-Regulatory enforcement responses
By Alfred Wreh, a Liberian Environmental Sustainability Researcher
There is no question that MNG Goldmine deadly situation is a perfect example regarding the EPA’s failures of pollution, compliance and regulatory enforcement responses
In Liberian policy arena where ‘politics’ is revered, and scientific evidence is pushed to the side, it is paramount that our policymakers identify critical information to support strong policies based on scientific innovation.
So, it is concerning when the EPA credibility and scientific integrity have been continually questioned regarding its statutory functions.
On November 6, 2018, it was reported that an accident took away four lives in Korkoya involving a vehicle belonging to a Chinese company hired by the Turkish Mining Company (MNG-Gold), which was followed by violent protests. This is all happening in the absence of robust air quality policy and previous denial of allegations by MNG-Gold that they’ve not impacted the air quality on public health and caused water pollution.
My deepest heartfelt condolences to the families and friends involved in the Korkoya accident which caused many casualties. Similarly, I unequivocally condemn the violence. We should not allow the intent of violence to drag us back to the past. I support decent law-abiding people from all communities.
However, the images I’ve seen say a lot…this is significantly more deeply rooted anger. Is an anger at government failure to make smart environmental decisions void of politics. Citizens in the mining communities are at a unique disadvantage in obtaining information about environmental risks and are now fighting back against them, thanks to politics instead of science.
Alfred Wreh, the Author
About a year ago, the EPA stressed that Sayewheh Town was safe for normal activities, cyanide pollution as they put it was “Solved”. The Inter-Ministerial Crisis Management Team (CMT) which included the EPA said “There was no detectable free cyanide in samples collected from all six hand pumps, indicating no groundwater contamination while free cyanide concentration within the Sein Creek remains at zero”, this according to them showed that the free cyanide level at the point of rupture (in the TSF) was below the permissible limit while the free cyanide level at the Containment Pond remained below the permissible limit.
When faced with environmental concerns, the EPA “does not take action” until it is “forced to do so” by either local environmental or international groups. When it does act, it makes informal choices and outsource any environmental responsibilities onto others. I remembered vividly when the EPA said the cyanide pollution has been solved, I asked, just like that, this is questionable and weak and urged the need for ‘re-analysis’. Were the decisions based on bioremediation or phytoremediation? Which solution model was employed as the basis for said decision? The EPA cannot keep protecting big polluters at the detriment of poor citizens.
The situation only promises to worsen as environmental regulations slackens and policymakers refuses to think about the environment each day as a standalone issue for driving economic growth and prosperity.
This re-analysis report by the National Bureau of Concession debunked the EPA statement, which showed that three million gallons of diverse toxic chemicals were released in the community by MNG and will remain in the environment for decades to come.
The research led by SGS, which established a causal link between fine particulate matter exposure associated with the pollution, it states “At the post-spill chronology of events, MNG Management were aware there were dozens of people from the spillage area seeking medical treatment and took hours to put in place any treatment which could or should have been rushed in at the time of the spillage occurrence and its on-going effects.
This wanton, reckless and inconsiderate dispossession of the emergency medical needs of the community by MNG Management is another palpable finding supplementing those gathered and assessed in the SGS Report.”
By July 2018, Meryem Tekol Pelenk, Global Health, Safety and Environmental Director of MNG, acknowledged the pollution when she said “The safety and well-being of our neighbours, employees and contractors are always our first priority and this is irreplaceable with any material benefit. We again apologize to our neighbours for any concern or inconvenience this may have caused them”.
The cyanide polluted towns in bong county sue MNG Gold for us$285 million in damages as well.
But unlike MNG Gold, the EPA fined Bea Mountain Mining Corporation for violation of the Environmental Permit granted, specifically, condition 5.2 which ensures that the limit of free Cyanide in wastewater from the TSF-R does not exceed 0.1mg/, adding that result implies that the level of free cyanide is nearly four times the maximum discharged limit. This situation is not different from MNG.
Ensuring environmental justice for these communities is an official duty of the government. More than 12 years ago, the environmental protection and management law was signed granting statutory responsibility to the EPA to protect the environment, the poor and communities that face disproportionately higher rates of pollution.
There is scientific consensus that exposure to cyanide pollution causes various diseases such as hypothyroidism, kidney damage and miscarriages.
There are studies from enormous scientific literature based on increasingly representative data and sophisticated analyses that overwhelmingly corroborate Cyanide toxicity causes direct damage to the nervous system by lipid peroxidation which impact the brain and the heart muscle, causing hypoxia a disorder of body cells function.
The Environmental Protection Agency should rely on science to set regulatory limits of ‘safe’ levels of air pollution and for decision making.
Government culture is part of the problem. A bigger part is a funding structure that since the early 2006 has relied on negotiations with recalcitrant polluters and budget signature fees to keep the pollution going. Simply put, the EPA doesn’t have enough money to do the job right, but the EPA is not innovative either.
It is understandable that politicians want to hear from all sides of an issue. However, it is irrelevant when it comes to considering and funding scientific research. Scientific research and innovation, essentially, is non-partisan. There are not ‘both sides.’ Yes, there is often active and ongoing debate of an issue among scientists that is critical for moving science forward. But that is not what is going on here.
In fact, it’s impossible to know whether the contamination has caused health problems, because EPA reports only occurrence risks based on physical contaminant levels and no agency of government have studied residents’ health beyond reporting pollution for over 12 years. Firestone, Kpanyan town, Sime Darby are all examples. That is typical, in part because definitively linking health problems with specific sources of contamination is extremely difficult.
Few days ago, I wrote an open letter Our “new normal” is a Public Health Threat: Road Traffic Accidents and It’s Killing us. That letter was not just about Road Accidents, it focuses on linkage between disability, public health, climate change, emission, safety and poverty. I wonder if those concerned read it?
Cyanide pollution can do serious damage to children. Children are particularly vulnerable because they play in and sometimes eat soil; their developing organs are highly susceptible to damage from chemicals; and they take in more food, water, and air than adults do.
Ultimately, the safest way to protect people is simply to consider that the environment matters and act, actions beyond not where people are clamouring.
Ensuring that the EPA is credible and well-accepted by the scientific community is vital to decision-making that has strong pegs to stand on and contributes to solving complex environmental issues we face. The EPA is a scientific institution, not just any random decision must be taken, a decision that deserves a voice must be that of science.
The debate regarding the economy, health, jobs and energy can and should be left to the politicians What they can’t debate is the science behind the air quality and pollution. The EPA must gather and synthesize scientific information on air pollution effects, and serves as a clearinghouse of data on emissions, air quality, and air pollution controls. Addressing and minimizing citizens exposure to pollution is healthier, a fact that is supported by scientific innovation.
If the EPA is serious about reducing air pollution and ensuring environmental health of Liberians in line with the constitution, we need to tackle pollution at its source.
The ‘polluters pays’ principle must be applied without fear of favour and those who produce pollution should bear the costs of managing it to prevent further externalities to citizens health or the environment.
This principle underpins our regulation of pollution affecting land, water and air. Pollution is defined in law as an indirect or direct alteration of the physical, thermal, chemical, biological or radio-active properties of a segment of the environment by discharging, emitting or depositing substances or waste, in other words the contamination of the land, water or air by harmful or potentially harmful substances.
In short, when it comes to the environment, the EPA needs to reassert itself as a scientific institution and shouldn’t squander its strengths but reinforce them by creating stronger network scientists that share the values of protecting the environment.
Enforcing environmental laws is part of poverty alleviation and the EPA must protect citizens health and the environment. They must ensure compliance with environmental requirements.
Since 2006, Liberia have not had a “State of the Environment report”, this here is a violation of the environmental protection and management law. The EPA must review the current state of knowledge on the behaviour of cyanide in the environment and its impact on the health of Liberians. There is no question that MNG Goldmine deadly situation is a perfect example of the EPA’s failures of pollution, compliance and enforcement responses.
The Liberian government must build and fund scientific research to capitalise on the opportunities growth and enable businesses to thrive and create jobs.
Like the Pro Poor Agenda for Prosperity and Development, I look forward to the ancillary Science Growth Plan. A science growth plan fund for large-scale research and development programs for restoration and adaptation for our ecosystem.
If the Pro poor agenda must succeed, then the “Environment Matters” and it’s time for forward scientific thinking.
Alfred Wreh is an Environmental Sustainability Researcher, a Scholar, Circular Economist, Environmentalist, Conservationist, Natural Resources Practitioner and a Concern Citizen. He is a member of several international environmental groups. His research focuses on the environmental sustainability, climate change, access to information and environmental democracy.