A sickening burnt smell descends over Shrewsbury. Darwinism comes home to roost.


Last night driving home past Battlefield, you could see a clear line of smoke tracking east, spewing out of the brand new Shrewsbury incinerator chimney.  Lit up by the moon against a clear night sky, the plume was floating past up above our heads, but inside the car you could, nevertheless, smell the burned matter quite distinctly.

That’s hardly surprising as the Shrewsbury incinerator is finally being commissioned (over the Christmas break to avoid active opposition. There is no mention of it in The Shropshire Star of course or on BBC Shropshire Radio) in preparation to burn 270,000 tonnes of waste matter being brought here from all over the West Midlands, one container lorry dumping its load every five minutes burning the unknown and unknowable contents round the clock.  Nothing could be more dangerous for the people expected to breathe this s***, bar a nuclear power station melting down on our doorstep.

Walking with my son this afternoon, a day with light winds of no particular direction, you could pick up the same smell of burnt matter across The Quarry and over the English Bridge into the town centre.  Walking back up our street, I mentioned the smell to the neighbour.  She said she’d been puzzled as to what it was.  I had the dubious privilege of being able to inform her.  She went silent.


Now back in the house, I feel as if I’ve had a layer of chemical particles planted across my throat.  I am belching constantly and feeling nauseous.  This stupidity (the incinerator) was resisted by Shropshire Council, who received a bill for legal costs of nearly £1 million in failing to do so successfully.  More’s the pity.  People are now about to pay a far higher price with their health.

We are faced with activation of this abomination from Veolia the same idiots who control the pick-up of our domestic rubbish with a fantastically lucrative contract from the Council that secures them and their earnings for a comfortable twenty years without the need to face any competitive bids.  Ensuring the people of Shrewsbury and its environs now fully comply with government death targets is another highly lucrative contract for this deadly corporation.  It won’t be long as far as I can see before rates of sickness surge.  It’s £90 million very well spent, if you support the depopulation agenda and plan to make Shrewsbury into a ‘sustainable’ town.  The problem for the citizens is the that the idea of lowering population means we won’t be able to sustain health, life or anything else.


That’s certainly not something that will bother Veolia.  

The name Veolia makes me think of nothing other than saying the phrase ‘violently sick’ except the actual event takes over during the first syllable.

Reports from Ireland indicate that rates of death around incinerators can be expected to rise, along with birth defects and all the other health effects associated with high levels of chemical pollution.  How nice of these people to bring this evil to our homes in sleepy Shrewsbury.  The famous Town Of Flowers will from now on be wilting under its load, literally incinerated.  So much for the plans to build a University here.  What will the students be studying? Hospital ceilings.  Hospices.  Funeral homes.  Undertaking.  Asthma.  Cancer.  Defective foetuses. I could add to the list, but you get the picture.


The Town Of Toxic Fumes can lay its gratitude for a much reduced future at the feet of its supposed hero, Charles Darwin, whose learned works led on to the eugenics movement, the holocaust, Malthus, the RIO Earth Summit, and the consequent 21st Century depopulation agenda.  Darwinism, the brutal philosophy associated with his name, and already responsible for killing millions all over the world, came home today.   All is set to deliver Darwinian misery all over the town from hereon, the town near to where he was born and the town where he is still, for some inexplicable reason, highly regarded.



This extract from an assessment made in Ireland of the likely effects of this health-destroying abomination gives you what people will soon be contending with in sleepy Shrewsbury.


Particulates, or particulate matter (PM) is a complex mixture of organic and inorganic particles that can be solid, liquid or both, suspended in the air. There is a large, and increasing body of research highlighting the health dangers of particulates found in incinerator emissions. Research done in 2004 by the WHO European Centre for Environment and Health, Bonn found that:

  • PM increases the risk of respiratory death in infants under 1 year, affects the rate of lung function development, aggravates asthma and causes other respiratory symptoms such as cough and bronchitis in children;
  • PM2.5 seriously affects health, increasing deaths from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases and lung cancer. Increased PM2.5 concentrations increase the risk of emergency hospital admissions for cardiovascular and respiratory causes; and
  • PM10 affects respiratory morbidity, as indicated by hospital admissions for respiratory illness (WHO fact sheet, 2005; 2).

In terms of heavy metals, several of the metals found in the emissions and ash produced by incinerators are known or suspected carcinogens. These toxins accumulate in the body over time. In children they have been implicated in childhood problems including autism, dyslexia, allergies, impulsive behaviour attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) as well as learning difficulties, lowered intelligence and delinquency. Exposed adults have demonstrated higher levels of violence, dementia and depression than in non-exposed adults. They have also been implicated in Parkinson’s disease. Inhalation of some of them, such as nickel, beryllium, chromium, cadmium and arsenic, is found to increase the risk of lung cancer. Mercury, one of the most dangerous heavy metals, is neurotoxic and implicated in learning disabilities, hyperactivity as well as Alzheimer’s Disease.

The report also found that a large number of the toxins emitted by incinerators can cause damage to the immune system. It is now thought that the synergistic effect of the combination of various toxins is likely to have an even more potent and damaging effect on immunity than any pollutant in isolation. Most of these chemicals are fat-soluble and accumulate in the fatty organs and tissue. They are particularly dangerous to the unborn child because many of these toxins are actively transmitted to the foetus across the mother’s placenta, for the body mistakes heavy metals for essential minerals. Until very late in the pregnancy, the only fatty tissues that the foetus has, is its nervous system and particularly the brain, so it is there that they accumulate.

The National Research Council was established to advise the US government on the extent of population that would be exposed to health hazards by an incinerator. They concluded that,

Persistent air pollutants, such as dioxins, furans and mercury can be dispersed over large regions – well beyond local areas and even the countries from which the sources emanate. Food contaminated by an incinerator facility might be consumed by local people close to the facility or far away from it. Thus, local deposition on food might result in some exposure of populations at great distances, due to transport of food to markets. However, distant populations are likely to be more exposed through long-range transport of pollutants and low-level widespread deposition on food crops at locations remote from an incineration facility (B.S.E.M.report,2005;34).

When looking at the updated incinerators that cause less air pollution, they found that they cause more toxic ash, which is easily wind-borne. It is of critical importance, that there is still no adequate method for disposing with this toxic fly ash and that it has a record of being poorly regulated.

The evaluated cost of incineration is enormous, not just in the waste disposal costs, which are very high, but also in health and environmental damage, which can cost countries billions to address. It was exactly for these types of situations that the Precautionary Principle was introduced into national and international law. A recent review of health effects of incinerators found a positive exposure-disease association with cancer and congenital malformations. It would therefore seem that from the evidence presented in this report, that building municipal waste incinerations not only contravenes the Precautionary Principle but possibly, European law.

Finally, the authors of the report note that,

Taking into account these results and the difficulty in identifying causes of cancers and other chronic diseases, it is a matter of considerable concern that incinerators have been introduced without a comprehensive system to study their health effects and that further incinerators are being planned without comprehensive monitoring either of emission or of the health of the local population. (B.S.E.M. report, 2005; 21)

As Professor C. V. Howard from the Centre for Molecular Biosciences, University of Ulster, concluded in his foreword on the report,

Incineration destroys accountability and this encourages industries to go on making products that lead to problematic toxic wastes. Once the waste has been reduced to ash who can say who made what? The past 150 years has seen a progressive “toxification” of the waste stream with heavy metals, radionuclides and synthetic halogenated organic molecules. It is time to start reversing that trend. We won’t achieve that while we continue to incinerate waste.

Juliet Duff,
Irish Doctors’ Environmental Association (IDEA)

TAP – If Veolia want to disguise what they’re up to (why else is there a media blanket over the firing of the incinerator?), they should wait for a windy day and then fire their plant.  It’s nice and dark in the evenings, and people are all relaxed enjoying their Christmas break, but there’s no wind.  So the noxious fumes are hanging around giving the game away.


28 Responses to “A sickening burnt smell descends over Shrewsbury. Darwinism comes home to roost.”

  1. Anonymous says:

    Truly shocking !! they have to be stopped. We really have got to take our rights back and the laws. The whole thing is rigged against us in such a sneaky backhanded way. The cowards hide everything and one day they will answer for their devious plots. All this green energy and re-cycling is a joke and a set up. These dark lords are destroying everything green.

    • sovereigntea says:

      TIP use a site like this to sniff out the company structure and the owners.

      You will need to create a login ( free for basic info ). Once logged in click the link below.


      In the case of Veolia ownership is masked behind a miasma of companies and investors. Once would be reluctant to rule out those in turn being commonly owned and managed further up the pryamid of interlinked globalist corporations.

      The net result is that they have a large war chest are unaccountable and can stomp on the rights of the individual even if represented by local govt.

  2. sovereigntea says:

    Here is the rub French Directed Veolia might pollute the atmosphere by burning waste and thus pollute the water supply (what goes up must come down).

    As a drinking water supplier do you think they will detect, report and rectify their own pollution ?

    The parent company the centre of the vast UK Veolia web is Veolia Environmental Services (UK) Plc, its shares are 100% owned by a holding company Veolia Es (UK) Limited who’s ultimate parent is a French company

    – veolia environnement sa

    On The Board of that is

    Paolo Scaroni NM Rothschild & Sons Ltd

    Paolo Scaroni is also Vice Chairman, NM Rothschild & Sons Ltd

    There appears to be no major equity owner having more than 2.9% and a 50/50 split between funds (e.g GMO International Equity III) and institutions( e.g banks HSBC France ).

    Company Profile
    Sector: Utilities
    Industry: Utilities
    Sub-Industry: Utility Networks
    Veolia Environnement operates utility and public transportation businesses. The Company supplies drinking water, provides waste management services, manages and maintains heating and air conditioning systems, and operates rail and road passenger transportation systems.

    Estelle Brachlianoff
    Dircector:Northern Europe

    Antoine Frerot

    More Details and list of foreign controllers here


    An interesting way to show ones discontent French style might be to obtain an old dustbin & burn some stinky smokey grass cuttings upwind of the Veoilia CEO as he sits down to his lunch. Trouble is you will have to travel to Paris to find him.

    Here is a list of UK Directors Veolia Environmental Services (UK) Plc

    Miss Carine Isabelle Kraus
    Born 35 years ago: Dec 1979
    22 May 2014 — Present (7 months, 7 days)

    Mrs Estelle Karine Brachlianoff
    Born 42 years ago: Jul 1972
    Director, Chief Executive Officer
    29 Aug 2012 — Present (2 years, 4 months)


    Mr Francois Louis, Andre Bertreau
    Born 59 years ago: Jan 1955
    24 May 2013 — Present (1 year, 7 months, 5 days)


    Mr Robert Charles Hunt
    Born 57 years ago: Jun 1957
    Director, Executive Director
    28 Nov 2013 — Present (1 year, 1 month, 1 day)


    Miss Celia Rosalind Gough
    Born 39 years ago: Jan 1975
    Director, Solicitor
    28 Nov 2013 — Present (1 year, 1 month, 1 day)


    Mr Gavin Howard Graveson
    Born 51 years ago: Aug 1963
    Director, Executive Director
    28 Nov 2013 — Present (1 year, 1 month, 1 day)


    Mr Patrick Richard Gilroy
    Born 43 years ago: Nov 1971
    Director, Chief Executive Officer
    28 Nov 2013 — Present (1 year, 1 month, 1 day)


    Mr David Andrew Gerrard
    Born 50 years ago: Dec 1964
    Director, Executive Director
    28 Nov 2013 — Present (1 year, 1 month, 1 day)


    Mrs Celia Rosalind Gough
    Born: Unknown
    Company Secretary
    28 Nov 2013 — Present (1 year, 1 month, 1 day)


  3. Tapestry says:

    The French are never happier than when they’re killing large numbers of British

  4. anonymous says:

    Nice scaremongering, didn’t look like smoke to me, more like vapour? You mention reports from Ireland, are there no such reports from England? Perhaps you could provide some alternatives to throwing our rubbish in the ground? Your article appears very one sided, why would the relevant agencies allow an operation such as this to be built if it was so bad for the environment? Do the Council have £90m to give to Veolia in less than 20 years? With your viewpoint, it looks like it wouldn’t matter who built or ran this, you would still be opposed? Perhaps a balanced view would be better in order for people to be allowed to way up any pros and cons then make their own minds up?

  5. Anon says:

    Such an unbalanced piece of writing which reads like a rant from someone with an axe to grind. I get this might be a pet cause for you but you make your case better if you consider all view points, as it is you sound like a crank that’s only taken seriously by other cranks (see comments above). Also, what’s with the bizarre dig at Darwin at the end? He was a scientists who came up with a theory. Are you angry at Newton too because something once fell on your head?

  6. anonymous says:

    I have not smelled any offensive odours and I only live 1.5 miles away. It is all well and good arguing about corruption and the involvment of the French etc etc- the incinerator is here to stay. Watching the complex construction of it over the months , surely a lot of research must have gone into the safety of it and its impact on the environment around it prior to construction . At the end of the day, what are we supposed to do with all the tonnes of rubbish we accumulate ? I was at the tip on the 27th and it was busier than the Next sale at opening time !! Surely we can only use landfill for so long before there is no space left and we literally do burst at the seams.

  7. Tapestry says:

    If you can’t smell it, you’re not trying hard enough. It is very noticeable but only once they’re firing it up, which is happening at different times of the day. As people don’t click through to the medical evidence at the foot of the post, I’ve added that at the bottom. This incinerator will kill a large number of people and cause many more to become sick and have shorter, unpleasant lives. Those are the facts. The only question is how long it will take people to realise this and get the plant closed. Thanks for your comments. The evidence is suppressed. That’s why the public doesn’t know and the ‘experts’ are overridden.

  8. barrie jenks says:

    The incinerator is the monster we have all created, everyone of us is to blame.
    You sit in your comfortable house full of conveniences you have been throwing your rubbish away for years, only to have it magically disappear on a set day of the week, where do you think it goes?
    You buy that ready meal, put it in a plastic bag, take it home and cook it, throw away your rubbish….
    You buy your apple juice, your milks and drinks in the evil that is tetrapak cartons, you throw them in the bin…
    You buy those toys for little jonny at xmas, the plethora of plastic packaging the cardboard and plastic coated wires, some may be recycled but the rest you throw in the bin…
    Only you can stop feeding the monster, it’s not just about reducing, reusing and recycling, it’s about changing your consumerism, doing without the conveniences you think you cannot do without! Change your shopping methods, change your outlook and expectations of what services you need, stop creating the demand for such things and these abominations will become redundant.
    You, me, WE are all to blame, do not start whining at the corporations at this late hour, do something about it starting by looking at yourself!

    • Tapestry says:

      The packaging is the supermarkets. If the small shops had survived (taxes and bankers drove them out), or if farmers were allowed to distribute their output (nor permitted by DEFRA), there needn’t be so much packaging. People are not allowed to burn their own rubbish, which would be under their own control. Its a regulated world created by big government. The contents of the waste are toxic. There is no need to be using so many toxic substances, plastics etc. That’s the preference of the oil companies.

  9. enonymous says:

    i find it surprising that you say you had no warning it was going to be started up when it as as i was aware and i dont live in shrewsbury

    • Tapestry says:

      The last coverage in the Shropshire Star was November. Of course we know it’s coming. We can see the bloody great building and chimney. What is so obvious is the deception being practised by not announcing the firing up of the plant at all on any media – BBC radio Shropshire or the Shropshire Star or any other medium like TV. It falls to blogs such as this to let people know what is being done to them on the sly. If you don’t realise why they’re frightened of people finding out/noticing what they’re up to, then what else can I say? They obviously want to run a yawn-inducing report in a week or two saying the plant started operations over Christmas hoping no one notices the change in their environment that’s taking place. When the rate of cancers and birth defects starts to lift, they’ll say that it’s not necessarily a result of the incinerator, and it’s been functioning a year or two by then. Very cunning stuff. Yet we know their game and we’re onto them.

  10. Anonymous says:

    The packaging is making megga bucks for the corporates. Our food was healthier when grown and bought locally. Very little waste all round. We have been led down the path with these shysters. All in the name of convenience and for our own good. Well now we are seeing the damage to health and the environment. Flying food from accross the world so we have no idea what we are eating anymore. Common bloody sense tells us things are out of control and in the wrong hands. We need change and it is coming…!

  11. Pengwern says:

    You lost me when you brought Darwin into it, sorry!

  12. brassmonkey001 says:

    This would be an interesting and informative article apart from the bit about Darwin which makes you sound like an utter crackpot and thus undermines the whole article.

    • Tapestry says:

      Alternatively there is something for you still to learn. Sounding like a crackpot is a necessary part of telling people things they don’t know and very often don’t want to know. It’s my speciality!

  13. Anonymous says:

    Awesome posts. I live less than a mile away from the incinerator. I opposed it right from the start. I leafleted in the town against it. I went to the meetings. I did everything I legally could to stop this plant from opening. Obviously to no avail, as big money and signed deals while taking the (then) Council out for hospitality has proven. Thanks must go to our conservative mp, Dan Kawczynski, who said he’d lie in the road to make sure the thing wouldn’t get built .. and then promptly jumped ship (cheers, Dan). Also have to laugh at the people outside of Shrewsbury who didn’t want the thing in their back yard, but are only too happy to let their waste be disposed of here. Finally, thinking back (and now that the damn thing’s here to stay) .. where were all you complainers when we had a chance to stop them? Too late to moan now.

  14. anonymous says:

    Not reading any complaints about the thick black smoke regularly appearing from ABP’s chimney?

    • Anonymous says:

      ABP just deals in animal waste. The Battlefield Incinerator will burn just about anything that’s chucked at it .. animal waste .. human waste .. hospital waste .. chemical waste .. you name it: it’ll get incinerated there. The white smoke from the B.I. is steam, as that is what they use first-off to check that the chimney has no cracks (the steam fuses it). It’ll be sometime early January before we get the pleasure of seeing “proper” waste being burned there.

  15. Helen Thiara says:

    I am very concerned by this news. This is the first time I have heard anything about it. I am wondering what I can do to help the situation please?

    • Tapestry says:

      You have to form a pressure group and exert pressure on the Council, on the people of Shrewsbury and finally Veolia. If the population won’t tolerate the incinerator, it will have to be closed. Activists can stop traffic easily enough. It only takes a few determined cars to block a road. If that happens every day, the incinerator will become impossible to run. Campaigning from the grass roots can be highly effective. It just needs a few very determined people to build such an opposition group and campaign.

  16. Richard Price says:

    Such anger, and debate, regarding this issue (and it is an issue), essentially, boils down to 2 things.
    1. How prepared YOU are to revise the FACTS regarding the current state we are in, and-
    2. How prepared YOU are to change what YOU can.
    This is not a problem unique to our beautiful town, as even a child could tell you…..the entire Earth is being treated like some kind of money-generating slave to man.
    I am very proud of the people informing the truth, and feel INCREDIBLY sorry for the mindless idiots who HONESTLY think this is a good thing.
    I genuinely hope anyone who doesnt see the bad in this incinerator isnt responsible for anything bigger than a crayon, and a dummy.
    One thing we can seek solice in, however, is that all the morons who think this is good, are either incredibly unhealthy already (thankfully VERY likely), due to their parhetic ignorance, or are suffering horrendous levels of stress as a result of their money-hunger, and “unnacountability” regarding their child-like ability to admitting a bad-thing.
    We all know a tw#t, when we see one.
    What goes around, my fine folk.

    • Tapestry says:

      Incineration is not a good thing. No need to blame the people being poisoned by it. The scheme is targeted on them. They are the victims, not the perpetrators. It’s the foundation of the depopulation agenda to blame the people for causing their own deaths from poison, merely by being alive. If an incinerator has to be used it should sited where the wind blows and blows constantly preferably near the sea. Otherwise stay with land-fill and cutting down on packaging – replacing milk plastic with glass bottles as used before, for example. The corporations wanted the plastics brought in, not the consumer.

  17. Charlie says:

    I was quiet surprised to read comments from well informed locals. I didn’t know they could still legally burn mixed waste anywhere in the UK, because of the inherent toxins released from plastics PCB, Dioxins etc. It’s ridiculous to have it at all, let alone so close to town. There’s some interesting commercial factors, 1, The Landfill Tax has increased substantially this year and 2. possibly related to the fact Shropshire only has one power station.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.