Tim Henderson
syonist.bsky.social
Tim Henderson
@syonist.bsky.social
The developer's ES on visual assessment says "some change but one that is not significant". Increased traffic in the lanes may disturb the character more.
November 29, 2025 at 9:48 PM
How much is in your drinking water ?
November 29, 2025 at 3:16 PM
Has anyone demonstrated the damage to the views from Rousham ? The developer's photomontages don't seem damning (but then they wouldn't). I'd be more upset at lack of scrutiny of PFAS from historic fire-fighting foam at US bases which seems to be concerning people from Okinawa to New Mexico.
November 29, 2025 at 12:05 PM
The photomontages from the statue of the Dying Gladiator aren't showing overwhelming damage to me (but then the developers presumably wait until full leaf development before taking the baseline pics) "to be viewed at arms length" see the dashed yellow line !
November 29, 2025 at 11:44 AM
And I think openstreetmap has a footpath running over the top of the rubbish pile down to a crossing under the A34 along the riverbank !
November 22, 2025 at 6:28 PM
Thames Water TDRA tells me that next week they should respond to my request for details of their data on PFAS compounds in the Thames at the abstraction point and in the effluent water after treatment by their trial Mogden pilot plant. They had told Ofwat it should have been in summer consultation!
November 20, 2025 at 11:15 AM
Germany seems worried about PFAS-4 levels in drinking water above 12ng/l. Almost getting frequent in my bit of London ?
www.presseportal.de/pm/7666/6150...
November 4, 2025 at 9:32 AM
It was last week when I got this www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/pfas...
November 3, 2025 at 10:16 AM
"Major Pfas pollution sources include airports, military sites,....."
Heathrow contribution :
November 3, 2025 at 7:58 AM
Despite what I thought, Wikipedia on Hampton Water Treatment Works tells me that water is abstracted from the Thames and www.sheetpilinguk.com/hampton-wtw-... tells me about protecting the eel screens.
So Portlane Brook ( ?draining PFAS from west/south of Heathrow) does enter upstream of the inlet !
November 1, 2025 at 6:56 PM
Meanwhile Thames Water have provided analyses of PFAS in the supply to my area. www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/pfas... Some results are rather higher than Jersey is trying to aspire to. PFOS 7ng/l ; PFOA 3ng/l
October 30, 2025 at 9:09 PM
Not sure if this location was sampled in the study to identify PFAS hotspots.
October 26, 2025 at 7:28 PM
I guess they don't have to replace the trees on the site they trashed ?
October 16, 2025 at 12:30 PM
And NOx (as NO2) annual mean :
October 1, 2025 at 7:06 PM
2024 modelling for mean annual NO2 :

uk-air.defra.gov.uk/data/gis-map...
October 1, 2025 at 7:03 PM
Concerned that PFAS from historic fire-fighting use hasn't been assessed and mitigated. Particularly with site being above "principal aquifer" and issues at Duxford, Jersey Airport, Schiphol.....
September 30, 2025 at 8:25 PM
Heathrow was included as a case study in the HSE Proposal for Restrictions of PFAS in Fire-fighting Foam. consultations.hse.gov.uk/crd-reach/pf...
September 15, 2025 at 3:25 PM
Not sure if Heathrow was in those 17 sites, but interested to see the "Improvement Actions" included in the revised permit for discharges issued in February 2024. environment.data.gov.uk/public-regis...
September 15, 2025 at 3:17 PM
Elevated PFOS readings in the Crane from the 2025 spot samples in the Environment Agency Water Quality Archive.
July 27, 2025 at 7:54 PM
The consultation PEIR has this for PFOS in the TDRA baseline. But I can't find anything about the other PFAS compounds. Nor any info on the PFAS discharged from Mogden either now or expected to be discharged back to Teddington in future. @munirawilson.bsky.social
July 27, 2025 at 7:47 PM
@leanahosea.bsky.social North Hyde (Heathrow) Fire review report. I wonder how the tankers of PFAS wastewater are processed off-site. www.neso.energy/document/363...
July 2, 2025 at 9:02 AM
April 25, 2025 at 8:59 PM
Mogden isn't connected to the Tideway Tunnel !
April 13, 2025 at 8:03 AM
"In the investigation into the emissions of hazardous substances the most dangerous is not included: ultrafine particles ".
April 5, 2025 at 10:36 AM
@leanahosea.bsky.social Utrecht University IRAS write about PFAS
"Almost no one says the word, but based on the above it can be said that there is a PFAS crisis"
April 4, 2025 at 12:35 PM