Production of Green Bricks in India can lead to future collapse of buildings
EKC homepage . . . . . SDN homepage
. . . . Schandpaal
EKC homepage . . . . . SDN homepage
. . . . Schandpaal
 Huizen, The Netherlands, December 25. 2002
Your Excellency,
As a follow up to my letter of August 15. 2001 in which I tried to warn the Indian people for the dangers of burning biomass in your energy stations, I now feel obliged to do the same concerning the fabrication of so called 'green bricks' for building purposes.
As in The Netherlands a technology was developed to produce bricks with fly ash and other chemical waste with a so called 'cold immobilisation technology' (AARDELITE), I have serious doubts about the safety of those bricks in the long run. This because of the endless differences of the compounds of those raw materials that will be used which also contain radioactive emitters as radon nucleons.
As a victim of those tests in a secret laboratory at Hoogovens (now Corus) in the Netherlands mr. Robert Kahlman developed serious illness. He had to test all kinds of chemical waste in a bunker in order to create a brick that was hard enough to be used in buildings. Up to 90% of toxic-waste and fly ash is used in green bricks and is also used as a replacement for artigravel pellets in concrete and in cement, next to the production of building blocks.
As a result of that project, introduced by the trading commission called the International Clean Coal Technology Cooperation The Netherlands, which was promoted by the Ministry of Economic Affaires in China, this technology of cold immobilisation of fly ash and chemical an industrial waste in bricks was presented, as you can see in the official presentation.
The danger of using those bricks is that no guarantee can be given that chemical interaction and crystallisation of some elements in the compound will emerge. The use of those bricks for construction can be hazardous because of pulverisation and the cracking of those 'green bricks'. And this can lead to the possible collapse of a building after 10, 20 or 50 years. Next to this migration of highly toxic materials out of those bricks can poison the environment; especially the water in the ground.
Below is a message from the Indian Express Newspaper (Bombay) Ltd. This entire edition is compiled in Mumbai by The Indian Express Online Media Limited, a division of The Indian Express Group of Newspapers. Managed by The Indian Express Online Media Limited and hosted by CerfNet. Monday August 14th 2000
Clear proposals of flyash-brick manufacturers in 6 weeks: HC
The High Court has asked the Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) to clear applications filed by manufacuturers of bricks using flyash-sand-lime technology within six weeks. The DPCC first gives permission to set up a unit and then to operate. All incoming proposals and the pending ones should be disposed off in a month-and-a-half, said a division bench comprising Chief Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice D K Jain. Their directions followed two petitions filed by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) and advocate B L Wadehra, which said the government has failed to prevent dumping of flyash in land fields which is an environment hazard.
The petitioners also urged effective utilisation of flyash in building and construction activities. The manufacture of bricks using the flyash-sand-lime technology does not cause pollution as the bricks are cured using an electric process. CPIL counsel Rakesh Khanna said the DPCC refused to permit operations of two manufacturers who were earlier brick kiln makers but have now invested huge amounts to make flyash bricks. The two manufacturers have not surrendered the land as per Supreme Court orders, the DPCC said in its letter on January 5. Five days later, it directed the units to remain closed. On April 28, the Supreme Court said matters regarding brick kilns will be taken separately and the order of land surrender will not apply to them. The DPCC should be directed to grant the two units permission to operate, Khanna told the court.
I do hope You will appreciate my information.
Robert M. Brockhus (webmaster SDN)
Huizen, The Netherlands, August 15th. 2001
To H.E. Ms. Shyamala B. Cowsik
Herewith I send you a copy of my letter to the appropriate European Commissions on August 15th 2001, in order to warn for a possible economical disruption concerning the energy supply in developing countries, as well as for the consequences for all people because of the diffused spread of carcenogenic and toxic materials, such as heavy metals, into the air. The text speaks for itself.
With the highest regards,
Robert M. Brockhus
Subject: Huizen, The Netherlands, August 15. 2001
This is the third mail you receive from the Social Databank Netherlands. All members of your committee with an e-mail box will receive this mail, and the members of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer policy will be informed as well, next to the members of the committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market and on Budgetary Control. Also the appropriate contacts with the press will have a copy of this mail. In the Netherlands the government and all members of parliament with an e-mail address have received a third version, as well as the Dutch press and broadcasting services.
Thank you for your attention on a international problem deriving from the World Trade Organisation Treaty en the GATS treaty for services for our environment and our health; for now and in the future, especially for the solutions that are available today as shown with this video (click)
The Dutch ministry for the environment (VROM) mr. J. Pronk, claims ƒ 1.300.000.000 guilders or € 590.000.000 euro to subsidize the burning of (toxic) waste and biomass in electricity stations. The minister knows that huge quantities of heavy metals such as arsenic, chrome, mercury, cadmium and other carcinogenic toxins will be dispersed into the environment through the chimney exhaust.
In my opinion it is fraudelous to acquire community money to produce so called "Green current" in privatised energy stations, fuelled with coal in order to dispose of toxic biomass on a large scale, making excessive profits at the expense of health conditions of all Europeans. Besides this, the way this taxpayers money is used must be unacceptable, because in a neo-colonial way public funds result in private property in other and developing countries which will harm competition locally.
For example: NUON now invests with our public money in private energy stations in India in order to produce any amount of so called 'GREEN CURRENT' for the local market and with a certificate of an Indian office, NUON can collect 17 guilder cents or 7,7 euro cents for each kilowatt hour by burning (abundantly available) waste with an uncontrolled label 'BIOMASS'. This is new form of colonialism, financed with community money and ruining the local energy market (in India) for electricity, because the currency exchange rate between the guilder and or euro to the rupiah of India is so wide that local energy stations in India will go broke, just as the Berkel station did in Holland, that produced nearly clean electricity by fuelling with natural gas.
I herewith reto block this subsidy and appoint the use of those funds differently to invoke to days technology, called the "Zero-option", that was developed by a recycling company in the Netherlands. With this technology we can get rid of all toxic waste completely. To view this technology you can visit a website where de demonstration video is available. All spoken in Dutch of course. Do visit the website of the Social Databank Netherlands at
video.html and choose the icon
Edelchemie: de NUL-optie
Please let me know if you have understood what benefit the European community can have from this environmental solution. Sincerely, Robert M. Brockhus (webmaster of the SDN)
|
Stichting Sociale Databank Nederland
E-mailadres: sdn@planet.nl
Internet site:
http://www.sdnl.nl/india-2.htm
