|
B.C. considers OK for toxic sludge |
|
|
|
Monday Magazine
Nov 30 2005
B.C. considers OK for toxic sludge
It was over almost before environmentalists heard it was happening-but
had they known about a public consultation on a proposal to allow
industries to spread industrial waste on land, they might've had
something to say.
"I've never seen any notices about it, and I'm paying attention," says
Matt Price, the co-ordinator of the Conservation Voters of B.C..
In October, the environment ministry posted a six-page "intentions
paper" on its website that says it is considering a code of practice
that would allow industrial byproducts like fly ash, residuals from
pulp or paper mill wastewater treatment, and lime mud to be used as a
"soil enhancement." The code would set limits on 11 contaminants,
including arsenic, lead and mercury. The comment period was set to
close November 30, though the ministry extended it another two weeks
after receiving complaints.
"It's a sham," says Delores Broten, the co-ordinator of Reach For
Unbleached, an environmental group that keeps an eye on the pulp and
paper industry. She also edits the Watershed Sentinel magazine, and in
the 1990s participated in a committee that discussed ideas similar to
the one being floated now. She heard about the current proposal last
week.
"It's up on the website if you happen to spend your time cruising the
ministry's website," she says. "An internet-based web consultation
isn't really a consultation. There should be a bit more than this. For
such a serious issue, it's not an appropriate consultation."
Colin Rankin of C. Rankin and Associates, the company managing the
consulatation, was unavailable by deadline. A spokesperson for the
environment ministry, Don McDonald, says the minstry is following its
normal consultation process. E-mails went to 52 environmental
organizations, as well as to other stakeholders, when the process
opened. These days the internet is the best way to inform people, and
they don't usually put out press releases about such consultations,
says McDonald. "We don't normally advertise those kinds of things."
Broten says she's concerned because several questions remain
unanswered. "Who's monitoring? Who's enforcing? What are the penalties?
It's just so vague. It's really open season on dumping."
There's no monitoring regime built into the proposed process, and the
restrictions cover only a small number of contaminants. The waste from
pulp and paper mills, says Broten, contains chemicals that are present
in wood, ones introduced in the processing and countless byproducts,
many of them unknown. "My main fear is we really don't know what we're
talking about here," she says. "You don't just open the door and say,
'let it rip boys'."
It would be foolhardy to allow the waste to be put on crops that we'll eat, she says. "Toxic sludge is not good for you."
-A.M.
|
In the News