Global support for ASP aims
Environmental health advocates around the world applaud the African Stockpiles Programme’s dual goal of removing stockpiles of obsolete pesticides from Africa while investing in systems to prevent a recurrence of the problem. NGOs, community organizations and others recognize the urgency of quickly removing and disposing of the more than 50,000 tonnes of obsolete pesticides throughout Africa. The persistent dedication that PAN UK and others have invested in this project over decades is especially recognized and appreciated.
Concerns about disposal
options
While GAIA fully agree with the goals of the ASP, many NGOs have concerns related to its actual implementation. These concerns have largely focused on the location and technology chosen for the final disposal of the obsolete pesticides and contaminated soils. The ASP aims to dispose of pesticides and associated wastes in an ‘environmentally sound’ manner in accordance with national and international laws, including the Stockholm Convention. It will require proof that a candidate disposal facility operates in compliance with these
standards.
A number of considerations, including the highly toxic content and deteriorated state of obsolete pesticide stockpiles in Africa, has led some ASP stakeholders to conclude that high temperature incineration is the only technological option currently available for treating these wastes. While all agree that incineration is not without risks, many ASP partners feel that in this specific case, the very real risks of sending these wastes to existing high temperature incinerators are outweighed by the serious and immediate daily threat posed by leaving the stockpiles unattended, where they are leaking directly into community environments and water supplies. At the same time many NGOs, including those who are members of GAIA (the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives), believe that waste incinerators – under their actual conditions of operation – can never be considered ‘environmentally sound’ and call for priority attention to full commercial deployment of appropriate non-combustion technologies that are able to meet this
need.
A significant percentage of waste pesticides in Africa are Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) and other organochlorines. The combustion of chemicals of these kinds is especially associated with the generation and release of dioxin, furans and other unintentional toxic by-products. High temperature incineration facilities strive for combustion temperatures in excess of 1200oC to reduce dioxin emissions. However, such temperatures are not always sustained in practice, and dioxins are also formed during the cool-down after incineration residues leave the combustion chamber. Incinerators also produce a dioxin-contaminated solid ash residue that requires further
disposal.
| Non-combustion technologies |
| A number of commercialised ‘no-burn’ technologies can destroy POPs, however, non-combustion facilities have not yet bid to handle waste from the stockpiles. There are a number of reasons for this, including their current inability to cope with the state of the stockpiles and their inability to offer a service to collect and transport the waste such as are offered by companies running high temperature incinerators. Three ‘no-burn technologies’ are briefly described. |
| Gas phase chemical reduction (GPCR)
In this process hydrogen reacts with the wastes at 800-900oC and at low pressure converting them to methane, hydrogen chloride and some light hydrocarbons. This takes places in an oxygen-free environment reducing the likelihood of dioxin production. Any dioxin present in the waste should also be destroyed. In tests this process has been effective at destroying at least 99.999% (or 99.9999%) of the POPs/dioxins and emissions can be captured for reprocessing if necessary. This process has been in use for the destruction of pesticides and POPs waste for several years. It can be used for solid and liquid wastes. Based catalyzed decomposition (BCD)
Sodium reduction (SR)
|
ASP position on incineration
In the early stages of the ASP, some African NGOs were concerned that the ASP would fund or facilitate the construction of new hazardous waste incinerators within Africa, or facilitate the conversion of existing cement kilns in Africa to make them available for hazardous waste disposal. Cement kilns are even less strictly regulated and more polluting than many conventional incineration facilities. They feared that increased incineration capacity – in dedicated incinerators or cement kilns – would not only increase POPs pollution in the region, but could also attract hazardous waste imports and serve as a disincentive for local industries to reduce waste at source through clean production techniques. The presence of incinerator vendors at national ASP meetings and the willingness of some African governments to consider new incinerators or converting existing cement kilns to make them available to receive ASP wastes further reinforced these concerns.
However, the ASP has specifically rejected the possibility of constructing disposal facilities within Africa and has also committed to actively encouraging alternatives to incineration. And while the ASP does not dictate a specific disposal technology, it does require disposal standards that ASP partners indicate cannot be met by cement kilns, ruling out such facilities for destruction of the ASP
waste.
Since the ASP only deals with State-owned stockpiles, it does not have the power to prevent private industries from using cement kilns for its own stockpiles. The ASP requirements and standards which preclude cement kiln incineration may raise government and national awareness of the inability of cement kiln incinerators to meet essential safeguards. GAIA organizations in Africa will monitor the situation to prevent any obsolete pesticides from being incinerated in cement kilns in Africa, or elsewhere.
If not incinerated in Africa, then what?
As the pesticide stockpiles are inventoried, there will be open bidding processes for which any company meeting ASP standards may submit a bid. In theory, any company with non-combustion technologies may also bid for the work. Unfortunately, due to the present weakness of the non-combustion waste treatment industry, and due also to specific logistical and technical challenges associated with collecting, transporting and treating these stockpiles, no non-combustion facility has come
forward.
The unfortunate reality, at this time, is that while there are some existing and promising appropriate non-combustion technologies at various stages of development, no existing facility appears to have the interest and ability to accept the ASP waste. As ASP funds are restricted for disposal and not for construction of disposal facilities, the programme will only use existing facilities and cannot fund the development of new facilities. To date, the vast majority of obsolete pesticides removed from Africa have been exported to Europe for high-temperature incineration because these are the only industries which have shown both an interest and the capacity to manage all stages of this work. Incineration in Europe is, at best, an imperfect interim resolution to an intractable problem. Incinerating POPs-containing waste, even in ‘state-of-the-art’ facilities, always has potential environmental and health risks. The fact that no current alternative exists does not mean that incineration is ‘environmentally sound’ but rather reinforces the need for rapid development of appropriate non-combustion treatment technologies for historic waste and prevention of future hazardous wastes. GAIA members hope that the ASP project will inspire industry to scale up pilot projects of non-combustion technologies so that ASP waste and other stockpiles around the world can be treated in a less harmful manner as soon as
possible.
In the meantime, many leading European environmental health advocates campaigning to end hazardous waste incineration have agreed not to single out imports of ASP waste for protest. They remain concerned about increased waste flow to existing facilities – especially those in low-income communities disproportionately impacted by industrial pollution – and will continue their campaigns to phase out ongoing hazardous waste incineration, but they also understand the pressing need to remove the waste from the current leaking sites in African communities. They continue to press for development of appropriate non-combustion technologies and for prevention as the only real and just
solution.
They also point out that the project will be more widely accepted and successful if implementing agencies not only strive for safe handling of the waste but also ensure that communities and other stakeholders are informed and meaningfully engaged in the entire process. This includes both those in contaminated sites in Africa and those in locations likely to import the
waste.
Working together
Many NGOs around the world – including members of PAN, IPEN, GAIA and other networks – share a vision of a toxics free future, ultimately without POPs-producing technologies. GAIA members in Africa and elsewhere are eager to work with our peers in PAN to ensure the clean up of obsolete pesticides while also ensuring that such an environmental health disaster never occurs
again.
References1. World Bank Office Memorandum, from Lars Vidaeus, GEF Executive Coordinator, Subject: AFRICA: Africa Stockpiles Project (ASP): funding the prevention and disposal of obsolete pesticides from African countries Work Program Inclusion – Resubmission – (FAO- World Bank Co-Submission), September 11, 2002Ann Leonard is the International Co-Coordinator of GAIA, the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, www.no-burn.org, aleonard@no-burn.org