text:
Chrome plating

Chrome plating (less commonly chromium plating) is a technique of electroplating a thin layer of chromium onto a metal object. A chrome plated part is called chrome, or is said to have been chromed. The chromium layer can be decorative, provide corrosion resistance, facilitate cleaning, and increase surface hardness. Sometimes, a less expensive substitute for chrome, such as nickel may be used for aesthetic purposes.

Chromium compounds used in electroplating are toxic. In most countries, their disposal is tightly regulated. Some fume suppressants used to control the emission of airborne chromium from plating baths are also toxic, making disposal even more difficult.

Process
The preparation and chrome plating of a part typically includes some or all of these steps:
 * Surface preparation
 * Manual cleaning to remove dirt and surface impurities
 * Removal of remaining organic contaminants using emulsion cleaning, alkaline cleaning, anodic electrocleaning, or solvent cleaning by immersion, spray, manual application, or vapor condensation
 * Rinsing
 * Activation or electroetching
 * Rinsing (not necessary if the activation and plating steps are done in the same bath)
 * Immersion in the chrome plating bath, where the part is allowed to warm to solution temperature
 * Application of plating current for the required time to attain the desired thickness
 * Rinsing

There are many variations to this process, depending on the type of substrate being plated. Different substrates need different etching solutions, such as hydrochloric, hydrofluoric, and sulfuric acids. Ferric chloride is also popular for the etching of nimonic alloys. Sometimes the component enters the chrome plating vat while electrically live. Sometimes the component has a conforming anode made from lead/tin or platinized titanium. A typical hard chrome vat plates at about 0.001 in per hour.

Some common industry specifications governing the chrome plating process are AMS 2460, AMS 2406, and MIL-STD-1501.

Hexavalent chromium
Hexavalent chromium plating, also known as hex-chrome, Cr6+, and chrome(VI) plating, uses chromium trioxide (CrO3, also known as chromic anhydride) as the main ingredient. Hexavalent chromium plating solution is used for both decorative and hard plating, as well as bright dipping of copper alloys, chromic acid anodizing, and chromate conversion coating.

A typical hexavalent chromium plating process is:

 * 1) Activation bath
 * 2) Chromium bath
 * 3) Rinse
 * 4) Second rinse

The activation bath is typically a tank of chromic acid with a reverse current run through it. This etches the work-piece surface and removes any scale. In some cases, the activation step is done in the chromium bath. The chromium bath is a mixture of chromium trioxide and sulfuric acid, the ratio of which varies greatly between 75:1 to 250:1 by weight. This results in an extremely acidic bath (pH 0). The temperature and current density in the bath affect the brightness and final coverage. For decorative coating the temperature ranges from 35 to 45 C, but for hard coating it ranges from 50 to 65 C. Temperature is also dependent on the current density, because a higher current density requires a higher temperature. Finally, the whole bath is agitated to keep the temperature steady and achieve a uniform deposition.

Disadvantages
One functional disadvantage of hexavalent chromium plating is low cathode efficiency, which results in bad throwing power. This means it leaves a non-uniform coating, with more on edges and less in inside corners and holes. To overcome this problem the part may be over-plated and ground to size, or auxiliary anodes may be used around the hard-to-plate areas. Hexavalent chromium is also considerably more toxic than trivalent chromium, rendering it a major health risk both in manufacturing and disposal if not handled with care.

Trivalent chromium
Trivalent chromium plating, also known as tri-chrome, Cr3+, and chrome(III) plating, uses chromium sulfate or chromium chloride as the main ingredient. Trivalent chromium plating is an alternative to hexavalent chromium in certain applications and thicknesses (e.g. decorative plating).

A trivalent chromium plating process is similar to the hexavalent chromium plating process, except for the bath chemistry and anode composition. There are three main types of trivalent chromium bath configurations:

 * A chloride- or sulfate-based electrolyte bath using graphite or composite anodes, plus additives to prevent the oxidation of trivalent chromium to the anodes.
 * A sulfate-based bath that uses lead anodes surrounded by boxes filled with sulfuric acid (known as shielded anodes), which keeps the trivalent chromium from oxidizing at the anodes.
 * A sulfate-based bath that uses insoluble catalytic anodes, which maintains an electrode potential that prevents oxidation.

The trivalent chromium-plating process can plate the workpieces at a similar temperature, rate and hardness, as compared to hexavalent chromium. Plating thickness ranges from 5 to 50 μin.

Advantages and disadvantages
The functional advantages of trivalent chromium are higher cathode efficiency and better throwing power. Better throwing power means better production rates. Less energy is required because of the lower current densities required. The process is more robust than hexavalent chromium because it can withstand current interruptions.

One of the disadvantages when the process was first introduced was that decorative customers disapproved of the color differences. Companies now use additives to adjust the color. In hard coating applications, the corrosion resistance of thicker coatings is not quite as good as it is with hexavalent chromium. The cost of the chemicals is greater, but this is usually offset by greater production rates and lower overhead costs. In general, the process must be controlled more closely than in hexavalent chromium plating, especially with respect to metallic impurities. This means processes that are hard to control, such as barrel plating, are much more difficult using a trivalent chromium bath.

Divalent chromium
Divalent chromium plating is done from liquids comprising Cr2+ species. Such solutions were avoided prior to ca. 2020, because of air-sensitivity and hydrogen evolution from aqueous Cr2+ solutions. In the 2020s, it was discovered that CrCl2 has ca. 4.0 M solubility in water at room temperature (i.e. with H2O:Cr molar ratio around 14:1), and such liquids behave like supersaturated electrolytes with a reduced propensity toward hydrogen evolution. The best quality bright deposits are produced at relatively high current density of 20 mA/cm2.

Decorative

 is designed to be aesthetically pleasing and durable. Thicknesses range from 2 to 20 μin, however, they are usually between 5 and 10 μin. The chromium plating is usually applied over bright nickel plating. Typical base materials include steel, aluminium, plastic, copper alloys, and zinc alloys. Decorative chrome plating is also very corrosion resistant and is often used on car parts, tools and kitchen utensils.

Hard
', also known as ' or , is used to reduce friction, improve durability through abrasion tolerance and wear resistance in general, minimize galling or seizing of parts, expand chemical inertness to include a broader set of conditions (such as oxidation resistance), and bulking material for worn parts to restore their original dimensions. It is very hard, measuring between 65 and 69 HRC (also based on the base metal's hardness). Hard chrome tends to be thicker than decorative chrome, with standard thicknesses in non-salvage applications ranging from 20 to 40 μm, but it can be an order of magnitude thicker for extreme wear resistance requirements, in such cases 100 μm or thicker provides optimal results. Unfortunately, such thicknesses emphasize the limitations of the process, which are overcome by plating extra thickness then grinding down and lapping to meet requirements, or to improve the overall aesthetics of the chromed piece. Increasing plating thickness amplifies surface defects and roughness in proportional severity, because hard chrome does not have a leveling effect. Pieces that are not ideally shaped in reference to electric field geometries (nearly every piece sent in for plating, except spheres and egg shaped objects) require even thicker plating to compensate for non-uniform deposition, and much of it is wasted when grinding the piece back to desired dimensions.

Modern engineered coatings do not suffer such drawbacks, which often price hard chrome out due to labor costs alone. Hard chrome replacement technologies outperform hard chrome in wear resistance, corrosion resistance, and cost. Hardness up to 80 HRC is not extraordinary for such materials. Modern engineered coatings applied using spray deposition can form layers of uniform thickness that often require no further polishing or machining. These coatings are often composites of polymers, metals, and ceramic powders or fibers as proprietary formulas protected by patents or as trade secrets, and thus are usually known by brand names.

Hard chromium plating is subject to different types of quality requirements depending on the application; for instance, the plating on hydraulic piston rods are tested for corrosion resistance with a salt spray test.

Automotive use
Most bright decorative items affixed to cars are referred to as "chrome", meaning steel that has undergone several plating processes to endure the temperature changes and weather that a car is subject to outdoors. However, the term passed on to cover any similar-looking shiny decorative auto parts, including silver plastic trim pieces in casual terminology. Triple plating is the most expensive and durable process, which involves plating the steel first with copper and then nickel before the chromium plating is applied.

Prior to the application of chrome in the 1920s, nickel electroplating was used. In the short production run prior to the US entry into the Second World War, the government banned plating to save chromium and automobile manufacturers painted the decorative pieces in a complementary color. In the last years of the Korean War, the US contemplated banning chrome in favor of several cheaper processes (such as plating with zinc and then coating with shiny plastic).

In 2007, a Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive (RoHS) was issued banning several toxic substances for use in the automotive industry in Europe, including hexavalent chromium, which is used in chrome plating. However, chrome plating is metal and contains no hexavalent chromium after it is rinsed, so chrome plating is not banned.

Arms use
Chrome-lining protects the barrel or chamber of arms from corrosion and makes these parts also easier to clean, but this is not the main purpose for lining a barrel or chamber. Chrome-lining was introduced in machine guns to increase the wear resistance and service life of highly stressed arms parts like barrels and chambers, allowing more rounds to be fired before a barrel is worn and needs to be replaced. The end of the chamber, freebore and leade (the unrifled portion of the barrel just forward of the chamber), as well as the first few centimeters or few inches of rifling, in rifles are subject to very high temperatures — as the energy content of rifle propellants can exceed 3500 kJ/kg — and pressures that can exceed 380 MPa. The propellant gases act similarly as the flame from a cutting torch, the gases heating up the metal to red-hot state and the velocity tearing away metal. Under slow fire conditions, the affected areas are able to cool sufficiently in between shots. Under sustained rapid fire or automatic/cyclic fire there is no time for the heat to dissipate. The heat and pressure effects exerted by the hot propellant gasses and friction by the projectile can quickly cause damage by washing away metal at the end of the chamber, freebore, leade and rifling. Hard chrome-lining protects the chamber, freebore, leade and rifling with a thin coat of wear resistant chrome. This significantly extends barrel life in arms that are fired for prolonged periods in full-auto or sustained rapid fire modes. Some arms manufacturers use Stellite-lining alloy as an alternative to hard chrome-lining to further increase the wear resistance and service life of highly stressed arms parts.

Health and environmental concerns
Hexavalent chromium is the most toxic form of chromium. In the U.S., the Environmental Protection Agency regulates it heavily. The EPA lists hexavalent chromium as a hazardous air pollutant because it is a human carcinogen, a "priority pollutant" under the Clean Water Act, and a "hazardous constituent" under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Due to its low cathodic efficiency and high solution viscosity, a toxic mist of water and hexavalent chromium is released from the bath. Wet scrubbers are used to control these emissions. The liquid from the wet scrubbers is treated to precipitate the chromium and remove it from the wastewater before it is discharged.

Additional toxic waste created from hexavalent chromium baths include lead chromates, which form in the bath because lead anodes are used. Barium is also used to control the sulfate concentration, which leads to the formation of barium sulfate (BaSO4).

Trivalent chromium is intrinsically less toxic than hexavalent chromium. Because of the lower toxicity it is not regulated as strictly, which reduces overhead costs. Other health advantages include higher cathode efficiencies, which lead to less chromium air emissions; lower concentration levels, resulting in less chromium waste and anodes that do not decompose.

Maintaining a bath surface tension less than 35 dyn/cm is necessary to prevent plating solution from becoming airborne when bubbles rise to the surface and pop. This requires a frequent cycle of treating the bath with a wetting agent fume suppressant and confirming the effect on surface tension. Usually, surface tension is measured with a stalagmometer or tensiometer. This method is, however, tedious and suffers from inaccuracy (errors up to 22 dyn/cm have been reported), and is dependent on the user's experience and capabilities.

While they are effective for the control of toxic airborne chromium, many widely used wetting agent fume suppressants are toxic themselves because they contain perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which are hazardous chemicals that can cause long-term health effects. This makes electroplating one of the jobs with the highest risk of occupational exposure to PFAS, but not as high as firefighters using fluorinated aqueous film forming foams. In addition to their detrimental effects on human health, PFAS are persistent pollutants that cause significant bioaccumulation and biomagnification, putting animals at the highest trophic level at the highest risk for toxic effects.

Mechanism of chromium electroplating
It has been known for over a century, that chromium electroplating is relatively easy from (di)chromate solutions, but difficult from Cr3+ solutions. Several theories have been proposed to explain this finding.

An earlier view suggested, that an active Cr3+ species (perhaps, with a ligand rather than water) forms initially from electroreduced Cr6+. This active Cr3+ species can be reduced into metallic chromium relatively easy. However, the "active Cr3+" also undergoes within less than 1 second a transition into "inactive Cr3+", which is believed to be a polymeric hexa-aqua complex. Some complexes of Cr3+ with ligand other than water can undergo relatively fast electroreduction to metallic chromium, and they are used in chromate-free chromium plating methods.

A different school of thought suggests, that the main problem with chromium plating from Cr3+ solution is hydrogen evolution reaction (HER), and the role of chromate is to scavenge H+ ions in a reaction that competes with H2 evolution:

Cr2O72- + 14H+ + 6e- → 2Cr3+ + 7H2O

The shine of plated chrome depends on whether microscopic cracks in the plating are visible on the surface. The dull appearance of some chrome layers is due to continuous cracks that propagate through the whole plated metal layer, while bright deposits appear in the case of small microcracks that are confined to inner depth of the deposit. This HER side-reaction mechanism seems more acceptable by the electrochemistry community at present. Methods of plating chromium from Cr3+ solutions that rely on reversed current pulses have been commercialized (allegedly, to reoxidize the H2).

title: Chrome plating


text:
Cambes

Cambes may refer to several communes in France:

 * Cambes, Gironde, in the Gironde département
 * Cambes, Lot, in the Lot département
 * Cambes, Lot-et-Garonne, in the Lot-et-Garonne département
 * Cambes-en-Plaine, in the Calvados département

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Cambes


text:
ETO

ETO may refer to:

Science and technology

 * Emitter turn off thyristor, a semiconductor device
 * Ethylene oxide, an organic compound
 * RUNX1T1, a gene
 * Efforts to Outcomes, software produced by Social Solutions

Sports

 * ETO-SZESE Győr FKC, a Hungarian handball club
 * Győri Audi ETO KC, a Hungarian women's handball club
 * ETO Park, a multi-use stadium in Győr, Hungary
 * Stadion ETO, the predecessor of ETO Park

Other

 * Electro-technical officer, on a merchant ship
 * Engineer to order, in supply chain management
 * English Touring Opera, an opera company in the United Kingdom
 * Eton language, a Bantu language
 * European Theater of Operations, United States Army, an American theater of operations in World War II
 * Earth-Trisolaris Organization, an organization in the novel The Three-Body Problem

title: ETO


text:
Cambes-en-Plaine

Cambes-en-Plaine is a commune in the Calvados department in the Normandy region in northwestern France.

title: Cambes-en-Plaine


text:
Cambremer

Cambremer is a commune in the Calvados department in the Normandy region in northwestern France. Cambremer is located in the heart of the Pays d'Auge, between Lisieux and Caen. The village is twinned with Witheridge, UK, and the two villages have annual exchange trips (although not solely for students).

Etymology
The exact etymology of the name of the town is unknown. The village is mentioned, however, from the seventh century under the Latinized form of Cambrimaro.

The second element is probably the Germanic meaning lake or pond (see Old English meri: lake, pond, now in place names -Mère). Common in the north of France (see Mortemer).

History
In 1973, the former communes of Grandouet, Saint-Aubin-sur-Algot and Saint-Pair-du-Mont were incorporated in Cambremer. On 1 January 2019, the former commune of Saint-Laurent-du-Mont was merged into Cambremer.

Heraldry
The arms of the town of Cambremer are: Gules the two-headed eagle displayed gold.

title: Cambremer


text:
Campagnolles

Campagnolles is a commune in the Calvados department in the Normandy region in northwestern France.

title: Campagnolles


text:
Campandré-Valcongrain

Campandré-Valcongrain is a former commune in the Calvados department in the Normandy region in northwestern France. On 1 January 2017, it was merged into the new commune Les Monts d'Aunay.

title: Campandré-Valcongrain


text:
Foulness Island

Foulness Island is a closed island on the east coast of Essex in England, which is separated from the mainland by narrow creeks. In the 2001 census, the usually resident population of the civil parish was 212, living in the settlements of Churchend and Courtsend, at the north end of the island. The population reduced to 151 at the 2011 Census. The island had until recently a general store and post office. The George and Dragon pub in Churchend closed in 2007, while the church of St Mary the Virgin closed in May 2010. In 2019, the Southend Echo reported plans for the church to be converted into a five-bedroom home.

Foulness Island is predominantly farmland and is protected from the sea by a sea wall. The island's unusual name is derived from the Old English fugla næsse ("bird headland"), referring to wildfowl. It is an internationally important site for migrating and breeding birds, including pied avocets. During the North Sea flood of 1953, almost the entire island was flooded and two people died.

Before 1922, when the military road was built, the only access was across the Maplin Sands via the Broomway, a tidal path said to predate the Romans, or by boat. Public rights of way exist, but the island is now run by QinetiQ on behalf of the Ministry of Defence as MoD Shoeburyness with access to the island by non-residents subject to stringent times and restrictions.

Governance
Foulness is part of the electoral ward called Foulness and Great Wakering. The population of this ward at the 2011 census was 5,738.

Geography
The island covers 9.195 sqmi bounded by its sea walls. Before 1847, tithes were payable in kind, but under the terms of the General Tithe Act of 1836, these were replaced by payments of money. The commutation commission, who were responsible for setting the level of payments, produced a details schedule and map in 1847, which provides a detailed land usage survey. At the time, the island included 425 acre of saltings, outside the sea wall. The 5885 acre inside the wall comprised 4554 acre of arable land, with pasture covering another 783 acre. 338 acre were described as inland water, which was made up of ponds and drainage ditches, while buildings, roads, the sea walls, and some waste ground made up the remaining 222 acre. The arable land was used to grow cereal crops, namely wheat, oats and barley, and beans, white mustard and clover.

Cheap imports of wheat from America caused widespread depression among agricultural communities in the 1870s, with much arable land reverting to rough pasture. However, a map attached to the report of the Royal Commission on Agriculture (Essex), which reported in 1894, shows that no land on the island reverted to pasture up to 1880, despite some 25% reverting in the neighbouring Rochford hundred. Great Burwood Farm had 47 acre of its 389 acre in use as pasture in 1858, which had dropped to just 12 acre in 1899. Land prices in the same period dropped dramatically, as the farm was bought for £11,165 in 1858 and sold for only £1,800 in 1899, losing 84% of its value. By the 1970s, the smaller farms had amalgamated into five large farming businesses.

Sea defences
The surface of the island, and much of South East England, has been sinking relative to normal tide levels since the end of the last Ice Age. There is no evidence for sea defences in the period of Roman occupation, although the area was flooded in AD 31 by an exceptional tide, which forced a withdrawal to Shoeburyness. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle also records an exceptional tide on 11 November 1099 which flooded the land, but these were rare occurrences. The first defences were probably erected in the late 12th century. By 1210, the "law of the marsh" was in effect: it required that the cost of such defences should be paid for by those who benefited from them, in proportion to the amount of land owned or rented, and this remained the case until the Land Drainage Act 1930. In 1335, 1338 and 1346, commissioners were sent to inspect the state of the banks in the Rochford hundred, which included Foulness.

The earliest record of sea walls is from 1271, and in 1348 there were problems with one of the marshes, which was flooding every day, indicating that it was below the level of normal tides. The sea walls were made of earth, and were thatched with hurdles of brushwood and rushes. The island was divided into 11 or 12 marshes, each with its own wall, rather than one wall around the whole area, and was extended in 1420 by a new wall around New Wick Marsh, and again between 1424 and 1486, when Arundel Marsh was enclosed. Ditches ran between the walls of the marshes, with sluices at the ends where the ditches met the sea. At high water, the island would effectively be divided into a number of smaller islands. A Commission of Sewers was appointed in 1695, whose jurisdiction included Foulness, but the inhabitants were not happy, and engaged the lawyer Sir John Brodrick to put their case. They argued that an exceptional high tide had flooded the island in 1690, but that they had repaired and improved the walls themselves, and therefore should not be taxed by the Commissioners. Eventually, Foulness had its own Commission, from 1800 to the early 1900s.

The size of the island has been increased several times by "innings". Saltings build up along the shore from silt which is carried to the sea by the rivers, and is deposited on the shore by the tide. Salt-loving plants then take root in the mud, and the salting is established. The plants trap sediments, and the surface rises until it remains above the level of most tides. Inning occurs when a sea wall is built around the edge of the salting, after which rain washes the salt downwards. The alluvium which forms the soil is highly fertile once freshwater plants start to grow. The inning of New Wick Marsh added 220 acre, and Arundel March covered 385 acre. No new innings took place in the 1500s, as there were several exceptional tides, and activity was centred on maintaining the existing defences, but another 170 acre was added between 1620 and 1662, and there was further activity between 1687 and 1688, in 1801, and finally in 1833. In total, 1632 acre were added to the island.

Development
The Broomway provided the main access to Foulness for centuries. It is an ancient track, which starts at Wakering Stairs, and runs for 6 mi along the Maplin Sands, some 440 yd from the present shoreline. The seaward side of the track was defined by bunches of twigs and sticks, shaped like upside-down besom brooms or fire-brooms, which are buried in the sands. Six headways run from the track to the shore, giving access to local farms. The track was extremely dangerous in misty weather, as the incoming tide floods across the sands at high speed, and the water forms whirlpools because of flows from the River Crouch and River Roach. Under such conditions, the direction of the shore cannot be determined, and the parish registers record the burials of many people who were drowned.

The island was also served by ferries, which carried fresh water as well as people. The carriage of water is mentioned in the accounts kept by the bailiffs in 1420, 1424 and 1486. By the middle of the 19th century, ferries ran to Burnham-on-Crouch, Potton Island and Wallasea Island. There was initially no source of fresh water on the island apart from any rainwater that could be collected. In 1725, it was thought that there might be water below the island, and a well was constructed on Great Shelford Marsh. It reached a depth of 92 ft, but no water was found. At the end of the 1700s, Francis Bannester, who owned Rushley Island nearby, attempted to find water by boring, but again failed to do so. However, his son, also called Francis, persisted and found fresh water some 500 ft below Rushley in 1828. Just six years later, there were more than 20 such springs scattered through the six islands of which Foulness is one, and fourteen farms on the island had their own wells by 1889.

Evidence for housing comes from the census returns. In 1801, 396 people lived in 43 houses, which gives an average occupancy of 9.2 people. This had increased to 9.8 in 1811, when 450 people occupied 46 houses. Ownership of the manor was inherited by George Finch in 1826, who took his responsibilities seriously, and set about improving the island by building brick houses for his tenants. Five years later, 630 people lived in 78 houses, and by 1851, 109 dwellings housed 640 people, with average occupancy down to 5.9 people. Population peaked at 754 in the census of 1871, but has steadily declined since.

Military Use
From 1855, the Shoebury Sands, which are a continuation of the Maplin Sands to the south of the island, had been used as an artillery testing site, and the War Office sought to extend this at the end of the 19th century, by buying the island and its offshore sands, to act as a research and development centre for new weapons. They bought some of the sands above Fisherman's Head in 1900, but the rest belonged to Alan Finch, the Lord of the Manor, and he refused to grant shooting rights over them. In 1912, the War Office also discovered that large areas of the sands were leased to tenants, who used them for fishing with kiddles. A kiddle was a large V-shaped or square wicker trap, which formed an enclosure in which fish were trapped as the tide receded.

Military Takeover
Attempts to buy the lordship were also refused by Finch, but he died in 1914, and his half-brother Wilfred Henry Montgomery Finch sold it on 13 July 1915, resulting in the War Office owning around two-thirds of the island. They had also been buying any farms that were not part of the manor, and by the end of the First World War the only buildings which they did not own were the church and rectory, the school, and a mission hall at Courts End. They demolished the post mill towards the beginning of the war, and the parish poor-house and a wooden lock-up which was located near the church were also demolished.

One benefit of the takeover was the construction of the military road in 1922, which crosses New England Island and Havengore Island by a series of bridges, to reach the mainland near Great Wakering. After its opening, the Broomway ceased to be used, except by the military. With the passing of the Ministry of Defence Act 1946 and the subsequent rationalisation of five agencies in 1971, ownership of the island passed from the War Office to the Ministry of Defence. In 2003, a contract to manage the testing of munitions was awarded to the defence contractors QinetiQ, and they also control access to the island.

Proposals
In the 1850s, the South Essex Estuary and Reclamation Company proposed a grand scheme to reclaim around 47.5 sqmi of land on the Essex coast, which would have included most of Foulness Sands and Maplin Sands. The civil engineer Sir John Rennie produced the plans, and an Act of Parliament was obtained in 1852. This authorised the construction of a 20 mi wall, running from Wakering Stairs to beyond Foulness Point. A small amount of work was carried out on another part of the scheme near Bradwell-on-Sea, but the company was wound up in 1868. Lack of finance and opposition from landowners contributed to its failure.

Another scheme was proposed by William Napier and William Hope in January 1862, in response to requests from the Metropolitan Board for imaginative ways to generate a profit from the large quantities of sewage which had been conveyed away from London by Joseph Bazalgette's sewer system. Hope had experience of reclamation and irrigation works in Spain and Majorca. Their scheme envisaged a 44 mi culvert from the northern outfall to Rawreth, where a northern branch would convey sewage to Dengie Flats, and a southern one to Maplin Sands. Some 20000 acre would be reclaimed on both sides of the River Crouch, which would become prime agricultural land. Among several schemes, it was the only one which came with detailed plans, and was accepted by the Board, despite opposition from the City of London, who argued that the soil on Maplin Sands was unsuitable for irrigation with sewage.

The estimated cost of the scheme was £2.1 million, with pumping costs of between £10,000 and £13,000 per year. The Metropolitan Sewage and Essex Reclamation Company was set up, and deposited £25,000 with the Board, to be refunded on completion. Construction work began in late 1865, and the Board remained confident that the scheme would be completed, but the collapse of the Overend Gurney bank precipitated a crisis in the City of London, which made it difficult to raise the finance. A report by the Board for 1867-8 stated that no progress had been made for some time, and all reference to the scheme had ceased by 1871. The board kept the £25,000, the only money that the London ratepayers ever received for their sewage, despite claims at the time that it was worth over £4 million.

Around 100 years later, the Roskill Commission investigated potential sites for a third London airport. Four sites were considered, including construction of an off-shore airport on Maplin Sands. The Commission chose a site at Cublington but the UK government rejected the commission's proposal and accepted a dissenting report recommending that a new airport should be developed at Foulness. The Maplin Development Act received royal assent in October 1973. In 1973 a Special Development Order was made under the Town and Country Planning Act granting planning permission for the project, and the Maplin Development Authority was constituted and began its work. The project would have included not just a major airport, but a deep-water harbour suitable for the container ships then starting to revolutionise maritime transport, a high-speed rail link together with the M12 and M13 motorways to London, and a new town for the accommodation of the thousands of workers who would be required. The new town was to cover 82 square miles, with a population of 600,000 people. The cost was to be a then-astronomical £825 million (£ in 2024), which many regarded as unacceptable. The Maplin project was abandoned in July 1974 when Labour came to power in the shadow of the 1973 oil crisis.

1953 flood
Most of the island was flooded in 1953, as a result of exceptional weather conditions which affected much of the Netherlands and the east coast of England. High water at Southend was expected to be 8.7 ft above mean sea level at 1:30 am on Sunday 1 February. The actual tide rose to 15.7 ft above mean sea level, which was 3.5 ft above the danger level for this part of the Essex coast. This level in itself was not a danger to the island, as the sea walls had been raised and strengthened between 1951 and 1952 by the War Office, and were 16.5 ft above mean sea level. However, the high water was accompanied by strong winds, creating large waves, which broke over the top of the defences, washing away the earth banks on the inland side of the walls. Two sections of the wall breached, from Rugwood Head to Asplin's Head on the eastern side of the island, and for about 1 mi to the west of Foulness Point on the northern side of the island. By 6:00 am, most of it was under water, and gas, electricity and telephone links had been severed. Rescue attempts on the Sunday failed to reach Foulness.

Plans were formulated by the army, the Southend lifeboat service and various civilian services for a rescue attempt on the Monday. Great Wakering village hall and the Royal Corinthian Yacht Club at Burnham-on-Crouch were prepared as reception centres, and a flotilla of small boats, the lifeboat, a barge and an army DUKW amphibious truck reached the stranded people and evacuated them to the reception centres. 30 men refused to leave, because of the plight of their livestock, but 24 of them were compulsorily evacuated the following day. Two people died in the disaster. Rescue of the animals was difficult, because the road was not accessible, and all access to the island was across the sands, using the Broomway to Fisherman's Head, which was only possible at low tide. On Wednesday 4 February, a number of DUKWs and four-wheel-drive lorries reached the island with food and water for the stranded animals, which were rounded up and assembled at the churchyard, where the land is slightly higher. The following day, they were moved to Newhouse Farm, near Fisherman's Head, ready for the arrival of 24 cattle lorries, which drove across the sands early on Friday morning. Most of the animals had been rescued by Saturday night, with the final sixteen dairy cows leaving by barge on Sunday morning. 400 cattle, 14 calves, 28 horses, 72 sheep, 6 lambs, 3 pigs, 670 chickens, 100 ducks, 2 dogs, 10 rabbits, 4 budgerigars and the 16 dairy cows were rescued. Around 700 sheep and 249 pigs were drowned.

In order to repair the walls before the next spring tides, which were due on 16 February 300 soldiers and 70 sailors were drafted in. Three Royal Navy minesweepers, the Cheerful, Cockatrice and Rinaldo, were moored near Foulness Point, and were used as accommodation by the workers. The number of personnel had increased to 400 soldiers and 100 sailors by 11 February. High tide on 14 February was 1.5 ft higher than expected, and washed away a section of the repaired wall at Shelford Creek, but repairs were again made, and the walls survived the spring tides of the following two days. Re-occupation of the island was delayed until 19 March, to ensure that the new walls would withstand the spring tides due on 14 and 15 March, but many people commuted to their homes each day to begin the task of cleaning up the mess. Of the 114 families who had been evacuated, 80 returned on 19 March.

Conservation
The island's name is derived from the Old English fugla-næss, with fugla (modern "fowl") meaning "of birds" and naess being the Germanic word for promontory, and it remains an important centre for birds, with the area around Foulness Point designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). Habitat is provided by extensive mud flats and sand flats, which are covered twice a day by the tides, together with salt marshes, banks of shingle and shells, grazing marshes, rough grass and scrubland. They are recognised as being internationally important for six species of birds. Thousands of dark-bellied brent geese arrive from Russia to spend the winter on the flats, which are also frequented by bar-tailed godwit, grey plover, red knot, oystercatcher and redshank. For curlew, dunlin and shelduck, the site is of national importance. In winter, hen harriers can be seen foraging, and a wide range of plants and invertebrates thrive there.

Other birds which use the island for breeding include avocet, common tern, little tern, Sandwich tern and ringed plover. During the winter months, in excess of 100,000 waterfowl have been reported. The avocet population is the second largest in the United Kingdom. The Foulness SSSI has been designated as a Special Protection Area for Birds under the EC Birds Directive, and is also a Ramsar site under the Ramsar Convention because of its importance as a wetland.

Foulness Heritage Centre
The island's heritage centre was established in 2002 in the old primary school at Churchend. The conversion was made possible following an ‘Awards for All’ grant, funding from QinetiQ and a donation the ‘Bishop of Bradwell’s Fund’. It opened to the public in February 2003. It is run by volunteers from the Foulness Conservation and Archaeological Society and acts as a museum with displays of archaeological artefacts and memorabilia as well as documents and photographs. In 2003 it was a runner up in the annual MOD award for the best conservation projects across the entire defence estate, the Sanctuary Award. It closed to visitors during the winter of 2005/6 for a reorganisation of its displays to include newly donated items. It is open to visitors on the afternoon of the first Sunday of each month from April to October.

title: Foulness Island


text:
Campeaux

Campeaux is the name of two communes in France:

 * Campeaux, Calvados
 * Campeaux, Oise

title: Campeaux


text:
Campeaux, Calvados

Campeaux is a former commune in the Calvados department in the Normandy region, northwestern France. On 1 January 2016, it was merged into the new commune of Souleuvre-en-Bocage.

title: Campeaux, Calvados