Penguin68

as I understand it the waste is treated in different ways. Garden waste will continue to be composted, I believe, but over time kitchen waste will be anaerobically digested - this allows for the gasses (I think methane) to be collected and used for power. Things like fresh grass cuttings can also be anaerobically digested but woody cuttings etc. can't be so readily. The residue of anaerobically digested material can also be used as soil improvers. I do not know, however, what time scale Veolia is working to, to cut over waste treatment and separately treat their different sources of organic waste. This change in collection method had been implemented, I would guess, as a consequence of charging for garden waste collection. They have to force unstickered large bins out of the borough (and force kerb-side caddies in) to ensure that unpaid for garden waste isn't collected. Somebody not a cynic would argue, of course, that this is just giving folks a long lead time to learn the new ways of recycling, to be ready for the new methods of disposal when (and if) implemented for Southwark collections. I'm a cynic.

This links to Veolia's pages on their recycling services in London https://www.veolia.co.uk/london/ for those interested in what happens to our waste. This is the link to their Southwark service https://www.veolia.co.uk/southwark/

Christopher Miller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Scabies - played in a (great) Punk Band - The Damned.

Do people steal plants out of window boxes? Absolutely. Certain people will steal anything not locked down (and will bring bolt cutters and angle grinders for those, if the prize if right). They will also steal window boxes themselves! Sorry for your loss, of course.

If the fault lies in the local network (between you and an exchange) then it is BT Openreach and not BT Retail that has an issue - BT Openreach is obliged to act at arms length to the rest of BT Group. If it is network supplying a third party (another thread suggested a problem with Skye Broadband) then your point of complaint needs to be with your service provider who liaises with BT Openreach and not with BT as a company. The fault (if it impacts 500 lines) may be with the exchange equipment (your 'retail' provider looks after that). Do remember that this is not like a fault with electricity or water or gas supply - every customer has unique equipment which connects (through interconnect points) their 'lines' directly to dedicated equipment in an exchange. It's not just like repairing a leaking water or gas pipe, where one repair can then give back supply to everyone 'on route'. If a multi-pair cable is cut (which can happen) every pair within that cable has to be reconnected to the correct other end. Although clearly having no service is very frustrating, it's often not that simple to identify and then correct a problem. Intermittent electrical faults (which seems like what you are describing) are a complete pain to locate and clear.

And Asif Khan is an East Dulwich boy, born and brought up here.

https://www.petrolprices.com/news/councils-pocket-more-than-320m-pcn-fines-one-year/ 'Nuff said.... (Southwark is not the worst London offender - but clearly the motorist is the council milch cow de nos jours.)

'strong support from residents in the section south of East Dulwich Grove but north of Ashbourne Grove or Chesterfield Grove for it to be extended slightly.' And so the zone creeps on and on...

Dos anyone know why they are excluding these roads from the proposals? Because the people who lived in those roads (in their 'survey') were clear that they were not in favour of a CPZ. The apparat will of course hope that the parking pressure that will be put on them will force them to acquiesce 'down the line' and so eventually the pervasive stench of paid for parking on all our roads will be achieved. And then watch the annual fees hike!. If they cared about pollution, of course they would either exempt electric cars from their system, or significantly reduce their fees, but of course this is primarily about revenue generation (and always has been) and nothing about congestion and pollution. And of course a left-wing view that car ownership, in and of itself, is wicked, and should be stamped out. Without any attempts actually to increase or indeed stand against the diminution of local public transport services.

We can't start banning dogs from all green spaces because a few ignorant people are irresponsible. And I wouldn't want to do that, but Goose Green is so small (and such a valuable green plot just there) that maybe banning dogs on the Green itself might help. Or fining anyone allowing their dog to soil the Green at all (as the idea of a whole family, with dog, picnicking is attractive). The green space is so limited around there that allowing it to be just another dog toilet (like the Rye, and Dulwich Park etc. etc.) may be becoming too much.

Goose Green is a (very small) amenity used by many people, and in particular people with children. Dog poo (whether deposited by dogs in the care of their owners or in the care of commercial dog walkers (however well qualified to look after dogs)) is unacceptable if not immediately collected and disposed of appropriately. If those walking dogs cannot or will not collect their dog's poo (even if it's only a small minority of those walking dogs) they should reasonably expect that their use of Goose Green should be curtailed. I'm sorry, I have no agenda to 'ban' dogs as such, but if those taking responsibility for dogs don't act responsibly, then I don't see why the health and enjoyment of others not choosing to cover the amenity with sh1t doesn't deserve a great deal more respect. If those walking dogs don't want to be banned then they should (all) act as responsible citizens - and huge credit to those who tidy-up after their less responsible peers. But they shouldn't have to.

Academic papers (see two attached) suggest that the inclusion of fats (including solids) in anaerobic digestion (the go-to method for disposal of kitchen waste, though not yet adopted by Veolia) is hugely beneficial to the process. http://iicbe.org/upload/9428C0315120.pdf https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4ffe/4817756121ddf4a2539e5656c638ff503ac9.pdf You should avoid oils in domestic compost however (so if you compost kitchen waste, don't include oils and fats). Veolia composts organic waste, but it doesn't like oils, liquids and fats https://www.veolia.co.uk/westberkshire/waste-services/food-and-green-waste-collection-service/what-can-be-recycled-food-waste-collection

Hell's Park Attendants?

Part of the problem is that Veolia has been changing all the routes (and changing the teams on the routes) - so that bin men who knew the area and where bins were meant to go are now working in different areas without that knowledge. Change normally p**s people off, so the bin men now in your area don't any longer really care, they just want to get the job over, as (because it's new to them) it appears to take longer. If you're familiar with a route/ area you know what to expect etc. The route changes have been caused by the removal of the large bins so that more of the work is decanting small caddies into a large bin being hauled by a front man - as it is large bins which get tipped into the lorries, not small ones. For those who just now put waste straight into the caddies (no liners) this is a much nastier job for the bin men, particularly in hot weather. Just imagine the joy when the (generally efficient) Veolia back-office is replaced by council staff (as is now official Labour policy) - and we all know how good these are at delivering value and efficiency - we just have this exercise for instance to go by.

With the new rules residents are supposed to place their bins on the edge of the property in time for pick up This is, of course, a ridiculous requirement - it assumes that everyone has a 'garden' frontage without walls - someone with a normal frontage with a gate into the street would block access by leaving up to 3 bins (two large, one small) in the gateway (but still inside their property; someone without a garden frontage would not be able to place their bins for collection elsewhere than in the street. Once placed 'on the edge of the property' but outside your curtilage this is no longer 'within the boundary of the property'. And for anyone whose property fronts directly onto the street, without a 'front garden' of whatever size it would be entirely impossible to meet the council's requirements. Only those with wide openings from their front garden into the street would be able to place their bins for collection on the edge of the property but still within it, and still be able to access their own front doors 'through' the bins. Maybe the council and their officers are looking for another fines bonanza!

There is now an electronic hailing ap for black cabs as well as Ubers. But of course you pay black cab prices. Most black cabs (all?) now have card payment options in-cab - that at least makes them more user friendly than when cash was the only option. And less of a muggers target. It is still very convenient to be able to get a cab either on-street or from a rank without having to book, at times; black cabs (and their drivers, but there is always John Worboys to remember) are generally better regulated than mini-cabs (which is what Ubers are). And 'the Knowledge' is of real value when there are street disruptions which sat nav aps can't pick-up on - even Waze isn't that sensitive to sudden road closures. As a customer there is room for both, but economically I'm not so sure.

They actually shortened the dotted area when they last repainted for reasons that are rather difficult to ascertain. Revenue generation? - these fines don't just hand themselves out... I'm on record elsewhere as suggesting our council(ors) are not to be trusted.

It's worth noting two things - the dotted lines probably start too late (ideally at least another bus-length or two of cross-over would be safer) and that section of bus lane (to Denmark Hill) would be very suited for morning rush-hour only (7am - 10am) restrictions - at most other times (except when there are road works) traffic flow is actually pretty good, and buses would not get held up by non bus traffic.

I suggested that maybe he could patrol Goose Green in the afternoons during the summer when more people/children are using the park, If professional dog walkers are the issue, as suggested above, then patrolling when they are about (often in my experience of other green areas in ED in the mid mornings) might be more effective. I'd guess they were more likely to ignore the common decencies of picking up poo when fewer people were about. The issue is more picking up the poo in the first place, not warning those with children to avoid it. Patrolling when they can be seen by the Goose Green using public might be good for their profile, but less likely to catch the miscreants, in my view.

But for me I still generally prefer a driver who can improvise when needed (and use the bus lanes). That's certainly true for Central London, where any unexpected road blockage can entirely stump Sat Nav dependent Uber drivers but Black Cabbies do know the alternative routes to get round blocks. If you want to get to a main line station in Central London, Black Cabs are the go-to choice (even where they are more expensive). But around us in Dulwich even if the Black Cabbie has done the local knowledge they're still not that much more savvy than Ubers with the right Sat Nav. And if you're going from, e.g. Kings Cross to Dulwich then the ?15 - ?20 (often) difference in fares (if the Black Cab will even go Sarf) is a deal breaker in my view.

Driver started doing a very odd route That can be very common with Ubers - they use Waze quite a lot, which tracks routes with the least congestion - which are often longer (in miles) and more circuitous but generally quicker in lapsed time to get to your destination. Of course, as most Uber drivers don't know where they are going (relying on Sat Nav) they are not making sneaky diversions to bump up the fare. The Knowledge has its good, and bad, points!

Mine arrived yesterday - Underhill

That's the theory but unfortunately, in my experience, this often doesn't work as expected. The only card cloning I've had has been picked up quickly (even before the bank paid out to the merchant) - and the algorithms are getting better, but of course different issuers use different security algorithms and staff their security centres differently - some are 24 hour - some use their AI IT to immediately block transactions and then only review the machine decision during 'office' hours. It would be possible (in the case you quoted) that an authorised user (spouse?) was driving your car in London whilst you were travelling in Bangkok on business - in which case blocking either transaction would have been more than an annoyance. I've had something similar - luckily my card issuer put a hold on the transactions (not the card) until they could clarify that the transactions were kosher or not. Sometimes banks can put a temporary block on a card and then clear it if transactions are seen as 'correct' - but some issuer's processes require a complete card re-issue once a perceived problem has arisen. It's always a good idea to carry a couple of cards in case that happens to the one you're using.

We had two Uber drivers (pick-up in East Dulwich), in quick succession, refuse trips to Central London (the third, who did take us, told me that traffic conditions there were bad, which they were). As they (Uber drivers) now no longer get told during the booking process where the trip is to, they had to refuse to our faces rather than just not accepting the offer of a fare on the ap. Both gave the excuse that they couldn't go into Central London because of the ULEZ (and one was a Prius!). In fact, Uber requires that the cars used are 'modern' which means that even the diesel ones would probably be ULEZ compliant, and certainly the petrol and hybrid ones! I complained to Uber and got a refund (as if they turn down a trip once they've arrived to the pick-up that can be flagged, and charged, as a customer no-show!). So, it's not just black cabs, although they do have a bad (and earned) reputation when it comes to Sarf of the River.

To answer the question - banks don't 'see' the act of cloning (or it wouldn't work), but their security algorithms pick up unusual usage activity, which a cloned card would demonstrate (i.e. close to simultaneous transactions geographically separated, unusual purchases etc. etc.)