33. Persistent Organic Pollutants in Pacific Island Countries

(POPs in PICs)

 

Andrew Munro

Waste Management & Pollution Prevention Officer

 

Pacific Island Countries

The South Pacific Regional Environment Programme is the regional organization in the Pacific mandated to assist the countries of the region with environmental management and strive towards sustainable development. It is also the UNEP=s Regional Seas Secretariat in the South Pacific region. The fourteen island member countries of SPREP are small in land area and population ranging from Niue with a population of about 2,500 to Papua New Guinea with a population of nearly 4 million. The region effectively covers about 29 million sq. km. of the world=s largest ocean spreading from Palau to the Cook Islands. The Exclusive Economic Zones of some countries are huge with Kiribati for example comprising three disjointed groups of islands, a total land area of 820 sq. km, an EEZ of 3,500,000 sq. km and a population of about 70,000.

Despite its island nature the region is diverse with a geographical mix of high volcanic islands to countries comprising only low atolls. This diversity continues to the regions indigenous populations which include Melanesians to the west, Micronesians to the north and Polynesians to the east. There is also a diversity of languages with each country speaking a different language and many countries several languages. There are about 750 different indigenous languages spoken in Papua New Guinea for example.

Most Pacific Island Countries are not economically prosperous with the main industries being mining in some of the volcanic counties, particularly Papua New Guinea; tourism; fishing; and agriculture. As an example, Tonga with a population of about 100,000 exports about $10 million worth of pumpkins to Japan annually. Standards of living are generally low with high population densities creating economic difficulties in many places. The population density of South Tarawa, Kiribati for example rivals that of Hong Kong and the density on Ebeye in the Marshall Islands is over 23,000 per sq. km.

 

Persistent Organic Pollutants in Pacific Island Countries?

So, with small populations can the Pacific Island Countries possibly have problems with Persistent Organic Pollutants? Despite their small size the warning signs of the adoption of western values and ways of life and a high reliance on agriculture with relatively poorly educated populations, should indicate the potential for problems with Persistent Organic Pollutants. In addition some Pacific Island Countries are unlucky enough to be confronted with the hazards of vector borne diseases such as malaria. The Solomon Islands in fact could be described as the malaria capital of the world.

Perhaps a few examples will help answer the question:

In 1993 the Marshall Islands convinced the US Environmental Protection Agency to undertake a clean up of PCBs in the country. Oil from each old transformer was analysed for PCB content and contaminated oils removed from the Marshall Islands. Contaminated soils and transformers were also removed to the US for disposal. The cost of this operation in just one of the fourteen Pacific Island Countries was about US $1 million. Fortunately the PCB in transformer oil problem is likely to be more significant in the ex-US territories of Palau, FSM and the Marshall Islands than in the other countries with European, Australian and New Zealand ties due to different electricity distribution systems having been adopted. About 500 old transformers were counted in FSM in 1994 however with storage conditions of many being of concern including a large transformer readily accessible to the public in the grounds of the Pohnpei hospital. In contrast to this there appear to be only about 40 old transformers in Tonga stored quite carefully on a concrete pad with a roof.

One Pacific Island Country at one stage boasted a thriving rice growing operation. In 1986 a cyclone destroyed the rice growing industry which by then was no longer thriving. The cyclone also destroyed the company, which owned the industry along with most of its assets. One of those assets was a shed stacked with a variety of pesticides, including methyl-parathion which has an LD50 of 14 mg/kg. This shed was simply abandoned for ten years. Local villagers decided that the shed and its contents were fair game and stole parts of the roof and substantial quantities of pesticides. Inevitably the shed deteriorated badly and some of its contents spilled onto the surrounding abandoned rice paddies. Some of the villagers made bare-footed excursions into the shed to steal pesticides which were then used for killing fish for the dinner table. They made gleeful comments indicating how successful the fishing method was with only small quantities of pesticides being required.

In late 1996 SPREP and the World Health Organization with help from the Government of the country undertook a repackaging exercise so that now the remaining 20 tonnes of pesticides are safely stored and protected from theft and rain. Nothing has been done however about undertaking an analysis of the extent of site contamination with the quality of groundwater for drinking being of concern. Organisations including WHO and AusAID, and of course the country=s Government have been aware of this particular shed for many years.

I understand that in Papua New Guinea approximately 120 tonnes of waste and unwanted Persistent Organic Pollutants, including DDT await disposal.

It is still official WHO policy to spray DDT for mosquito control in malaria stricken areas such as the Solomon Islands, although I understand that now due to Government pressure this practice is no longer carried out. In defence of WHO however it must be acknowledged that the use of DDT is being phased out and restricted to old stock with pyrethroids being preferred. Supporters of the decision to continue the use of DDT, which was reviewed only in 1995, make observations, which are undoubtedly quite correct such as >DDT has saved more lives than it has taken=.

Sloppiness in the handling of products such as DDT however can not be defended. In April, 1996 I observed a shed owned by the Ministry of Health in one Pacific Island Country. In addition to materials owned by the Ministry of Health, WHO stored about 20 tonnes of DDT, which was gradually being used, in the shed. Some of the DDT was in 200 litre drums of concentrate while some was in powder form. The drums were in poor condition with some starting to leak. Stored on top of the drums of concentrate were several drip bag stands for use at the hospital. The powdered DDT was in very poor condition with many of the cardboard boxes of DDT deteriorating badly. Some were stored next to an open window allowing rain to further hasten the deterioration. A family lived next to the shed.

I am pleased to report that by December, 1996 only about 5 tonnes of DDT remained with the rest having been used.

The drinking of paraquat has been a favoured method of suicide in many Pacific Island Countries for many years. The reasons for suicide are many but the pressures of increasing weternisation undoubtedly contribute. I understand that suicide by paraquat is not pleasant. The drinking of paraquat has some nasty consequences like desiccating the lungs and death is slow and painful. Up until about 1993 one Pacific Island Country with a population of 160,000 experienced an average of about 20 suicides annually. Diligence and education have helped greatly and now only about six people die from the deliberate drinking of paraquat annually.

An unsuccessful move was made about five years ago to ban the use of paraquat in Samoa. It is reported that within days of the move becoming public ICI dispatched a deputation to the country to convince the Government that banning paraquat would be folly. The market in one Pacific Island Country is small but the domino effect is powerful!

In Samoa and the Solomon Islands and perhaps other countries timber treatment operations have been abandoned by their owners. Site contamination with copper - chrome - arsenic has been the inevitable result.

Oil is perhaps not classified as a Persistent Organic Pollutant. It can certainly be a contaminant however. The island of Betio in South Tarawa, Kiribati is home to a diesel power station. Leakage of oil has been a problem for many years with the sandy, coralline soil being an excellent transport medium. The freshwater lens about 2 metres under the surface supports a 30 mm thick layer of oil. Some residents of Betio still drink water collected from hand dug wells.

 

Glimmers of Hope

Is there light at the end of the tunnel? Indeed there is! Fora such as this and an increasing awareness of health and environmental issues in developing countries such as the fourteen SPREP member countries are helping enormously. SPREP is both assisting NGOs with public education campaigns on many issues including pesticides, and is attempting to co-ordinate environmental education in the region. Many of SPREP=s projects contain an emphasis on both formal and informal education.

It is also pleasing to see increasing effort by organisations such as UNEP, IFCS and FAO. SPREP welcomes the forthcoming Prior Informed Consent Convention. Perhaps the Pacific can avoid being used as a dumping ground by unscrupulous operators!

AusAID Chemicals Management Project

The traditional donors in the region are also helping enormously. AusAID has demonstrated its commitment by the recent announcement of approval to the >Management of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) in Pacific Island Countries= project which will be co-ordinated by SPREP and which commences early in 1998.

The project recognises the difficulties which the management of chemicals pose for Pacific Island Countries due to:

 

Objective

The objective of the project is to upgrade the regional capacity for management of chemicals in order to eliminate the threat posed by POPs and related chemicals toward the environment and human health in Pacific Island Countries.

In order to achieve this objective, the project will assist countries in the management of POPs by assessing the types and quantities of waste and unwanted POPs involved, the current extent of contamination resulting from POPs, the facilities and expertise available to deal with these materials; developing improved handling, disposal and remediation procedures; and recommending measures including legislation to ensure that effective management is established.

The project is to be conducted in all island countries of SPREP with the exception of Papua New Guinea, i.e. Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu.

 

Staging

The project will be undertaken in three Phases with the bulk of activities under Phase I scheduled to be completed in 1998. Phase I will essentially comprise an accurate assessment of the current state of waste chemicals management, and a preliminary assessment of the state of contaminated site management in Pacific Island Countries. Included will be both formal and informal training programmes relating to chemicals management, and recommendations for disposal options for waste chemicals identified and further investigations regarding chemicals contaminated sites.

Phase II of the project will involve the provision of storage facilities in each country to house the materials requiring disposal in leak-proof and cyclone proof premises prior to actual disposal. Phase III will see the safe disposal of these hazardous materials in a number of countries.

 

Activities

Specific activities to be undertaken in Phase I of the project in each country mainly by specialist consultants working with a local consultant and country counterpart include:

 

Upon completion of this programme it is anticipated that capacity to handle chemicals in Pacific Island Countries will have been enhanced and a sound basis will have been achieved to commence Phases II and III of the project.

The future looks promising! Phase I of the project will be undertaken in thirteen of the fourteen SPREP island member countries. It must be remembered however that Phase I is only the investigations phase and the region will not be rid of the menace of unwanted and waste POPs until Phase III is completed. At present there is no guarantee that AusAID will fund Phases II & III.

The South Pacific region looks forward to continuing collaboration with UNEP, IFCS and FAO to ensure that the problem of POPs in PICs can be overcome.