Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> According to Wiki, "In March 2015 the World Health

> Organization's International Agency for Research

> on Cancer published a summary of its forthcoming

> monograph on glyphosate, and classified it as

> "probably carcinogenic in humans"


Read onto the next sentence, and you'll see that there is some dispute around this.


I'm not saying that glyphosate is wonderful stuff and we should all start bathing in it... but at the same time I think there's a bit of scaremongering going on, and evidence (on both sides) seems rather inconclusive.

  • 1 month later...

The sprayers seem to covering a lot of ground. I have never seen it been used this extensively before. I guess a problem is if it is used in this quantity in a paved urban environments, rain water will wash most of it off into the water ways. It doesn't break down very easily so will build up over the years. It has been linked to the bee population decline.


Chicago and Paris have stopped using it because of concerns. It is not agent orange but it is still nasty stuff.


Campaigners in Hackney are trying stop it being used there.


http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/apr/21/glyphosate-probably-carcinogenic-pesticide-why-cities-use-it

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So if we think this stuff isn't ideal - what is

> the alternative that we're proposing?



I think probably the alternatives would be too labour intensive and expensive, BUT what I was asking above was that a sign be put up in streets/places which are to be sprayed, maybe a week beforehand, warning residents that this will be happening and when.


Also, I know in Islington (where there was council encouragement to residents to plant up tree pits as part of Islington in Bloom) the people doing the spraying had a list of places including tree pits which they were asked not to spray.


This did depend on good communication between various council departments, not always a council strong point, but eventually this seemed to work quite well (after one or two very disgruntled residents got their carefully planted and tended tree pits trashed with weedkiller ..... )

Hi henryb,

That was a really ijntersting letter. Theb est bit for me:

"

So here is our proposed alternative: a technique called weed steaming, based on an old method of killing weeds with simple hot water. A London-based company called Weedingtech offers a weed steaming product called Foamstream, which uses no harmful chemicals and is already being used by water companies and councils. In London, the boroughs of Southwark and Kensington & Chelsea are using Foamstream in parks using the contractor Quadron Services.

"


I will ask the Director of the department about this and ask Cllr Rosie Shimell the Lib Dem opposition spoeksperson on Environment to explore this.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Seems a pretty dangerous position to me - apart from getting in the way of pedestrians trying to cross the road large vehicles heading south have to edge into the oncoming traffic lane to get past. I've got a normal-sized car and had to squeeze through a gap the other day.  
    • When a car is left damaged by the road-side it may be that the insurer is tasked with recovering the vehicle to assess it and (possibly) take it for repair. Only if it is in a dangerous position will the police recover it - which saves money for the tax-payer.  You may also have some recovery options with e.g. the AA (other organisations are available). Were the car to have been stolen or abandoned then it will take some time to sort this out, and again unless the vehicle is in a dangerous position the police won't be rushing to deal with that. Not sure who the 'they' are in this case.
    • I wouldn't like to speculate, Sue. Not my thing. Teddy Boy is your man on the ground for that sort of first-hand detail. It's six points for driving without insurance and six points for using a phone, so that's an automatic ban of at least six months. They're going to be practically uninsurable for a considerable period after that. So, nobody's hurt, a clearly crap driver is off the road for some time and the good burghers of SE22 get a lovely, shiny new post - probably paid for by the driver. Every cloud, and that. If only Franklins wasn't changing hands, Lordship Lane would be almost perfect.
    • Was the driver still with it when the police arrived?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...