Local authorities were quick to assure enquirers that the fumes posed no health risk to local residents. But in Béziers, about 150 people were admitted to hospital in the hours following the fire, suffering from irritated and sore eyes and throat, and/or dizziness. 

Two weeks later, after some tests had been carried out, it became apparent that toxic chemicals such as cyanhydric acid and bromic acid had been present in the fumes. On 15 July an incomplete list of the substances stored on the SBM site was released to the public. However, the local government representative (the ‘Prefet’), kept reassuring the public promising a risk evaluation would be released by mid-October. 

The Non-Governmental Organisation MDRGF (Mouvement pour les Droits et le Respect des Générations Future) decided that the people from Béziers and the surroundings had the right to know to what extent their environment had been polluted. With support from an independent laboratory (Analytika, which had analysed the oil from the Erika tanker spill in 1999) samples of earth and leaves from the surroundings of the factory were analysed. By mid-September, results showed the presence of procymidone, iprodione and 15 other chemicals were found in the earth sample. Iprodion is classified as a possible carcinogen by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) and there is some evidence that it may be an endocrine disruptor while procymidone is classified by the US EPA as likely to be carcinogenic to humans (category B1 and B2), and is a suspected endocrine disruptor.

A press campaign was started, with the story making headlines in regional newspapers: ‘Toxic pollutants found close to the SBM factory’. Under pressure from the media, the mayor released results of the analysis that had been ordered by the local government of Béziérs. Unsurprisingly, the local authorities concluded that the exposure of the population to the various chemicals was too low to present any risk. 

MDRGF stressed again that, according to official results, dioxins were found everywhere around the site, along with 59 various pesticides. Among the pesticides found 19 where potentially carcinogenous, 23 where neurotoxic, 12 were potential endocrine disruptors, four were potential developmental or reproductive toxins and one was a suspected mutagen. Moreover, 24 of the pesticides were not authorised for use in France. The fight is now raging between the NGOs and the officials as everybody is waiting for the official exposure and risk evaluation by the official INERIS institute, due to be published on 19 October.

François Veillerette, www.mdrgf.org; mdrgf@wanadoo.fr - Pesticide News No 70 - December 2005