the toxic truth - Greenpeace

the toxic truth
ChemiCAls in the wAste
Although several agencies conducted tests on the waste
material carried by the Probo Koala and dumped in Abidjan,
there is a lack of information about its exact chemical
composition. The first test was carried out by Amsterdam
Port Services (APS) in the Netherlands, six weeks before
the dumping took place, and, as detailed in Chapter 3, this
revealed a chemical oxygen demand (COD, a measure of
contamination) that was substantially higher than APS had
expected. The Netherlands Forensic Institute (NFI), which is
part of the Dutch Ministry of Justice, also carried out tests
on the aqueous and hydrocarbon layers of the waste. After
the dumping had taken place, Centre Ivorienne AntiPollution
(CIAPOL), part of the Ivorian Ministry of Environment also
carried out analyses on samples of the waste found on the
quay, as well as waste from the Akouédo dumping site. However,
each of these tests had limitations in terms of what
was analysed. This issue is discussed further in Chapter 6
and in the annex to this report. Trafigura has never published
its own analysis of the waste.
What is known is that the chemicals present in the waste
included sodium hydroxide, mercaptides, sulphides, phenolates
238 and organic chemicals such as benzene, xylenes
and toluene. Exposure to these chemicals and/or their
reaction/decomposition products (some of which may have
been formed and released if the pH – which is a measure
of how alkaline or acidic a substance is – of the waste was
lowered) in certain concentrations can lead to negative
health impacts.
Amnesty International and Greenpeace asked a toxicologist
to review the publicly available evidence about the waste and
to comment on likely impacts. As noted above, the publicly
available information has limitations, but there is evidence
to suggest that the pH of some of the dumped waste fell
below 11, which would have resulted in a portion of the
mercaptides being converted into mercaptans and being
released into the air. 239
The likely effects of inhaling significant quantities of mercaptans
would be headache, nausea and vomiting, coughing,
dizziness and drowsiness. Mercaptans are recognized
irritants of the eyes, skin, and respiratory tract. Both eyes
and skin become red and painful, and prolonged exposure of
the skin causes dermatitis. Mercaptides would be a source
of mercaptan vapours as the pH of the waste decreased
after it was dumped, but mercaptides themselves are also
hazardous chemicals, including by skin contact, ingestion
and aspiration (ie inhalation of droplets).
The waste also contained sulphides. It is more difficult to
determine whether individuals would have been exposed to
hydrogen sulphide and in what concentrations. Hydrogen
sulphide would be released if the pH (of parts of) the waste
fell to between 7 and 8. A toxicologist consulted by Amnesty
International and Greenpeace stated that, over time, it is
likely that this lower pH could have been reached for some
of the waste because of dilution by rainfall and contact with
other soil ingredients. However, on the basis of the information
available, it is not possible to say how long it would
have taken to reach this stage. 240 The effects of exposure
to hydrogen sulphide depend on the concentration of the
chemical itself; high concentrations create the greatest risk.
Hydrogen sulphide is irritating to the eyes and respiratory
tract and affects the central nervous system. The effects of
exposure are known to include headache, dizziness, cough,
sore throat, nausea, and laboured breathing. Exposure of
the eyes will result in them becoming red, painful, and there
may be severe deep burns. Exposure to high concentrations
of hydrogen sulphide can result in unconsciousness and
death.
Benzene, xylenes and toluene were also identified in the NFI
analyses of the waste, but their concentrations in the air in
Abidjan following the dumping of the waste are not known.
Exposure to these organic chemicals could have had a
range of negative health impacts. 241 Individuals can become
drowsy and develop headaches. Many of these chemicals
are respiratory tract irritants, and exposure could exacerbate
breathing problems in individuals with conditions such as
asthma or bronchitis.
Initially, Trafigura denied that the waste was the sole cause
of any effects on health, claiming that there were alternative
plausible explanations for the mass attendance of people
at medical centres in the days and weeks after the dumping.
According to the company, other explanations for the
reported health impacts could have included mass hysteria
and people capitalizing on the provision of free health care
by the state. Trafigura also suggested that people suffered
negative effects due to a product that had been sprayed to
kill mosquitoes in and around Abidjan in the days before the
dumping. 242
Trafigura has since accepted that the waste could have had
an effect on people’s health but only to a limited extent. In
an out-of-court settlement with 30,000 victims in the UK
personal injury claim (see Chapter 13), Trafigura accepted
that the waste could have had a range of short-term health
impacts that were comparable to “flu like symptoms”. 243 The
underlying evidence on which this assessment is based has
not been made public by Trafigura.
59
Chapter 5