groundWork

Bobby Peek - Director
Gillian Addison - Dep. Director: Finance & Admin
Bathoko Sibisi - Office Manager
Siziwe Khanyile - Air Quality Campaign Manager
Ben Mazibuko - Waste Campaign Manager
Rico Euripidou - Research Manager
Jane Harley - Campaign Support Manager
Ashika Maharaj – Intern

From the Smokestack

by groundWork Director, Bobby Peek

This column allows me, as Director of groundWork, to get on my soapbox and say what I like about people and issues. Generally I have restrained myself and been diplomatic. However, in the next few hundred words I seek to pull no punches and take no prisoners.

Over the years much concern has been voiced about air pollution in Pietermaritzburg. groundWork, although based in Pietermaritzburg, never tackled this issue directly until people from the area began knocking on our door for assistance in this regard. We participated in the Pietermaritzburg Air Quality Forum (a multi-stakeholder voluntary forum) and began assisting the city officials as well as the provincial department of environmental affairs to understand the pollution problems in the area. groundWork took bucket brigade air samples for the city and had several discussions with city officials.

It was, then, with some surprise, that groundWork learned through the media last month that “PMB pollution is ‘normal’” [sic]. Apparently the local authorities, together with the Johannesburg University, undertook air monitoring in November and December 2005, without inviting any of the civil society people to work with them in developing the protocols for monitoring or seeking advice from the very people who complained about the pollution.

In May 2006 the City Strategic Executive Manager, Zwe Hulani, called a meeting with various government authorities to discuss the monitoring results. This meeting excluded the civil society people who had raised concerns about these issues. When I sought clarity from the government officials - in both provincial and city departments - they all denied responsibility for excluding civil society from this process.

There is no other way to describe this approach taken by the Pietermaritzburg municipality but as one of seeking to go on a publicity stunt of greenwash to counter the deserved bad publicity the city has on its ever increasing air pollution problem. During the winter months, as one enters the city in the earlier hours of the morning and leaves it at night, you can smell the sulphur and volatile organic compounds in the air. No amount of greenwash is going to deal with this reality.

Secondly, it is now nearly five years since the Petronet crude oil pipeline carrying Sasol gas ruptured next to a school in Tongaat on the North Coast. The Commission of Enquiry into this process was completed in 2004. The Premier’s office in KwaZulu-Natal and the office of the MEC for Agriculture and Environment are sitting on the Commission’s report, which will, no doubt, present key findings on how to better manage fuel pipelines in South Africa. Whilst they keep the report under wraps, Petronet is seeking permission to develop a new fuel pipeline between Durban and Sasolburg.

It can only be self-defeating for government not to release the report. We all could learn from the past mistakes of government and Petronet and make the future development more sound. groundWork has written to both the Premier and the provincial MEC on this issue. The MEC has decided to ignore his registered letter – it was returned to groundWork -although a follow up “snail mail” (normal post) letter was accepted. Is this then the approach by government – ignore registered letters in case they return to incriminate officials in court. Mr Premier and MEC, take your heads out of the sand and release the report so we that can learn from our past mistakes.

Finally, I would like to end this smokestack off on a high note. As I write this today, 1st June 2006, groundWork celebrates seven years of hard graft and cutting edge environmental justice action, not only in South Africa but globally. I want to thank all the people who have worked in and with groundWork to make groundWork a success. From all those presently at groundWork, I would like to extend a big thank you. Your efforts will always be built upon.

Lead Story

Caltex and government go head to head over incidents (and not accidents!)

By Bobby Peek

For many community people living next to petrochemical installations, polluting industrial incidents – such as explosions, fires, chemical spills and gas leaks - are all too familiar events. Note that I use the word “incidents” and not “accidents”, because an incident is avoidable, whereas an accident is, by definition, usually unavoidable.

Residents in the Cape Town suburb of Table View, which neighbours the Caltex Oil Refinery (owned by Chevron), are all too aware of the various incidents at the refinery. For years residents of Table View have had to endure incidents ranging from gas clouds overwhelming them to crude oil raining down on them. No authority figures have adequately responded to these incidents in the past. But in a welcome change of events, over the last year government (at all levels) has started to critically assess what is going on at the Caltex Refinery.

A start to action

There is no doubt that over the years residents next to petrochemical facilities have felt that government has failed them in tackling industrial pollution in general and life-threatening industrial incidents in particular.

Last month groundWork received an invitation from the so-called “Green Scorpions” – the Enforcement: Environmental Quality and Protection Directorate of the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT). The invitation was extended to groundWork and the Table View Residents’ Association - as “key civil society representatives” - to meet with the Directorate and make suggestions on what measures we thought were necessary to deal with the Caltex Refinery’s track record of pollution and incidents.

Needless to say, we were stunned into silence by this invitation! Attached to the invitation were a series of communiqués between government and Caltex that revealed that government had begun rigorously interrogating incident reports supplied by Caltex since 2003.

The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), which came into force in early 1998, requires in section 30 (5)¹ that industries provide incident reports to the DEAT after every industrial upset occurs at their plants. These incident reports were casually churned out and forwarded to DEAT without any fear by the industry that government would interrogate them. Until now, that is!

Interrogating information

In the Caltex case, government last year started interrogating incident reports received since 2003 and has started asking probing questions, such as how Caltex has come to have these incidents as well as how Caltex goes about determining the environmental and health impacts of each and every incident.

groundWork and various civil society organisations have long called on government to recognise the real impacts pollution has on the lives of ordinary South Africans. We as civil society know and experience the reality of the consequences of being exposed to pollution: "ours is not perception: environmental injustice and racism are a reality" ² . It is known that incidents and related pollution from petrochemical industries impact upon people’s health, but industries can be very good at hiding and fudging information. For them, releasing information is literally a case of “smoke and mirrors” (I could not resist the pun on the word smoke!).

But, reading the many incident reports filed by Caltex, I was shocked at the manner in which everything was described as “normal” and that the impacts upon people and the environment were either described as “extremely low” or “not detected”. With the community uproar in Table View and other pollution hot spots in South Africa over the past year, these statements could not go unchallenged, and thus the reason for the government investigation into what is going on at the Caltex refinery.

The various government departments responsible for environmental management at a local, provincial and national level began questioning Caltex in 2005 about its incidents. Gone are the days – I hope – where incident reports were simply filed once received!

At our meeting convened by the Green Scorpions, it was clear to us that the relevant government departments, including the Department of Labour, were serious about this interrogation. The UK’s Environmental Protection Agency had even been roped in to assist in responding to the Caltex incident reports!

Victory for Table View Residents Association and Civil Society

This process is far from complete so we need to still be cautious of talk of victory. But what must be recognised is the fact that the Table View Residents’ Association has played a key role in getting government to take this course of action with Caltex. For more than a decade, local people have been publicly questioning and challenging Caltex’s pollution levels, employing tactics ranging from regular coverage in local newspapers and community radio to speaking in parliament.

For far too long, industry has got away with penning bland non-damaging statements about their damaging pollution. Civil society organisations have often questioned this information but have been ignored – and thus the pressure on government to ratchet up governance. This new approach by government bodes well.

The Table View Residents’ Association and groundWork recommended to government the following measures to mitigate incidents occurring at the Caltex refinery:

Footnotes:

1. Section 30 (5) of the National Environmental Act, No 107 of 1998.

2. See the People's Memorandum to the 8th World Congress on Environmental Health held in Durban in February 2004.

_{back to top}

Air Quality

SOLIDARITY IN ROSSPORT COUNTY MAYO: Shell in Ireland

By Siziwe Khanyile

A community called Rossport, in Mayo County, in Ireland, has sought to aggressively stave off a Shell operation in the form of a gas pipeline and onshore refinery.

As happened in Nigeria - where Shell and the Nigerian government colluded to suppress opposition to Shell in Ogoniland resulting in the execution of Ken Saro-Wiwa and nine others, the Irish community of Rossport has experienced collusion between the state and oil giant, Shell.

Five members of this community, known as the “Rossport Five” were jailed for 94 days for refusing to allow their land to be forcibly taken away to make way for the development of a high-pressure gas pipeline and onshore refinery. Their jailing was as a result of breaking a high court injunction when they denied Shell access to their and their neighbours’ farmlands for the proposed development.

Myself and Desmond D’Sa of the South Durban Environmental Alliance (SDCEA), visited this community on a solidarity visit at the invitation of a documentary maker, Aiobheann O’Sullivan. SDCEA and groundWork were invited to speak at the Irish screening of her documentary on Shell, BP, Engen and SDCEA.

We spent our first night in Dublin where a screening of the film was made to various Shell to Sea campaigners based in Dublin. The turnout was great, comprising members of the Sinn Fein political party, anarchists, students from local collages and the social movements, all in solidarity with the Mayo County struggle against Shell. A vibrant discussion was had after the screening of the film.

On the second day we drove to County Mayo, which is North West of the country, through scenic terrain. As we approached Rossport, we come across a caravan at the entrance to the proposed Shell development area, which is manned by community members twelve hours a day, every day. They keep watch with the aim of calling on the community to act as a physical shield should Shell resume operations.

At Rossport we had the privilege of addressing a hall full of people at a screening of the same film. The people could identify with what Shell does to communities where it operates. Two of those who had been imprisoned were present at the screening.

We also visited one of the Rossport Five, Willie Corduff, and his wife Mary, at their home. They are determined that they will not allow Shell to do to their community what it has done to others worldwide. They recognize that they have the world’s solidarity, and that their victory is a victory for all communities resisting industrial giants.

In spite of enormous obstacles, including jailings, divisions within the community and the seemingly unbreakable power of Shell, the people of Rossport, and the Shell to Sea campaigners all over Europe continue to demonstrate enormous strength and courage. This was evident at the screening in Rossport, where people committed themselves to fighting tooth and nail, even to the grave, to ensure that their and their children’s heritage is not damaged by Shell.

The Corrib gas field project is controlled by a consortium with Shell as a majority owner. The Corrib and associated fields in the Slyne/Erris basin off the north west coast of Ireland are estimated to be worth 50 billion Euro. The Irish taxpayer receives no royalties from the project.

The government has continually questioned the resistance of a few people in a sparsely populated part of the country which is not considered attractive as an investment location. The government has motivated that the project would create jobs and supply gas for Ireland.

Those contesting and willfully resisting this development do so because this is a “first-of-its-kind” development that has never been tested before and therefore Shell’s claims of meeting the highest international standards does not hold water. A major concern is its close proximity to homes. There is also evidence that this planned pipeline and terminal will bring about many negative consequences including the possibility of pipeline ruptures, pollution of the local environment, effects on the aquatic environment and other social and political ills.

The struggle and solidarity with the people of Rossport is strong. The Rossport Solidarity Camp was set up in June 2005 on the route of the proposed pipeline. The function of the camp is to stop Shell from building the pipeline.

Shell AGM

From county Mayo we made our way to the Shell AGM in the Netherlands as part of a global campaign against Shell’s environmental and human rights atrocities. Activists from communities located next to Shell operations around the world as well as NGO’s voiced their concerns to Shell’s shareholders at The Hague.

The problem with Shell

The problem with Shell is that it does not learn from its mistakes. Its behaviour is the same in all communities where it operates. Minutes before the start of the AGM, the CEO of Shell International, Jeroem van der Veer, pretended to engage with civil society groups outside the AGM, but when questions were posed, he refused to answer. It was clear that his intention was for a photo opportunity and not to seriously engage and consider the concerns of people who had flown from all over the world to address the Board and other shareholders.

A different strategy needed

Although community activists have had some victories, such as the replacement of pipelines in South Durban and the relocation of a community in Norca, USA, there is still frustration in many communities – for example, in Port Arthur where Shell plans to expand even though it has not addressed existing pollution problems and in County Mayo, where Shell attempts to repress the voice of locals through unreasonable injunctions.

As a result, global Shell campaigners have decided to re-strategies their approach to Shell, and think deeply about what has, and has not worked in the past in order to tame the dragon called Shell in the future.

_{back to top}

Air Quality

Richards Bay is torn by inner conflicts

By Bobby Peek

There is no doubt that Richards Bay is a company town. It is dependent on the large industries and the busy port in the area. People who live here experience inner conflict about how to respond to industrial pollution – on the one hand the town is economically dependent on the industries but on the other hand pollution from many of these industries is having a destructive effect. If people dare to oppose industrial developments on account of their pollution, are they biting the hand that feeds them?

This conflict resulting from the pollution is not only internal. Conflict has emerged between people in the area. This conflict was brought to a head by the proposal of Tata Steel to develop a steel ferrochrome smelter in Richards Bay in an Industrial Development Zone (IDZ). Developed within the IDZ, Tata Steel will get preferential tax breaks and other “unknowns”. Operating in South Africa they also get the cheapest electricity they could find globally – and even cheaper than that supplied to households within South Africa!

Despite facing public opposition, the Department of Agriculture and Environmental Affairs (DAEA) in KwaZulu-Natal gave Tata Steel permission in February 2006 to go ahead with the development of the smelter. The Record of Decision (ROD) was the most detailed ROD groundWork has come across, with a colleague referring to the ROD as a “gold standard” – i.e. of the highest standard that he had ever seen.

However two problems remain. Firstly, the Richards Bay Clean Air Association (RBCAA) - a body made up of residents and other industries but not Tata Steel – does not agree with the provincial government that Tata Steel will not have a negative impact upon the community environment in Richards Bay. The air pollution monitoring evidence that the RBCAA has collected over the years indicates that there is already an air pollution problem in Richards Bay and the development of a ferrochrome smelter would add to this.

Secondly, groundWork is convinced that, despite the ROD being a “gold standard”, there is no one in government (from local through to national government level) with the necessary understanding, capacity and knowledge to adequately enforce this ROD effectively. Basically, it is just a piece of paper with some good words on it.

The RBCAA and groundWork both appealed to the MEC against the ROD on the grounds that the smelter would be located too close to residential neighbourhoods. No response has been received as yet to either of our appeals. groundWork also called for conciliation as per Sections 17 and 18 of the National Environmental Management Act, which make provision for a formal arbitration process to be followed in order to resolve a dispute. But this too has been ignored.

Getting back to the conflict…
Mayor Moffatt of Richards Bay has a long history of having a go at anyone speaking out against industrial development in the area. This democratically elected office bearer has concentrated much of his verbal attack on the RBCAA, indicating that its objections to the proposed smelter were not supported by RBCAA member organisations. A local council official is also a representative on the RBCAA and Mayor Moffatt made known that he was not impressed by the official’s opposition to the development. However, the RBCAA chair refuses to be fazed by the mayor’s verbal attack and the RBCAA has indicated that it will not withdraw its appeal against the development.

One problem is the fact that the RBCAA is a non-statutory body and thus can be sidelined and ignored when it suits government. As a voluntary body it can only hope to bring about improvements through applying public pressure. The new Air Quality Act makes provision for multi-stakeholder statutory (government chaired) air quality committees at a local level. If such a committee were in existence in Richards Bay, it would be in a position to push through reductions in air pollution and other improvements. Mr Moffatt would not be able to ignore them and, more importantly, residents would be able to hold government (and Mr Moffatt) accountable for poor governance that ignored credible information emanating from this committee.

Corporate Accountability

World Environment Day – are we focused on the real enemy?

By Bobby Peek

Industry is apparently at liberty to cause pollution and deaths and then government will use World Environment Day to make promises around action it knows it will never keep.

Over the past year I have done much travelling that has resulted in me spending hours on intercontinental flights. Being the dad of a young child, I seldom get to visit movie cinemas so I have used my time on aeroplanes to catch up on some movies. To my surprise Hollywood has got the message that corporate power and abuse is on the increase and that this is a real problem. Hollywood has produced some good “skop, skiet and donner”¹ films recently such as “Sahara”, “The Island” and “Resident Evil” - all highlighting the evils of corporate power. These follow on other insightful films such as “Erin Brochovich” which told the true story of chrome pollution in California.

In this month of June, when the world celebrates World Environment Day, I choose rather to focus on the failures of environmental governance and the broad-based corporate power agenda that pervades society, and which results in deaths and environmental destruction.

Noteworthy in a Durban newspaper on the morning of June 5th, World Environment Day, was a full page advert about Toyota’s new environmental management processes at its Durban car manufacturing plant. These types of adverts are common and newspapers and other media generally accept them as this is where the media makes their money.

What is even more alarming than the large, flashy adverts is that the shortage of staff in the newsrooms of all major newspapers globally results in journalists having to churn out stories without having the time to do good investigative research. This often results in one-sided stories where corporate viewpoints are captured without contestation.

Then there is the very long and painful saga of Sasol, South Africa’s biggest petrochemical industry, whose operations have repeatedly killed and maimed people. In its biggest accident to date, in September 2004, ten workers died and more than 300 were injured. In a long, protracted process, Sasol came to an agreement at the end of May 2006 to set up the “September 2004 Accident Trust”, a Trust that would assist the victims and victims’ families of the blast. Although no official figure was released, the media speculated it to be in the region of R40 million. When you consider that Sasol’s profit margins are between R40-R50 million a day this amount no longer looks so generous!

The safety issue at Sasol is a moral issue for me – and I am sure for many others. Since September 2004, Minister of Labour, Membathisi Mdladlana threatened that he would close Sasol down if there were any more deaths at its SA plants. Well, there have been further deaths, yet Sasol still operates. Even more alarming, less than two weeks after Sasol committed itself to the trust fund - and a day after World Environment Day - another explosion took place at a Sasol plant in Sasolburg, injuring 19 people, one of them seriously. Again the Minister uttered brave words stating that he is concerned about “employers who consider profits before the lives of the workers". He also called on workers’ unions to strengthen the role of safety representatives in their workplaces. So now is it the workers’ responsibility to protect themselves?

I would venture to say that one of the possible causes for the most recent explosion is the increasingly popular practice of outsourcing key operational processes to cut costs and increase profit margins. In the September 2004 incident, contract workers were operating at the site of the explosion. In this month’s incident in Sasolburg, contract workers were finishing off a job left by previous contract workers who did not meet their obligations. The outsourcing of key operations within the petrochemical industry generally has resulted in poorly trained people with little intimate knowledge of the industry operating in highly complex arenas. It is a disaster waiting to happen. What was alarming to note about the media’s reporting of the explosion was the fact that reports on Sasol’s new development in Doha took precedence over the injury of workers at its SA plant.

But Sasol is not the only company facing challenges of poor operations and worker deaths. Foskor in Richards Bay is another company that has repeatedly had incidents that have injured or killed people. On June 5th, the National Prosecuting Authority indicated that it is investigating the recent incidents at the plant with the aim of taking action against Foskor. While this might be praised and welcomed, we have heard it all before – nearly to the date. Last year on the 7th of June the “Green Scorpions”, the environmental enforcement directorate within the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, indicated that it might take action against Foskor but never did. So the message in all of this is this: “Industry, you are free to cause pollution and deaths and then government will use World Environment Day to make promises around action it knows it will never keep”.

Government recognises that industry has an upper hand with regard to the power dynamics in the country. Thus brave words will be uttered and little action will be taken.

However, in a recent address at the World Economic Forum, President Mbeki pondered on the issue of equity with regards to access of power for all. Cosatu, for reasons only known to its leaders, has stated that: “President Mbeki and his industrialists run South Africa”. Well that statement can, no doubt be supported, considering the litany of industrial incidents and lack of response from government.

Ann Crotty of Business Report has, over the last year, skilfully indicated that it is actually business that is writing the policies that affect South Africans rather than government taking directions from the people on the ground. Margaret Legum of the South African New Economics Network, reflecting on the World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting held in Cape Town this month, warned government against taking advice from the captains of industry at the WEF. She indicated clearly that the agenda for those at the WEF is about making profit, whereas the agenda of governments should be alleviating poverty and “never the twain shall meet”.

Until people have a real say in governance, environmental destruction will continue in the quest for more profit, and World Environment Day will be a farce. The time is now ripe for a World Environmental Justice Day to highlight the legacy of corporate power and government’s failure to respond.

Waste

Government is in confusion -
Holcim is denied then granted permission to incinerate hazardous waste

By Ben Mazibuko

On 2nd March 2006, the Northern Cape Department of Tourism, Environment and Conservation granted permission to Holcim Cement to incinerate unspecified “alternative wastes” in its cement kiln plant at Ulco, a small Northern Cape town. This came as a surprise because only four months earlier, in November 2005, another provincial department – this time the North West province’s Department of Agriculture, Conservation, Environment and Tourism - had denied Holcim Cement permission to do the same in the North West province.

One cannot help but wonder if there is any guidance and assistance, in terms of waste policies, that the national Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism is providing to the provincial departments for their reference. If there is, one can only be puzzled by these contradictory records of decision. This suggests that there is a serious loophole in our waste policies that needs urgent attention.

Silence from government

groundWork and other civil society organisations - such as Earthlife Africa and the Wildlife and Environmental Society of South Africa (WESSA) - have consistently addressed our concerns about the burning of hazardous waste in cement kilns to the Ministry of Environment and Tourism. On the 22nd March 2006, groundWork forwarded a letter of concern and objection (its fifth such letter in five years) to proposals made by cement companies to burn hazardous waste to the Deputy Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Mrs Rejoice Mabudafhasi. Provincial departments were also provided a copy of this letter. The letter called upon the Deputy Minister to:

Sadly, there hasn’t been any response from the Deputy Minister as yet. According to the spokesperson for the Northern Cape MEC for Conservation and Tourism, the MEC did receive our letter and would respond by the 2nd May 2006. It is now in mid-June and still the MEC has not responded to the letter, despite repeated follow-up by groundWork.

groundWork visits Ulco and Barkley-West

On 3rd May 2006, groundWork visited the Dikgatlong (Barkley West) Municipality of which Ulco is a part. The main objective of this visit was to conscientise the Mayor, her councillors and the NUM¹ regional organiser of the dangers threatening the Northern Cape, especially in the areas surrounding Ulco where one finds the biggest cement mines and diamond factories in the Southern Hemisphere. The power of Holcim’s Ulco Cement Plant within this far-flung town was evidenced when a local shop worker was asked about the proposal to burn hazardous waste in the plant, and her response was, “Nee, Meneer, dit is net leuens” (“No, Sir, that’s just lies”). When seeking clarity from another local, we were instructed to speak to the management of the plant. Need we say more!

The area around Ulco is characterised by formal agriculture, game farms and historical settlements. One may also view the historical and modern diamond digging sites in the area. It’s ironic that this area, with all its diamond mines, cement plants, farms and heritage sites, is one of the poorest in the country with an unemployment rate of about 70%. It is easy for people in that situation to be easily manipulated.

As the presentation was still being made, one councillor (Mr. T. Jammer) could not contain himself and interjected. He drew our attention to the Dikgatlong Municipality’s mission statement, which states that the aim of the municipality is: “To be a democratic, accountable and transparent local government by providing sustainable, affordable and economically viable service and provide social and economic development and a safe and healthy environment for the people”. He was very thankful to groundWork for providing such an enriching and eye opening presentation free of charge. He urged other councillors to make use of the information provided and to pass it on to disadvantaged members of the community who might benefit greatly from it.

Another councillor (George Damesen) remembered seeing an advert in the local newspaper for the Holcim EIA process but had no idea of the outcome of the whole process. Above all, the Mayor herself and some of her councillors had no idea whatsoever of Holcim’s intentions to burn hazardous waste in its cement kilns. Listening to the comments that the Mayor and the councillors made, one could identify the following problems that might have occurred when the EIA process was conducted:

groundWork also visited the NUM offices in Kimberley and rendered the same presentation to the NUM regional organiser and his colleague. They showed a great interest in our presentation by listening attentively and making comments. At the end of the presentation, the NUM regional organiser, Orapeleng Moraladi, spoke about his brother who works at Holcim’s Ulco plant and who has had asthma problems for some time. He had always wanted to know the cause of his brother’s sickness, and he was very thankful that at least now he has a clue that it might be related to the cement kilns. He promised to extend an invitation to groundWork in the near future to do another presentation to the NUM members who work for Holcim Cement at Ulco.

groundWork’s concerns on the burning of hazardous waste in cement kilns have also been raised with BAMCWU, a worker’s union based at Holcim’s Ulco plant. The regional chairperson, Mr. Peter Manwedi, promised to take a closer look at this issue and act accordingly.

As a way forward, Councillor Jammer indicated that the mayor usually attends a bi-monthly meeting with the premier and other mayors. As councillors, they would mandate her to present groundWork’s concerns at that meeting. The Mayor also proposed a public debate between groundWork and Holcim, which she was determined to organise. She also promised to extend another invitation to groundWork in the near future to give the same presentation to the whole council.

_{back to top}

Groundwork USA

Hurricane Katrina – still counting the costs

By Toussaint Losier

Although it has been roughly nine months since Hurricane Katrina made landfall in Southeast Louisiana, communities all across the Gulf Coast are still recovering from the costliest natural disaster in American history. As residents of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida have worked to pick up the pieces and start over again, they have had to weigh not only the economic, but also the environmental costs of recovery. Nowhere is that more true than in New Orleans - four fifths of which was left underwater in the storm’s wake.

Just as the floodwaters exposed the oft-ignored fissures of race and class, the planning and processes of reconstruction have exposed similar injustices. In some respects, from the outset, the deck has been stacked against the poorer and blacker neighbourhoods which generally occupy lower-lying land. As a result, the floodwaters hit these areas hardest.

Six months after Katrina, Downtown New Orleans was almost fully cleaned up and prepared to welcome the city’s annual Mardi Gras parade. Yet working class neighbourhoods, like the Lower Ninth Ward in New Orleans East, are still ghost towns. Lower Ninth Ward is unable to even host temporary trailers for those returning as the neighbourhood remains without access to basic city services. In contrast, day labourers, contractors and residents have already been rebuilding wealthier neighbourhoods and residents have hired urban planners to put together a plan for their neighbourhoods’ rebirths.

A sad exception is the predominantly Vietnamese-American neighbourhood of Versaille, also of New Orleans East. While its residents were some of the first to return to the city to rebuild and have planned out much of their area’s revitalisation, thousands of families must now contend with a municipal landfill recently opened within two miles of their homes. The residents of Versaille are not the only ones threatened by this landfill’s location, as it is presently located within two miles of Bayou Savage, the nation’s largest urban wildlife refuge with 23,000 acres of marshland, canals and lagoons - home to herons, egrets, alligators as well as tens of thousands of ducks that migrate there in the fall.

If the plans of city and state officials come to fruition, the Chef Menteur landfill will cover 100 acres, be 85 feet high and take 2.6 million of an estimated 7.2 million tons of debris generated by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Three times previously officials have proposed a landfill for this site, but each time it was defeated at the zoning level. In this instance, Waste Management, a leading waste and recycling corporation, proposed the site and Mayor Ray Nagin used emergency powers to waive zoning regulations, bypassing public hearings and city council oversight. When the landfill opened on April 26th, Waste Management promptly donated 22% of the dump’s revenue to the city.

The Chef Menteur landfill currently operates as an open rubbish pit without the standard safeguards, such as synthetic liners, leachate collection systems or groundwater monitoring systems. After Katrina, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality expanded the definition of construction and demolition debris to include carpeting, furniture and other household waste that would normally be relegated to a more tightly regulated municipal solid waste landfill. Critics have pointed out that the waste brought to Chef Menteur probably contains chlorine bleach, drain cleaners, microwaves, televisions, computers and other potentially hazardous materials. Similarly, little attention has been paid to the danger posed by building materials exposed to the toxic chemicals that seeped into the city’s floodwaters. Moreover, groundwater in New Orleans East runs one to five feet below ground, whilst this landfill is dug as much as 35 feet below the surface, raising a significant threat of water intermixing and migrating off site.

Local community leaders have responded quickly, highlighting the lack of public participation or environmental impact assessments. On May 10, over 200 Versaille residents along with members of Mary Queen of Vietnam Church, the Southern Leadership Christian Leadership Conference and Louisiana Environmental Network protested outside the City Hall. On the eve of an important runoff election, Mayor Nagin responded by granting a three-day moratorium on dumping to allow for safety tests. This ban has been extended as the residents and Waste Management attempt to reach an agreement on how to test the site. The landfill’s critics have proposed an alternative plan that replaces use of Chef Menteur with a “hub and spoke” method that hauls debris collected by area to fully permitted landfills in other parts of the city,

Lax regulations have not simply affected New Orleans East. The Old Gentilly landfill, an unlined site closed in 1986, was reopened after Katrina. But a subsequent lawsuit brought by the Louisiana Environmental Action Network has resulted in the site only being allowed to accept a limited amount of debris. This is not the first time something like this has happened as another landfill site - the Agriculture Street landfill - was reopened to take debris after Hurricane Betsy in 1965. Decades later, those nearby registered an abnormally high rate of cancer and the dump was registered as a superfund site for federal remediation!

In spite of these obstacles, activists have worked to develop their own solutions to environmental hazards. For instance, the safe Way Back Home project works to remove grass, top soil and accumulated topsoil potentially contaminated by Katrina’s floodwaters. Each lot will be re-landscaped with graded water sand and fresh sod. Supported by a variety of volunteer, labour and environmental justice organisations, this project will be piloted in New Orleans East with the hope that the federal government will replicate this effort in all other affected areas.

International News

Gaps in health systems!

By Rico Euripidou

groundWork’s Rico Euripidou recently addressed European Members of Parliament in Brussels on mercury in the health care sector and health care waste incineration.

In May I was privileged to be given the opportunity to address representatives from an alliance of leftist European Members of Parliament - the GUE/NGL - which was holding its Seventh Annual Environmental Conference in Brussels at the European Parliament. ¹

The aim of this year’s meeting was to highlight “gaps in health systems” in order to find solutions to eliminate discrimination in health systems and ensure that spending is proportionate to the health benefits. The group also recognises that there is a gender gap, a sustainability gap and a global justice gap and this conference aimed to analyse these gaps in greater depth and look at concrete projects with achievable ways forward. In this regard groundWork, in partnership with Health Care Without Harm² , was invited to present to the GUE/NGL parliamentarians the challenges we face in the Global South with regards to the presence of mercury in the health care sector and health care waste incineration, and the possibilities for the GUE/NGL group to sympathetically consider and vote on the various EU directives that may directly influence these issues.

So why are we worried about mercury use in the health care sector and mercury emissions from health care waste incinerators in the global South, and in South Africa in particular?

In South Africa, we have a Bill of Rights enshrined in our Constitution that recognises the right to live in an environment that is not harmful to your health and well being. The reality, however, is that we still have much inequality in South Africa, with the poorest being most vulnerable to the often devastating effects of environmental pollution and destruction. Outdated technology and poor hospital waste management practices, especially in rural settings, coupled with poor capacity and regulation by the regulatory agencies, means that many Southern Africans suffer inequitable environmental exposure in the context of an economic policy that favours development.
Hospital waste incinerators emit a range of pollutants including dioxins, mercury and other toxic chemicals. The balance of evidence suggests that dioxins and related chemicals do cause cancer and other adverse health effects at prolonged, high levels of exposure, as evidenced by occupational cohort studies.

How then can the GUE/NGL parliamentarians help our campaigns? The EU is currently discussing two major pieces of legislation: the Waste Framework Directive and an EU Limitations Directive. With regards to the former, there has been pressure to reclassify incineration as a recovery technology and place it on a par with recycling. We urged the GUE/NGL members of parliament to resist this trend. Regarding the export ban on mercury, which has been agreed upon by the European Union but not yet implemented, we urged the GUE/NGL members of parliament to ratify this via legislation. With regards to the EU Limitations Directive, which will ban the sale of new mercury thermometers in hospitals, we urged the EU Parliament to widen this ban to include other measuring devices including those used in hospitals.

Overall it was a privilege to be given the opportunity to address the European Members of Parliament. A short time of questioning followed my presentation but it was difficult to gauge from this what action, if any, the EMP’s would take to stem the release of mercury emissions into the environment. The EU Parliament’s progress with these issues will be monitored by an international alliance known as the Zero Mercury Campaign³ , with which groundWork is aligned through our membership of Health Care Without Harm.

footnotes:
1. The Confederal Group of the European United Left (Gauche Unitaire Européen)/Nordic Green Left, with GUE/NGL as the standard acronym, comprises 41 current European Members of Parliament from 16 member political parties representing 12 EU Member States. This makes GUE/NGL the fifth largest Group in the European Parliament. For more information on the political parties and politicians within this alliance please refer to http://www.europarl.eu.int/gue.
2. Health Care Without Harm is an international coalition of more than 450 organisations in 52 countries. The HCWH Mission is “to transform the health care industry so it is no longer a source of environmental harm by eliminating pollution in health care practices without compromising safety or care”. See www.noharm.org.
3. The ‘Zero Mercury’ Campaign has as its ultimate objective ‘Zero’ emissions, demand and supply of mercury, from all sources we can control, in view of reducing to a minimum, mercury in the environment at EU level and globally. Details on the campaign can be found at http://www.zeromercury.org/about_us/index.htm.

Community News

The DRC: A country where danger awaits Civil Society

By Jean Claude Katende from ASADHO Katanga (Association Africaine de défense des Droits de L’Homme), a human rights NGO based in the DRC ¹

The Democratic Republic of the Congo has 50% of the world’s cobalt reserves, 10% of the world’s copper and 30% of its diamonds, plus reserves of gold, uranium, germanium, manganese and more. But in spite of these mineral resources it is a country whose population is among the poorest in the world.

This poverty is the result of a combination of factors including: the poor management of the natural/mineral resources by political leaders; pillaging by international exploiters; armed conflicts, directly or indirectly linked to the exploitation of these resources; and existing legislation which does not take into account the interests of local communities.

To deal with this disastrous situation, civil society organisations have undertaken to fight alongside local populations against pillaging, environmental damage, the illegal exploitation of natural resources and the violation of human rights by companies in the extractive industries sector and the exploitation of mineral/natural resources.

Since the new mining code was put into law in July 2002, the mining sector has been invaded by companies of all types. They come from Africa, Europe, America and Asia. Mining companies set up by Asian groups with Congolese partners do not pay any heed to national or international standards in terms of environmental protection or human rights. In Lubumbashi, we refer to them as "savage or uncivilised companies".

Members of the Réseau Ressources Naturelles de la République Démocratique du Congo (Network for the Natural Resources of the DRC), who denounce the various forms of environmental abuse regularly committed by these companies as well as human rights abuses (such as inhuman salaries, child labour, lack of security measures for workers etc), receive death threats either from the companies or from members of the local or national political administration who benefit from the activity of these companies at the expense of the local population.

As an example of the dangers to those who are bold enough to speak out against abusive practices, the following incident occurred in April 2006 at the end of a workshop on "The Role of Civil Society and the Media in the Management of the Natural Resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo". The workshop was organised by NiZA and several member organisations of the Réseau Ressources Naturelles in Lubumbashi.

At the end of the workshop some participants held a press conference where they denounced: corruption; one-sided contracts; the use of child labour in mines; the degradation of the environment; and the non-adherence to social responsibility practices by extractive industry companies. A few days after that press conference, two members of the network, Jean Pierre Muteba and Jean Claude Katende, were threatened by phone and e-mail and told that their lives would be in danger if they continued to organise such conferences. They were forced to leave the country for a while to protect themselves from further threats

These death threats are regular and constant but the members of the Réseau Ressources Naturelles know that their commitment to achieving mining practices which respect human rights, environmental rights and corporate social responsibility will lead to sustainable development in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Footnote:
1 groundWork together with the Netherlands institute for Southern Africa (NiZA) works with civil society organisations from the DRC, Zambia, Botswana, Angola and South Africa in the Peace, Principles and Participation programme that seeks to unite civil society organisations in the region to resist and challenge corporate abuse. ASADHO, is one of the organisations from the DRC participating in this programme.

In Brief

EnviroServ

The EIA process has begun for the autoclave which EnviroServ is proposing to install in Westmead, West of Durban. This is the start of the end of a long battle of nearly two and a half years waged by the community against Enviroserv. EnviroServ wanted to install an old incinerator at the Shongweni landfill site but surrounding community members strongly objected to this. Eventually, EnviroServ has relented and will install an autoclave (a far more environmentally acceptable alternative to incineration for treating waste) in the industrial area of Westmead and not in Shongweni.

Launch of New EIA Regulations

During 2000 the government began a process of drafting updated EIA regulations. The amended final draft of these EIA regulations was launched by the Minister in April 2006 and since then a road show has been travelling around the country work-shopping and presenting these amendments to the regulations which will come into effect in July 2006.

Generally the updated regulations redefine and list the activities identified in terms of Section 24(2)(a) and (d) of the Act, which may not commence without environmental authorisation from the competent authority. They also include the amendments and withdrawals of environmental authorisations, exemptions and provisions of the regulations, an interpretation of the public participation processes, and a chapter on appeals. The final two chapters cover general matters affecting applications and appeals and transitional arrangements and commencement.

The section which may prove to be the most useful tool for NGO’s challenging EIA’s in the future is found in Chapter 2 point 6 to 8: “Consultation between competent authorities and other organs of state having jurisdiction”.

Simply put, in the event of one appealing an EIA on the grounds of credible evidence suggesting that human health might be at risk, in terms of the section mentioned above, one can write to the Minister or MEC and request that the application be considered in terms of additional legislation – for example, the Health Act or the Bill of Rights - and that additional information to make a better decision is required – for example, local health data. In this case the DEAT must take steps to enter into a partnership with the Department of Health in order to investigate these concerns that have been raised before a decision can be taken on the EIA.

Oil, debt, global finance and climate change

An oil, debt and global finance conference took place at a monastery in Collevachcio outside Rome, earlier this month.

The meeting was an interesting mix of global campaigners on oil, debt and climate change from various parts of the world. The objective was to address concerns related to oil, debt and climate change, to make links between these various campaigns, and to identify shared goals and build mutual understanding between groups working on oil, external debt, global finance (IFIs/ECAs/private banks/corporations) and climate change.

Participants at the meeting worked on an array of issues, including addressing the role of oil in creating and exacerbating external debt, campaigning to put an end to international subsidies (from International Finance Institutions, Export Credit Agencies, Overseas Development Agencies, etc) and challenging unaccountable corporate behaviour in the oil sector.

Our major concern was that of energy poverty and how this could be addressed in the immediate term taking into account our people's need for sustainable energy alternatives as well as their immediate energy needs in light of a growing climate crisis. African NGO's who participated in the gathering agreed to focus their energies on monitoring debt, financial institutions and their impact on civil society in Liberia. There is also a proposal to lobby African Members of the African Union and the European Union to discussion the links between poverty, oil, climate change and debt. For more information see: www.priceofoil.org

groundWork News

groundWork repositions itself

This June marks groundWork’s 7th birthday. Over the years groundWork has grown from three to eight full-time staff members. This year sees several changes to the staff composition, all of which are aimed at building groundWork into a more effective, resourced and articulate organisation.

Welcome to Jane and Rico

groundWork is incredibly pleased to have two particularly bright individuals, who previously contracted to groundWork, join the groundWork team full-time.

Euripides Euripidou (better known as “Rico”) is a qualified environmental epidemiologist and health scientist who has been doing contractual work for groundWork since January 2005. In January this year he joined groundWork full-time as our Research Manager.

Rico was born and educated in KwaZulu-Natal (where he obtained a BTech Honours Degree in Waste Management and Epidemiology) before moving to the UK where he read for an MSc at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (University College, London), and then read for an MSc in Contaminated Land Management at Nottingham University. He says one of his more interesting jobs was working for the Chemical Incident Response Service, Medical Toxicology Unit in London. There he was responsible for, amongst other things, giving real time appropriate toxicological information, sampling advice, interpretation of results and detailed local investigations during or following chemical incidents.

Now at groundWork, Rico hopes to assist groundWork’s community campaigns by providing an evidence base for environmental health inequalities which can be used by community campaigns to push for environmental improvements.

Jane Harley has consulted to groundWork for more than two years, mostly assisting in setting up groundWork’s resource centre. In March this year she became a full-time member of the groundWork team, providing research, IT and planning support to the Director and the other project managers.

Jane’s varied employment history reflects what a multi-talented individual she is. From humble beginnings as a secretary she climbed the corporate ladder to MD of her own company before changing tack completely and taking up organic farming in the Natal Midlands. Jane has also been a dedicated Lifeline counsellor since she was 21 (save for a four-year interval whilst she was farming – being a woman organic farmer in a male-dominated, conservative and sometimes conflictual environment presented enough challenges of its own!). Besides her many talents, Jane brings to groundWork her creative energy and her passion for justice and protecting those more vulnerable than herself.

Goodbye to Toussaint and Ashika

For the past 2 years Toussaint Losier has been managing the groundWork USA office in Boston, USA. At groundWork Toussaint has been involved in developing closer collaboration between the South African and US groundWork offices, the 2005 Nigeria Solidarity Exchange, annual staff retreats and research for the various groundWork campaigns and newsletters. He leaves groundWork at the end of this month to pursue a doctorate in History at the University of Chicago.

Toussaint, it has been great working with you and getting to know you and we know that you will succeed and make a difference wherever you go! Goodbye!

Ashika Maharaj joined the groundWork office in January for a six-month internship. As a research intern she provided valuable research support to the Director and campaign managers on environmental issues and also assisted with some of the media work. She leaves us at the end of June to complete her studies in Social Science and to seek full-time employment. We thank her for her contributions to groundWork and wish her all the best in her future studies and career.

GROUNDWORK's QUARTERLY NEWSLETTER Volume 8, No 2 June 2006

IN THIS ISSUE:

Staff Profile

From the Smokestack

by groundWork Director, Bobby Peek

Lead Story

Caltex and government go head to head over incidents (and not accidents!)

By Bobby Peek

A start to action

Interrogating information

Victory for Table View Residents Association and Civil Society

Air Quality

SOLIDARITY IN ROSSPORT COUNTY MAYO: Shell in Ireland

By Siziwe Khanyile

Shell AGM

The problem with Shell

A different strategy needed

Air Quality

Richards Bay is torn by inner conflicts

By Bobby Peek

Corporate Accountability

World Environment Day – are we focused on the real enemy?

By Bobby Peek

Waste

Government is in confusion - Holcim is denied then granted permission to incinerate hazardous waste

By Ben Mazibuko

Silence from government

groundWork visits Ulco and Barkley-West

back to top

Groundwork USA

Hurricane Katrina – still counting the costs

By Toussaint Losier

International News

Gaps in health systems!

By Rico Euripidou

Community News

The DRC: A country where danger awaits Civil Society

By Jean Claude Katende from ASADHO Katanga (Association Africaine de défense des Droits de L’Homme), a human rights NGO based in the DRC 1

In Brief

EnviroServ

Launch of New EIA Regulations

Oil, debt, global finance and climate change

groundWork News

groundWork repositions itself

Welcome to Jane and Rico

Goodbye to Toussaint and Ashika

GROUNDWORK's QUARTERLY NEWSLETTER
Volume 8, No 2
June 2006

**by groundWork Director, Bobby Peek**

Government is in confusion -
Holcim is denied then granted permission to incinerate hazardous waste

_{back to top}

By Jean Claude Katende from ASADHO Katanga (Association Africaine de défense des Droits de L’Homme), a human rights NGO based in the DRC ¹