Please take action STOP Water Fluoridation in Cumbria

 

Flouride.jpgth.jpg

The following is a guest blog and request for action from Flouride Free Cumbria campaigner Dianne Standen.

In May 2017 there will be County Council Elections throughout Cumbria. It is Cumbria County Council and Councillors who currently authorise and finance water fluoridation.
At the moment fluoride is only added to drinking water in West Cumbria (!) but as the Cabinet supports water fluoridation this could be introduced anywhere in Cumbria. 
Please send and preferably adapt and personalise the following letter to your COUNTY COUNCILLOR and make it clear that their position on water fluoridation will influence how you vote in the May County elections.Your County Councillor details will be easily found on www.writetothem.com just enter your postcode. If you don’t want to send through that site just find the name and put a dot between  the first names and surname  i.e. ..stewart.young then @cumbria.gov.uk.
Stewart.young@cumbria.gov.uk
Please copy to your MP and ian.stewart@cumbria.gov.uk also Stewart Young who leads CCC. If we all make it clear to our Councillors that we do care about this issue then we may have a chance of seeing it finish in 2017…Please send any replies to Dianne.standen@virgin.net as the Councillors  Position will be recorded on our website so others can see at a glance.   There is a sample letter below but it is always best to try and write in your own words.Dear Councillor,

On 15th December last Cumbria County Council Cabinet decided not to review the issue of water fluoridation until the completion of the current Catfish research project in 2021.
They also declined to offer any advice about reducing potentially health damaging levels of fluoride to vulnerable members of the West Cumbrian community such as 
Infants receiving high levels through milk formula made up with fluoridated water and people using high fluoride anti depressant medication.
They refused to consider following the lead of Eire,NZ and the USA ,the major fluoridating countries, in reducing the target level of fluoride in drinking water from 1mg/ml to 0.7mg/ml in order to avoid excessive intake and accumulation of fluoride . 
They ignored Bedford Councils recent action in rejecting water fluoridation after their Health Scrutiny Committee advised the precautionary principle and safety should prevail. I would like you to know that I consider all of the above to be a failure in public health responsibility and as you are my Councillor I would like to know your position on water fluoridation as it will influence how I vote in the May elections. 
Looking forward to hearing from you. 
Name and address.
 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
More Info:
Cumbrians Against Flouride have been trying for two years to get CCC to take some responsibility for water fluoridation and address the safety and public health issues.
Cumbria County Councillor Ian Stewart holds  the portfolio for public health .
Councillor Stewart recently misled the Cabinet into believing that Bedford council had not reversed their position on water fluoridation.
The accurate position was that like West Cumbria, Bedford had a longstanding water fluoridation scheme that had ceased whilst renovation work was undertaken on the corroded dosing unit.
Local opposition resulted in it going to Bedford’s Health Scrutiny Committee and after two years they advocated the precautionary principle due to lack of quality evidence to support its effectiveness and safety.
In contrast here in Cumbria our County Council will not pass it to Scrutiny.
The only way we will ensure pressure for change is if  Cumbrians express their opposition to being dosed with flouride through their water.

Flouride.jpg

Featured Image -- 9906

This week the issue is not Trump. It is ourselves.

OffGuardian

by John Pilger

161109031839-donald-trump-november-9-2016-new-york-exlarge-169

On the day President Trump is inaugurated, thousands of writers in the United States will express their indignation. “In order for us to heal and move forward…”, say Writers Resist, “we wish to bypass direct political discourse, in favour of an inspired focus on the future, and how we, as writers, can be a unifying force for the protection of democracy.”

And: “We urge local organizers and speakers to avoid using the names of politicians or adopting ‘anti’ language as the focus for their Writers Resist event. It’s important to ensure that nonprofit organizations, which are prohibited from political campaigning, will feel confident participating in and sponsoring these events.”

Thus, real protest is to be avoided, for it is not tax exempt.

Compare such drivel with the declarations of the Congress of American Writers, held at Carnegie Hall, New York, in 1935, and again two years later…

View original post 2,066 more words

#Stop Moorside Letter to Jeremy Corbyn, Labour Leader

Dear Jeremy Corbyn, Leader of the Labour Party,

We are a volunteer group in Cumbria made up from all walks of life from scientists, tourist trade, doctors, nurses, teachers, and nuclear workers.

We oppose the planned Moorside nuclear development in Cumbria and feel that you may be underestimating the strength of feeling against plans for the ‘biggest nuclear development in Europe’ on 1,500 acres of greenfields and floodplain next to Sellafield.

When you appeared on the Andrew Marr show you missed the chance to condemn the project with the painfully equivocal response: “I want to see a mix, I want to see a greater emphasis in the long-term on renewables in the way Germany and other countries have done but we do have nuclear power stations, we do have a nuclear base at the moment and that will continue for a long time.”

So I would like to draw to your attention that the North West Evening Mail is running a poll on the issue. Unlike the official government and industry consultations this poll offers the option to say NO and 85% of the 2,321 people voting so far have done just that.

There is also an ongoing 38 Degrees petition to: “Stop Moorside the ‘biggest nuclear development in Europe’.” Despite the virtual media block on the resistance to Moorside (all media attention has been on the pylon route) this poll to Stop Moorside has attracted 11,769 signatures and rising.

‘Weaker containment, less redundancy in safety systems, fewer safety features’

Campaigners have raised funds to commission reports independent of government and industry. A report by the Edinburgh Energy and Environment Consultancy makes shocking reading. Construction has so far commenced on ten AP1000s, six in the US and four in China, and another three are scheduled to begin soon.

Of these two of the ten have been suspended, presumed abandoned, and the other eight are all running several years late and hugely over cost. Not a single one has ever been completed.

But the EEEC report highlights a completely separate problem: the design is intrinsically unsafe.

A design objective of the AP1000 was also to be less expensive than other designs, by using less equipment than competing designs. The design decreases the number of components, including pipes, wires, and valves. The AP1000 has: fewer safety-related valves, fewer pumps, less safety-related piping, less control cable, and less seismic building volume.

Westinghouse claims that this enhances safety because there are fewer active components to go wrong. In contrast the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) says that “the Westinghouse AP1000 has a weaker containment, less redundancy in safety systems, and fewer safety features than current reactors.”

There is a great deal of uncertainty about how these passive approaches would actually work in practice, and since, like the EPR reactor proposed for Hinkley Point C, there are no operating AP1000s anywhere in the world, there is no operating experience to draw from.

‘Pinhole containment flaws’

Nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen, of US-based Fairewinds Associates, has repeatedly warned that the AP1000 design suffers from a design flaw which makes it vulnerable to a very large release of radioactivity following an accident if there were just a small failure in the steel containment vessel.

In that event gases released from the reactor would be sucked through existing ‘pinhole’ containment flaws in the AP1000 Shield Building due to the ‘chimney effect’, potentially leading to the rapid venting huge amounts of radioactivity to the environment.

Cumbria already has the intolerable burden of Sellafield. Adding to that burden with Moorside would be genocidal, the school gates at Beckermet would be just 700 metres from the “biggest nuclear development in Europe” which would be next to Sellafield already the biggest and most dangerous nuclear site in Europe.

Please, please, set aside the siren voices that are working hard to convince you that outright, principled opposition to the Moorside nuclear complex would be a vote-loser in the forthcoming by-election.

Instead listen to the voices of resistance – which include many Labour voters previously encouraged by your rational, well-informed scepticism of the nuclear industry and its taxpayer-funded spin doctors.

All our local knowledge is consistently informing us that the Moorside monstrosity is widely opposed across the community, and that the pro-nuclear brigade represent a small if highly vocal minority. Your firm and outspoken opposition to the project would galvanise and inspire nuclear opponents, and give them a compelling reason to vote Labour!
Yours sincerely,

Marianne Birkby, Radiation Free Lakeland.

 

 

Poll Courtesy of Jeremy Corbyn’s Appearance on the Andrew Marr Show

should-cumbria-be-home-to-a-new-nuclear-power-station

Evening Mail Poll (screenshot 15th January 8.25pm) – Please VOTE NO

You may have seen Jeremy Corbyn talking about “Moorfield” on the Andrew Marr show 56 mins in. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08bmyl4/the-andrew-marr-show-15012017

He doesn’t sound wildly enthusiastic  and refuses to endorse the plan but on the other hand doesn’t say it’s a diabolic idea which is what he SHOULD be saying to protect the workforce at Sellafield, the people of Copeland …and further afield.

Jeremy Corbyn’s home in North London is after all a mere 245 miles from Moorside as the radioactive cloud flies.

We are all under threat from Moorside. … The lack of attention to detail to the name suggests that he hasn’t been paying attention to just how nasty this diabolic plan is!! #StopMoorside

The Evening Mail has an online poll which unlike the actual government and industry consultations allows for a NO.

Please vote – please send a message to Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour party and the government that we do not want three more nuclear power stations in Cumbria. Expensive, dangerous, nuclear-bomb producing, cancerous even when running normally, a melt-down every ten years… No Thanks.. The online poll is here http://www.nwemail.co.uk/news/millom/Row-breaks-out-over-Labours-position-on-proposed-west-Cumbria-nuclear-plant-c4dc6fa7-c5aa-4608-b3b1-bbed6fe165d3-ds

Thinking About the Energy Fuelling the Food We Eat.

is-your-dinner-creating-nuclear-waste

The Lancaster Guardian had a gem of an article entitled “Thinking About the Energy Fuelling the Food We Eat” (12/1/17)

The hidden ingredient . . . .

However much care we take with the ingredients for our favourite dishes – there is one ingredient we probably don’t think about very much – and that’s the power we use to cook the food. Even brewing up tea – whatever we do that uses electricity – might well be including some ingredients we hadn’t thought about – like increasing nuclear waste dumps, or piling loads more CO2 in the atmosphere.

If our household supply is with a regular electricity supplier then it is likely to be generated by coal fired power stations or else nuclear ones. So it may well be that even the most carefully selected food is creating nuclear waste just by the way it is cooked.

Sam from Skerton has been looking into all this and has found that there is now a really simple way to change over our household electricity to a green renewables provider. http://www.greenelectricity.org is a comparison site listing all the possible renewable suppliers for the area. It is really easy to compare the costs and to click to change your household supply to renewables. Green electricity comes from the renewable sources of wind, rivers, waves and sun.

A few years ago green energy often cost more than the regular suppliers. As more and more people change over to renewables and more and more companies offer 100% nuclear free electricity the costs are coming down. You can see for yourself by using the comparison website.

It could be a good new years resolution to sit down with a brew and check out the comparisons and make the change – and tell your friends that you are now clean and green.   Those of us who cook with gas can change too, since most of the renewables providers also supply gas.   While the gas coming along the pipes is clearly a fossil fuel – if we buy it from a renewables supplier then that company is already investing in alternatives.

Sam says – ‘It seems that changing to renewables and away from nuclear/coal is something that really interests a lot of people.   There seems to be an increasing public concern about the dangers of nuclear and coal.

It’s never been easier to switch to renewables – so your favourite meals don’t need to increase CO2 or the nuclear waste dumps.’

Save

3rd Installment of the Springfields Archive. “Something is Wrong” The River Ribble Birthing the Nuclear Nightmare

Radiation Free Lakeland have been given access to files relating to Springfields Nuclear Fuel plant near Preston.  Shining a spotlight on Springfields is more important than ever with the Toshiba Westinghouse operation gearing up to produce “high burn” nuclear fuel for the much hyped “nuclear renaissance.”   Have we so sold our souls to the nuclear industry’s sweet lies that we no longer care to look at the radioactive waste going into the river Ribble, Clifton Marsh landfill, the Irish Sea, the air and our DNA?  This is from 1991 – nothing has changed apart from the accelerating and ever more entrenched nuclear juggernaught coming our way and the disbanding of Radmil the county council’s independent radiation monitors.  This article appears online for the first time…..

springfields-radioactive-waste-lancashire-evening-post-nov-22nd-1991

Lancashire Evening Post

 

November 22nd 1991

 

‘Natural’ radiation ruled out

 

A suggestion that radiation contamination in the Ribble could be due to sources other than the Springfields factory at Salwick has been refuted by Preston environment health director Tom Meredith.

 

At Preston Counicl’s environmental health committee meeting Counc Geog Haines said members needed to establish wheter some of the pollution came from natural sources such as granite or was washed down from Sellafield.

 

Mr Meredith said the Radmil monitoring organisation, the county council’s nuclear watchdog, had tested the Ribble and there was no radiation along it from granite. The elements wihc formed the source of the Ribble pollution could only have come from Springfields.

 

Referring to the Friends of the Earth report which sparked off the uproar over Ribble contamination, he said the group had done a “snapshot” sample in May and found levels unusually high.

 

The picture changed dramatically after May but the group had taken that one finding as an annual average.

 

It had also adopted its own standards without explaining the basis for them. Radmil’s findings were based on National Radiology Board standards and he was satisfied that the risk to health was minimal.

 

He added that the radioactive elements had a life of about 24 days and BNFL monitored in a way specified by the Government’s Directorate of Pollution.

 

But Coun Ron Ball said : “Something is wrong somewhere and we want it put right for the health of the people of Preston.”

 

Coun Mark Buckley was also unhappy with the situation. He criticised the level of monitoring done by BNFL and said he would not trust the company.

 

“Friends of the Earth is an organised campaigning group and BNFL has a position to defend. We are in the middle and have nothing to gain from antagonising either but we want to establish the facts.”

 

Chairman Coun Jacky Nagy said she was not satisfied that the standards laid down were adequate and at her request the committee called for an urgent top-level meeting to discuss the whole question of discharges from Springfields and the level of contamination in the river.

 

Councillors will be asking the county council. BNFL, health authorities and the National Rivers Authority to meet them to thrash out the problem.

A PLANT TOLD ‘PUT SAFETY BEFORE BUSINESS’

 

Lancashire County Council is to seek assurances that commercial considerations are not preventing lower radioactive discharges into the River Ribble.

 

Council leader Coun Louise Ellman said emissions of radioactive waste from British Nuclear Fuels’ Springfields plant must be the lowest possible.

 

She also called on BNFL not to pump increased amounts of radioactive waste into the Ribble.

 

Coun Ellman said today: “My concern is that we should always have the lowest possible radioactive releases. Arguments like the one BNFL is using, saying that the levels are below nationally accepted standards might well be true. But we should be seeking levels as low as reasonably achievable.”

 

REDUCE

 

“The thing I am most concerned about is the allegation from Friends of the Earth that BNFL has the technology to achieve lower and less damaging releases but that they are not doing it for commercial reasons. I think the key point is that if the technology is available to reduce the discharges then it should be used. If there are commercial reasons why that technology is not being used then the public should be told.”

 

The council has ordered a specific study by Radmil – the authorities radiation watchdog – to be presented to the next policy and resources committee on November 28th.

 

The report will make special reference to the Penwortham area near Preston highlighted in the Friends of the Earths report.

Nuclear Madness by Teresa May #StopMoorside

Hansard, 11 January 2017
Prime Minister’s Questions
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2017-01-11/debates/4139811D-0756-4C58-827D-E00D1CCD970E/Engagements

· Mark Menzies (Fylde) (Con)

Q3. Westinghouse’s Springfields site in my constituency employs more than 1,200 people in highly skilled jobs manufacturing nuclear fuel, which generates 15% of the UK’s electricity. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the nuclear industry is of crucial importance to the north-west economy? Will she continue to support the construction of a new generation of nuclear power stations to guarantee jobs in the region? [908082]

· The Prime Minister

I certainly agree with my hon. Friend that new nuclear does have a crucial role to play in securing our future energy needs, especially as we are looking to move to a low-carbon society. The industrial strategy that the Government will be setting out will have a strong emphasis on the role of regions in supporting economic growth and ensuring that the economy works for everyone. Like him, I very much welcome the proposals from NuGen and Toshiba to develop a new nuclear power station at Moorside in Cumbria. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy continues to work closely with NuGen and other developers as they bring their proposals forward.

Nuclear Exit Continues

*Finnish retailer Kesko allowed to exit nuclear project*

http://www.reuters.com/article/finland-nuclear-kesko-idUSL5N1F01OO

Tue Jan 10, 2017 | 4:38am EST

HELSINKI Jan 10 Finnish retailer Kesko Oyj is allowed to walk away from the
Fennovoima nuclear project, an arbitration court ruled on Tuesday.

Kesko, which owned about 2 percent of Fennovoima at the time, said in 2014
it wanted out of the project, but Fennovoima’s Finnish owners said Kesko
had committed to further financing for the 6-7 billion euro ($6.4-7.4
billion) plant.

Finland’s court of arbitration dismissed that claim on Tuesday.

“This is the end of the case. We are happy with the decision,” Kesko
spokesman Lauri Peltola said.

Fennovoima declined to comment and its Finnish owners’ consortium,
Voimaosakeyhtio SF, was not available for immediate comment.

The project has seen several of its original investors opt out, including
Germany’s E.ON.

Russian state-owned nuclear company Rosatom agreed in 2013 to take a large
stake in the project, and to supply the reactors

Facing concerns about an increase in Russia’s influence on Finland’s energy
sector, however, the Finnish government then set a requirement for 60
percent local ownership in the project.

That threshold seemed out of reach and the project was close to collapse in
2015 before Finnish utility Fortum signed up.

Prior to the arbitration ruling, the project was 66-percent owned by
Voimaosakeyhtio SF, which includes Finnish utilities and industrial
companies, while Rosatom held 34 percent, Fennovoima’s website showed.

The reactor is due to come on stream in 2024.

($1 = 0.9427 euros) (Reporting by Jussi Rosendahl; editing by Jason Neely)

*Finnish ministry calls for continued talks on joint disposal*

16 December 2016

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-Finnish-ministry-calls-for-continued-talks-on-joint-disposal-1612164.html

Finnish ministry calls for continued talks on joint disposal
<http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-Finnish-ministry-calls-for-continued-talks-on-joint-disposal-1612164.html&gt;

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org

Fennovoima’s environmental impact assessment (EIA) program for its own used
nuclear fuel disposal facility is “comprehensive” and meets legal
requirements, Finland’s Ministry of Employment and the Economy has said.
However, the ministry expects Fennovoima to continue cooperation with the
licensees of the Onkalo repository project at Olkiluoto.

*Fennovoima’s environmental impact assessment (EIA) program for its own
used nuclear fuel disposal facility is “comprehensive” and meets legal
requirements, Finland’s Ministry of Employment and the Economy has said.
However, the ministry expects Fennovoima to continue cooperation with the
licensees of the Onkalo repository project at Olkiluoto.*

Moorside – a Diabolic Plan – Come on …RESIST

Recently I was asked for maps of the Moorside site – here a satellite map indicates the overall view.  From Sellafield the Moorside site would stretch to Beckermet , Braystones and Calderbridge and include the flood plain of the River Ehen.  The near proximity to the jewel in the crown of the Lake District- Wastwater can be seen here.  As you can see from the map this is a greenfield site with many special areas of wildlife and cultural protection – those protections are being overridden to accommodate this “Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project.”

Those spending huge energy and finances on opposing the pylons are in the wrong fight. No greater illustration of this is needed than the sight of rabidly pronuclear MP John Woodcock leading the fight against the pylons.

arial-view-of-moorside-sellafield-and-drigg
Arial View of Drigg, Sellafield and the area proposed for Moorside (greenfields, river Ehen and coast from Sellafield stretching to Beckermet and Calderbridge) Wastwater can be seen to the right.

Moorside Proposed Site.jpg

From NuGen’s website ….

“1 Power Blocks: 3x AP1000 reactors plus turbine, annex and auxiliary buildings.

2 Beckermet, Braystones and Calder Bridge: NuGen will work with the local community to avoid and mitigate impacts of construction for its neighbours as far as possible.

Roads, Internal Roads and Limited Car Parking: access roads to Moorside Site to be established and access roads to Sellafield Site are likely to be altered. Other changes will mitigate the impact on the A595. During the construction, there would be up to 200 car parking spaces for blue badge parking, coaches and essential safety and security staff
plus 100 for visitors.

3 Sellafield Site: working under a long-term co-operation agreement, NuGen will work closely with Sellafield and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority.

4 Environmental mitigation: NuGen will provide environmental mitigation and compensation, including earthworks, landscaping, replacement habitats, environmental offsetting, common land replacement and floodplain compensation.

5 Low Church Moss SSSI and St Bridget’s Church: both have determined the position of the plant and development is being carefully sited to minimise the impact on the setting of St Bridget’s Church and the Saxon stone crosses in the grave yard.

6 Cooling Tunnels and Forebay: an integral part of the Circulating Water System, the Forebay and four tunnels up to 4km long (two intake, two outflow) will provide and discharge sea water to and from the Irish Sea.

7 Marine Off-Loading Facility (MOLF) and Heavy Haul Road: a key part of NuGen’s transport strategy is to bring materials and components to site by sea to the MOLF. Breakwaters may be needed and NuGen may need to establish a Harbour Authority.

8 Earthworks: mounded areas to the northwest of the Moorside Power Station will accommodate up to 15 million m3 of excavated material, which will be landscaped as screening for the local community and could provide an opportunity for recreational amenity.   (Editors Note – this area is “too contaminated” for a low level nuclear waste dump according to the industry and yet it is fine to excavate and heap up tonnes of it with crapola leaching out?)

9 River Ehen: will need to be crossed by the floodplain bridge to carry the Heavy Haul Road from the MOLF onto site and by a new rail viaduct. No bridge piers are expected in the river but works may be required to ensure the integrity of the bridge and river structure.

10 Rail: a new rail passenger station and freight facility are required to provide transport for staff, construction workers and freight needed for the Moorside Project.

11 Support Buildings: would house a range of administration, medical, storage, centralised fire support, maintenance, security facilities and an outage maintenance building. The tallest building would be the administration building at up to eight storeys tall.

12 Substation and Switchyard: required to allow the electricity generated to be exported to the national electricity transmission system.

Public Rights Of Way: various public rights of way exist over the Moorside Site. NuGen is assessing the impact of the Moorside Project on these rights of way and potential diversions.”

Editors Note: this whole area is a flood plain with run off from these fields already causing regular flooding in Beckermet – the concreting over of this area would exacerbate this AND the run off would be from the excavated mounds not to mention the  untried untested AP1000 reactors
A reminder of recent flooding…the nursery at Beckermet would be less than 700 metres from Moorside

Firemen rescue children from nursery

FLASH floods trapped children inside a nursery school as heavy rain and lightning hit West Cumbria.

Firefighters had to dig away huge amounts of silt washed up by heavy rain that was blocking the door of Beckermet Nursery before helping carry 20 youngsters to safety yesterday.
Nursery staff say the water “came out of nowhere” following heavy rainfall that quickly washed up to eight inches of water into their new £175,000 building, which they moved into on Monday.
And the flooding in Beckermet, which also damaged houses at the Mill Field, was not the area’s only weather emergency yesterday.
The chimney of the former station building at Drigg Station – now a craft shop – was struck by lightning, starting a small fire.
A clean-up operation is now underway at the nursery, on Sellafield Road, with the charity that runs it assessing the damage.
Committee member Steve Malpas, whose four-year-old daughter Kiera was one of the children trapped inside, said rain started falling at about 11.30am and quickly turned torrential.
He said: “It was like a monsoon. There were flash floods. The water came down across the road. It washed our car park out.
“There was six to eight inches of water in the new building. It has taken us five years to get that building. We’re a charity. We’ve spent all our money doing this.
“About three tonnes of silt was up against the front door – nobody could get out. Firefighters had to come and dig to get to the front door.”
Mr Malpas said the children inside were fine despite the emergency, only realising what happened as they were carried out.
“The staff did a fantastic job keeping the situation calm,” he added.
Firefighters from Egremont, Whitehaven and Seascale dealt with the flooding, pumping water from flooded properties at the Mill Field into the nearby river.
Station Manager Joe Little said they had to prioritise the risk because water was flooding into homes – with most of it running towards the nursery.
Firefighters told staff to keep the doors shut until water levels had dropped.
Mr Little added: “We asked them to stay in the building because if they opened the doors they could have had water running right through the building. It was up to two-foot at the bottom. If people were coming for their children firecrews were taking them out to the parents.”
Ian Curwen, press officer for Copeland Borough Council said: “We’ve sent out a lot of sandbags in the area yesterday and today.
“There has been a bitof flooding in the Millfield area, two houses were affected.
“If we get down pours like we did yesterday, that might cause some problems again today.
Substantial flooding was also reported on the A595 between Iron Bridge at Beckermet and the Black Beck Roundabout, Egremont.
Mr Curwen said: “The A595 often floods, and it may well flood again today. The council will be a meeting on September 23 to discuss how to resolve the problem.”
In Thornhill, two houses flooded and fire crews from Egremont, with help from police, pumped water onto the disused railway line.
Meanwhile, a woman was praised by firefighters for her quick reaction after lightening struck her craft shop at Drigg Station.
Group Manager Dave Edgar said the lightening bolt had struck the chimney, gone down its lining and arced on a gas pipe at the bottom, starting a small fire.
He added: “The lady in the shop had a fire extinguisher and put the fire out herself, otherwise it could have been quite severe. We can only praise her quick-thinking.”
The Met Office predicted that more heavy rain could fall in Cumbria today and continuing into tomorrow, although getting lighter and more intermittent.
But a spokesman said: “Fortunately the orientation of the weather system bringing the rain means it will reach Cumbria on an east or northeasterly wind.
“This is good news for much of the county because it allows the north Pennines to filter out much of the heavier rain.
“Although we could, over the period, see appreciable rainfall totals, the wettest parts of the county look like being in the south and east with least rain towards the west and northwest.”

Save

Save

Save

Environment Ministry deleted some of its remarks from minutes on contaminated soil meet

What to do with all those bales of radioactively contaminated soil……soil ….the stuff of life is being poisoned by the nuclear industry and then they hide the truth to poison us some more.

Fukushima 311 Watchdogs

12311101_10203992616535655_8047555880147001339_n.jpg

The Ministry of the Environment deleted some of its remarks made in closed-door meetings on reuse of contaminated soil stemming from the Fukushima nuclear disaster from the minutes of the meetings, it has been learned.

When the ministry posted the minutes on its website, it said it had “fully disclosed” them. The deleted remarks could be taken to mean that the ministry induced the discussions. The remarks led the meetings to decide on a policy of reusing contaminated soil containing up to 8,000 becquerels of radioactive cesium per kilogram. An expert on information disclosure lashed out at the ministry’s handling of the minutes, saying, “It is extremely heinous because it constitutes the concealment of the decision-making process.”

The meetings were called the “working group to discuss safety assessments of impacts of radiation.” The meetings were attended by about 20 people, including radiation experts, officials of the Environment Ministry and the…

View original post 386 more words