Adv. Mr. D. Or Chen: RTO This is a facility that the factories have installed to reduce the emission of VOC. It is a type of regressive thermal oxidizer that the factories have installed to reduce the emission of VOC, of the VOC. Don't you know that?
[....]
Interpreter, A. Second: I know that over time measures have been taken to reduce pollution, but I don't know details about it. My analysis was about the concentration of pollutants in the ambient air.
(page 2352, lines 9-24).
And later on -
Interpreter, A. Shani: I'll translate what the witness said and she thinks she forgot to answer some of them, so you'll have to say please if there's anything she needs to complete. The answer so far has been yes, I did answer but I will be back. The ranges I present are ranges that are averages for each and every year. I showed averages every year between 2005 and 2018 and I show the lowest and the highest and what you see from what I present there, when even though there is a 70 percent decrease in emissions, there is no 70 percent decrease in the concentrations in the ambient air relative to many components. My point was that there is no one-to-one correlation between emissions and environmental levels. What matters is levels in the ambient air. What is important is to see the full range, from lowest to highest because otherwise we might miss something...
(page 2359, lines 19-30) (see also: her testimony on page 2493, lines 19-29).
- The professional experts on behalf of the applicants [and even allegedly Prof. Grotto in his writings] completely ignored the subject of the monitored "environmental air", did not relate to it and its measurements over the years, which is the air breathed by the applicants and the other members of the group – residents of the bay, each in his area of residence. They also did not present other or contradictory data about him in the relevant years. As the respondents' experts correctly stated, the residents of Haifa Bay do not breathe the air emitted from the chimneys and in the premises of the various factories.
- Goodman's words in this context according to which "...Standards regarding air in Israel and in the United States and elsewhere, all of which are based on environmental levels, not emissions, when they come to protect public health" (page 2366, lines 11-13), are not contradicted, acceptable to me, and are required in the circumstances of the matter and in light of all that has been cited above (see also her testimony on this matter at pages 2186-2188).
- Similarly, in addition to the environmental air values measured at the various monitoring stations scattered throughout the area (see, for example, section 1 and Figure 1-4 of the first Livki opinion ), in order to examine whether the smoke emitted from the chimneys in the factories is causing the alleged excess morbidity [in what type of cancer?], it must be isolated The other causes of pollution include the other rules in the background – including transportation, the Haifa port, the electric company, and personal data such as age, smoking, and socioeconomic status should also be taken into account. This was not done and was not proven by the applicants.
- The Applicants' evidence, and especially the expert opinions on behalf of the Applicants, does not refer to or provide data regarding the ambient air or the measurement data at the monitoring stations, during the years relevant to the application. Similarly, the Applicants did not attempt to substantially undermine the many different data [including the data of the monitoring stations], which were expressed in the Libiki opinion, and were even addressed in the Goodman Opinion, including with regard to the concentrations of various materials, and the data of readings in the monitoring stations in the relevant years.
- In this context, Prof. Rennert was asked whether he had heard complaints from the Environmentalists: "...that the picture obtained from the monitoring is only partial" and they do not trust him, his answer:
The witness, Prof. Gad Rennert: The answer is that I didn't hear.