Heavy Burden A Case Study on Lead Waste Imports Into India
Item
- Title
-
Heavy Burden
A Case Study on Lead Waste
Imports Into India - extracted text
-
SRfemcf
.w
Heavy Burden
A Case Study on Lead Waste
Imports Into India
Greenpeace International, Toxics Campaign, March 1997
Heavy Burden
A Case Study on Lead Waste Imports into India
By
Malini Morzaria
Nityanand Jayaraman
Greenpeace International Toxics Campaign
Keizersgracht 176
1016 DW Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel *31 20 523 6222
Fax *31 20 523 6200
Address in New Delhi
K54. Jangpura Extension
2nd Floor (Back Entrance)
New Delhi 110014
Tel *91 11 460 3458 / 460 3165
Fax *91 11 460 3458
OGreenpeace - March 1997
Acknowledgements and thanks to the following:
DGOS SeX° P BrUdeV' Cal=u”a
Oava SanMIo Deb, Goenka
cus.o™. N,,™., Karunan.Ppartho Babu' Pr^
Xpad"^ X
Subramaman, Rachel Kellett Ravi Aoarwai c; <-=>„
>^P°anyay. Hradeep
Shramik Sangh (Thane). Sukhendu Da (NAPM CakSta) Von H^09 h
Bengal State Pollution Control Board
Calcutta). Von Hernandez and West
©Greenpeace - March 1997
%
liBRAFtr XXx
»
*nd
5
K.
.
; • kJ « y
|5 -15'0
06771
Table of Contents
Summary
2
A: Hazardous Waste Exports: The trend today
4
B: The Basel Convention: India’s position
5
C: The importance of the Basel Ban
6
D: Attempts to undermine the Basel Ban
7
E: Judicial Action
8
F: What is Lead Waste
8
G: Lead Waste exports to India
9
H: The Lead Industry in India
10
I: Indian Lead Ltd
11
J: Site visits and affected communities
12
1 Calcutta Plant
2 Thane Plant
12
12
K: Waste disposal
13
L: Worker Safety at Indian Lead Ltd
13
....14
M: Sample results
1 Calcutta
2 Thane
.
N: Environmental and Human Health Effects
Lead
Cadmium
Zinc
................................
14
15
16
16
16
16
O. Conclusion and Recommendations
17
Appendix 1: Indian Import Data from April 1996 to February 1997
20
Table 1: Lead and battery scrap by category
Table 2: OECD exports of lead and battery waste
Table 3 Exports from known transhipment points
Table 4: Imports by Indian Lead Ltd of lead and battery scrap
Appendix 2: Sample Analyses
1
Heavy Burden - OGreenpeace. March 1997
20
25
25
25
26
Summary
At the end of this year, the full scope of an international ban on hazardous waste
exports to India and other less industrialised countries comes into effect under the
Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes for the
purposes of recycling India had been a firm supporter of the ban, but since 1995
that support has wavered. Pressure from the waste traffickers and from countries
like the U S A and Australia has forced the Indian Government to weaken its
commitment to the Basel Ban
Today, the Indian government is under strong pressure from the Supreme and High
Courts to resolve the problems of hazardous waste and imports into India. Despite
the fact that the highest authorities are involved in the process to effect change, the
entry of hazardous waste into the country continues unabated.
The industrialised nations belonging to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD)1, all of which - with the exception of U.S.A. - are
signatories to the Basel Convention, have commited and are legally bound to ban
the export of hazardous waste to non-OECD countries. Yet, many of the OECD
countries are exploiting the chinks in India's regulatory and monitoring regime to rid
themselves of toxic their waste.
India is unable to ebb the tide of hazardous waste imports. The primary
responsibility, therefore, should be placed firmly on the shoulders of the developed
countries to deal with their own hazardous waste. However, India does have a part to
play by categorically rejecting the import of hazardous wastes and ratifying the Basel
Ban
Waste moves for economic reasons, not for environmental ones. Toxic waste
follows the path of least resistance, moving towards areas, like India, with the least
possible processing and disposal costs and little political and economic clout to
resist.
Hazardous wastes, such as lead and battery wastes, have well documented effects
on human and environmental health. Lead is one of the most pervasive and toxic of
all environmental contaminants. Children are particularly vulnerable to the toxic
effects of lead, especially in high levels.
To illustrate the problem of hazardous waste trade for India, Greenpeace has
researched the operations of one of the country's leading private sector secondary
lead smelting operations, Indian Lead Ltd. This report reveals that industrialised
countries continue to export hazardous wastes to India with utter disregard for India’s
attempts to protect itself from such trade. Further, we document that such imports
are a serious threat to the environment of India and the health of its people.
Heavy Burden makes the case that unless India ratifies the Basel Ban and returns to
its position as a leading proponent of the Ban in the international arena, any effort
that the government may make nationally to clampdown on waste imports is unlikely
to serve as a sufficient deterrent to the international waste traffickers.
The report is based on collated import data, visits to Indian Lead Ltd’s facilities in
Thane, Maharashtra, and Rajerhat-Gopalpur, West Bengal, laboratory analyses of
2
Heavy Burden -(?)Greenpeace, March 1997
waste and sett samptes taken at these <ac«ies. and intenaew. With government
officials and workers
Among the findings of this report are
.
, tj n of |ndian
Lead acid battery, lead waste and scrap from South
April 1996 issued an order prohibiting hazardous waste impo
=
=>
xan“
Delhi High Court ban on waste imports; was in p
(S
,he
P
$
year
. envtrenmenta. and working eondtt.ons a.
e7S andwh.en ceotd manttes, ks.tt as heat.n
disorders.
=~!=S3=?E=“F
=
™,alS'
Sediment samptes atso show ete.a.ed tev.ts. 0<
indicating long-term discharge of contaminated waste waters.
protective gear.
.
Indian Lead Ltd is eemm.nl, cited as one of thebest “;«Snci="“ “potential
invested in pollution control devices^ Yet the samp
g
hea|th The OECD
threats posed by these facilities to t e enviro
(
(n their own backyards
countries, which would not permit sue a uni
d
d battery wastes
on environmental grounds, are knowingly siding their, lead and ha ry
and scrap to facilities with inadequate standards This is a clear
standards
3
Heavy Burden - ^Greenpeace. March 1997
A: Hazardous Waste Exports: The trend today
"You industrialised countries have been asking us to do many things for the global "aod stop cutting down our forests, stop using your CFCs. Now we are asking you to do
something for the global good: keep your own waste. "
A. Bhattacharja, Head of the Indian delegation. First Conference of Panics to the Basel Convention.
Uruguay. November 19924
"Due to strict environmental regulations, U.S. secondary smelters generally have higher
processing costs than secondary smelters in other countries. . .foreign secondary smelters
can pay higher prices, relative to U.S. smelters. ”
United States Environmental Protection Agency
In 1986, only three countries in the world had laws prohibiting hazardous waste
imports. The figure had risen to 33 by 1988. and to 88 by 1992. Today the number of
countries with regional or national waste import bans is well over a hundred.6 With
Africa7, the Caribbean.8 Central America9 and the Pacific countries10 having shut
their doors to toxic wastes, international waste traffickers are increasingly targeting
Asia . Asia remains the last dumping ground for international waste traders
According to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), 400 million metric
tonnes (MT) or more of hazardous waste was generated around the world in 1990.
Of this, 98 percent came from the then 24 member states of the OECD12. The
generation of such wastes continues unabated. In the USA, for example, annual
hazardous waste volumes leapt from 9.1 million MT in 1970 to 241 million MT in
1990.13
However, even as hazardous waste generation is increasing, the options for
disposing these wastes have reduced. Relatively stringent environmental regulations
in some OECD countries has pushed up costs of disposal of hazardous wastes for
waste generators there. According to the US Bureau of Mines. ‘Waste disposal is
becoming a very significant expense and it is often a difficult task to perform.”14
It is hardly surprising that waste generators in these countries find it cheaper to
parcel off their hazardous wastes in shipments to developing countries where
enforcement of environmental regulations is lax. In short: poorer nations are seen as
accessible and inexpensive landfills that compare favourably in economic terms to
the ones closer to home.
To provide a semblance of legitimacy to such hazardous shipments, waste traders
package them as recyclable materials for further processing. By using the phrase
"recycling for further use.” waste traffickers are defining waste as a freely tradable
commodity. This creates a loophole through which noxious substances can enter
countries unregulated The reality is that when one recycles a hazard, one is left
with a hazard.
4
Heavy Burden - ©Greenpeace. March 1997
Greenpeace research in India and Southeast Asia has documented that the facilities
which recover material from such toxic wastes are highly polluting and hazardous to
workers and nearby residents. Such operations would not be tolerated in the
Northern countries that export these wastes
Clearly, wastes move for economic reasons, not environmental ones, following the
path of least resistance where disposal and processing costs can be subsidised at
the cost of worker, community and environmental health
The international trade in lead wastes illustrates the problem well
Lead is one of the most strictly regulated substances in industrialised countries
Because of lead's well-known ability to harm the development of young children,
leaded petrol and paint are banned or severely restricted in most industrialised
countries. Many lead battery recycling plants in the USA have closed over the last 12
years and the secondary lead industry has shifted out en masse. According to the
Journal of Metals, by 1987 “the inability to economically install emission controls and
purchase liability insurance forced the closures of over half the lead smelters in North
America.”15
The few plants left in the UK are threatening to close. They claim they cannot afford
the costs of complying with tough environmental regulations on lead. One of two
major secondary lead smelters in the UK, H J Enthoven in Derbyshire, recently
spent 10 million pounds sterling (Rs 560 million) updating its smelter; 40 percent of
this was invested in pollution control 17
If Indian importers can pay $180 per MT for lead battery waste, double the average
18
price in Europe,
it is because they can externalise the costs during the production
process
B: The Basel Convention: India’s position
Until recently, the Indian government was a strong opponent of the international
trade in hazardous wastes. Nationally, under the Hazardous Wastes (Management
and Handling) Rules, 1989, the Government had legislated to prevent the import of
hazardous wastes by Indian companies for final dumping The import of hazardous
wastes “for processing or re-use as raw material" was allowed, but only by
companies that had a valid license to import.19
Internationally, in its efforts to protect its citizens from “garbage imperialism.” India's
delegation to the 1992 meeting of the UN’s Basel Convention appealed passionately
to the Group of 77 (G-77) nations to denounce the flow of hazardous wastes from
the rich countries to the less-industrialised countries
In March 1994, at the Second Basel Conference of Parties. G-77 countries, including
India, successfully pushed the parties to the Convention to agree to a ban The
consensus agreement banned exports from OECD to non-OECD countries of
hazardous wastes meant for final disposal effective immediately. The agreement
also included a committment by all parties to effect a ban on shipments of hazardous
waste destined to non-OECD countries for recycling - known as the Basel Ban (Ban),
this is to enter into force January 1. 1998
5
Heavy Burden - <• Greenpeace. March 1997
By September 1995, in the lead up to the Third Conference of Parties, India’s stance
began to change. Opponents of the Ban, including waste traders, developed
countries like the U.S.A, and Australia, and importers in developing countries started
pushing India and a few other Asian governments to break ranks with the G-77 and
back out of the Ban.
Just weeks before the Third Conference of Parties, the Indian Government
announced that it was reconsidering the Basel Ban and might continue to allow
hazardous waste imports for recycling into India. An article in a national daily The
Pioneer quotes a senior Environment Ministry official: “We will see how the situation
develops, but we definitely feel that environmentally controlled recycling is not
hazardous.”20 Subsequently, officials at India’s Ministry of Environment and Forests
(MOEF) confirmed that U.S.A and Australian trade representatives had personally
urged them to drop their support for the Ban.21 The lobby efforts met with success.
At the Third Conference of Parties, inspite of India’s wavering stance, proponents of
the Basel Ban were successful in formally incorporating the committment to ban
exports of hazardous waste for the purposes of recycling in the form of an
amendment to the Basel Convention. India, which is also a signatory to the Ban, is
now obligated to ratify the Ban and implement its provisions into national law.
The Basel Ban marks one of the most significant environmental victories of the
decade and India deserves credit for helping achieve it.
In 1997. Greenpeace had meetings with several officials at the MOEF. It was
apparent that the MOEF continue to be under pressure from the OECD countries,
from within the government and industry lobbies to once again soften its stand
against waste imports. Some officials expressed the need for India to deal with its
own generation of hazardous wastes before addressing the problem of imports.
While Greenpeace certainly appreciates the urgent need for India to reduce its own
generation of hazardous wastes, that cannot be an excuse for exacerbating the
problem by continuing importation of wastes from abroad. The Government must
realise that the issues of domestic hazardous wastes and waste imports should be
dealt with simultaneously.
C: The importance of the Basel Ban
The Ban, which was endorsed by all Parties in September 1995, stands as an
impressive legal landmark for several reasons. For so long, unscrupulous business
interests in rich nations have exploited the less stringent regulations and weak
infrastructure in poor countries to avoid the responsibility of minimising their wastes
at home. The Basel Ban is the developing world's answer to this disturbing trend, a
repudiation of the widespread dumping by developed countries of hazardous
wastes Backed mainly by the G-77 developing countries and China, the Ban not
only represented a major victory for environment and justice but was also an
overwhelming expression of solidarity among the non-OECD countries.
•
It is legally binding The Basel Ban was adopted as a legally binding instrument
with criminal penalties for violators. This is particularly significant in the present
political climate of deregulation and voluntary agreements.
6
Heavy Burden - C-Greenpeace March 1997
•
Defeat of the moneyed interests. The Ban was passed despite the staunch
opposition of powerful business lobbies, including the International Chamber of
Commerce, the U.S.A, the UK and Australia These opponents stood to profit
tremendously if the huge economic liability for toxic waste could be cheaply
exported
•
Recognised recycling of hazardous waste as a problem: The Ban closed the
recycling loophole through which more than 90 percent of exported hazardous
waste was by then flowing.22 It recognised that recycling of hazardous wastes
represents a perpetuation of our waste crisis, not a solution.
•
Instrument for Clean Production: By forcing hazardous waste generators to deal
with their own wastes, the Ban has provided the much needed disincentive to
discourage wasteful and dirty production
D: Attempts to undermine the Basel Ban
The Basel Ban is essentially an OECD export ban without exceptions for all
hazardous waste listed and defined by the Convention. The burden of implementing
the Ban rests primarily on the industrialised nations exporting wastes to poorer states
which often do not have the infrastructure to test, identify and classify wastes
To implement the Ban. Parlies to the Convention have tasked a Technical Working
Group (TWG) to define wastes which are subject to the Ban To date, the TWG has
recommended more than 54 categories of wastes, including lead-acid batteries, lead
ash and scrap, which will fall under the ban
Although the Basel Ban has been agreed upon, there are still efforts to undermine its
effectiveness These efforts have focused on two main areas, the use of bilateral
agreements to circumvent the ban, and redefining certain hazardous waste streams
to fall outside the scope of the ban.
In past meetings of the Convention, industry representatives have sought to exempt
lead waste, particularly used car batteries from the ban list They argued that issues
of workplace health and safety, and poor management should not be allowed to
dictate the status of wastes.
This argument makes a mockery of the very reason the Basel Ban was adopted — to
force waste generators to deal with their own wastes and to discourage them from
exporting it to unsuspecting, ill-equipped nations. Such arguments only serve to
highlight the industry’s disregard and contempt for the will of the majority of countries
as manifested in the Basel Convention process itself
In July 1996. the Indian Government came up with a directive freeing the import of
various types of waste such as lead battery plates scrap and lugs (battery
terminals), while instating import restrictions on lead dross, wastes, and whole,
broken, drained and undrained lead batteries The logic of this definition is elusive,
internationally lead battery plates are considered hazardous, in the same league as
scrap batteries In fact, because they are less contained, the potential risk due to
7
Heavy Burden - OGreenpeace. March 1997
%
r
exposure to lead and other heavy metal contaminants is higher during handling,
transportation andstorage.
■
E: Judicial Action
As with other issues of political and environmental concern in India, it is the courts
who are provoking tie Government to confront the issue of hazardous waste.
The future of the Bssel Convention in India, therefore, depends largely on the
processes which tte ongoing court cases on hazardous waste imports to India have
unleashed. With tte two pending cases, the Indian Government has been forced to
confront the problem of hazardous waste generation and imports and set procedures
in place for effective regulation.
A September 1995writ petition in the Supreme Court of India ^challenges the
government and a Bhopal-based waste importer Bharat Zinc on the illegal and
unconstitutional decision of the MOEF permitting imports of toxic wastes in India
under the cover of ecycling knowing fully well that the real purpose of suc^i export to
developing countries is to make India a dumping ground for toxic wastes.
Simultaneously, in April 1996, the New Delhi High Court banned the import of toxic
waste into the country. Although the case was initiated by a waste importer against
the Customs, which had retained the importer’s incoming shipment of lead waste, the
Court passed an injunction against hazardous waste imports based on the
25
intervention of Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) Srishti and WWF-lndia.
On April 10. 1996, Justice Anil Dev Singh said: “The country cannot be made a
dumping ground fortoxic wastes generated in other countries.”2 The Court also
ordered the Indian Government to respond in this case.
According to the imoort data collated by Greenpeace, this High Court injunction does
not seem to have had any effect on hazardous waste imports, (see Appendix 1,
Table I)27
The waste trade lobby has pulled all stops to influence government policy. Their
goal: to keep hazardous wastes flowing freely into India. Their argument: metal
containing wastes are important to India’s development. Organised-sector industry
representatives admit that the reason they need to import is because the local
collection system for lead and battery waste is weak.2 As the Supreme Court
proceedings revealed, there is no documentation of the hazardous wastes, including
lead wastes, generated within the country.
F: What is Lead Waste
Among the several forms that lead scrap takes, the most commonly traded
categories are used lead acid batteries and battery scrap. Batteries, which are used
in automobiles and motorised vehicles including trains and ships contain a
significant proportion (more than 50% of the total battery weight ) of lead in addition
to sulphuric acid and the hard rubber, polypropylene or PVC cases that contain
them. The lead in batteries occurs in the form of terminals and lugs, and plates
coated with lead oxides.
8
Heavy Burden - ©Greenpeace, March 1997
Lead ash, slag, residues and dross, all of which are by-products of the lead smelting
and refining operations, make up nearly 20 percent30 of the hazardous scrap used by
recyclers. Besides containing high levels of lead, itself a neurotoxin, these wastes
are usually contaminated with other toxic compounds of cadmium, antimony and
arsenic
G: Lead Waste exports to India
Greenpeace investigation of Indian ports and customs data revealed that it is
business-as-usual for OECD exporters. Large quantities of lead and battery waste
still flood the country to feed the country’s dirty and sham recycling operations.
Partial import data for the penod between April 1996 and February 1997 show that
over 15,000 MT of hazardous waste came into India from 27 countries. This is
almost double the amount (7,176.4 MT) for the last year. Despite the High Court
order,31 the Government has not been able to stop the exporters from shipping
hazardous wastes to India. (See Appendix 1. Table 1)
Between April 1996 and February 1997, exports to India of lead and battery wastes
by OECD countries including the USA. Australia, South Korea, Germany, the
Netherlands, France. Japan and the UK amount to more than 9,864 MT - nearly 65
percent of the total lead waste imports by India during that period. Between April
1996 and January 1997, South Korea exported more than 7,000 MT of lead ash,
dross and scrap; the USA. over 1,499 MT of mainly lead residues and dross,
Australia over 565 MT of predominantly lead waste and scrap; Japan exported over
238 MT of lead scrap; France more than 235 MT of drained battery and battery plate
scrap; Germany 161 MT of lead scrap and residues; UK over 93 MT of lead residue,
the Netherlands in excess of 43 MT of lead scrap and battery plates; and other
countries in the European Union shipped more than 24 MT of lead scrap.(See
Appendix 1. Table 2)
Exports of hazardous lead and battery waste to India between April 1996 - February
1997. (Source: Informant, Calcutta Customs. Directorate General of Commercial
Intelligence and Statistics.)
36%
45%
■ Korea
OE CD
V USA
OECD
|||| Australia
OE CD
£= Other OECD
Others
S%
10%
This is a conservative estimate because figures for all the ports were not available
Since Singapore houses the London Metal Exchange warehouse, shipments from
9
Hee'^v Burden - ©Greenpescc. fZcrch i997
OECD countries could well be coming in as transhipment exports via Singapore.
According to the Mumbai Customs, Sri Lanka is also a potential transhipment point,
as is UAE Import data of lead and battery waste consignments from Singapore, Sri
Lanka and UAE alone totalled more than 3.009 MT. lending credence to this
hypothesis (See Appendix 1 Table 3)
H: The Lead Industry in India
The growth of the Indian lead industry is a tale of haphazard and unplanned
development. Against an installed capacity of 109,000 MT, including primary and
secondary smelters in the organised sector, production of lead approximated 63,699
MT in 1994-95, according to the India Lead Zinc Information Centre. An additional
21,000 MT of metallic lead was imported that year. Industry sources peg the
estimated demand for 1994-95 at 97,000 MT. However, this figure only attributes
8000 MT - a very conservative amount - to the backyard smelter sector.
The primary lead resources in the country are used solely by the Government-owned
Hindustan Zinc Ltd., Rajasthan, to produce more than a third of the national demand.
Except for a handful of larger private sector secondary smelters such as the
Mumbai-based Indian Lead Ltd and Associated Pigments Ltd based in Calcutta, the
lead supply industry is liberally peppered with small and backyard smelters.
The secondary industry feeds on a wide variety of imported and domestically
generated waste and scrap material including battery scrap, sheathing cables, slag,
ash. dross and residue. The recovered lead is ploughed back into the manufacturing
sector for lead acid batteries, solder wire, cable sheathing, PVC, and for nuclear and
defence applications.
The driving force behind this industry is the automobile battery sector, which
consumes nearly 70 percent of the production.32 The rapid growth in the automobile
sector since 1993 is expected to put the annual growth of lead demand on a double
digit trajectory. Demand can increase by “about 10 percent every year.”33
Sectoral consumption of lead in Indian Industry
Source: India Lead Zinc Information Centre, New Delhi
6%
15%
■ Lead-acid batteries
i ]|L Cable sheathing
Paints & Chemicals
10%
== Other
69%
10
Heavy Burden - ©Greenpeace, March 1997
Neither the collection nor the processing of battery waste is anywhere close to being
organised, efficient or environmentally sound. Smelters in the organised and
unorganised sector have a track record of environmental negligence and
mismanagement in India. In 1994, several cattle deaths due to lead poisoning in a
village near New Delhi were traced to 23 unlicensed lead smelting units in the
vicinity 34
Studies analysing ambient contamination around organised medium- to large-size
smelters were equally bad. The early 1990s saw an upswell of protest by residents
living close to lead smelters (Indian Lead Ltd and an alloy manufacturing unit near
Talasari) in two locations in Thane district in the Western state of Maharashtra.
In the absence of legislation to promote efficient retrieval of hazardous wastes like
used batteries, battery manufacturers in the country have washed their hands of the
responsibility of dealing with their products once they leave their factory premises.
While companies like Indian Lead complain that they are forced to^ import waste
because domestic battery and lead waste collection is inefficient, an important
question remains unanswered: Could the lead demand be fulfilled by better collection
systems in place?
I: Indian Lead Ltd
Following up on its September 1995 investigation of toxic zinc ash exported by
German and Dutch companies to a Bharat Zinc, a dirty recycling operation in Bhopal
Greenpeace has recently conducted a similar investigation into the operations of
Indian Lead Ltd
Indian Lead, a listed company with a Rs. 679.2 million turnover, operates two
secondary lead smelters, one each in Rajerhat-Gopalpur, near Calcutta, and at
Thane, near Mumbai. The rotary smelting furnaces at both plants are omnivorous in
their diet of feedstock, which includes lead concentrates, and wastes and scrap like
lead-acid battery plates, battery lugs and lead ash or dross
The processing technology is referred to as “ferrosilicate slag technology. A silicacoke-iron millscale charge added to the furnace during the smelting process results
in a black, iron-rich slag. The impure lead extracted from the smelter is conveyed to
a refiner. The refining process yields the pure lead which is cast in the form of ingots
Waste is generated in the form of slag, ash and dross.
A bulk of the raw material is imported. Between April 1996 and February 1997,
Indian Lead imported 1,949.5 MT of lead waste, residues, scrap, battery plates and
whole drained batteries. Out of this amount, the USA alone exported 626.07 MT
Exports from the USA to Indian Lead contravenes the Basel Convention which
clearly prohibits trade with non-party states like the USA. (See Appendix 1 Table 4)
11
Heavy Burden - OGreenpeace. March 1997
J: Site visits and affected communities
In March 1997, Greenpeace visited the Indian Lead plants near Calcutta and at
Thane, near Mumbai.
1. Calcutta Plant
The plant is located in a largely residential area in the outskirts of Calcutta city.
Because it is situated close to the airport, the factory works with an 18-meter high
chimney stack against the specified minimum of 30 meters.37
Fifteen-foot high piles of slag and other process waste are openly dumped in the
factory’s backyard. One company spokesperson insisted that most of the piles would
dwindle as they are mixed with fresh feedstock and reintroduced into the furnace for
further recovery. However, a long-time resident in the area mentioned that the pile
up was “about five years old."
This is cause for alarm because post-refining rejects often contain toxic levels of
cadmium, copper and chromium, which could either leach into the environment or
escape into the air in the form of dust to affect workers and nearby residents.
Greenpeace analysis of the solid waste, which was found heaped in piles within the
factory, revealed that it contained 3.18 percent zinc and high levels of lead (5.82
percent) in available form, which means that it leaches out more easily into the
environment. (See Appendix 2, Sample No. 3)
A 1990 study of the soil, leaf dust and pond sediments in the vicinity of the Indian
Lead factory by the School of Environmental Studies of the Jadavpur University in
Calcutta reported that “most of the soils and sediments are contaminated."38 High
levels of arsenic, lead, zinc and cadmium were detected in a soil sample taken from
the yard of a nearby house.
2. Thane Plant
Thane is a heavily industrialised and thickly populated area close to Mumbai. The
Indian Lead smelter is surrounded by housing colonies and other residences. The
nearest large colony is located less than 300 meters from the factory. In the early
1990s, residents living near the factory began complaining of the pollution from the
factory.39
A subsequent study conducted by the Environment Assessment Division of the
Mumbai-based Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) found that mean lead and
cadmium levels in the surface soil samples taken varied between 6000
micrograms/gram of lead near the smelter to 500 micrograms/gram 1.5 kilometre
away. The corresponding concentrations of cadmium were 13.4 and 1.24
micrograms/gram.
According to Dr. David Santillo scientist at Greenpeace Research Laboratories at
the University of Exeter in the UK . the presence of such high levels of lead and
cadmium in the soil represents a significant source of intake of the contaminants by
residents in the vicinity. Children playing in the grounds are particularly vulnerable to
the contamination soil, both through inhalation and direct contact.
12
Heavy Burden - CGreenpeace. March 1997
A range of investigations have found that blood lead levels can increase by 3 to 7
micrograms/decilitre for every 1000 parts per million increase in soil or dust lead
concentration 41
The BARC study also reported high levels of atmospheric lead and blood lead in
children Ambient lead in air in the residential colony nearest to the smelter was
found to average 16 3 micrograms/m3, nearly 11 times higher than the^ National
Ambient Air Quality Standards” (24-hour average of 1.5 micrograms/m ) for industrial
areas set by the Central Pollution Control Board.42 Blood lead levels were found to
be as high as 23 4 micrograms/decilitre among children living close to the smelter
Blood lead levels as low as 10 micrograms/decilitre have been associated with
impaired neurobehavioural and cognitive development The lead blood levels
among children in lead waste exporting countries like Australia are sought to be
maintained below 10 microgram/decilitre.
K: Waste disposal
A major problem with secondary lead smelting operations which use hazardous
waste as their raw material is that the final residue remains toxic.
The final waste from the Thane factory's operations is reportedly in the form of
ferrosilicate slag Our investigations led us to a dumpsite about 14 kilometres from
the plant where Indian Lead's lead-smelter waste, some of it still smouldering, was
haphazardly and openly dumped. Sources knowledgeable about the company
revealed that Indian Lead had entered a contractual agreement with the landowner
to use his land as a dumpsite. A few workers at the dumpsite were engaged in
manually breaking the slag blocks with no protective clothing, not even shoes We
saw two children in their pre-teens who were panning to recover metal
L: Worker Safety at Indian Lead Ltd
Altogether, the two Indian Lead factones employ about 250 workers in addition to
contract workers who are employed periodically. No gloves, suits or masks were in
evidence among the workers. In the Thane plant, some of the workers wore helmets.
However, employees contacted by Greenpeace at a separate meeting indicated that
protective gear was provided only when "outsiders come to inspect the factory
Indian Lead employees working near the furnace and engaged in furnace loading or
tapping operations constantly inhale toxic fumes and flue dust. When asked about
the working conditions, one employee half-proudly remarked, “Of course Jt s
dangerous work. There's still a lot of dust and lead-laden air in the area " "
Several of the workers told Greenpeace that they suffered from general malaise, loss
of appetite and an inability to move their limbs for a while after resting These
symptoms are consistent with lead poisoning The workers also refuted the
company's claims that worker health was constantly monitored "Even when medical
checks are done, they rarely show us the results, said one employee
13
Heavy Burden - 6 )Greenpeace, March 1997
A copy of the results of a company-sponsored medical test of one of the employees
turned out to be a regular blood test. This report had no specific tests for lead levels
in blood or unne.
Indian Lead does not have a license to import hazardous waste which is on the
restncted list (such as whole batteries drained or undrained), and yet has imported
close to 400 MT of drained battery scrap between September and October. 1996.4*
According to one employee, these batteries are manually broken by contracted
workers, again without protective gear. The employee, who had been assigned to
this job last year, recollects; ‘A cloth around your face is not enough while breaking
batteries; I remember I used to get this oily sweet taste in my mouth. I could never
wash it out and whatever it was affected my appetite."49
In contrast, lead smelter workers in Australia and the USA are required to wear full
body protective gear to shield themselves from hazardous fumes and burning liquids
Moreover, lead processing and recycling operations in the developed world are
highly mechanised operations requiring very minimal worker contact with the
hazardous materials. All key stages of the recycling operation; battery breaking, acid
neutralisation, smelting, refining and casting involve the use of machines.
Hazardous waste processing operations in the less-industrialised countries like India,
on the other hand, have the competitive advantage of lax environmental and worker
safety norms. This double standard continues to be exploited by lead acid battery
brokers who constantly seek out buyers who can afford to pay the highest price for
their toxic wastes.
Last year. Australian Refined Alloys (ARA), a leading processor of lead wastes,
admitted to Greenpeace that although their company has the capacity to recycle all
of Australia's battenes, a significant amount of the country's domestic battery scrap
still end up being exported. The reason, ARA admits, is that it cannot compete with
foreign buyers who can afford to pay up to $70 AUS higher per MT.
M: Sample results
See Appendix 2 for full data
1. Calcutta
a) Wastewater
The zinc, lead and cadmium levels in the wastewater collected from the Indian Lead
Calcutta plant (see Appendix 2. Sample No 1) indicate severe contamination:
cadmium levels are four times higher than the Central Pollution Control Board’s
standards; zinc levels are 10 times higher, and the lead levels exceed the CPCB
standards for lead in effluents by a factor of 615.50
Lead, zinc and cadmium are listed under the Dangerous Substance Discharges
Directive of the European Economic Community (EEC) legislation.51 In the Directive
dealing specifically with cadmium discharges, the maximum level of cadmium
permissible in wastewater discharged from any mining or manufacturing industry is
0.5 milligram/litre. At 7.5 milligram/litre, Indian Lead’s discharges contain more than
10 times the level permissible under European legislation.
14
Heavy Burden - ©Greenpeace. March 1997
b) Sediment
The levels of these metals in a sample of the sediment (see Appendix 2, Sample No.
2) taken from an effluent channel running alongside Indian Lead’s Calcutta plant
indicate severe contamination. Given that lead (5589.3 milligrams/kg). cadmium
(672 1 milligrams/kg) and zinc (3165 milligrams/kg) levels are in such high levels, it is
very likely that the raw matenal used is severely contaminated with these metals,
according to Dr. Angela Stephenson of Greenpeace Research Laboratories at
University of Exeter. Metal impurities will not be destroyed by smelting, they will only
be redistributed in the waste.
While there are no set limits for sediment concentrations of lead, cadmium and zinc
in India, the significance of the levels found in Indian Lead’s above sediment can be
appreciated when compared with the most polluted river sediments in the UK. Here,
cadmium levels are highest in the River Tyne at 2.17 milligrams/kg. The Indian Lead
sample contains 672.1 milligram/kg of cadmium. Lead levels at the Indian waste
processor are double the levels found in the River Gannel, Cornwall, which receives
acidic drainage from past and present mining activities
Also, the high levels of contaminants in the sediment indicate that heavily
contaminated wastewaters from the smelter have been discharged over quite a long
period of time. Even if discharges were to cease, or treatment procedures improved,
retention of the metals by the sediment would delay the elimination of contamination
for many years, Dr. Stephenson notes
c) Solid waste (slag)
The slag, which is either dumped at the back of the factory or used to fill potholes in
the road nearby, contain between 2 and 6 percent lead (See Appendix 2. Sample
No 3 and 4) The lead is not bound in any complex mineral structure but exists in
either an elemental form or as a simple oxide, hence the potential for lead leaching
out into the surrounding environment is higher.
2. Thane
a) Wastewater and sediment
Samples of wastewater and sediment taken from Indian Lead’s Thane plant also
indicate a heavy load of lead. The lead levels in wastewater are in excess of 40
times the Indian permissible level for effluents discharged into inland surface
water.53(Appendix 2, Sample No. 5)
b) Solid waste (slag)
Analysis of the slag collected from an unlined dumpsite used by the company
indicated the presence of more than 1.3 percent lead in elemental form or as lead
oxide. Lead in these forms is prone to escape into the environment. (Appendix 2,
Sample No. 8)
15
Heavy Burden - (OGreenpeace. March 1997
N: Environmental and Human Health Effects
Lead
‘Affects human central nervous system A poison by ingestion; moderately imtating A common air
contaminant It is a carcinogen of the lungs and kidneys... Flammable in the form of dust when exposed
to heat or flame When heated, it emits highly toxic fumes; can react vigorously with oxidizing
materials From the point of view of industrial poisoning inhalation of lead is much more important than
is ingestion Lead is a cumulative poison. Increasing amounts build up in the body and eventually a
point is reached where symptons and disability occur?4”
The principal danger from the environmental fallouts of lead smelting is to the
workers. Because the raw material (lead and battery wastes) is often contaminated
with potentially toxic substances such as cadmium, copper and zinc, workers in
unsound facilities like the ones often found in the less industrialised countries are
constantly exposed to these toxins.
Lead has no biochemical or nutritional function.
The toxicity of lead depends on the availability, uptake and species sensitivity. Over
the last 20 years, there has been increased scientific attention on the impacts of lead
at low levels on the intellectual development (IQ) of babies and young children.55
Even at low levels of exposure, lead can cause behavioural disturbances,
neurological damage and other developmental problems. These effects are
irreversible, even if lead levels in the child are reduced.56 In adults, high levels of
exposure to lead can cause brain and kidney damage, lead to increased blood
pressure in middle aged men, and affect sperm count.57
Cadmium
; Poison to humans by inhalation and other routes. Poison by ingestion, intraperitoneal, subcutaneous,
j intramuscular and intravenous routes. Dust is moderately flammable and explosive when exposed to
| heat, flame or by chemical reaction with oxidizing agents.
Like lead, cadmium has no biochemical or nutritional function. It is highly toxic to
both freshwater and marine organisms. It is bioaccumulative through the food chain
Exposure to elevated levels of cadmium can lead to severe irritation of the stomach
and lungs, kidney diseases, and increased risk of lung cancer. Lung damage, such
as emphysema, has occurred in workers in factones where cadmium concentration
in air is high
Zinc
‘Human skin .rntant and pulmonary system effects. .The difficulty arises from oxdization of zinc fumes
|Peadp0‘n 3 31,00
PreSGnCe °f ,mPur,ties such as Cd. Sb. As. Pb ’ [cadmium, antimony, arsen.c and
Although essential in trace quantities, zinc becomes toxic if increased levels are
present Inhalation of large amounts of zinc dust can cause metal fume fever61
16
Heavy Burden - ©Greenpeace, March 1997
O. Conclusion and Recommendations
Previous Greenpeace research in India and elsewhere, including the 1995 report
Slow Motion Bhopal62 has clearly demonstrated that hazardous waste imports for
recycling are exceptionally dangerous and should be banned. This conclusion has
been endorsed by the Parties to the Basel Convention in 1994 and again in 1995.
Heavy Burden confirms that import of hazardous wastes into India continues in
violation of the Delhi High Court order, and that such imports contribute to the
poisoning of India’s land and her people.
The sample analyses from Indian Lead's factories and the telling import statistics
document the systematic violation of national and international covenants by Indian
waste reprocessors and their waste suppliers in countries like the USA. Australia,
South Korea, France, Germany, Japan and the UK.
There is only one reason why toxic lead and battery waste should travel all the way
from the USA to a smelter in Thane, Maharashtra. That reason has nothing to do
with trade as we know it. The United States Environmental Protection Agency
explains that due to strict environmental regulations in the U.S.A . secondary
smelters there generally have higher processing costs than secondary smelters in
other countnes.
A bulk of the blame for this ‘toxic imperialism' lies with the developed OECD
exporters, who together with international waste traffickers, are a strong lobbying
force to keep the floodgates of hazardous waste open to the poorer countries.
In India, this pressure has resulted in confusion at the policy level of the
Government, including arbitrary classifications, conflicting directives and a maze of
import licensing These regulatory mechanisms have served more to confuse the
implementers at the Customs or port level.
Waste traders have taken full advantage of the Indian Government's inability to
monitor the ports. Although only licensed importers are allowed to bring in
consignments of hazardous wastes, more than 38 Indian companies, none of them
with a proper licenses, have imported lead and battery wastes between April 1996
and February 1997. In fact, the flow of lead and battery wastes has more than
doubled since last year.
The Indian Government should be clear and unequivocal in its repudiation of the
import of toxic waste, such as lead and battery scrap under the guise of recycling. It
should support the strongest possible interpretation of the Basel Ban: by stopping all
attempts to reverse the Ban decision; by not signing bilateral agreements to
circumvent the Ban; and by endorsing and accepting the hazardous waste definitions
by the TWG
Simultaneously, it should work towards improving the collection and recycling of
domestically generated battery and lead waste With the help of trade unions, and
citizen and community groups, the Government should ensure the strict enforcement
17
Heavy Burden - ©Greenpeace. March 1997
of environmental and occupational safety standards in all battery recycling
operations.
Workers and communities have a right to a livelihood with dignity and a right to
healthy living. The Government should not give in to arguments that pitch the health
of workers and resident communities against nebulous, industry-led criteria of
development' that entails wasteful and environmentally hazardous practices
Currently, the people living or working near lead smelters have little or no knowledge
on potential health effects that could result from these operations. The Pollution
Control Boards should actively make such information available to the public.
Greenpeace sample results revealed that the area surrounding Indian Lead could be
so severely contaminated that even if all discharges/emissions to the environment
stopped, it would take years for contaminant concentrations to fall to safe levels.
As the date for the permanent ban on such hazardous trade draws near, India's
commitment to its citizens and to the international process nurtured by it in the past
will once again be tested — this time, at the Fourth Conference of Parties to the
Basel Convention on 6 - 10 October 1997 to be held in Malaysia.
A committed implementation and enforcement of the Basel Ban by India would not
only discourage the generation of hazardous wastes worldwide; it would also propel
industry to move towards cleaner production by eliminating hazardous inputs.
Instead of giving in to the strong-arm tactics of OECD countries, India should stick to
its principled stand exhorting the developed world to deal with its own poisons The
Government should live up to its responsibility of providing its citizens a healthy
environment by ratifying the Ban and reflecting its provisions in the national
legislation
Greenpeace urges the OECD signatories to the Basel Convention to
♦ Respect the Basel Ban by ceasing efforts to sign bilateral agreements with non
OECD signatories.
♦ Respect Indian law by immediately stopping all lead waste exports and other
hazardous waste exports to India.
Greenpeace calls on the USA to
♦ Respect Indian law by immediately suspending all exports of lead wastes and
other hazardous wastes to India.
Greenpeace urges the Government of India to:
♦ Support the strongest possible interpretation of the Basel Ban.
♦ Ratify the Basel Ban on hazardous waste trade exports from OECD to non
OECD countries
18
Heavy Burden - ©Greenpeace. March 1997
Appendix 1:
Indian Import Data from April 1996 to February 1997
Source Figures in Appendix 1 are a collation of import data from
Statistics' Calcutta’ CalCUtta Customs' Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence &
Table 1: Lead and battery scrap by category
Battery plate and lug scrap
Month
Apr-96
Apr-96
Apr-96
Apr-96
Apr-96
Jul-96
Aug-96
Sep-96
Sep-96
Sep-96
Sep-96
Sep-96
Oct-96
Oct-96
Oct-96
Oct-96
Oct-96
Oct-96
Oct-96
Nov-96
Nov-96
Nov-96
Nov-96
Nov-96
Nov-96
Nov-96
Nov-96
Dec-96
Dec-96
Dec-96
Dec-96
Dec-96
Dec-96
Dec-96
Dec-96
Importer_________
Indian Lead
Exporter
S. Africa
Sri Lanka
Nigeria
Israel_____
Israel_____
Nigeria
Malaysia
Kothari Metals & Alloys
Indian Lead
Indian Lead_____
Indian Lead
_ Indian Lead
Panoli Metal & Chemicals
Indian Lead_____
Kothari Metals & Alloys
Panoli Metals & Chemicals
Kothari Metals & Alloys
RD Metal__________
Raj Finoxides
Gupta Pigments & Chem
Gupta Pigments & Chem
Gupta Pigments & Chem
RD Metal Co
Gupta Pigments & Chem
_ Accumulators Alloys Ltd
Raj Finoxides
Metacon Industries
RD Metal Co
JJ Metal P Ltd
~~
Gravita India Ltd
Panoli Metal & Chem
Indian Lead
Indian Lead
HP Exports Corp,
Ravi Metals
J^Metal P Ltd
Manoj Metal Traders
Shah Khetaji Dhanaji
Rmish Overseas P Ltd
Shah Khetaji PhanajT
Ravi Metals
Netherlands
Israel_____
Singapore
Singapore
USA
Qty in MT Port
40 00 Mum
20 00 Mum
88 00 Mum
50 23 Mum
78 28 Mum
44 00 Mum
66 00 Mum
22 00 Cal
38 83 Cal
22 00 Cal
20 00 Cal
Singapore
France
UAE______
UAE
Jordan
Jordan
Oman
Nigeria
Sri Lanka
Nigeria
Sri Lanka
UAE_______
Sri Lanka
Singapore
Singapore
Sudan
Nigeria
Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka
Singapore
__ Nigeria
Sri Lanka
Nigeria
20
Heavy Burden - ^Greenpeace, March 1997
19 22 Cal
20 71 Cal
215 07 Mum
2141 Mum
128 17 Mum
39 33 Mum
62 61 Mum
59.60 Mum
44 00 Cal
40 00 Cal
WO 00 Cal •
21 00 Cal
2100 Cal
20 00 Cal
81 50 Cal
21 87 Cal
75 00 Mum
44 00 Mum
20 00 Mum"
20 00 Mum
42 00 Mum
44 00 Mum
21 50 Mum
44 00 Mum
Dec-96
Gravita India Ltd
Jordan
44 00 Mum
Dec-96
Rinish Overseas P Ltd
Nigena
22 00 Mum
Dec-96
Panoli Metal & Chem
Sn Lanka
20 00 Mum
Dec-96
Indian Lead
Singapore
18 31 Mum
Dec-96
Indian Lead
Singapore
43 04 Mum
Dec-96
Tirupati Chemicals Ltd
UAE
169 68 Mum
Dec-96
Indian Lead
Singapore
20 87 Mum
Jan-97
Panoli Metal & Chem
Sh Lanka
40 00 Mum
Jan-97
Shah Khetaji Dhanaji
Singapore
20.41 Mum
Jan-97
Hind Brass P Ltd
Australia
21 31 Mum
Jan-97
Gravita India Ltd
UAE
59 99 Mum
Jan-97
Azad Metal Works
Nigeria
22 00 Cal
Jan-97
Sige Ram Industries
Singapore
40 87 Cal
Jan-97
Vishnu Metals Ltd
Sri Lanka
20 00 Cal
Jan-97
RD Metal
USA
19.29 Mum
Feb-97
Vijay Metal Works
Nigeria
22 00 Cal
Feb-97
Vijay Metal Works
Nigeria
22.00 Cal
Feb-97
Leadstone Energy Ltd
Nigeria
22.00 Cal
2363.30
TOTAL
Battery scrap
Month
Exporter
Importer
Qty in MT Port
Apr-96
Shinn Metals P Ltd
France
20.29 Mum
Apr-96
Kothari Metals & Alloys
Sn Lanka
40 00 Mum
Apr-96
Kothari Metals & Alloys
Sn Lanka
40 00 Mum
May-96
NV Metals & Alloys
Malaysia
22 96 Mum
Jun-96
Hind Brass P Ltd
Bahrain
43 13 Mum
Sep-96
Indian Lead
USA
36 86 Cal
Oct-96
Indian Lead
USA
18 57 Mum
Oct-96
Indian Lead
Sn Lanka
170.50 Mum
Oct-96
Indian Lead
Singapore
107 56 Mum
Oct-96
[Indian Lead
Singapore
42 67 Mum
Oct-96
Indian Lead
Singapore
21 51 Mum
564.05
TOTAL
Battery scrap/scrap battery
Month
Importer
Exporter
May-96
RD Metal
KSA
104 46 Mum
May-96
NV Metals & Alloys______
Ethiopia
49 79 Mum
Qty in MT Port
Sep-96
Shah Khelaji Dhanaji & Co
Singapore
37 39 Cal
Sep-96
Metacon Industries
Sri Lanka
20 00 Cal
Dec-96
Akrum Metallurgical Ltd
Nigeria_____
88 00 Cal
Jan-97
Hindbrass P Ltd
Singapore
44 57 Mum
Jan-97
Snyam Impex
Saudi Arabia
20 94 Mum
TOTAL
365.15
<4.
'J
Vo X
21
Heavy Burden -
Greenpeace. Marcel 997
06771
n00'
n
/
%
Lead ash, lead ash/dross, lead dross
Month
Importer_____________
Exporter
Apr-96
RD Metal Co__________
USA
91.95 Bom
Apr-96
Indian Lead_______
USA
99.29 Mum
Apr-96
Indian Lead
USA
192.07 Mum
Apr-96
Jugal Metals P Ltd_____
USA
40 24 Mum
Apr-96
Shirin Metals P Ltd
Kenya
18.00 Mum
May-96
Jugal Metals P Ltd_____
AUS
99 95 Mum
May-96
RD Metal Co
_______
USA
18.42 Mum
Jun-96
Jugal Metals P Ltd_____
USA
54 75 Mum
Jun-96
RD Metal Co__________
USA
Aug-96
Associated Pigments Ltd
Korea
352 80 Cal
Aug-96
Associated Pigments Ltd
Korea
3,140 00 Cal
Dec-96
Hind Brass P Ltd _____
USA
38 49 Mum
Jan-97
Bhavna Metal Co______
S. Africa
64,40 Mum
Jan-97
Jugal Metals P Ltd_____
USA
Jan-97
38 90 Mum
Gupta Pigments & Chem
AUS
21.69 Mum
_____
TOTAL
Qty in MT Port
18 59 Mum
4,289.54
Lead residues, lead slag
Month
Importer
Exporter
Apr-96
Indian Lead
Chile
99.29 Mum
Apr-96
RD Metal Co
Ghana
43.22 Mum
Apr-96
N/A________
China
99.00 Mum
Apr-96
N/A________
Apr-96
N/A________
Kenya
{Malaysia"
Qty in MT Port
18 00 Mum
43.00 Mum
Apr-96
N/A________
USA
Apr-96
13.30 Mum
N/A________
UK______
Apr-96
N/A________
93.85 JNPT
USA
Apr-96
35 45 JNPT
N/A________
USA
May-96
291.00 Bom
Nikhil Metal
Ghana
May-96
N/A______
N/A______
N/A_____ _
N/A_____
N/A_____
N/A_____
N/A______
N/A______
Indian Lead
65.00 Mum
Australia
113.00 Mum
Ghana
65.00 Mum
May-96
May-96
May-96
May-96
May-96
May-96
Jun-96
Jun-96
Jul-96
USA
18.00 Mum
USA
76.00 JNPT
Singapore
21.00 Del
USA
6.00 Del
AUS
100.00 Bom
USA
55.00 Bom
Singapore
193.57 Mum
63 83 Mum
Nikhil Metal
N/A_________
Ghana
Jul-96
Jul-96
N/A
Ghana
Jul-96
N/A
63.00 Mum
Germany
121.00 JNPT
Korea
3,493.00 Cal
22
Heavy Burden - ©Greenpeace, March 1997
Jul-96
N/A
USA
21 00 JNPT
Aug-96
Indian Lead
UAE
41 98 Mum
Oct-96
Indian Lead
UAE
43 44 Mum
Oct-96
Indian Lead
USA
158 03 Mum
Jan-97
Indian Lead
Singapore
96 33 Mum
Jan-97
Indian Lead
USA
99 25 Mum
5,649.54
TOTAL
Lead waste/scrap
Month
Importer
Exporter
Qty in MT Port
Apr-96
N/A
Australia
20 00 Mum
Apr-96
N/A
UAE
83 82 JNP
Apr-96
N/A
UAE
79 00 Kandla
Apr-96
A R Mohammed Shaali
UAE
Apr-96
Sadan Metal & Alloys
Singapore
42 49 Mds
May-96
RD Metal Co
USA
19 60 Mum
9 15 Mds
May-96
N/A
Korea
16 00 Cal
May-96
N/A
USA
20 00 Mum
May-96
N/A
Singapore
2000JNP
May-96
N/A
UAE
6 3 34 Del
Jun-96
N/A
Australia
19 56 Cal
Jun-96
N/A
Australia
10 OOlMum
Jun-96
N/A
Bahrain
86 00 Kandla
Jun-96
N/A
Kuwait
241 50 Kandla
Jun-96
N/A
Malaysia
63 00 Kandla
Jun-96
N/A
UAE
321 00 Kandla
Jul-96
N/A
Singapore
103 00 Mds
Aug-96
Simplex Metal & Alloys
Singapore
83 85 Mds
Oct-96
Accumulators & Alloys India
Saudi Arabia
22 31 Mum
Australia
39 62 Cal
Oct-96
Metacon Industries
Oct-96
Tirupati Chems__________
UAE
40 00 Mum
Oct-96
Raj Fmoxides___________
Singapore
20 97 Cal
Nov-96
42 43 Cal
Raj Fmoxides___________
Singapore
Nov-96
Mahalaxmi Udyog________
Singapore
41 16 Cal
Nov-96
Ajay Kumar/Rakesh Kumar
Nigeria
22 00 Cal
Dec-96
Indian Lead
Singapore
20 50 Cal
Dec-96
Kothari Metals & Alloys
Germany
40 00 Mum
Dec-96
Metacon Industries
Japan_____
15 47 Cal
Dec-96
Raj Finoxides_________
Singapore
63 40 Cal
Jan-97
Manoj Metal Traders
Netherlands
21 65 Mum
Jan-97
Sing Battery Mfg Co
Australia
20 74 Cal
Jan-97
Associated Pigments Ltd
European Union
24 70 Cal
Jan-97
Associated Pigments
Japan_________
223 34 Cal
Jan-97
Loadstone Energy Ltd
Singapore_____
39 25 Cal
Jan-97
Sing Battery Mfg Co
TOTAL
Singapore
20 86 Cal
2119.74
23
Heavy Burden - (• >Greenpeace March 1997
Table 2: OECD exports of lead and battery waste
Country_____________________
Qty in MT
Australia
France
________ 565 8
________ 235.3
Germany
________ 161.0
The Netherlands
_______ 436
________ 238 8
Japan
Korea
7,001,8
Other European Union Countries
UK
_________ 24,7
USA
_________ 93.8
1,499.2
Total
9,864.2
Table 3: Exports from known transhipment points
Country
Qty in MT
Singapore
1.4140
Sri Lanka
________ 513.0
UAE
1.081.9
Total
3,009.0
Table 4: Imports by Indian Lead Ltd of lead and battery scrap
Month
Commodity
Exporter
Apr-96
Lead dross
USA
Apr-96
Lead dross
USA
Apr-96
Chile
Apr-96
Lead residues
[Battery piates scrap RAILS
Apr-96
[Battery plates scrap RAILS
jNigena
[Israel
S Africa
Apr-96
Battery plates scrap RAILS
Apr-96
Battery plates scrap RAILS
Israel
Jun-96
Lead residues
Sing
Jul-96
Battery plates scrap RAILS
Nigeria
Aug-96
Lead residues
UAE
Sep-96
Battery plates scrap RAILS
Holland
Sep-96
Oct-96
Drained battery scrap Rams
USA
Lead residues
UAE
Oct-96
Lead residues
USA
Qty in MT Port
992 Mum
1920 Mum
99.2 Mum
400 Mum
88.0 Mum
50.2 Mum
78.2 Mum
193 5 Mum
44 Q Mum
41,9 Mum
22.0 Cal
368 Cal
43 4 Mum
158.0 Mum
18.5 Mum
170 5 Mum
107,5 Mum
42 6 Mum
21.5 Mum
81.5 Cal
21 8 Cal
Oct-96
Drained battery scrap Rams
USA
Oct-96
Drained battery scrap Rains
Sri Lanka
Oct-96
Drained battery scrap Rams
Sing
Oct-96
Drained battery scrap Rains
Sing
Oct-96
Drained battery scrap Rams
Sing
Nov-96
Battery plates scrap RAILS
Sing
Nov-96
Battery plates scrap RAILS
Sing_____
Dec-96
Battery plates scrap RAILS
Sing
Dec-96
18 3 Mum
Battery plates scrap RAILS
Sing
Dec-96
43.0
Battery plates scrap RAILS
Sing
20 8
20.5
96.3
992
Dec-96
Lead scrap RADIO
Sing
Jan-97
Lead residues
Smg
Jan-97
Lead residues
USA
TOTAL
Mum
Mum
Cal
Mum
Mum
1,949.5
24
Heavy Burden - ©Greenpeace, March 1997
Appendix 2: Sample Analyses
All samples have been analysed at the Greenpeace Research Laboratones. at the University
of Exeter. U K
rpZW iiCP-AHS,.
sa.pi.
drying, sieving and acid digestion, or
2) Scanning Electron Microscopy X-ray diffraction (SEM X-ray)
inorganic analytical results of effluent and solid waste
Lead Ltd, Calcutta in March 1997, and Thane, in July 1996 and March 1997
Sample 1
Indian Lead Ltd Calcutta
Sample type Industrial wastewater
Sampling date 08/03/97
Lab code: MI7021
Analysis method ICP-AES
Concentration microgram/litre
Metal_____
4080
Manganese
"
”
240
'
50860
<10
Chromium
Zinc______
Copper
6150?
Lead
200
Nickel
Cobalt
7590
Cadmium
Sample 2
Indian Lead Ltd Calcutta
Sample type Sediment
Sampling date 08/03/97
Lab code MI7022
Sample of black sediment collected from open channel running along the factory front wall
Three drains from the factory dlscharge wastewater into the channel
Analysis method; ICP-AES
Metal
Manganese
Concentration milligram/kg
_______256 40
21 40
3165 00^
Chromium
Zinc______
151 40
Copper
5589 30
Lead
20 00
Nickel
Cobalt
Cadmium
’
6 40
672 10
25
Heavy Burden -" Greenpeace March 1997
Sample 3
Indian Lead Ltd Calcutta
Sample type Solid waste
Sampling date 12/03/97
Lab code MI7026
Black vitreous post-furnace slag Found in piles within factory
Analysis method SEM / X-ray analysis
METAL
Weight % as Oxide
Silicon
_____________ 32.16
Aluminium
______________ 7,73
Iron_______
Sodium
___________ 20.82
____________ 8.08
Calcium
_____________ 11.10
Lead______
___________ 5.82
Potassium
____________
Magnesium
___________ 8.66
Titanium
_ _________
Manganese
______________ 053
Zinc_______
____________
Sulphur
0.71
0.45
3.18
0.76
Sample 4
Indian Lead Ltd Calcutta
Sample type Solid waste
Sampling date 08/03/97
Lab code MI7027
Black vitreous rock (post-furnace slag) Found in pothole in the road which runs adjacent to
the side wall of the factory.
Analysis method SEM/X-ray analysis
METAL
Weight % as Oxide
Silicon_____
_____________ 35.99
Aluminium
Iron_______
Sodium
Calcium
Lead______
Potassium
Magnesium
Titanium
Manganese
Zinc
_ ___________ 11 16
_____________13.14
______________ 9 83
_____________ 13.49
______________2 58
_____________ 0.78
_____ ________ 9 71
___________0.49
_____________ 0.50
______________1_50_
I Sulphur
0 84
26
Heavy Burden - ©Greenpeace. March 1997
Sample 5
Indian Lead Ltd Thane
Sample type Industnal wastewater
Sampling date 16/07/1996
Lab code MI6058a
lead ac.d battery recychng plant Effluent sample from an open channel frequently seen to
*
overflow onto factory site
Analysis method ICP-AES
Concentration microgram/liter
Metal
230
Manganese
Chromium
'
Zinc______
“
Copper
<19W"°
<10
4090
‘
Lead______
Nickel_____
<7o
w
Cobalt
Cadmium
Sample 6
Indian Lead Ltd Thane
Sample type Solid residue
Sampling date 16/07/1996
Lab code MI6058b
Solid oily waste sample from open channel
Analysis method ICP-AES
Metal
Manganese
Concentration milligram/kg
Not detected
Not detected
Chromium
65 sF
Zinc______
_____ Not detected
Copper
Lead______
Nickel
Cobalt
323 3?
Not detected
~
Not detected
’
’
o’go
Cadmium
27
Heavy Burden - '• ’Greenpeace March 1997
Sample 7
Indian Lead Ltd. Thane
Sample type: Solid waste/soil
Sampling date: 16/07/1996
Lab code: MI6059
Solid waste from adjacent to the open channel
Analysis method ICP-AES
Metal_____
Concentration milligram/kg
Manganese
Nickel_____
______________ 763.60
________________________ 115.70
______ ________________ 7055.60
________________________ 468.20
______________________ 17777,80
_________________________ 86 90
Cobalt
_________________________ 32.60
Chromium
Zinc_______
Copper
Lead______
Cadmium
1165.20
Sample 8
Indian Lead Ltd Thane
Sample type: Solid waste
Sampling date. 20/03/97
Lab code MI7028
Solid waste found at a private dumpsite 14 km from the plant The
site is used as a dumpsite
by Indian Lead Ltd
Analysis method SEM / X-ray analysis
Metal_____
Silicon
Aluminium
Iron_______
Sodium
Calcium
Lead_____
Potassium
Magnesium
Titanium
Manganese
Weight % as Oxide
_ _____________ 23 56
______________ 9.64
_____________ 29 69
_____________ 0.84
_____________ 12 42
______________ 1.35
______________ 0.32
_____________ 6.19
______________ 0 80
______________ 0.57
Zinc _____
Chromium
Chlorine
Sulphur
12 42
_____ _______
0.22
____________
0.12
____________ 3 40
28
Heavy Burden - ©Greenpeace. March 1997
References
*
L
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, an organisation composing the most
industnalised and developed nations The OECD currently consists of the following member states
Australia. Austria. Belgium, Canada. Czech Republic, Denmark. Finland. France. Germany. Greece.
Hungary. Iceland. Italy. Ireland. Japan. Luxembourg. Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand. Norway.
Poland, South Korea, Spain. Sweden, Switzerland. Turkey, United Kingdom. United States of Amenca
2 Informant. Mumbai. April 1995 to March 1996. "Non-ferrous metals’
3 Transhipment point is the intermediary between export and import countries
Hallett. Jim. "Basel 'Dumping' Convention still Legalises Toxic Terrorism’ Greenpeace Toxic Trade
Update. 6.1, First Quarter 1993
5 US ERA (1992) "States' Efforts to Promote Lead-Acid Battery Recycling " EPA/530-SW-91-029, pp
21 January 1992.
6 Spalding. Heather. Greenpeace Toxic Trade Project. Greenpeace USA
7 The Bamako Convention on the Ban of the Import into Afnca and the Control of Transboundary
Movement and Management of Hazardous Wastes within Africa, adopted 29 January 1991, in Bamako.
Mali Wawa O. Leba. Director of ESCAS Dept., OAU Secretanat. Addis Ababa. January 1991.
Member States of the Organisation of African Unity adopted a treaty banning all forms of hazardous
and nuclear waste imports to the African continent, the treaty also forbids imports of products that have
been banned for use in the country of manufacture. Bamako Convention went into force in 1996
8 The Lome IV Convention: Article 39. Adopted 15 December 1989. 69 African. Caribbean and Pacific
nations (ACP) agreed a waste trade ban with the European Union as part of their negotiations for the
Lome IV Convention The agreement prohibited the EU from exporting nuclear or hazardous wastes to
the ACP countnes. while the ACP agreed to prohibit such wastes from any other country.
9 Central American agreement on Hazardops Waste. 6 Central American States banned all imports of
hazardous wastes Acuerdo Regional sobre Movimtento Transfrontenzo de Desechos Peligrosos.
Cumbre XIII de Presidentes del Istmo Centroamericano. Panam. 9-11 April 1992 Article 1. paragraph i
defines waste as in the Bamako Convention
10 Waigam Convention, adopted in Waigani. Papua New Guinea on September 16 1995. In August
1993, Member States of the South Pacific Forum agreed to complete a similar treaty to the Bamako
Convention, banning hazardous and nuclear wastes imports to the region.
11 Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN). Joint Communique. ASEAN inter parliamentary
organisation s 14th working committee and General Assembly. Kuala Lumpur. 20-25 September 1993
Voted for a Regional Convention to prohibit the import of toxic wastes into the region of South East
Asia So far this initiative has yet to bear fruit, leaving the region vulnerable
12 The OECD had 24 members then, now it has 28.
13 US General Accounting Office. 1987 based on US Environmental Protection Agency data and
estimates
4 Smith and Daley. “Domestic Secondary Lead Industry Production and Regulatory Compliance
Costs " Department of Intenor (Bureau of Mmes), information Circular, 1987
15 Taylor and Zunkel. 'Environmental Challenges for the Lead-Zmc Industry,’ Journal of Metals. 40 (8)
August 1988, pp 27-30
18 Leonard. Ann, op cit
17 Leonard, Ann. op cit
18 Metal Bulletin. 22^96
18 Rule 11. Hazardous Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules. 1989 Ministry of Environment and
Forests (Department of Environment, Forests and Wildlife) Notification. New Delhi. 28th July. 1989, in
Central Pollution Control Board (ed.) "Pollution Control Acts. Rules and Notifications Issued
Thereunder." Pollution Control Senes PCL/2/1992 (Volume I), pp. 383. March 1996
20 Pioneer. 11 April 1995. "India may break ranks with G-77 on toxic waste dumping"
21 Stairs. Kevin. Head of Greenpeace Delegation at all Basel Convention meetings April 1995
22 Database of Known hazardous Waste Exports from OECD to non-OECD Countries 1989 - March
1994. prepared for the Conference of Parties to the Basel Convention. Greenpeace 1994
23 Wnt petition (c) number 657 of 1995, in the Supreme Court of India Filed on September 18. 1995. by
Supreme Court Advocate Sanjay Pankh, on behalf of the Research Foundation for Science and Natural
Resource Policy (petitioner) against the Union of India. Secretary. Ministry of Environment and Forests
and Bharat Zinc (P) Ltd (respondents)
24 Leonard. Ann. ‘India and the international waste Trade’ Ecologist Asia. Vol 5. No 2. March/Apnl
1997
29
Heavy Burden • OGreenpeace. March 1997
2 Civil Writ Petition number 67 of 1996, in the High Court, New Delhi, in the matter of M/s
Harshwardan Steel (P) Ltd (petitioner) versus Government of India and others, (respondents), and
World Wide Fund for Nation - India and Srishti (intervenors).
** "HC bans import of toxic wastes,' Times of India, 11/04/1996
27 Collation from Informant. Mumbai, Calcutta and Mumbai Customs daily manifests and DGCIS
Personal interview with S G Beke, Factory Manager. Indian Lead Ltd, Thane 18/03/97
Subramamam. V.R "Lead acid battery collection for effective recycling of lead through secondary
production " India Lead Zinc Information Centre. New Delhi. Unpublished document.
Subramamam. V.R. ibid
11 op cil. Delhi High Court, New Delhi
3 Subramamam. V.R. “Imperatives of Recycling for Developing Economies’ India Lead Zinc
Information Centre. New Delhi. Speech delivered at the Bureau of International Recycling Forum in
London. October 25. 1995.
Thadam. B.C. 'Prospects of Growth of Lead Industries in India. Challenges and Opportunities.’ Paper
presented at Metal Bulletin's 2nd Indian Metals Conference. New Delhi. March 31 - April 2. 1996
Chaturvedi. B "The Economics and Compulsions of Waste Recycling: The case of lead and zinc in
India Srishti paper presented at the seminar on “Environmental Economics’. Centre For Science and
Environment. New Delhi. July 1996.
“ Personal interview with Indian Lead employees. 0930 hours. March 19.1997 Thane
op at S G. Beke
37 Samanta. G .Chatterjee. A.. Das. D.. Samanta. G.. Chowdhury. P.P.. Chanda. C.R.. Chakraborti. D
Calcutta Pollution Part V. Lead and other heavy metal contamination in a residential area from a
factory producing lead-ingots and lead-alloys“ Environmental Technologies vol 16 pp 223-231 1995
Samanta. G. et al. Ibid. 1995
Personal interview with Indian Lead employees. 0930 hours. March 19.1997. Thane
Sathe, A P . Tnpathi. R M.. Vinod Kumar. A.. Khandekar. R.N.. and K.S.V. Nambi. ’Environmental
Contamination due to a Lead Smelter’ Indian Journal of Environmental Protection vol 15 No 11
November 1996.
Environment Flection Agency. 'Air Quality Cnteria for Lead.’ Research Tnangle Park
(NC). Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. EPA Report No. EPA/600/8-83/028aF 1986
See also^Bornschein. R.L.. Succop. P A.. Krafft. K M . Clark. C.S.. Peace. B.. Hammond. P B "Extenor
Surface Dust Lead. Interior House Dust Lead and Childhood Exposure in an Urban Env.ronment' m
^Qed TraCe Subslances ,n Environmental Health ’ Columb.a. Umvers.ty of Missouri pp
4‘ -National Ambient A,r Quality Standards,’ Central Pollution Control Board Nobficabon S O 384(E)
Dem, Aprn I t 1&94 m Central Pollution Control Board. ’Pollution Control Acts. Rules and Notifications
Thereunder Pollution Control Senes. PCL/2/1992 vol.I. New Delhi, March 1996
nagu. JO (1990) Global Metal Pollution. Poisoning the Bioshpere? Environment 32 7-32
al'Jr
u cOnn01' ■preven,in9 Lead Poisoning in Young Children. Statement by the Centre for
Disease Control U.S. Department of Health, Atlanta. U.S.A. October 1991
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. ’Lead in Australian Children: Summary of the National
Survey of Lead in Children Federal Environment Agency. 1995
w Personal interview with Indian Lead employees. 0930 hours. March 19,1997. Thane
Personal interview with Indian Lead employees. 0930 hours. March 19, 1997 Thane
Blood test results of an Indian Lead employee, July 1992. by Divine Diagnostic Centre Mumbai
Irrformant. Import data of Drained battery scrap as per RAINS.’ September and October 1996
Personal interview with Indian Lead employees. 0900 hours March 20, 1997. Thane
General Standards for discharge of environment pollutants. Part A-effluents ’ Schedule VI of
(P'01ec,lon> Second Amendment Rules. 1993. notified vide GSR 422(E). Gazette No. 1 74.
S1 76/464/EEC
UnXZIlVe^r
Stephenson, saent.st, Greenpeace Research Laboratories.
General Standards for discharge of environment pollutants. Pari A-efftuents ’ Schedule VI of
f9/5/°993
(Proleclion) Second Amendment Rules. 1993. notified vide GSR 422(E). Gazette No
174
“
’HaZardS 'n Chemicals Desk Reference’ Van Nostrand Reinhold 1987 po 582
Australian Institute for Health and Welfare. 1995 op cit
. P9 004
Multinational Monitor. January 1993
USPHS(1993). Toxicological Profile for Lead ’ U S D
Department of Health and Human Services
„
/.April 1993.
30
Heavy Burden - ©Greenpeace, March 1997
” USPHS (1993). ’Toxicological Profile lor cadmium U S Oegartmenlt of H^’’h ggd3Huma
Pubhc Health Serv.ce. Agency for Toxic Substances and D.sease Reg.stry April 1993
“ USPHS9 ,19^) -Tox.colog.cal Profile for Lead ' U S Department of Hea.tf.andI Human Serv.ces
Greenpeace international. New Delhi. September 199.
•>
t
w
I5'/5'O
06771
31
Heavy Burden - o )Greenpeace. March 1997
- Media
6771.pdf
Position: 1190 (7 views)