Drawing on the Sadiq Khan ‘who-could-possibly-argue-against-clean-air?’ playbook, DEFRA has launched a very low-profile consultation titled ‘Draft air quality strategy‘. In keeping with the increasingly common tactic among those that govern us of limiting dissenting voices, this consultation opened on April 11th and will close on… April 21st!
Why should this concern us? Because the consultation document talks about the consequences of ammonia and oxides of nitrogen in the context of their “significant impacts for the natural environment and biodiversity”. This is naturally ringing alarm bells in Britain’s farming community as it feels chillingly close to a replay of the Dutch Government’s proposal to cut nitrogen emissions from farming by 50% by 2030, which led to a massive backlash from farmers whose livelihoods were being threatened, and a political earthquake.
The consultation goes on to explain that, “Depending on the local circumstances (and in light of any relevant national or local policies), ammonia emissions may be a material planning consideration for planning applications”. So, if farmers were not already facing enough opposition from local authorities, they could now be blackmailed into reducing ammonia emissions or see planning applications refused. Season 3 of Clarkson’s Farm could be entertaining. In case the role to be played by local authorities in oppressing farmers is not clear enough, the document states:
Agriculture is the largest source of ammonia and contributes to PM2.5 through chemical reactions in the atmosphere. While not having direct regulatory powers over agriculture, local authorities should exercise their wider functions to minimise emissions from this source.
PM2.5 is the term favoured by DEFRA for fine particulate matter. It is regarded as the air pollutant that causes the most harm to human health. Reducing it is pivotal to the consultation. In DEFRA’s words:
The air quality strategy (AQS) sets out the actions the Government expects local authorities in England to take in support of achieving our long-term air quality goals, including our ambitious new PM2.5 targets.
If the ambitious new PM2.5 targets slipped under your radar, the scientific basis for them can be found in a separate DEFRA document here titled ‘Air quality PM2.5 targets – Detailed evidence report’. This documents the supposed ‘wealth of evidence’ concerning the harm wrought by fine particulate matter (including modelling by Imperial College London), and referring, inevitably, to the “Government’s response to the coroner’s Prevention of Future Deaths Report following the inquest into the death of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah”. Farmers could be forgiven for thinking that Sadiq Khan is now running agriculture policy.
One does not have to don one’s tinfoil hat to feel alarmed at this turn of events. Anyone campaigning against the ULEZ extension in London is already aware of the contempt Sadiq Khan has shown towards his own consultation process. Here is another consultation, this time from a central Government department, allowing only 10 days for responses and launching during local election campaigns.
Ian Price is a Business Psychologist. Find him on Twitter.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
PM2.5 fine particulate matter maybe harmful to human health but I suspect not having food on the table is more harmful to human health or am I being stupid?
Another example of a western WEF controlled government!
PM2.5 is, essentially, yet another modelling scam. From the fact that choking animals with diesel fumes unsurprisingly kills them, comes the theory that lower concentrations of such particulates are proportionately harmful to humans, and models for exposure based on proxies like post-code distance from a main road, leading to predictions – or rather speculations since they are never checked in the real world – of excess deaths in city dwellers (or in this case, I suppose, country dwellers).
At no stage is it demonstrated that any real individual has died from a detected intake of PM2.5 – or indeed that any such individuals exist anywhere in the world. But once you’ve persuaded the world that diesel fumes are killing city-dwellers, and that wood fires are decimating underdeveloped nations, you only have to identify such particles in relation to some politically useable substance to enforce whatever policies are profitable.
Large Malawi study found no respiratory benefit from clean cookstoves (but a major reduction in burns) https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161026081142.htm
No, no. You don’t understand. Everyone knows than PM2.5 pollution is incredibly deadly. So deadly that average age at death in the UK has not increased almost continuously since 1922 (the last time we had a border change), apart from a couple of wars. Oh wait. Yes it has increased, a lot.
Anyway, ignore that. What this consultation process does is explain away the fact that there are almost no differences between respiratory mortality in rural and city areas.
See? ULEZ Goooood.
Don’t expect to see this covered in the BBC State Broadcaster’s output. ‘Trusted News Initiative’ you see.
Fires? Interesting because a wood fire will not produce significant PM2.5s because the fuel is not finely divided enough to do so. They may produce some soot (usually not a lot) but it’s particles are much bigger than 2.5 microns, more like 250 microns. The mechanism of diesel PM 2.5s is because that is about the size of the atomised injected fuel droplets. Never let fact stand in the way of a good story. Petrol injection also does not produce any but the reason for that is obvious so I will leave it to the student to answer with a little thought for himself (you can add her, it, them, etc. but that is just poor English!).
I would imagine that current levels are far far far below the level at which it would constitute harm to public health.
There is no decrease in air quality, just an increase in sensitivity of instruments able to measure it. In fact our air has never been fresher.
These are rounding error particulates and don’t affect anything.
The real goal is 15 minutes areas, no cars, complete control by government over the sheeple or in the Muzzie’s case, the Infidel ape and pig.
I hope I have a michelin star restaurant in my 15 minute area so that I can have a 6 course taster menu of lovely well prepared insects, now that’s something to look forward to.
A brief search on the web yields the following from Our World in Data – “How many people die from air pollution”.
“indoor air pollution – caused by people living in energy poverty – is one of the largest contributors to outdoor air pollution”
About half of all deaths result from indoor air pollution, so my irreverent conclusion based on the current article is – don’t keep your cows indoors.
On a more serious note, green propagandists should re-evaluate their thinking about green and renewable energy, since energy poverty due to banning fossil fuels would arguably cause a greater numbers of deaths compared with renewable sources.
I had no idea that rural communities had such high mortality rates from all the PM2.5 they are being exposed to. Presumably DEFRA have these figures, right??
Definitely. They are the experts.
Department for the
Eradication of
Farming and
Rural
Activities
as a farmer friend of our explained…
It’s scienz, init.
Or ‘The $cience.’
How many of you are sick to death of this interfering money grabbing set of self appointed elite?, Not only do they take increasingly eye watering amounts of money from us in Council tax, VAT,general taxation, levy’s they put onto our fuel bills, the list goes on. Since the Covid 3 years the Public sector numbers and its payroll has increased dramatically meanwhile the Private sector employed has reduced from pre Covid levels, and what do we get for all this money? increased interference and ruination of our freedom and lives.
Why are we continuing to pay for this? its insanity like Neil Oliver said in a recent clip, its like we are being held by the Krays protection money, at the threat of prosecution or worse, but unlike the Krays no protection.
If there are enough of us and I am willing to join a group, but it needs thousands of us, lets just stop paying the council tax, the tax when they demand it on returns, what would they do? they can’t jail everyone. I can think of no other way that is a peaceful resistance to stopping this World group of meglomaniacs from trying to direct and control every part of our lives, How do we start this?
Up to a third of the council tax we pay goes towards their pensions.
In every respect green ideology seeks to remove prosperity and as a direct result of that they will remove well being, lower life expectancy and health. They call it “Sustainable Development”. Doesn’t that sound like a very nice thing? Until you realise that availability and cost of energy correlates perfectly with HDI (Human Development Index) This article is specifically about food, but ofcourse you cannot look at anything green in isolation. Wind turbines, smart meters, banning of coal and getting rid of gas central heating and petrol and diesel cars etc etc etc are all part of the one agenda. It is all connected. An article in my local paper the other day was encouraging people not to own anything but to borrow it. They suggested that everyone eg owning a lawnmower was a bad idea and that one lawnmower would suffice for the whole street. ————Wake up people, you need to see exactly where this eco communism is going.
“Wake up people, you need to see exactly where this eco communism is going.”
A mass kill off and complete enslavement for the survivors.
UK population according to Deagel – 25 million by 2025.
Absolutely Huxley.. and if I remember correctly.. 500million was the aim wasn’t it.. living in harmony with nature of course.. give or take a few luxury yachts, private jets, and ocean front mansions that is..
Correct. That was the figure on the Georgia Guidestones.
We should be left alone with all our faults to let natural selection & Nature take their course ! We don’t need any of this WEF climate bullsh1t which is far more of a threat to life , coupled with all the other type of fear porn we keep enduring ! Let’s F- -K them all off & breath easy .
Find out all about PM2.5 at Steve Milloy’s site https://junkscience.com/. He’s been debunking the PM2.5 myth for years
https://junkscience.com/?s=PM2.5
“EPA and PM2.5: No Science, No Bodies, Just Fraud“
The brutal approach by the Dutch government caused a bit of an uprising so Fishy and Co have been given a different set of plans to work to – something more British and slightly hands off with a bit more warmth and cuddle factor.
“It’s all for the benefit of national health. We really want to look after you. Honest.”
Oh how apt is the nickname ‘Fishy’ eh!.. Fishy by name and fishy by nature..
Great food reset means mass starvation
***************************
***************************
Stand in the Park Make friends & keep sane
Sundays 10.30am to 11.30am
Elms Field
near play area
Wokingham RG40 2FE
–
Oh look a Cow ! Danger Danger ! 8 Wheeler Gravel trucks on HS2 ,No Problamo ! The Chunts with power are drunk on it !!
Do we at all, perhaps, see the ‘obesity crisis’ as being the softening-up process to justify us having less to eat – to save the Planet?
Or is that just another ‘conspiracy theory’?
I found the consultation at the DEFRA web site and have completed it. I expect they will hate my comments, but how else is one supposed to stop these morons from making ever more pointless regulations that hamstring everyone in the business of making a living.
Imperial College modelling eh? So a load of hysterical old bollocks then.
This is the first I’ve heard of the consultation (in the Daily Sceptic email of 22 April, so too late to
respond). How appalling. I find it all beyond depressing.
Me too. I haven’t seen or heard anything elsewhere AFAICR – about the so called‘consultation’.
My observation:
PM2.5s are not harmful to human health, at least not in any reasonable quantity. The biological science for this is 100% clear, mammals have a very effective mechanism to remove particulate matter from our lungs, invented millions of years ago. How do they suppose camels in deserts with sandstorms survive? Lungs contain a mucus film over the internal surfaces which traps any dust particles of pretty much any size. Mucus continuously moves upwards out of lungs, into the throat and is swallowed where the digestive system eventually expels it. Of course there have been a few experiments to check this and so far NO ONE has shown the presence of particles moving across the air/blood barrier, and even if a few did, they will be filtered out of the blood by the kidneys. Human Biology has been eliminated from the school curriculum, except sex of course, and even this is not taught as science.
Something else to note, the whole ULEZ, Euro6 scam is based on these PM2.5s, and we know that is fraudulent, to make us buy new cars, and only electric ones at that! But even electric cars still have tyres (which shed particulate matter) and brakes with friction surfaces (which shed particulate matter) so what is the principle to say that these are the slightest bit less polluting? Or any experimental data? Or anything except nonsense?
There is zero case for any of it, certainly on the basis of dangerous air pollution. Real Science says so! If Khan says it, it must be a lie, he cannot even answer simple questions on his policies!