former chelsea boss thomas tuchel has agreed to become the next england manager. tuchel�*s been out of work since leaving bayern munich at the end of last season. he won league titles during his time as bayern and p56 boss as well as the champions league with chelsea. he'll be in charge for the november intenationals against greece and the republic of ireland. england have been without a permanent manager since gareth southgate resigned following their defeat in the final of euro 2024 against spain. lee carsley has been in charge on an interim basis. the big question is will tuchel be a success? he has a talent for getting a lot out of the sport and finding solutions. some people enjoy football slightly differently to the one that thomas �*s two goal has been putting out. i think there's no doubt that he's a very talented manager and it's as close to a

guarantee of a success as anyone else. there are eight games being played in the nations league as we speak. croatia have come from behind to lead poland 3—1. scotland lost their opening three nations league fixtures still all square against a portugal team with christiano ronaldo starting. former manchester city defender aymeric laporte has put spain infront against serbia and isaac price has scored twice with northern ireland now three nil up against bulgaria at windsor park. you can keep up to date with all the scores on the bbc sport website. the search for the new arsenal women's manager is underway afterjonas eidevall resigned with immediate effect, after three seasons in charge. it comes following arsenal's 2—1 home defeat against chelsea at the weekend, leaving them with justi win in 5 matches and sixth in the women's super league. they were also thrashed 5—2 by bayern munich in the champions league last wednesday. a bit sad, eunice has

been our leader for the last several years and they have made the choice to step away now and we have a huge amount of respect for him and as the group improves as part of the leadership group we must get the players together and obviously it is a big change but we must move forward now and change our focus to what will be the game tomorrow. england's women have been knocked out of the t20 world cup after a disappointing performance against west indies in their final group match. they only managed 141—7 — nat sciver—brunt with a half—century — but captain heather knight was forced to retired with a tight calf and her absence was felt in the reply. west indies hit boundary after boundary as england dropped five catches — and their run—rate was high enough to take them into the semi—finals at england's expense. they'll face new zealand on friday, with south africa against defending champions australia the day before. after a nervy start, pakistan will be happy with their with their workl on the opening day

of the second test against england in multan. at one point pakistan werejust 19 for two — jack leach taking those two wickets — but debutant kar—man goo—lam hit a century as the home side reached 259—5 at stumps. there are a few unknowns about this pitch because they are playing back to back test matches which is unusual, although it's unusual they playing a test match there is still a lot of unknowns, everything that we do know in the way the pitch played today, they will be pretty pleased to just be five wickets down and have a decent run number of runs on the board. they didn't feel it was too bad a surface it was doing quite a few different things. just the one seam bowler. their attack is going to be very different from the way england had attacked today. jack leach had bold a

lot. it's very hard to say what will be a good score but we do get the feeling eventually this rock—hard pakistani service rock—ha rd pakistani service will start rock—hard pakistani service will start to break up. and that's all the sport for now. a bbc investigation has found the practice of incinerating much of the uk's household rubbish is as polluting as burning coal — the dirtiest fossil fuel. almost half of all household waste now goes into industrial incinerators, and recycling rates have stagnated. our environment correspondent matt mcgrath reports. steam billows down mandy royal's street from what she calls the monster next door. look how thick it is. it's blown straight at our houses and we're breathing all that in.

her home in runcorn, in the north west of england, is a stone's throw from the uk's largest energy from waste incinerator. so if you want to sit in the garden and enjoy the sun, you've got the smell, the steam, flies and then the noise, as well. this viridor site burns the equivalent of around 200 double decker buses of black bin bags every single day — around a million tonnes a year. i've lived here since �*98, and then in 2015, they decided to put the incinerator in my front garden. well, it felt like my front garden. and ever since, it's just been a nightmare. viridor say their site is closely monitored by the environment agency, and the amount of noise and water vapour remain within permitted levels for the environment and human health. we used to bury our rubbish in landfill sites like this, but the government imposed heavy taxes as worries grew about planet—warming methane seeping out from underground. so councils turned to burning. and over the past decade, there's been a rush to build energy from waste facilities, with many more in the pipeline. all those incinerators are using increasing amounts of this stuff — black bag bin waste.

but our investigation shows that burning this is the same as burning coal. and that's because we're using increasing amounts of this stuff — plastic. making energy from waste our dirtiest way of making electricity. we do have concerns about the building ofj new energy from waste plant. this can't be seen as a sort ofjust a way of getting out| ofjail for free and dealing with the whole kind - of management of waste. we raised these questions with the body that represents uk incinerator operators. in a statement, they said the growth in overall carbon emissions from energy from waste corresponds with the growth in the number of facilities over the past decade, which have moved millions of tonnes of residual waste out of landfill. the government said they are considering the role waste incineration will play as it decarbonises and grows the economy. for mandy royal, the personal impact of living next door to an energy from waste site

is taking its toll. i'm sort of stuck, i'm stuck in a rut down here. matt mcgrath, bbc news. let's speak to professor hugh hunt — deputy director of the centre for climate repair at cambridge university. welcome to the programme. what's the solution then? because we saw in that report its cost reasons that councils have turned to come of this use of incinerators. it's an interesting situation, because 20 years ago when we started moving away from the landfill because of the methane issue, but the methane was being caused by food waste and other organic stuffed rotting in the landfills and releasing this methane gas. of these days we've got increasingly these anaerobic digester �*s taking food waste in dealing with that

methane problem responsibly. these incinerators that were put in place of the landfills still need the food stock. there is a commitment that the local authorities have got to provide fuel for these incinerators and increasingly incinerators and increasingly in that makes more and more plastic, and that is what is leading to the problem of high c02 leading to the problem of high co2 emissions from these emissions. c02 emissions from these emission— emissions. particularly plastic. _ emissions. particularly plastic, the _ emissions. particularly plastic, the key - emissions. particularly i plastic, the key problem emissions. particularly - plastic, the key problem and challenge when you talk about their in these incinerators, or is there a wider issue about the way we get rid of our waste? �* , the way we get rid of our waste? �*, . ., , waste? it's particularly -lastic waste? it's particularly plastic "s _ waste? it's particularly plastic 's and - waste? it's particularly plastic 's and i - waste? it's particularly plastic 's and i think i waste? it's particularly| plastic 's and i think 20 waste? it's particularly - plastic 's and i think 20 years plastic �*s and i think 20 years ago, i don't think anyone would have imagined just how much more plastic there is in our bins. now, we try as best we can to recycle the easy stuff, they are the ones that your drinks bottles and so on, there

some pretty tricky ones, pvcs polystyrene foam, the stuff pipes are made of, plumbing fittings, medical devices and bits of plastic from computing equipment. these are not recyclable, and there's a hell of a lot of it. to be honest, we probably ought to be putting those plastics into landfill because believe it or not, once they are buried deep in the ground, they stay there for centuries, they don't decompose, but the best way to sequester the carbon from those plastics is through landfill. we have made the wrong decision 20 years ago, and maybe we've got to start going back particularly to the plastics to be landfilling that stuff. many councils using _ be landfilling that stuff. many councils using incinerators - be landfilling that stuff. many| councils using incinerators and more are still being built. is

there a way to incentivise people to do things differently when they are already far down the road when it comes to incineration.— incineration. isn't that a problem? _ incineration. isn't that a problem? the - incineration. isn't that a problem? the idea - incineration. isn't that a problem? the idea that| incineration. isn't that a - problem? the idea that these incinerators are going to need for the next 20 years of feedstock because the local authorities are committed to paying for these incinerators to ron. it removes the incentive, i think, for us not to use plastics. there's got to be something to put in these incinerators. imagine if we somehow magically in the next five or ten years reallyjust got rid of plastics completely in our bins and we send all of ourfood waste to in our bins and we send all of our food waste to anaerobic digester �*s, there wouldn't be anything to go into these incinerators. that in itself would cause a problem because of our financial commitments that local authorities have made to these incinerator companies. made to these incinerator companies-_ made to these incinerator companies-— made to these incinerator

companies. indeed. it's all about use _ companies. indeed. it's all about use of _ companies. indeed. it's all about use of plastic- companies. indeed. it's all about use of plastic and i companies. indeed. it's all about use of plastic and it | about use of plastic and it does remain a challenge. professor from the cambridge centre for climate repair, thanks for preparing your thoughts. if you're watching in the uk, you can see more on this story in "the nightmare next door" — available on iplayerfrom 6pm. tomorrow, we ll look at where these giant furnaces are built and how the companies that run them operate. widening waistbands are placing a significant burden on our health service, costing the nhs some 11 billion pounds a year — even more than smoking. those words from the health secretary wes streeting, who says its holding back the economy. his plan — giving obese and unemployed people new weight loss jabs to get them back to work. the government's agreed a multi—million pound deal with a pharmaceutical firm which to pay for a trial with the nhs. the prime minister, sir keir starmer, told the bbc it could have multiple benefits: joining me now is founder of obesity awareness organisation,

all about 0besity, sarah lebrocq, and head of campaigns from the taxpayers alliance, elliot keck. welcome to both of you. let me start with you, sarah. do you think this is a good idea? i think this is a good idea? i think it's a good idea to invest money into the treatments for living with obesity, yes, in that respect, i do. but i don't like is the framing of how this is done about focusing about unemployment levels, perpetuating some of the stigma that we already have about people living with obesity. making up the people living with obesity kind of are unemployed, not working, what people living with obesity have is a chronic condition, so people living with chronic conditions do have elements of time where they are maybe not able to work because of their condition, and what we are not doing is managing that

condition very well at the moment. untilthese condition very well at the moment. until these new medications are coming through. what do i like is the fact that the government is saying that they want to invest in this and they want to invest in this and they want to ensure more people to get access to these treatments, which i think will only have a positive impact because then people can, you know, if it has been debilitating or making them struggle to do their role, they will be able to do that if they lose weight and kind of regain their health. so i see it as a positive step forward, really. elliotts, do you think this is a good idea?— a good idea? i'm certainly sceptical- _ a good idea? i'm certainly sceptical. over _ a good idea? i'm certainly sceptical. over the - a good idea? i'm certainly sceptical. over the years | a good idea? i'm certainly - sceptical. over the years we've had multiple schemes, programmes, the sugar tax which we are _ programmes, the sugar tax which we are always told is going to be a — we are always told is going to be a silver bullet, that will turn — be a silver bullet, that will turn the _ be a silver bullet, that will turn the tide, so i'm sceptical, however, on the other— sceptical, however, on the other hand, the way that they are going _ other hand, the way that they are going about it is the right wax — are going about it is the right way. they— are going about it is the right way. they are doing a trial, receiving _ way. they are doing a trial, receiving significant amounts of private capital in recognition that there are potentially companies that would _ potentially companies that would benefit from it. they're certainly— would benefit from it. they're certainly going about it in the

right— certainly going about it in the right way, sceptical about whether it has any long—term benefits _ whether it has any long—term benefits that they would like to claim. . benefits that they would like toclaim. ., ,. , , to claim. sarah, scepticalthey are from elliott _ to claim. sarah, scepticalthey are from elliott whether - to claim. sarah, scepticalthey are from elliott whether it - are from elliott whether it would have long—term benefits. do you disagree with that? because what you are saying an earlier answer is there are some merits in this as a way of helping people who have serious obesity. helping people who have serious obesi . ~ , ,., , helping people who have serious obesi , . ., obesity. absolutely. what we know is obesity _ obesity. absolutely. what we know is obesity is a _ obesity. absolutely. what we know is obesity is a chronic. know is obesity is a chronic relapsing condition. so we been treating it for years as if it's a lifestyle choice, something behavioural that we just need to behavioural change our way out of it, we now know that the signs and evidence shows us that it's a chronic condition where there's a lot of biological physiological factors at play, so actually what these medications are doing is addressing those physiological elements of obesity, so enabling people to lose weight and maintain it for the first time ever, really, other than bariatric surgery, so it's really giving us another option for people living with obesity, and fundamentally what that will do, hopefully come as enable people to live healthier lives.

so if we can allow people to live healthier lives and have a better quality of life, that will have a knock on impact with people's productivity at work with their well—being generally, so i see this is kind of an investment now that will have long—term benefits in the future because we will have people living healthier for longer as a result of treating obesity and managing it much better than we have done up till now. ., �* , till now. elliott's let me brina till now. elliott's let me bring you _ till now. elliott's let me bring you in _ till now. elliott's let me bring you in on - till now. elliott's let me bring you in on that, . till now. elliott's let me - bring you in on that, because sarah thinks this is an investment and she believes it would be if this trial does come off. a good use of public funds. your organisation advocates for lower taxes and less involvement from the government, so what does your take on sarah's point on this is a good investment? i take on sarah's point on this is a good investment?- take on sarah's point on this is a good investment? i was and similar drugs — is a good investment? i was and similar drugs have had - is a good investment? i was and similar drugs have had a - is a good investment? i was and similar drugs have had a really l similar drugs have had a really positive — similar drugs have had a really positive consequence for many people. — positive consequence for many people, including senior politicians in the news of the moment— politicians in the news of the moment you are sowing the benefits _ moment you are sowing the benefits of it. the flip side of that _ benefits of it. the flip side of that is— benefits of it. the flip side of that is the does exist to provide _ of that is the does exist to provide vital public services. it's 1535 00:15