. It would have been difficult to be more precise as the spray came out 'watering can-like' from waist level. There was a breeze, and cake/food stalls.... The guy seemed pretty blase`. I mentioned the WHO announcement and his reply was 'that's what they say, but...' he never finished and I was left wondering 'but what?'. He wasn't wearing a mask. As for alternatives, countries and cities around the world have banned glyphosate - including Holland and Paris. How do they manage? I've just been to Paris and it did seem a bit weedier than London but people seem to accept it. Could Southwark council not communicate with Paris/Dutch councils and find out what they do? My road, Crystal Palace Road, is due to be sprayed soon but if you look you will see there are hardly any weeds. I think to spray at this point is completely unnecessary, as it was to spray North Cross Rd. And I think most people could accept a few more weeds (as they seem to in other parts of Europe) especially if they were aware of the risks in getting rid of them. Glyphsate's breakdown time is not known, but is known to be far longer on hard sufaces. Monsanto lost a court case in France for false advertising claims that glyphosate is biodegradable and leaves the soil clean. www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8308903.stm. This means that the glyphosate may ultimately end up in our drinking water via the gutter (this is the reason it is banned from Denmark's paved surfaces). Water treatment plants do not remove this. I have a feeling that eventually glyphosate will be banned for UK council usage, especially as evidence accumulates, but why wait just for the sake of a few weeds. www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/apr/21/glyphosate-probably-carcinogenic-pesticide-why-cities-use-it

I have reposted. I am guessing that my posts were deleted because I didn't include a trade address. That is because I do not have a business - I'm just an individual and didn't want to put my personal address. This time I mentioned the rough area where I live - hopefully that is Ok. Fingers crossed.

Hi, I put up a post yesterday but it was deleted. I read through the terms of use but couldn't work out what was wrong, so thought maybe it was an accident and I posted it again today and again it was deleted. I'm really happy to comply with the rules and don't want to do anything wrong - but I'm not really sure what it is that I am doing. I did get a private message from someone saying 'This price is very slow its not is good for all cleaners.' I wonder if this person reported me. I am charging a low price because I am just starting out and need to build up references/experience - I wasn't aware of any rules against this. Please can someone enlighten me. My post is below: Title - Cleaner available - ?7.50 p/h Hi, I'm available for cleaning work and odd jobs in the Dulwich area. I'm a mature student, conscientious with good attention to detail, and come with plenty of elbow grease! In addition to cleaning I can carry out other tasks including: Shopping Cooking Gardening - digging, weeding etc... Typing and copy editing (50 wpm) Please message me or give me a call if interested - Tammy xxxxxx xxxx