ToxicsWatch, Journal of Earth, Science, Economy and Justice

RTI applicant and Scientific Experts expose fundamental flaws in study; Farmers and Workers across India demand withdrawal of NIOH report

In a press conference held today an expert panel of lawyers and scientists shared details of how The Right to Information Act (RTI) helped expose and confirm the fundamental flaws in a scientific study on pesticide residue analysis by the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH), Ahmadabad. The NIOH study titled “Final Report of the Investigation of unusual illnesses allegedly produced by exposure in Padre Village of Kasargod district (N.Kerala)” and related reports have been cited in Kerala Government’s decision to ban Endosulfan and at Stockholm Convention while proposing a listing of Endosulfan as a Persistent Organic Pollutant (POP). If European Union (EU) proposal for listing Endosulfan as POP is accepted by the Conference of Parties in April 2011, millions farmers in India will lose their right to choose an affordable, pollinator friendly crop protection solution. In view of its national importance, several scientific committees established by the Govt. of India had reviewed the NIOH report. These committees concluded that there is no link established in the use of Endosulfan and the health problems reported in Padre Village in Kerala. Raw data obtained through the RTI have now confirmed the findings of these committees.

Present at the conference was the RTI applicant, Dr. Jyotsna Kapadia who investigated the scientific errors. According to Dr. Kapadia, “the analysis of raw data relating to the endosulfan study obtained from the NIOH confirms that the NIOH final report is indeed erroneous, inconsistent, suffers from incorrect representation of facts and therefore invalid and scientifically untenable”. The NIOH study has caused irreparable harm to Indian farmers and according to chemical industry sources the loss to the Indian industry on account of the flawed NIOH study could be as high as Rs 1200 crores shared Mr S Ganesan, Chairman – International Treaties Expert Committee of Indian Chemical Council. On the strength of the RTI expose and “In view of the procedural and technical flaws, falsified data, omissions, errors, misrepresentation of facts, the NIOH study report and allied publications must be withdrawn immediately” added Mr Ganesan.


Dr. S K Handa, former WHO consultant to the Ministry of Health had recently rejected the NIOH study on the basis of its failure to conduct confirmatory tests.

The Government of India has strongly opposed the EU proposal for listing Endosulfan as a POP and has been under pressure from environmental groups to consider a national ban. As the flawed NIOH study was cited as the reason for a ban, it evoked public outrage when ten thousand people marched through the streets of Bhavnagar in November 2010 demanding withdrawal of the NIOH report. During December 2010 year another agitation was led by thousand of workers in Kochi to demand justice for the unfairly stigmatized workers at the government run Hindustan Insecticide Limited plant. Protesting workers are willing to offer their blood for analysis before the Government can consider any decision is taken against Endosulfan.

Mr S. Ganesan, Chairman – International Treaties Expert Committee, Indian Chemical Council (ICC) concluded that “Indian Constitution has both fundamental rights and fundamental duties. Article 51 a (h) of Indian Constitution states that it shall be the fundamental duty of every citizen to develop scientific temper. Scientific temper requires application of scientific logic without bias and errors. By producing an erroneous report NIOH scientists have erred in their fundamental duty and betrayed public trust”.

Concerned about the impact of the flaws on the integrity of the country’s scientists and crop protection industry, Mr Pradip Dave, President, Pesticide Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India congratulated Dr Jyostna Kapadia for exposing the first ever scientific flaw with help of RTI.

http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/right-to-information-confirms-flaws-in-nioh-study/424827/

What is the role of Ganga River Basin Authority (GRBA) when instead of closing polluting industrial units in Haryana, the National Capital Region (NCR) gets deprived of water supply by closing water treatment plants (WTPs).

The plants of Wazirabad and Chandrawal WTPs in NCR has been shut down due to presence of massive pollutants in Yamuna water coming from Haryana. Excessive levels of ammonia and chloride in raw water has emerged as a regular problem.

Can GRBA stop the Haryana factories from dumping all their effluents in Yamuna river?

Does GBRA have short-term and a long-term vision for the Ganga river basin?

Government of India constituted GRBA on 20th February 2009 under Section 3(3) of the Environment (Protection) Act (EPA), 1986 to act as a planning, financing, monitoring and coordinating body of the centre and the states.

According to GRBA as of September 2009, a total of 478 Grossly Polluting Industries (GPIs) were identified in Ganga Basin, out of which 348 industries have installed ETPs and operating satisfactorily 74 industries have been closed down and 56 industries are not operating satisfactorily.

The 56 industries which are admittedly not operating satisfactorily merits attention for action under Section 5 of EPA Act as an upfront initiative rather than undertaking effete steps like closing water treatment plants.

GRBA must address the emerging crisis due to industrial effluents and sewage generated by towns of Haryana including Chhachhrauli, Faridabad, Gharaunda, Gohana, Gurgaon, Indri, Karnal, Palwal, Panipat, Radaur, Sonepat and Yamunanagar-Jagadri to set matters right.

Under Section 5 of EPA, the Central Government has the power to direct the closure, prohibition or regulation or any industry, operation or process and/or stoppage or regulation of the supply of electricity or water or any other service. The closure of water treatment plants in NCR reveals that there is a compelling logic for GBRA and other concerned agencies to exercise their powers instead of adopting Ostrich policy.

WORLD SOCIAL FORUM

Dakar to Dhaka

New Delhi, Feb 5, 2011 (IPS) - Is it more important to build links with African civil society groups or concentrate on existing networks in the South Asian region? That is the dilemma before Indian delegates heading for the World Social Forum in Dakar, Senegal, and some who have opted out.

"Both are important," Amit Sen Gupta of the Delhi Science Forum (DSF) told IPS. "Today, more than ever before, a world reeling from the impact of multiple crises needs alternatives at the global, national and local levels."

Those attending the 6-11 Feb. event in Dakar, like Sen Gupta and his fellow activist, D. Reghunandan, have an eye on a meeting there on 10 Feb. aiming to prepare for the South Asia Social Forum scheduled for Nov. 2011 in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

"This does not, however, mean that Indian movements have given up on the WSF," said Sen Gupta. "Ever since the WSF was held in Mumbai in 2004, India has had a special place in its decade-long chronology and many still argue that WSF 2004 was among the most successful chapters of the WSF."

So what happened to the special vitality of the Indian movement and the willingness it showed to work together to build up the WSF?

Sen Gupta told IPS that the situation in India in 2001 - when the WSF movement began - and that in 2011 are very different. "The unity of the Left and Democratic movements stands fractured and this has resulted in lower investment of Indian movements in the WSF process - in India and globally."

"A fundamental expectation of Indians in Dakar would be that the Indian Left would once again heal the recent fractures and be part of the global voice that challenges neo-liberalism," said Sen Gupta. "Much of this has to be attended to back in India, but Dakar is an occasion where the need for unity will get more sharply defined."

Meena Menon, a writer and activist who is attending the Dakar meet, agrees with Sen Gupta, but adds that the fact that there is no strong Left movement in West Africa was also a dampener to Indian groups.

"Of course, African groups are saying that this is precisely why they are hoping for strong Indian participation in Dakar," she said. "The reality is that had the venue been in South Africa or even in the Maghreb, where Indian groups have linkages, the participation may have been far stronger."

However, she added that any linkages that could be forged with African groups in Dakar would be valuable because of commonality of interests in such areas as food security and agriculture.

Like other Indian delegates, Menon is also looking forward to the opportunity to strengthen the Dhaka’s South Asia Social Forum. "There is global relevance to recent events in Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Nepal and the current regime in Bangladesh offers the democratic space to hold the November Forum."

Gopal Krishna, convenor of Toxic Watch and campaigner against toxic industries, said he could not spare time to attend the Dakar WSF.

"Right now we are following a trade mission from Quebec led by Clement Gignac, economic development minister, that is in India through the week and we will try and prevent it from signing any deal that will enlarge the asbestos industry in India," he said.

The proposals, Krishna said, reveal the "callous disregard of the Quebec- based asbestos mining companies and Indian asbestos product manufacturing companies towards the health of Indians".

Krishna said he was looking forward to attending the Dhaka Forum because "we do need to build regional-level solidarity first," and because there was a "close commonality of issues and approaches".

According to Sen Gupta, whether regional or global, there is a general sense that the WSF needs to evolve from a platform of debate over "neoliberal globalisation" to one that can provide space for the forging of strong alliances that would be the building blocks of "Another World".

"While the WSF’s format has seen changes to accommodate these new expectations, it is still a largely untested format in terms of its ability to play the role that is expected of it," Sen Gupta said.

"Recent revelations that wealthy Indians had stashed away millions of dollars in Swiss banks reinforce the logic that Indian movements need to build up solidarity and challenge neoliberal globalisation," Sen Gupta said.

Leading Indian economists say that as the country liberalises so is the amount of money - that could have gone into development - being siphoned away to secret accounts abroad.

"While movements in India are confronting the present government on these issues, the WSF is an occasion to ponder on the need for a much larger unity," he added.

By Ranjit Devraj

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=54364

Regulations to check mercury pollution take backseat as Centre promotes fluorescent light

Rupa collects CFL every day. Each bulb gets her `3, and a whiff of mercury vapour (Photo: Ruhi Kandhari)
Sifting through Delhi’s municipal rubbish every day, Anwarul Shaikh and Rupa Begum often find broken CFL bulbs mixed in kitchen and other domestic waste. The compact fluorescent lamps have replaced incandescent bulbs in garbage mounds in the past couple of years, Rupa said, picking a few up. The glass tube and plastic end cap of a CFL fetch them up to Rs 3. Of late, Anwarul has been complaining of restricted vision. “It’s difficult to recognise distance between objects and me. I keep bumping into waste,” he said.

Mercury vapour in broken CFLs could be the reason for Anwarul’s condition, said T K Joshi, director, occupational and environmental programmes centre of Maulana Azad Medical College in Delhi. Since mercury is a neurotoxin, it can affect all organs of the body. Its major impact is on the brain, lungs and kidneys, said Joshi.

But with growing demand for energy- efficient lighting, the country’s production capacity for CFLs has gone up 25 times—from 19 million in 2002 to 500 million in 2010. Centre’s Bachat Lamp Yojana, a scheme to popularise CFLs, alone has pushed 20 million CFLs in the past three years. And all this is without any check on mercury pollution.

The CFLs sold in the country have 3- 12 mg of mercury. As per the standards proposed by the International Electrotechnical Commission it should not be more than 5 mg. Advanced technologies have even helped manufacturers in USA and Europe produce CFLs with just 1 mg of mercury. “Indian industry does not have any mandatory or voluntary standards for regulating mercury in florescent lights,” said Gopal Krishna of Toxics Watch, a non-profit in Delhi.

Indian industry does not have mandatory or voluntary standards for regulating mercury in CFL

Centre should have promoted energy efficient LED (light emitting diode) lights that do not contain mercury, he added. Assuming that each of the 350 million CFL bulbs produced in 2009 contained 5 mg mercury, 1,750 kg mercury would have been added to the waste in 2010. “There is no recycling unit for fluorescent lamps in India,” said an official at the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). In 2008 the board framed guidelines on mercury management in the CFL sector. It said all mercury-contaminated lamps and cut glass tips “may be treated or recycled” in a recycling unit at production site or at an authorised unit.

CPCB guideline was based on a task force report commissioned by Union environment ministry in 2007. Headed by the ministry’s additional secretary A K Khwaja, it is the only committee set up so far to look into the safe use and disposal of mercury in fluorescent lamp sector. The task force had recommended the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) to draw up standards for the amount of mercury in CFLs. But BIS is yet to drft mandatory standards. “One of the hindrances is the lack of advanced testing facility in the country,” said H C Kandpal of the National Physical Laboratory.

He is part of the BIS committee working on mercury standards in CFLs. The task force had also called for a tax on CFLs to finance safe disposal of mercury. Its report mentioned industries could buy back CFLs for recycling them. The report did not go down well with the industry, which has commissioned another study.

“Both the CPCB guidelines and the task force report were sketchy and could not be used to frame laws on the complex CFL disposal issue,” said spokesperson of Electric Lamp and Components Manufacturers Association of India (ELCOMA). Industry sources suggest if buy-back is made compulsory, it will add to the cost of CFLs.

So, the industry is buying time by commissioning another study. “After the report is out, ELCOMA plans to seek public opinion and government’s response,” said an industry analyst. A draft law may be ready by the end of 2011. It would take another couple of years before the law comes into force and recycling units are established, he added. And by that time another 2,500 kg of mercury would have been released into the environment.

Ruhi Kandhari
Issue: Feb 15, 2011
Down To Earth

http://www.downtoearth.org.in/node/32975

PLASTIC WASTE (MANAGEMENT AND HANDLING)RULES, 2011

Press Note
February 7th, 2011: The Ministry of Environment and Forests has today notified the Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011 to replace the earlier Recycled Plastics Manufacture and Usage Rules, 1999 (amended in 2003). These Rules have been brought out following detailed discussions and consultations with a wide spectrum of stakeholders including civil society, industry bodies, relevant Central Government Ministries and State Governments.

Releasing the Rules the Minister for Environment and Forests, Mr. Jairam Ramesh said “It is impractical and undesirable to impose a blanket ban on the use of plastic all over the country. The real challenge is to improve municipal solid waste management systems. In addition to the privatization and mechanisation of the municipal solid waste management systems we must be sensitive to the needs and concerns of the lakhs of people involved in the informal sector”

[I] Salient Features

Some of the salient features of the new Rules are:-
• Use of plastic materials in sachets for storing, packing or selling gutkha,
tobacco and pan masala has been banned.
• Under the new Rules, foodstuffs will not be allowed to be packed in recycled
plastics or compostable plastics.
• Recycled carry bags shall conform to specific BIS standards.
• Plastic carry bags shall either be white or only with those pigments and colourants
which are in conformity with the bar prescribed by the Bureau of Indian Standards
(BIS). This shall apply expressly for pigments and colourants to be used in plastic
products which come in contact with foodstuffs, pharmaceuticals and drinking water.
• Plastic carry bags shall not be less than 40 microns in thickness. Under the earlier Rules, the minimum thickness was 20 microns. Several State Governments in the
meanwhile, had stipulated varying minimum thickness. It is now expected that 40
microns norms will become the uniform standard to be followed across the country.
• The minimum size (of 8x12 inches) for the plastic carry bags prescribed under the
earlier Rules has been dispensed with.
• Carry bags can be made from compostable plastics provided they conform to BIS
standards.

One of the major provisions under the new Rules is the explicit recognition of the role of waste pickers. The new Rules require the municipal authority to constructively engage agencies or groups working in waste management including these waste pickers. This is the very first time that such a special dispensation has been made.

[II] Role of Implementing Authority

The Municipal authority shall be responsible for setting up, operationalization and
coordination of the waste management system and for performing the associated functions, namely;
• To ensure safe collection, storage, segregation, transportation, processing and
disposal of plastic waste;
• To ensure that no damage is caused to the environment during this process;
• To ensure setting up of collection centres for plastic waste involving manufacturers;
• To ensure its channelization to recyclers;
• To create awareness among all stakeholders about their responsibilities;
• To ensure that open burning of plastic waste is not permitted.

[III] Additional Safeguards

• No carry bags shall be made available free of cost to consumers. The municipal authority may determine the minimum price for plastic carry bags.
• The municipal authority may also direct the manufacturers to establish plastic waste collection centres, either collectively or individually, in line with the principle of ‘Extended Producers Responsibility’.
• The new Rules have stipulated provisions for marking or labeling to indicate name,
registration number of the manufacturer, thickness and also to indicate whether they
are recycled or compostable.

The Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011 is available here:

http://moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/DOC070211-005.pdf