the toxic truth - Greenpeace

the toxic truth
Some within the company appear to have been indifferent
about what would become of the ship transporting the waste:
“ 5k per day I think you are dreaming as this is the opex costs of
a vessel like this in WAF [West Africa] and if you add amortization
of current scrap prices you get over double then that to start with.
In addition that implies you do not want insurance class p &I and
you do not care if she sinks. ” 329
Internal emails also raise questions about whether Trafigura
was trying to avoid regulatory scrutiny of its unprecedented
activity on a ship. An email dated 21 June 2006 suggests that
Trafigura had also considered storing the coker naphtha in the
UK port of Milford Haven, but rejected this:
“ We should store the PMI crap on a ship in Gibraltar rather
than take it to Milford Haven. Reasons are as follows… Milford
will require at least one approval. The bucket in Gib will require no
330
such thing. ”
Amnesty International and Greenpeace have asked Trafigura to
explain the content of these emails, but the company did not
respond.
In the end, Trafigura went ahead with its decision to carry out
caustic washing on board a ship without having identified any
safe means of dealing with the waste material that it was about
to produce.
The Bay and Rock of Gibraltar. © Greenpeace/Sara del río
gaps in governanCe:
the Mediterranean area
and gibraltar waters
There is no effective, integrated system of environmental governance
in the Mediterranean. The present situation is characterized
by a patchwork of legal and jurisdictional regimes that
establish competencies on different issues and in different parts
of the sea, from coastal waters and territorial seas to ecological
and fisheries protection zones and the international waters of the
high seas. Unlike other maritime regions, many Mediterranean
coastal states have not declared Exclusive Economic Zones
(EEZ), which means that a large part of the Mediterranean is still
beyond the jurisdiction of any individual Mediterranean state. As
a consequence, there has been a lack of effective control of and
responsibility for the marine environment.
Environmental groups, including Greenpeace, have expressed
concern about serious gaps in regulatory oversight associated
with shipping activity in waters around Gibraltar. In 2010,
112,843 vessels crossed the Strait of Gibraltar, 331 the gateway
to the Mediterranean Sea. There is a longstanding disagreement
between Spain and the UK about the jurisdiction of these waters.
This disagreement, combined with intense business competition
between the nearby Spanish Port of Algeciras and the Port of
Gibraltar, has resulted in a situation where regulation is lax. 332
Both ports compete in the market for ships to enter the bay for
port operations, especially for bunkering, but there is a lack of
co-ordination between the port authorities. Failures in communication
between the two port authorities have led to a number of
environmental disasters, such as the collision between the cargo
ship New Flame and the oil tanker Torm Gertrud in August 2007,
which resulted in a major oil spill.
The problem is compounded by the fact that Gibraltar enjoys a
special European Union (EU) status, under which certain rules
do not apply, including some concerning environmental protection.
333 As a consequence, Gibraltar waters have acquired a
reputation for irregular port operations and activities that could
not take place elsewhere in the EU.
Because of the serious environmental and human consequences
of the regulatory gaps, Greenpeace advocates governance
reform, including a joint monitoring, control, surveillance and
compliance mechanism for the Mediterranean. Greenpeace also
advocates for a biodiversity agreement under the UN Convention
on the Law of the Sea to address the global gaps in oceans
governance. 334
81
Chapter 7