No. 297, Sept. 23 - 29, 2004

SECCIÓN EN ESPAÑOL

ENVIRONMENT





To read an article, click on the headline.


Montana tribes oppose return to cyanide mining

Global warming may spawn more super-storms

The UK’s new rubbish dump: China





Montana tribes oppose return to cyanide mining

By Brenda Norrell

Fort Belknap, Montana, Sept. 14— While the Bush administration pressed for a record number of oil and gas leases in the West, American Indians in Montana opposed new legislation that would permit mining companies to return to cyanide leach gold mining.

Montana Rep. Jonathan Windy Boy, D-Box Elder, said American Indians have a sacred responsibility to protect nature and points out the water and soil has already been poisoned by cyanide leach mining in Montana.

“It is the fight that we have to do to protect nature, what was left here for us. We don’t own anything; it is not our place to tear up what does not belong to us.

“We don’t even own our lives; we are here only on borrowed time. It is up to us as humans to protect what was put here for us to protect,” Windy Boy told Indian Country Today.

Windy Boy, Rocky Boy Chippewa-Cree tribal councilman, opposes new legislation, Initiative 147, which would repeal Montana’s ban on cyanide leach gold and silver mining, if passed by voters in November.

Although the new legislation adds some environmental protections, tribal members say it is not enough.

Windy Boy pointed out that Zortman-Landusky Gold Mines declared bankruptcy, leaving behind poisoned streams for Montana tribes and an enormous clean-up bill for Montana taxpayers.

Zortman-Landusky Gold Mines were operated by Pegasus Gold Corporation in the Little Rocky Mountains, at the southeast end of the Assiniboine and Gros Ventre Fort Belknap Reservation.

Catherine Halver, 74-year-old Gros Ventre tribal member in Lodgepole, helped lead the fight to halt cyanide leach mining, which destroyed burial grounds and poisoned streams.

“Most of our water is contaminated and will be for years and years to come because of the way they were mining,” said Halver, vice-chairman of the local Native grassroots group Island Mountain Protectors.

Spirit Mountain was destroyed before the mining operations of Zortman-Landusky Gold Mines were halted.

“A lot of our ancestors in the past used this mountain for vision quests and prayers. That was a very sacred mountain to our people. Now you go up there and it is just a little pile of rubble.

“It really affects the old people; a lot of our burial sites were destroyed. There were people buried all over that mountain. They were just digging up the dead.”

Halver lives 15 miles from the mine sites and cyanide waters flow by, down Little Warm Creek, through her property. She had the water tested and cyanide was found years ago; now it is too expensive to have the test performed again. “The mine always said it would come out and test it and they never did.”

Urging voters to oppose I-147, she said, “Do not bring it in! We have got contaminated water running into our reservation every day. We have to live with all this destruction. Everything needs water.

“Who is stuck with all this contamination? It is the Native Americans. It has affected our Native roots we use for medicine.” Along with the medicine roots, she said tribal members wonder how much cyanide is in their sage and chokecherries. “We don’t know if it contaminated our berries and no one is helping us find out.

“It has affected our way of living, our soil, the water, everything. The list goes on and on of the destruction. It will never in our lifetimes be cleaned up. The mining companies will say they are going to reclaim it, they claim there are new processes with new technology that they will use, but they are not going to use those, because they are too expensive.”

The cyanide spills and groundwater contamination from acid mine drainage from the Zortman-Landusky were documented. In 1982, 780 gallons of cyanide-tainted solution leaked from a containment pond when a section of piping used in the mine’s cyanide sprinkling system ruptured and released 52,000 gallons of cyanide solution onto lands and into creeks. There were at least eight other cyanide spills.

Julie King, Assiniboine of Fort Belknap, remembered playing in those same mountains as a child in north central Montana. She said the waters no longer flow the way they did where the family fished when she was a child. Now, they have been diverted.

Opposing passage of I-147, she said her concern is the contamination of the groundwater. King said American Indians and other residents are always promised reclamation after mining, but there is no way to reclaim lost living creatures.

Pegasus’ Zortman-Landusky Gold Mines were sued under the Clean Water Act and faced a $36 million clean-up settlement in 1996. The company declared bankruptcy in 1998.

Windy Boy said Zortman-Landusky made more than $250 billion before declaring bankruptcy. Now, the cost of cyanide leach mining cleanup is projected to be $60 million and required into perpetuity.

“The state has determined that water treatment will be required forever.” Further, he said very few tribal members in Montana ever benefited from the jobs, often claimed in publicity to support the push for new mining.

Tribal members in Montana say the devastation is not worth it. During cyanide leach mining, a cyanide solution is trickled over crushed rock. After the gold dissolves into the cyanide, it is recaptured and processed to extract the metal.

The new legislation, I-147 to overturn Montana’s ban on cyanide leach gold mining, is backed by the mining industry, which raised more than $1 million to press for passage. Of $1,057,805, 97 percent came from cash and in-kind contributions from Canyon Resources Corporation of Golden, Colo., which has joined forces with a Montana mining group.

“The people of Montana have made it abundantly clear that they want the opportunity to vote on I-147,” said Tammy Johnson, campaign manager for Miners, Merchants and Montanans for Jobs and Economic Opportunity.

Windy Boy, however, urges American Indians to get out and vote against I-147 in Montana, pointing out that their vote can make a difference. “The Native vote has made a big difference in a number of key races.”

Now, with drilling and mining leases at a record high, the last pristine wildernesses of the West are at risk.

Windy Boy points out waterways in the West are already contaminated with high levels of PCBs and mercury.

Fish in many areas have been found unsafe for human consumption and PH levels in water near cyanide leach mines are the equivalent of battery acid.

“Montana is the last of the Western frontier,” Windy Boy said, pointing out the purity of the water in the region’s aquifer.

“This water is the purest in the world. If the aquifer becomes polluted, we might as well kiss our human existence goodbye.”

Source: Indian Country Today

Global warming may spawn more super-storms

By Stephen Leahy

Brooklin, Canada, Sept. 20 (IPS)— Hurricane Ivan, the incredibly powerful storm that killed at least 120 people in the Caribbean and southern United States, may be a harbinger of the Earth’s hotter future, say experts.

“As the world warms, we expect more and more intense tropical hurricanes and cyclones,” said James McCarthy, a professor of biological oceanography at Harvard University.

Large parts of the world’s oceans are approaching 81 degrees Fahrenheit or warmer during the summer, greatly increasing the odds of major storms, McCarthy told IPS.

When water reaches such temperatures, more of it evaporates, priming hurricane or cyclone formation. Once born, a hurricane needs only warm water to build and maintain its strength and intensity.

Over the last 100 years, the Earth has warmed by about 2 degrees Fahrenheit, according to the 2001 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an international scientific body that studies the relationship between human activity and global warming.

The IPCC report was based on research by more than 2,500 scientists from about 100 countries who determined that emissions of gases such as carbon dioxide act as a blanket that prevents much of the sun’s energy from dissipating into space.

Much of the extra energy from this “greenhouse effect” is being absorbed by the oceans.

The “proof” that the oceans are warming is the fact that global sea levels have rizen 1 inch in the past 10 years, said Kevin Trenberth, head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

Water expands when heated, and sea levels are expected to continue rising by as much as 18 inches by 2100.

While the warming of the oceans is not uniform — the North Pacific and North Atlantic are a bit cooler — the hurricane-producing mid-Atlantic and Caribbean oceans have warmed significantly.

“Global warming is creating conditions that are more favorable for hurricanes to develop and be more severe,” said Trenberth.

Will that result in more Category 4 or 5 storms like Ivan?

“That’s the logical conclusion, although it may be somewhat controversial,” he said.

Before it struck Cuba a glancing blow, Ivan was a Category 5 on the Saffir-Simpson scale, which rates hurricanes from 1 to 5 according to wind speeds and destructive potential. Category 5 hurricanes have winds that blow continuously above 160 miles per hour an hour. Ivan’s gusts topped 200 miles per hour an hour at times, making it the sixth most powerful hurricane on record for the Atlantic Basin.

Hurricane Ivan’s 12-day rampage killed 70 people in the Caribbean and 50 in the United States. It will be some time before the full extent of the damage is known, but some estimates put it at 10 billion dollars for the United States alone.

As emissions of greenhouse gases continue to trap more and more of the sun’s energy, that energy has to be dissipated, resulting in stronger storms, more intense precipitation and higher winds, says McMcarthy.

However, the statistical record of hurricanes hitting the US shows a decrease in the past 50 years.

Most hurricanes do not strike land, McCarthy points out, and up until the past 25 years, with the advent of satellite tracking, there was scant data on the storms.

But there is abundant evidence of an unprecedented number of severe weather events in the past decade, McCarthy says. In 1998, Hurricane Mitch killed nearly 20,000 people in Central America, and more than 4,000 people died during disastrous flooding in China. Bangladesh suffered some of its worst floods ever the following year, as did Venezuela. Europe was hit with record floods in 2002, and then a record heat wave in 2003.

More recently, Brazil was struck by the first-ever recorded hurricane in the South Atlantic last March.

“Weather records are being set all the time now. We’re in an era of unprecedented extreme weather events,” McCarthy said.

Historical weather patterns are becoming less useful for predicting the future conditions because global warming is changing ocean and atmospheric conditions.

“In 30 to 50 years’ time, the Earth’s weather generating system will be entirely different,” he predicted.

What hasn’t changed in the United States is the lack of concern about climate change, said Ross Gelbspan, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and author of two books on global warming, most recently one titled: Boiling Point: How Politicians, Big Oil And Coal, Journalists and Activists Are Fueling the Climate Crisis — And What We Can Do to Avert Disaster.

Sharp reductions of emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide on the order of 70 percent are urgently needed to minimize the impacts, Gelbspan said.

But despite the recent destructive series of hurricanes and tornadoes, global warming is off the radar screen of the US presidential election campaign, he said.

Gelbspan is not surprized at this, given the power and influence of the fossil fuel lobby in Washington, which he outlines in great detail in his book.

“America’s oil and coal industries receive more than $20 billion a year in subsidies,” he said. “Imagine what could be done if that money was invested in green energy.”

The UK’s new rubbish dump: China

Sept. 20— More than a third of the waste paper and plastic collected by British local authorities, supermarkets and businesses for recycling is being sent 8,000 miles to China without any knowledge of the environmental or social costs -- and to the complete surprise of most consumers.

New government figures suggest that exports to China are running at 200,000 tons of plastic rubbish and 500,000 tons of paper and cardboard a year -- a huge increase on just three years ago.

Much of the plastic sent to China is packaging but a Guardian investigation has found that agents for Chinese companies are now buying up and exporting thousands of tons of unwashed bottles, containers, and other household waste.

“China is buying up everything it can. It is sucking in material from all over the world and it doesn’t give two noodles what it takes,” said one plastics recycler who asked not to be identified. “I know of 300 firms, mostly in China, offering to buy my plastics. I have three or four companies cold-calling me every day from China requesting material. They have very cheap labor to sort the material but the shame is that it is being done there and not here. They don’t care about the quality, or the contamination. No one checks what is sent or what arrives.”

The British plastics industry admits that the global trade is starving some local recycling initiatives of materials and putting established firms out of business or at risk. According to UK plastic recyclers, agents for Chinese companies are offering $250 a ton for mixed plastic bottles, far more than British companies can pay. “The industry here can only support $100 a ton. We believe that 10-15,000 tons of old bottles are going to China. Yet only about 25,000 tons were collected last year,”said Stephen Chase of Chase Plastics.

“The Chinese put me out of business,” said Edward Clack, a plastics recycler who invested in two recycling plants in Britain. “Everyone has lost supplies to China. The local market is being starved of materials. Hundreds of brokers are buying up the plastic and shipping it out. It’s cheaper to send a container to China than to Scotland.”

China drives the global waste trade, importing more than 3 million tons of waste plastic and 15 million tons of paper and board a year. But the trade is being driven equally by tough EU legislation forcing local authorities and businesses to recycle more. Landfill charges are rising steeply, making it relatively cheaper to send the waste abroad. Meanwhile, major companies have moved in, offering to collect and dispose of large quantities.

The trade is made possible by the vast numbers of shipping containers arriving in Britain with Chinese exports. One of Britain’s largest freight forwarding companies confirmed that the return waste trade to China is accelerating rapidly.

“We are shipping a phenomenal amount of waste, maybe 15,000 tons a week to China,” said a spokesman for Warrant freight forwarders of Liverpool. The current price for sending a standard 26-ton container of waste plastic to China, he said, is about $1,000.

The Tanjin Songzi Import and Export Trade company based in the huge port of Tianjin Xingang is typical of the growing trade. “We are specilize [sic] in import the scrap plastic bottle, waste plastic, waste paper. Europe origin. Please show me your offer,” says its advertisement on an international plastics exchange website brimming with traders wanting the raw material for the Chinese industrial revolution.

Most Chinese plastic waste importers want pictures of what they are buying, but some are are not fussy. “We buy all types, such as the mineral water bottles, pure water bottles and plastic bottles of other drink. Any specifications will be fine. If you can supply, please email,” says Lee of a Shanghai company on the same site.

Western plastic companies are setting up in China, but some of the poorest people are employed to sort and recycle the plastic. “Plastic is now one of the biggest industries in Guangdong province, but much of the work is being done by migrant labor earning a pittance,” said Martin Baker, of Greenpeace China.

“I would say that Britain is dumping its rubbish in the name of recycling. It is not responsible recycling that is being done. It is reprocessing, but the methods being used are still mostly rudimentary. There are some good factories, but on the whole it is small scale, done in backstreets with little environmental standards. People are burning plastic, sorting it by hand, the water gets polluted and it goes back into the rivers,” he said.

UK supermarket chains, some of the largest generators of plastic packaging waste in Britain, are all getting their recycling done in China, said a spokesman for Sainsbury’s. “We send 5,000 tons of plastic there a year. We used to send it to a firm in Nottinghamshire, but it has closed down,” he said. “We looked for others in Britain but no one could match the Chinese option for quantity or price. We would love to see it being recycled here, but it’s not possible at present.”

But Ian Bowles, a spokesman for Asda, said he did not know where the company’s plastic recycling was being done. “UK companies pick it up. As far as we know it’s being reprocessed here. It could be that excess quantities are going abroad.” Other retailers known to be generating large quantities of plastic waste, including Tesco, did not respond to questions about where their recycling was being done.

No detailed studies have been done of the environmental costs of shipping vast quantities of waste from Britain to China, but environment groups and MPs were yesterday shocked at the scale of the trade. “Exporting lightweight packaging waste to China makes little sense environmentally,” said Liberal Democrat MP Sue Doughty. “It is a failure of the UK recycling market which allows the UK to export plastic for recycling. We have no control over environmental standards in China. Instead of solving the problem we are exporting it. Much more needs to be done to stimulate the markets in the UK so that waste is handled as close as possible to the point of generation.”

Clare Wilton, wastes spokeswoman for Friends of the Earth, said: “People will be shocked that some of the newspapers and empty drinks bottles they put out for recycling can end up in China. It’s an environmental disgrace. The solution is to expand the UK’s own recycling industry. This would be good for the environment, create local jobs and help Britain become a leader in green technology.”

Sending plastic bottles to China is “barmy,”said Mike Croxford, manager of Newport Wastesavers, which collects 50 tons a month of plastic from 50,000 homes in south Wales. “We should be dealing with the stuff here, but the reality now is that most plastic in Britain is going abroad. I don’t think the public knows where some of it goes. If they knew it was going right round the world, they might not encourage it.”

But other recyclers said it was better to send rubbish to China to be recycled than to put it in landfills in Britain. Andrew Simmons of the Peterborough-based waste charity Recoup buys millions of plastic bottles from UK councils, bales them up, and sells them to a reprocessor who then sells them on to Europe or, increasingly, to China. He rejected claims that Britain was dumping its rubbish on China and said that the environmental cost of sending bottles thousands of miles was negligible compared with making “virgin” plastic bottles from oil.

China is increasingly aware that countries are exporting their pollution to them and have imposed strict laws governing what can be exported. Large amounts of German household waste have been found and all waste exports from Japan have recently been halted after electronic and contaminated household waste was found. However, the Chinese authorities, are unable to check the contents of all the waste containers that arrive in Chinese ports every year.

British plastic bottles are mostly sent to Hong Kong where they are sorted and “flaked” before being sent to factories on the mainland. “One type of plastic bottle goes on to make soft furnishings and clothes, another is made into pellets which are sold back to European manufacturers to make things like plastic bags,” said Mr Simmons.

This insatiable demand for the world’s rubbish, he said, has actually boosted the British market for plastic recyclers, raising the price and making it far more worthwhile for councils to collect and not dump it in landfill. Partly because of this, more than half of all British local authorities now offer plastic recycling.

More and more British plastic is likely to go to China, said Tim Frier of Valpac, whose subsidiary, Valiant, collects waste from more than 5,000 businesses in Britain, including supermarkets, pubs and clubs, and sends up to 15,000 tons of plastic to China a year. Valpac has just opened an office in China.

“We will be sending more there. But they have strict rules. The problem was that a lot of waste going to China was contaminated, and not being sorted properly. There were concerns about British waste, too,” he said.

The government insists that companies have export licences but few if any checks are made in British ports. The Environment Agency admits that it is unable to check what is being exported.

“There is a legitimate trade in waste exports for recovery involving materials such as paper, ferrous metals, plastics and card. These wastes are classed as ‘green list’ and are not subject to the same level of control as wastes classed as hazardous,” said a spokesman.

Source: Guardian (UK)