I was outside my house contemplating the BT's contribution to the landscape
and wondered why, three and a half years into the twenty-first Century,
Britons foremost telco is still permitted to distribute it's wares by
dandling wires from dead trees.
I don't imagine Telewest or NTL would get away with this technique so why
can BT.

(I have this vague memory of something called Redifusion, someone tell me
that was just a bad dream)


Graham.


%Profound_observation.%

On Mon, 24 May 2004 21:27:11 +0100, "Graham" <me@you.com> wrote:

Do BT poles come from rainforests?

Historic. I bet if Telewest/NTL were allowed to use poles they would
- must be much cheaper to get wire into a property than digging up the
street and gardens.

Redifusion was no dream.

--
Hiram Hackenbacker

Hiram Hackenbacker <brains@sky.cam> wrote:
At least the one I sawed through seemed to be pine, with lots of
creosote.

Hiram Hackenbacker wrote:
Actually in at least one part of Nottingham they (Diamond/NTL)have indeed
flown their wires from poles & if you think BT's look untidy you aught to
see those...

Ian Stirling wrote:
So it's you going around cutting into poles is it...

Better be quiet about it as old nick is involved...

(on a more serious note it is actually happening)...

"Kr?ft??" <kraftee@spam_off_&_die_ntlworld.com> wrote:
And I thought it was just the crack assault digger squadron.

They cut it down first (I'm not completely sure why)ault digger squadron.

They cut it down first (I'm not completely sure why).

Ian Stirling wrote:
The ones I'm referring to are/were still standing (just).

On Mon, 24 May 2004 21:15:15 +0000, Ian Stirling wrote:
Did you know creosote has been banned? I kid you not, just do the rounds
to your local DIY stores and garden centres and try to get hold of some.

Personally I blame Blunkett. ID cards, counter terrorism, immigration,
wood preservatives, it's all part of the wider conspiracy.

K

K <kayjaybee@clara.net> wrote:
Makes about as much sense as changing the formulation in CCA wood.

"Kráftéé" <kraftee@spam_off_&_die_ntlworld.com> wrote in message
newsevsc.129$8_4.110@newsfe5-gui.server.ntli.net...

Surely you mean 'old bill'.... or are you suggesting Satan himself is up to
his old tricks?

Rory wrote:
With some of the senior management you just can't tell. I suppose they
could be trying to kill of the field staff to save on pensions, you just
can't tell nowadays...

On Tue, 25 May 2004 19:16:45 +0000, K wrote:

No it has not. A particularly nasty chemical (I forget which) has been
banned which is present in creosote. It is by no means a major component
of creosote as it is only present in small quantities. From memory it has
now been classified as a known mutagen i.e. it definitely causes damage to
DNA and is therefore certain to cause cancer. Something classified as
a carcinogen is only statistically linked to cancer, with no formal
mechanism for the cause of cancer known.

However this does not stop creosote manufactures from removing the said
chemical from their product and continuing to sell it. Last time I checked
(fairly recently and after it was supposed to be banned) it was still
available.

Any manufacture of creosote that is/was dumb enough not to head the
warning and modify their manufacturing process to remove the chemical
in question only has themselves to blame.

JAB.

--
Jonathan A. Buzzard Email: jonathan (at) buzzard.me.uk
Northumberland, United Kingdom. Tel: +44 1661-832195

Jonathan Buzzard wrote:
Now that would account for the engineers on long term poling duties & the
way they are ;-)

On Sat, 29 May 2004 16:49:10 +0100, Kráftéé wrote:

I would also add I was in B&Q this very afternoon (29/5/2004) and they
had plenty of "new formula" creosote i.e. minus the nasty banned chemical
on sale.

Frankly the original poster was another miss informed/ignorant anti E.U.
nutter. I say that because it was a supposedly nasty E.U. directive that
banned the toxic chemical. Quite why someone would want to buy a wood
preservative containing a nasty polluting, cancer causing component is
beyond me.

JAB.

--
Jonathan A. Buzzard Email: jonathan (at) buzzard.me.uk
Northumberland, United Kingdom. Tel: +44 1661-832195

Because it worked.

Do you drive ?

--
Please add "[newsgroup]" in the subject of any personal replies via email
--- My new email address has "ngspamtrap" & @btinternet.com in it ;-) ---

On Sat, 29 May 2004 21:36:17 +0100, Jonathan Buzzard
<jonathan@uk.me.buzzard> wrote:

because most of these issues are hypothetical at best. If you were to
pour the creosote down the drain for years into a fishing river and
live exclusively off the fish from that river then you might have a
few of the "pissing yourself and dribbling out of your mouth" years
shaved off the end of your life. Big deal.

Whenever you see a product about to be banned I thoroughly recommend
going out and buying a stock of it. These are always the most
effective weedkillers etc - after all, there's a fundamental conflict
between needing something to be harmful enough to do its job and yet
benign enough to allow bunnies to bath in it.

Phil

On Sun, 30 May 2004 00:01:53 +0100, Colin Wilson wrote:

DDT worked, are you proposing that we reintroduce it?

As little as possible, and the chemical in question is *very*
nasty, way more nasty than anything in petrol.

JAB.

--
Jonathan A. Buzzard Email: jonathan (at) buzzard.me.uk
Northumberland, United Kingdom. Tel: +44 1661-832195

On Sun, 30 May 2004 07:00:50 +0100, Phil Thompson wrote:

That the point you idiot, they are not hypothetical. The chemical in
question has been shown to be a mutagen. It *WILL* cause cancer.

That is shear rubbish. You simply don't understand the science. Cyanide
which is about as toxic as you can get is not going to stick around
in the environment or give you cancer because you breathed the fumes
in. Oh and it does not work having a few years shaved over the end of
your life. You could use the old style creosote and drop dead a year
latter as a result.

JAB.

--
Jonathan A. Buzzard Email: jonathan (at) buzzard.me.uk
Northumberland, United Kingdom. Tel: +44 1661-832195

On Sun, 30 May 2004 09:24:38 +0100, Jonathan Buzzard
<jonathan@uk.me.buzzard> wrote:

and how many times did this happen ? none.

Phil

On Sun, 30 May 2004 09:17:16 +0100, Jonathan Buzzard
<jonathan@uk.me.buzzard> wrote:

still in use in countries not intent on putting themselves out of
business, especially those who value their populations enought to want
to keep malaria at bay.

Phil