the toxic truth - Greenpeace

38 Amnesty internAtionAl And greenpeAce netherlAnds
Chapter 3
A woman working close to the APS facilities
explained why she called the authorities on
3 July 2006:
“ It was a very chemical smell. It got me very
nauseous in my head and abdomen. I also suffered
from a persistent tickle in my throat. I got a terrible
headache. At half past nine I was at work and then
already I smelled the stench, but at that moment
I still felt all right. Around eleven [we] phoned the
police. At the time of reporting the smell was very
intense, as if a big cloud was passing. … During
the day I didn’t have any appetite. When I went
home at five o’clock, I still felt nauseous and dizzy
and I had headaches. ” 105
The police took samples of the Probo Koala
waste. 106 One of the police officers who had
taken samples of the waste on 3 July 2006
later testified:
“ We smelt heavy air that stank of gas and
ChemiCal oxygen
demand (Cod)
COD is a standard method of indirect
measurement of certain types of
pollutants in a sample of water. The
COD test is based on the chemical
decomposition of organic and some
inorganic contaminants dissolved
or suspended in water. The result of
a COD test indicates the amount of
water-dissolved oxygen consumed by
the contaminants during two hours of
decomposition in a solution of boiling
potassium dichromate. The higher
the COD, the higher the level of these
types of pollutants in the test sample.
oil. Also a rotten smell was observable, which
we related to sulphur. Before I had been on the
APS premises, I felt in good health during that
day and the period before that. During and after
that evening/night, in which the sampling had
taken place, I began to suffer from dizziness,
headache and forgetfulness. Most of the
day, on Tuesday, 4 July, I suffered from these
complaints. ” 107
Another police officer later
described what had occurred
when he took further samples
from the Probo Koala’s slop
tanks the following day, 4 July
2006:
“ “My safety shoes were
touching the raised edge of the
opening from which the sample
was taken. As soon as the [gas
detection] meter was positioned
above the opening, the device
sounded the alarm. Up to that
point, the device display had
not shown any value indicating
a deviation from the measurement values. The
alarm indicates that the safety values set are
being exceeded and that the environment is not
safe. ” 108
The samples taken by the police were sent to
the Netherlands Forensic Institute (NFI) for
testing. 109 However, the initial tests results
were not returned until 2 October 2006, after
the ship’s arrival in Abidjan. The complete
results of these tests were not made available
until 29 January 2007.
Meanwhile APS also took samples of the
waste for testing on 2 July 2006. 110 This
testing revealed that the waste had a
significantly higher chemical oxygen demand
(COD, an indirect measure of contamination)
than APS had anticipated when it had initially
agreed a price for the job. 111
APS had based its original quote to Trafigura
on a COD level of less than 2,000mg/l. 112
However, the APS tests revealed a COD of
almost 500,000mg/l. 113 This was not only far
higher than APS had expected, but was more
than APS could process on its premises. 114
On the basis of the test results, and because
APS would have to send the waste to another
specialist, APS increased its quote from €27
(US$34) per m 3 to €1000 (US$1,300) per m 3
(approximately 37 times the original price). 115
As a result, it would have cost Trafigura more
than €500,000 (over US$630,000) 116 to treat
all the waste. As noted earlier, Trafigura’s
executives had estimated that the coker
naphtha was going to make a profit in the
range of US$7 million per cargo (roughly
equivalent to £3.8 million or €5.5 million at
the time). 117 Despite this, Trafigura stated that
the APS price was “exorbitant”, and refused to
pay the higher charge. 118