Monday, March 19, 2012

Hydro-québec's $1-billion battle


Hydro-québec's $1-billion battle

Provincial utility is preparing to defend itself in front of the Regie de l'energie against critics who say its proposed smart meters are a health hazard and won't deliver on promised savings

Gatineau's Sharon Déoux opposes smart meters because she believes they are among the kind of devices that make her ill. She says she suffers from electromagnetic sensitivity, which has prompted her to take protective measures.

Photograph by: JULIE OLIVER POSTMEDIA NEWS, The Gazette

Sharon Déoux suffers from the fallout of our technological age. She believes her health degrades with prolonged exposure to electromagnetic fields.

That is why she has taken measures to reduce her exposure to a minimum. She has no cellular or wireless phones, no wireless Internet connection and no microwave oven. She has had aluminum strips added to her attic and an outer wall of her townhouse to deflect emissions from a nearby power transmission line.

"I have been diagnosed by my physician as suffering from electromagnetic sensitivity," Déoux, 58, said recently from her Gatineau home.

Electromagnetic sensitivity - along with its triggers or causes - is getting a lot more exposure in North America as electric, gas and water utilities move to wireless "smart" meters.

In jurisdiction after jurisdiction, there has been widespread public backlash against these wireless devices that use radio-frequency (RF) signals to communicate with utilities.

Public forums are awash with opinion about the health hazards of smart meters. Some experts contend the public should be alarmed, others dismiss the brouhaha as the toxindu-jour.

Whatever the status of the science, health concerns often top a sizable list of objections to the devices. Such was the case in 2011 when officials in Marin County near San Francisco outlawed the installation of smart electric meters in some areas.

Although Hydro-Québec says the proposed meters in this province are perfectly safe - citing Health Canada as its authority - widespread worry by consumers promise to nip at the heels of the utility as it goes before the Régie de l'énergie on Monday to seek permission for the first phase of a $1-billion project to deploy about 3.8 million wireless smart meters across the province by 2017.

The utility says it wants to follow about 100 other power utilities around the world by replacing its mostly aging meters with the new meters and a wireless advanced measurement infrastructure (AMI) system.

The benefits for Quebecers, according to Hydro-Québec, include reduced operating costs for the state-owned utility, invoices for exact consumption instead of estimated bills, outage detection and - of considerable interest in a province that unofficially claims July 1 as Moving Day - the ability to disconnect and reconnect service remotely.

The AMI system would also allow customers to monitor their energy consumption quickly and accurately.

While the entire project is pegged at $997 million - $915 for acquiring, installing and operating the new meters and $82 million for the implementation of the AMI system - the purchase, installation and operation of next-generation meters would pay for itself and translate into system savings of $300 million over the next 20 years, the utility says.

The economic viability of the AMI project will be tested before Quebec's energy board, which has granted intervenor status to various interested parties, including several that challenge the technical and fiscal sense of the venture.

The Groupe de recherche appliquée en macroécologie, a Lachine-based non-profit pushing for sustainable development, has hired a U.S. firm to analyze the Hydro-Québec project. The report's author is expected to testify during the hearings.

"We are paying for a Cadillac," GRAME director Jonathan Théorêt said.

"Are we receiving the features one expects in a Cadillac? We don't see evidence of that in documents filed (thus far) by Hydro-Québec."

For instance, Quebec is actively encouraging people to use electric vehicles, but the cost of integrating EV chargers into the system is not spelled out, he said.

According to the union that would see about 800 jobs cut from its roster if the project goes ahead, Hydro-Québec will lose money on the venture.

Rather than save $300 million over 20 years, the venture will cost the public utility $104 million, the Syndicat des employés de techniques professionnels et de bureau d'Hydro-Québec says.

Hydro-Québec has said it intends to challenge its critics' claims.

As for health-related concerns about the meters, the utility's stance is straightforward. The meters are "completely safe and pose no health risks" as their RF emissions are far below standards set by Health Canada.

Déoux, along with a host of other individuals and associations who have registered their concerns with the Régie, isn't buying what Hydro-Québec or Health Canada have to say on the subject.

Should Hydro's plan go through as tabled, there will be four of the devices on an outer wall of her home. She worries that the increase of electromagnetic emissions in her home and garden will negatively affect her health.

"I fear for my already very restricted ability to function," she wrote to the Régie.

The Association québécoise de lutte contre la pollution atmosphérique (AQLPA), which also has intervenor status, describes the meters as a "serious threat to public safety" because of their RF emissions.

Among other things, AQLPA points to the Hydro-Québec filings that say the meters will broadcast data about a customer's energy consumption six times a day.

An expert engaged by the AQLPA assessed meters installed in Quebec during a pilot project and found they emitted every 30 to 60 seconds or between 1,440 and 2,880 times a day.

Subsequently, Hydro-Québec held a news conference in a bid to allay rising public concerns.
Tests done by staff showed emissions from the meters were a fraction of those coming from a microwave oven, reporters were told.

And, as to the number of RF emissions, energy consumption data would be sent six times a day - in bursts of about 1.5 seconds - while the meters would synchronize themselves intermittently.

But the total daily emissions would be less than 90 seconds.

So the meters are generating RF fields throughout the day "but most of that generation is not being used to communicate to the utility," notes the Havard-educated doctor David Carpenter.

Carpenter, director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany is co-editor and an author of BioInitiative: A Rationale for a Biologically based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields, a work often cited by critics of smart meters.

"From a public health point of view, it is very short-sighted to bring on new sources of human exposure to radiofrequency radiation without any attention to the adverse effects on human health," Carpenter said.

Smart meters are not essential and benefit only utilities, he says while there is no doubt that they add to our exposure to RF emissions.

"And it's going to be an exposure that most people are not aware of, to children as well as adults. It is unnecessary," he said.

Joe Schwarcz, director of McGill University's office for science and society and a regular contributor to The Gazette, said he does not have health concerns about smart meters.

"I'm not going to contend that there is no possible (longterm) risk because no proper scientist would do that. All you can say is that it certainly looks now - taking everything into account - that this is a tempest in a teapot," Schwarcz said.

Scientific literature on electromagnetic radiation is vast, he said, and his opinion is based on weighing both the quality of research and the weight of the evidence.

"Right now, I don't have a concern about these meters because I know the frequency that they put out and I know the time they are active and I know the power they put out is extremely, extremely low," he said.

Any discussion of RF electromagnetic fields should include reference to a recent landmark report by the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), said Magda Havas, associate professor with Trent University's environmental and resource studies.

A group of 31 scientists classified RF electromagnetic fields as a possible carcinogen to humans based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, which has been linked by some with wireless phone use.

That Group 2B classification includes such things as lead, carbon tetrachloride and DDT, according to the IARC website. And, as Schwarcz points out, coffee and pickled vegetables.

While the headlines generated by that report, made public May 31, 2011, focused on wireless phone use, the report's findings are relevant to the ongoing smart-meter debate, Havas said.

"It's not the technology, it's the radiation that is critical and any technology that generates this radiation is generating a Class 2B carcinogen," Havas, an adviser with the International commission on Electromagnetic Safety, said. "And that means smart meters as well."

In an email to The Gazette, IARC official Robert Baan said that the 2B classification, "possibly carcinogenic," applies to all types of radiation within the RF part of the electromagnetic spectrum, including the radiation emitted by base-station antennas, radio/TV towers, radar, Wi-Fi, smart meters, and so on.

"Of course, an important point to keep in mind is the intensity of the radiation. Because the exposure levels for many of these other devices and exposure situations are so much lower than the exposure to someone who has a functioning cellphone against her/his ear, the risk will be considerably less," Baan wrote.

Canadians have legitimate health concerns about smart meters, Havas said.

Firstly, smart-meter emissions can differ depending on how many other meters are communicating with them and "the radiation is pulsed," she said.

Authorities tend to average the radiation over the duration of the pulse but "biologically, it is not the averages that affect living organisms ... it's the peaks, the high exposures," she said.

"Health Canada is really failing Canadians on this particular issue," she said.

"We have among the worse guidelines in the world to protect the public. We have no long-term guidelines for exposure"

Havas said she is concerned about our increased exposure to electromagnetic fields and noted that residences could soon find themselves with wireless meters for electricity, gas and water along with a host of other wireless devices.

For his part, Schwarcz said that he is confident that scientific studies are keeping up with the times.

In any event, Health Canada is not measuring the cumulative effect of RF emissions in homes, apartments, businesses or urban centres, according to its spokeswoman.

"That is not what we do," said Pascale Bellier, research scientist with Health Canada's radiation protection bureau.

Health Canada has developed guidelines for safe human exposure to RF energy using a WHO framework established in 2006, Bellier said.

"Our limits are not devicespecific. It is an emissions standard," she said.

But, after getting "numerous calls" about smart meters from the public, the agency had some scientists look "a few" smart meters in the Ottawa area, noting in particular how they transmit, Bellier said.

That survey, according to an information sheet on smart-meters issued by the agency last December, helped Health Canada conclude that RF emissions from the devices are "far below the human exposure limits specified in Health Canada's code."

Exposure to RF energy from smart meters, the agency concluded, does not pose a public health risk.

One measure of public resistance to smart electric meters - be it for health, privacy, technical or economic reasons - is the growing number of opt-out programs.

When Hydro-Québec first filed its petition with the Régie to go ahead with the smart-meter rollout in this province, there was no mention of an opt-out plan.

On Wednesday, Hydro announced that consumers choosing to opt out for health or other reasons would pay an initial fee of $98 and then $17 a month to cover the cost of manually reading the meters. The cost would be $302 the first year and $204 each year thereafter.

That item will be among the hot topics when hearings begin Monday in Montreal.

WHAT IS ELECTROMAGNETIC SENSITIVITY?
Electromagnetic sensitivity, also known as electromagnetic hypersensitivity, is characterized by a variety of non-specific symptoms, which afflicted individuals attribute to exposure to electromagnetic fields, according to the World Health Organization.

"The symptoms most commonly experienced include dermatological symptoms (redness, tingling, and burning sensations) as well as neurasthenic and vegetative symptoms (fatigue, tiredness, concentration difficulties, dizziness, nausea, heart palpitation and digestive disturbances). The collection of symptoms is not part of any recognized syndrome," according to the 2005 fact sheet.

"While some individuals report mild symptoms and react by avoiding the fields as best they can, others are so severely affected that they cease work and change their entire lifestyle."

Lynn Moore
lmoore@ montrealgazette.com

Saturday, March 17, 2012

Paper on Cell Phone/Reproductive Function Retracted


Paper on Cell Phone/Reproductive Function Retracted


Microwave News



The editor of the International Journal of
Andrology has announced the retraction of
a paper, which claimed to show that cell
phones can impair the reproductive
function of rabbits.

Score one for Germany's Alex Lerchl who
has taken on the role of policing the
EMR/RF literature for bad science and
misconduct.

Check out this story --our latest Short Take--
as well as another on a new paper from Yale
showing that mice exposed to cell phone radiation
in the womb develop behavioral disorders later
in life.

Go to:
http://www.microwavenews.com

Best,
Louis Slesin

__________________________________________________________
Louis Slesin, PhD
Editor, Microwave News
A Report on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Phone: +1 (212) 517-2800; Fax: +1 (212) 734-0316
E-mail: <mwn@pobox.com>
Internet: <http://www.microwavenews.com>
Mail:  155 East 77th Street, Suite 3D
New York, NY 10075, U.S.A.

After Fukushima, fish tales


After Fukushima, fish tales

 

 



An aerial view of debris floating in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Honshu in March after a 9.0 magnitude earthquake and tsunami struck northern Japan: The garbage patch is estimated to be twice the size of Texas.
 

An aerial view of debris floating in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Honshu in March after a 9.0 magnitude earthquake and tsunami struck northern Japan: The garbage patch is estimated to be twice the size of Texas.

Photograph by: U.S. Navy



































After the world’s worst nuclear accident in 25 years, authorities in Canada said people living here were safe and faced no health risks from the fallout from Fukushima.


They said most of the radiation from the crippled Japanese nuclear power plant would fall into the ocean, where it would be diluted and not pose any danger.


Dr. Dale Dewar wasn’t convinced. Dewar, a family physician in Wynyard, Sask., doesn’t eat a lot of seafood herself, but when her grandchildren come to visit, she carefully checks seafood labels.


She wants to make sure she isn’t serving them anything that might come from the western Pacific Ocean.


Dewar, the executive director of Physicians for Global Survival, a Canadian anti-nuclear group, says the Canadian government has downplayed the radiation risks from Fukushima and is doing little to monitor them.


“We suspect we’re going to see more cancers, decreased fetal viability, decreased fertility, increased metabolic defects – and we expect them to be generational,” she said.


And evidence has emerged that the impacts of the disaster on the Pacific Ocean are worse than expected.


Since a tsunami and earthquake destroyed the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant last March, radioactive cesium has consistently been found in 60 to 80 per cent of Japanese fishing catches each month tested by Japan’s Fisheries Agency.


In November, 65 per cent of the catches tested positive for cesium (a radioactive material created by nuclear reactors), according to a Gazette analysis of data on the fisheries agency’s website. Cesium is a long-lived radionuclide that persists in the environment and increases the risk of cancer, according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, which says the most common form of radioactive cesium has a half-life of 30 years.


The Canadian Food Inspection Agency, which monitors food safety, says it is aware of the numbers but says the amounts of cesium detected are small.


“Approximately 60 per cent of fish have shown to have detectable levels of radionuclides,” it said in an emailed statement.
“The majority of exported fish to Canada are caught much farther from the coast of Japan, and the Japanese testing has shown that these fish have not been contaminated with high levels of radionuclides.”


But the Japanese data shows elevated levels of contamination in several seafood species that Japan has exported to Canada in recent years.


In November, 18 per cent of cod exceeded a new radiation ceiling for food to be implemented in Japan in April – along with 21 per cent of eel, 22 per cent of sole and 33 per cent of seaweed.


Overall, one in five of the 1,100 catches tested in November exceeded the new ceiling of 100 becquerels per kilogram. (Canada’s ceiling for radiation in food is much higher: 1,000 becquerels per kilo.)


“I would probably be hesitant to eat a lot of those fish,” said Nicholas Fisher, a marine sciences professor at the State University of New York at Stony Brook.


Fisher is researching how radiation from Fukushima is affecting the Pacific fishery. “There has been virtually zero monitoring and research on this,” he said, calling on other governments to do more radiation tests on the ocean’s marine life.


“Is it something we need to be terrified of? No. Is it something we need to monitor? Yes, particularly in coastal waters where concentrations are high.”



Contamination of fish in the Pacific Ocean could have wide-ranging consequences for millions.


The Pacific is home to the world’s largest fishery, which is in turn the main source of protein for about one billion people in Asia alone.
In October, a U.S. study – co-authored by oceanographer Ken Buesseler, a senior scientist at the non-profit Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Woods Hole, Mass., – reported Fukushima caused history’s biggest-ever release of radiation into the ocean – 10 to 100 times more than the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe.


“It’s completely untrue to say this level of radiation is safe or harmless,” said Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.


Edwards, who is also a math professor at Vanier College, said Fukushima has highlighted how lackadaisical Canadian authorities are about radiation risks – the result, he says, of the influence of Canada’s powerful nuclear industry.


“The reassurances have been completely irresponsible. To say there are no health concerns flies in the face of all scientific evidence,” said Edwards, who has advised the federal auditor-general’s office and Ontario government on nuclear-power issues.



Other Fukushima impacts have been unexpected, too. The first debris swept into the sea by the tsunami reportedly started to wash ashore on the west coast in mid-December, a year earlier than scientists and authorities predicted.


Residents of Vancouver Island, Alaska and the U.S. Pacific coast have said they’ve found large quantities of bottles, cans, lumber and floats.


The debris is part of 18 million tonnes of debris from Japan floating across the Pacific – taking up an area thought to be twice the size of Texas.


The impact of the debris on the Pacific is unclear. Much of it is expected to eventually join an already massive patch of existing garbage floating in the Pacific gyre.


The arrival of the debris on the west coast also appears to have caught Canadian authorities off guard.


“What debris are you talking about?” Health Canada spokesman Gary Holub asked when contacted for a comment this week.
“Debris from Japan is not expected on the west coast of Canada for another year.”


He asked a reporter to email him media stories about the debris. Later, Holub emailed a statement saying “there has been no official confirmation that the source of this debris is from the tsunami in Japan.”


He said, “It is ‘highly unlikely’ the debris will be radioactive and that Health Canada will await scientific data before deciding whether to test any of it.”


It’s also unclear how the debris will impact fish in the Pacific.



But there is a good chance Canadians have already eaten some of the types of fish most likely to be contaminated with cesium, based on the Japanese fisheries data.


Japan exported $76 million of food products to Canada in 2010, including $13 million of fish and crustaceans. No figures were available for 2011.


The Gazette analyzed the Japanese fisheries data for 22 seafood species that Japan has exported to Canada in recent years.


Some cesium was found in 16 of these 22 species in November, the last full month for which data was available.


Cesium was especially prevalent in certain of the species:


73 per cent of mackerel tested
91 per cent of the halibut
92 per cent of the sardines
93 per cent of the tuna and eel
94 per cent of the cod and anchovies
100 per cent of the carp, seaweed, shark and monkfish


Some of the fish were caught in Japanese coastal waters. Other catches were made hundreds of kilometres away in the open ocean.
There, the fish can also be caught by fishers from dozens of other nations that ply the waters of the Pacific.


Yet, Japan is the only country that appears to be systematically testing fish for radiation and publicly reporting the results.


CFIA is no longer doing any testing of its own. It did some radiation tests on food imports from areas of Japan around the stricken nuclear plant in the weeks after the Fukushima accident.


Only one of the 169 tested products showed any radiation. CFIA stopped doing the tests last June, saying they weren’t needed.
“The quantities of radioactive material reaching Canada are very small and within normal ranges,” CFIA spokesperson Lisa Gauthier said in an emailed statement.


“They do not pose any health risk to Canadians, the food we eat or the plants and animals in Canada.”


In August, CFIA also tested a dozen samples of fish caught in B.C. coastal and inland waters. None of those tests found any radiation.
CFIA said it has no plans to do any other radiation tests on fish in the Pacific or imports from other nations that fish in the ocean, including Japan.


CFIA now relies on Japanese authorities to screen Japanese food exported to Canada.


But Japan’s monitoring of food has come under a storm of criticism from the Japanese public after food contaminated with radiation was sold to consumers.


A Canadian seafood industry official was surprised when told CFIA doesn’t plan any more tests of Pacific fish.


“It is certainly our expectation that the CFIA will test again this year,” said Christina Burridge, executive director of the B.C. Seafood Alliance.


The alliance is an umbrella of Pacific seafood harvesting associations whose member firms generate about $700 million in yearly revenues.


Burridge said CFIA promised her group last spring it would test Pacific salmon and tuna returning to B.C. fishing grounds in 2012 and 2013 because of the possibility those fish could have migrated close to Japan.


“We all agreed that if there was any risk of contamination, it would be in 2012 and 2013,” she said.


She wouldn’t comment on the Japanese fisheries data, which she hadn’t seen previously. But she said of the data: “It would reinforce our expectation that the CFIA would test this year.


“We want to be able to assure our customers that our expectation that there will be no increase in detectable levels (of radiation) is true,” she said.


She said she based this expectation on “a general belief that contamination will be limited to the coastal waters off Japan.”


But despite this belief and the importance of the Pacific fishery, few studies exist on how Fukushima affected marine life.


One of those studies found that fish and crustaceans caught in the vicinity of Fukushima in late March had 10,000 times more than so-called safe levels of radiation. The study, published last May in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, also said macroalgae had 19,000 times the safe level.


Those levels were measured before the Japanese utility that runs the crippled nuclear plant dumped 11,000 tonnes of radioactive water into the Pacific in April and additional leaks that have released hundreds of tonnes more.
But since that early study, little research has been published on the topic.


“People want to know what’s happening with the cesium and how much is in the fish, but we don’t know. It’s frustrating,” said oceanographer Buesseler.


“It’s disconcerting how big of an event Fukushima was and how little data are out there. No one has taken responsibility for studying this in a single agency (in the U.S.), even though we also have reactors on the coast and other events could happen,” he said.
SUNY’s Fisher agrees: “In the U.S., it’s very difficult to acquire funding to do that work. A lot of people are very frustrated. Funding agencies are already spread incredibly thin, and they were not prepared for this,” he said.


After governments refused to provide funds, Buesseler, Fisher and other scientists secured funds from a private foundation for a research voyage in the Pacific to gather radiation data on fish, plankton and water.


Fisher can’t discuss his findings because they aren’t published yet. He expects to send them for publication in coming weeks.
Buesseler has already reported some results from the 15-day cruise last May and June.


He co-authored the study in October that said cesium levels in the Pacific had gone up an astonishing 45 million times above pre-accident levels. The levels then declined rapidly for a while, but after that, they unexpectedly levelled off.


In July, cesium levels stopped declining and remained stuck at 10,000 times above pre-accident levels.


It meant the ocean wasn’t diluting the radiation as expected. If it had been, cesium levels would have kept falling. The finding suggested radiation was still being released into the ocean long after the accident in March, Buesseler said in an interview.


“It implies the groundwater is contaminated or the facility is still leaking radiation.”



The Japanese fisheries data seems to support this conclusion. Far from declining, contamination levels in some species were flat or even rose last fall, including species that Japan exports to Canada like skipjack tuna, cod, sole and eel.


In November, the average Japanese catch had 111 becquerels of cesium per kilogram – above the new radiation ceiling of 100 becquerels per kilo that Japan has announced it will implement for food this spring.


The November level declined from a peak level of 373 becquerels per kilo last April. But it was an increase from the October average of 78 becquerels per kilo.


Such persistently elevated levels of radiation warrant more monitoring and research, Fisher said. “It’s not something we can easily dismiss.”


Continuing radiation leaks from Fukushima could be to blame, he said. Another culprit, he said, may be a phenomenon called biomagnification – the tendency for radiation concentrations to increase in species that are farther up the food chain.


About 2.7 per cent of the fish catches also exceeded Japan’s existing ceiling for food of 500 becquerels per kilo. That was also up from one per cent in October.


In November, 0.8 per cent of Japanese catches exceeded Canada’s ceiling of 1,000 becquerels per kilo, up from 0.2 per cent in October.


But food with radiation below these limits can still pose health risks, Edwards believes. “There is no safe level of radiation. They should be making every effort to monitor food.”






Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/After+Fukushima+fish+tales/5994237/story.html#ixzz1pPuRMro3

Longbridge mobile phone mast protesters pledge to continue campaign


Longbridge mobile phone mast protesters pledge to continue campaign





Protesters at Longbridge Methodist Church are opposing the installation of a mobile phone mast
Protesters at Longbridge Methodist Church are opposing the installation of a mobile phone mast
MEMBERS of a nursery and church group have slammed a decision by Birmingham planners to allow a mobile telephone mast to be built on their doorstep.
Parents, neighbours and the congregation of Longbridge Methodist Church, Bristol Road South, gathered around 400 signatures opposing the 12 metre Vodafone mast just yards from the church’s front door.
But two weeks ago Birmingham City Council planning committee took the decision to allow the mast which could now be erected at any time.
Opponents to the scheme gathered at the church on Monday to voice their disapproval and have vowed to continue fighting the application.
Reverend Mary Shannahan from the church said the view of local people seemed to have been ignored in the planning process.
She said: “This is a community church, we have hundreds of people coming through the doors every week.
“Over 400 people signed the petition and out voices are not being heard - they’ve taken the decsion to ignore the concerns of the local people.
“We want them to ensure the safety of the young people and those who use the church facilities.”
Brian Kite, secretary of the Jelly Babies Nursery, which is run at the church, said: “From our point of view we have 50 children coming here walking past the mast.
“It hasn’t been proven completely the isn’t any harm in connection with them.
“There are three schools within half a mile of it so pupils will be walking twice a day past it so we are concerned about the children.
“We’re very dismayed and annoyed.”
Coun Andy Cartwright (Lab, Longbridge) said he was not against phone masts but said a better place should have been found.
He said: “We all have mobile phones but they should think about where they put them and outside a place of worship is disgusting.
“The people here have voices and they should be listened to.”
A spokesman for Birmingham City Council said the decision had been taken following correct planning procedures.
He said: “All planning decisions are taken by considering al material considerations and set against relevant planning legislation.




















Read More http://www.birminghammail.net/news/top-stories/2012/03/12/longbridge-mobile-phone-mast-protesters-pledge-to-continue-campaign-97319-30515752/#ixzz1pPsQujS2
“There is a legal process in place for anyone who wants to object to appeal against a decision taken by the planning committee.”

Disconnect Film T-Shirt