Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

English rivers polluted by neonicotinoids, first tests reveal

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 134 posts

Re: English rivers polluted by neonicotinoids, first tests reveal

#51

Post by pjc50 »

nlperguiy wrote: post #44
pjc50 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are they earning money because regulations need to be met? Yes? If there aren't regulations, then waste will be disposed of by the cheapest method, which usually involves dumping it into the atmosphere and/or water. This is how it used to be until environmental campaigning in the 70s and 80s got the regulations introduced in the West, and far more recently in China.

Whey is waste in the dairy industry, yet it's sold profitably as a dietary supplement and used all over the processed food market. Unfit oranges, apples etc. are waste to the fruit producers, but juices love it. Cow shit is a complete waste but is used as a fertilizer. Although, a bunch of cow shit is also thrown into rivers. Wasted food is ground into powder and given to animals. I guess food might be an exception.…

Well, yes, the difference between "waste" and "feedstock" is whether there is some valuable use for the thing and whether it can be easily collected. Insecticide once used cannot be easily collected again.

Much of the history of the petrochemicals industry is trying to find valuable things to do with less-valuable fractions and non-oil stuff that comes up from wells. Of course, if it's not valuable it tends to be flared off and contributes to global warming.

> Wasted food is ground into powder and given to animals

.. although since the CJD epidemic I think this is extremely limited. By regulations.

Re: English rivers polluted by neonicotinoids, first tests reveal

#52

Post by fiftyacorn »

akhatri_aus wrote: post #47
jimnotgym wrote: post #3

After years of rubbish in the UK press about the impact of regulations from the EU, they can add protecting fish, bird and most likely human health to the list of 'harm' done. I'm glad the EU still cares about the environment.

The UK is still in the EU and yet the river is still polluted.

I think he means it will get worse when we leave EU

Re: English rivers polluted by neonicotinoids, first tests reveal

#53

Post by dazc »

akhatri_aus wrote: post #47
jimnotgym wrote: post #3

After years of rubbish in the UK press about the impact of regulations from the EU, they can add protecting fish, bird and most likely human health to the list of 'harm' done. I'm glad the EU still cares about the environment.

The UK is still in the EU and yet the river is still polluted.

The article implies this is pretty much a worldwide problem and doesn't say what other countries are blighted, bar a strong hint at the Netherlands (also in the EU)?

Re: English rivers polluted by neonicotinoids, first tests reveal

#54

Post by Nicholas7900 »

jimnotgym wrote: post #3

After years of rubbish in the UK press about the impact of regulations from the EU, they can add protecting fish, bird and most likely human health to the list of 'harm' done. I'm glad the EU still cares about the environment.

  Whenever I'm been hired as a Hacker i typically only take jobs that I find somehow original, challenging, or especially helpful to the community. I've never wanted to sit around defending some video game company's source code from network intruders - I prefer to help nonprofits, private investigators, Private Individuals, government contractors, and other traditionally underserved populations.
And I'd rather match skills against the best in the field of state-sponsored hackers engaged in economic espionage than put some kid in prison for pranking the phone company. When a company tries to hire me, the first question I ask is: "Who is this going to help?"

I know I'm well-known but i always try to avoid people thinking I'm proud or making Many individual think its only the big companies that can hire me, fine, here is my mail: """"compositehacks@gmail.com"""" You Can Reach Out To Me for Your Desired HACKING Services Ranging From: Penetration Testing Phishing Phone Hack: Giving you access to the Target's Call Log, messages, chats and all social media Apps . Retrieval Of Lost Files Location Tracking. Clearing Of Criminal Records. Hacking Of Server, Database And website e.g Facebook, twitter, Instagram Snapchat etc Hacking and sales Of Programmed credit cards , amazon , Walmart , PayPal , bank logs . And Other Cyber Attacks And Hijacking.

YOU CAN ALSO CONTACT ME FOR MY SPECIAL CREDIT CARD TOP-UP PACKAGE : Its 100% LEGIT

Re: English rivers polluted by neonicotinoids, first tests reveal

#55

Post by akhatri_aus »

fiftyacorn wrote: post #52
akhatri_aus wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK is still in the EU and yet the river is still polluted.

I think he means it will get worse when we leave EU

That's speculative though isn't it? The rules could be better outside of the EU if equivalence is used (and judged from statements this week) and the EU standards would simply be the baseline.

The EU hasn't been a panacea thus far, particularly with the environment. The strongest influence they've had is with personal rights & freedoms but there have consistently been lapses when it comes to the environment. They refuse to pound down on coal in Eastern Europe/Northern Greece & overlooking Diesel-gate are just more recent ones.

The only thing that can help the environment is if green politicians get a sufficient vote in the country involved

Re: English rivers polluted by neonicotinoids, first tests reveal

#56

Post by Hendrikto »

akhatri_aus wrote: post #47
jimnotgym wrote: post #3

After years of rubbish in the UK press about the impact of regulations from the EU, they can add protecting fish, bird and most likely human health to the list of 'harm' done. I'm glad the EU still cares about the environment.

The UK is still in the EU and yet the river is still polluted.

Did you even read the article?

> EU vote to extend the ban to all outdoor uses is expected soon.

Re: English rivers polluted by neonicotinoids, first tests reveal

#57

Post by tolien »

akhatri_aus wrote: post #55
fiftyacorn wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he means it will get worse when we leave EU

That's speculative though isn't it? The rules could be better outside of the EU if equivalence is used (and judged from statements this week) and the EU standards would simply be the baseline. The EU hasn't been a panacea thus far, particularly with the environment. The strongest influence they've had is with personal rights & freedoms but there have consistently been lapses when it comes to the environment. They ref…

You’re right that it’s speculative (the UK will retain the laws created by the directives into UK law as part of the “Great” Repeal Bill so nothing might change) but the UK could have higher standards already - the EU directive sets a minimum requirement, not a maximum.

Diesel-gate is a different issue and highlights the weakness of recognising other countries’ testing standards without setting sufficiently stringent regulations to ensure that testing was valid. The problem was that member states weren’t required to do their own testing but to trust that whoever did it had done it correctly while incentivising the testing state to be lenient lest they lose the payments to perform tests.

Re: English rivers polluted by neonicotinoids, first tests reveal

#58

Post by akhatri_aus »

Hendrikto wrote: post #56
akhatri_aus wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK is still in the EU and yet the river is still polluted.

Did you even read the article? > EU vote to extend the ban to all outdoor uses is expected soon.

Did you? The runoff still comes out of greenhouses where the insecticide will be allowed to be used after the ban. What the article implies is the ban will have little effect & advocates a total ban. Commercial interests won.

> The proposed EU ban would still allow neonicotinoids to be used in greenhouses and as a flea treatment for pets. A new Greenpeace study suggests neonicotinoids are frequently found in waterways close to greenhouses where they have been used.

Re: English rivers polluted by neonicotinoids, first tests reveal

#59

Post by toyg »

akhatri_aus wrote: post #55
fiftyacorn wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he means it will get worse when we leave EU

That's speculative though isn't it? The rules could be better outside of the EU if equivalence is used (and judged from statements this week) and the EU standards would simply be the baseline. The EU hasn't been a panacea thus far, particularly with the environment. The strongest influence they've had is with personal rights & freedoms but there have consistently been lapses when it comes to the environment. They ref…

I’m not sure you’re familiar with the UK situation.

The country has no green tradition, it was dragged into modern practices kicking and screaming by German and Scandinavian-inspired EU regulations. Their rivers and beaches only started looking clean in the early ‘00s.

The Cameron government promised to be “the greenest ever” and failed to deliver on all accounts, dropping the whole issue after less than a year in power; the current one doesn’t really have a green policy at all, unless you count “build on greenfields” as such.

Because of the hardcore first-past-post electoral system, green parties in England are happy when they manage to elect 1 MP and maybe throw enough races against Labour that “reds” have to listen a bit; but in the meantime they get a Tory government that is naturally pro-business and anti-environment. The only real influence they can have is by winning seats in the proportionally-assigned EU Parliament, where they gang up with the more numerous Eurogreens and deeply influence actual regulations.

Leaving the EU is a tragedy for UK greens, and it will kill any semblance of environmental policy in the country.

Post reply on HN