The NAEI offer a table of air pollutants through history...

They also offer this histogram of the totals for each pollutant...

You can drill down and look at particular years and/or industries in which you might be interested...

Perhaps in this type of air pollution world, the industry behind the fluoride being put in those wacky northerners by the www.nfl.si/new_doctors doesn't exist...

My freedom of information request asks the NAEI where these fluoride emissions could possibly have gone?

Re: The UK Government and the NAEI's Facts on Fluoride emissions 1970-2016

1970 is the earliest year in a table of data presented by The National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory at http://naei.beis.gov.uk/data/data-selector-results?q=109918.

It is also the year people in Lincoln, UK were first fluoridated. As has happened in a few other unimportant places, twenty councillors voted to chemically alter the residents by increasing their fluoride intake. I have an interest in the connection between these two as I later lived in the city, where this changed my life. 

The superphosphate fertilizer industry is a well known contributor to airborne fluorides in both HF and SiF4 forms. 

The literature on fluoride air pollution is vast and wide-ranging, in utter contrast to mainstream media coverage. Abatement can also result in devastating marine pollution at point-sources such as Immingham, where the added fluoride incorporated into Lincoln people both living and departed was extracted from minerals brought from North Africa. 

It is enough to say the overwhelming majority of the fluoridated Lincoln people were in 1970 and remain today uninformed about the existence of fluoride pollution in general, or about the factory, and that is not for want of trying by myself and many others, and that this is no accident, and that this is a problem of media control, and that it is not a conspiracy theory to say so. The opposition material could fill its own TV channel without too many repeats. Let any who says otherwise contradict these points if he can. 

But those qualified know that the seriousness with which fluoride pollution, and particularly of the air, ought to be taken should not be assessed on the basis of this deliberate blackout or dumbing down of the public perception of fluoride, which is not being sold in an honest manner but by slick misdirection and by leaving 99% of the story out. www.nfl.si/ed

For a thorough summary of the technical situation at the industrial level as of 1970 I suggest http://ufdcimages.uflib.ufl.edu/UF/00/09/77/12/00001/fluorideremovalf00crairich.pdf

Other fluoride emitting processes mentioned in the introduction thereto, namely steel, aluminium and brickmaking, are duly included in the NAEI table, which lists contributions to hydrogen fluoride emissions 1970-2016 from numerous sources and purports to be a panoptical representation of the UK's national total of these emissions. 

There are two reasons to suppose the table is a national total although nobody is going to legally prove the NAEI said so. One is that "memo items are excluded from the national total" - but there's no fertiliser factories in that part either. The other reason is that this is the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory, a sub-agency of DEFRA, the UK government's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

However in its subdivisions of activities the table contains no reference to the phosphate processing industry, which has surely existed in the UK for over a century prior to, as well as since, 1970. 

That there is a phosphate fertilizer industry in the drop down list if you want to customise the table shows the government is aware of it. The screenshots show my result. 

Airborne fluoride from the phosphate fertiliser industry during this period is therefore egregiously absent from this statistical presentation, and if not included there, there is little motive to expect that it forms part of the visual representation at http://naei.beis.gov.uk/overview/pollutants?pollutant_id=112 either.

The 2016 bar of the NAEI histogram indicates a 2016 total of 0.4 kilotonnes of HF from "Production Processes and Waste", the only category in the drop-down which could conceivably include the phosphate industry.

As the data on one of the most significant sources of airborne fluorides is missing, this seemingly good-news historical histogram can only be hagiographic. and is not particularly credible.

By a happy coincidence, pretending the phosphate fertiliser industry doesn't exist is broadly a policy position if you are in favour of fluoridating people. www.nfl.si/f-bombs

Therefore would the NAEI kindly attend to the following freedom of information request:

What is the missing data I have described?

Regards

Julian Bohan

It was sent by email on 20 July 2018.

Maintain a grip on your government with Fluoroludo