Dear Sir,
explain to me how did he become Director ARPAV when issuing such statements on the need for incinerators.
Maybe he realized that the people of Veneto is not gullible, people or ox, as he thought ... we are many to follow daily developments in the situational and I assure you that we are well aware, but ignorant. And that gives her trouble. Above all, we move
compact, finally aware that we can have a weight in decisions from now on will be adopted for incineration and hopefully in other fields.
I graduated in Economics and the Environment in 1998 and I always worry about the implications of the pollutants on health, especially children who are affected in a particular way and how it might change the quality of life by simply changing our habits. Surcharges in recent months I have been well documented for incineration, and there are compelling studies related to the close connection between disease and nanoparticles. Especially that the new generation of incinerators that burn at high temperatures to prevent the production of dioxin, lead inevitbilmente the production of PM 2.5 and PM 1 and as well you know are much more dangerous than PM10.
She has assessed the environmental costs of these plants? It 's easy to accuse us of hysteria ... as she says:
"The presence of incinerators is in fact lived with hysteria by the Venetians, the only ones who see them as dangerous and not as a resource." Here
forgive me but we are only too aware that the waste is a resource for this not to be burned.
Imagine if I can give up at the prospect of building incinerators ranging against all logic and biological ethics, the only explanation I can give is that of profit.
not believe that his statements are contrary to the role it plays? I understand that you should refrain from doing certain circumstances, it makes me think he has some personal interest, if not economic, in supporting a technology that has now turned to other countries exceeded. Its task would be quite different, and incineration should be the last resort, and a residual after trying all the possible ways to reduce waste and raise awareness on the mountain that is essential and a priority to change their abitiudini and push production to another direction more compatible with the environment. Not to mention the more technical aspects: I think you also know that the incineration will produce, in addition to smoke, even a significant quantity of highly toxic ash and sewage.
"It 's absurd, it's time to put an end to unreasonable fears, also the result of political games. Incinerators are over controlled machines"
If anything, the political games they are doing you ...
controls on emissions of fumes if not mistaken are not daily, but annual, we know that are burned in incinerators designed different categories of waste and therefore emissions are difficult to control. Not to mention the leaks dioxin contaminated milk that is high in the vicinity of incinerators in Italy. Other than food miles to zero.
But those who think they have to do?
We know that the Po valley is one of the sites pù polluted in the world regarding the situation of the air: I think this is already an indication that we can not support a system that instead of moving toward clean energy, is so determined to make the interests of certain lobbies to the detriment of our health and future generations.
"we are one of the most advanced regions of Europe, GDP for the product"
The new way to measure well-being from a few years is not using the GDP that is not a good indicator other aspects. Have you ever heard of carbon footprint? Indeed from a decline in GDP in some ways you can have an improvement in air quality (less than truck driven ..) I think
know that assessments should take into account the negative externalities, which by virtue of be readily converted into cash can hardly be underestimated.
I just think that would be better to resign.
"goes haywire when an incinerator is a mess," but for whom? For you that in recent years has pursued a far-sighted vision on the environment as it should have done? To hear the emergency you are: you're right! How long does it take to build an incinerator? Would not it be better to use that time to sensitize the public about industrial priorities and change their habits? Do not you think you might be a new business and jobs also by recycling? And maybe take us out before the economic crisis from which we could go much more reinforced and competitive? If I'm not mistaken there are also eco-labels, certification and ISO14000 LCA (Life Cycle Assessment - with which sees itself as a product life-cycle with regard to externalities). Why has not focused on this successful strategy in recent years and instead it was decided to divert the 7% to improperly bill enel incinerators? Would could divert that money to truly clean energy.
prevention and environmental protection is not just what you can expect from her. It'll keep this in the future. Yours sincerely Dr Marta
Bizzotto
0 comments:
Post a Comment