Course A155171 Training of Trainers on OSH and HIV & AIDS

Dangers of Toxic Wastes and Chemical Pollutants at the Workplace and in the Communities – Trends, Major Problems & Way Forward in Africa

Franklin Muchiri

ILO, Pretoria ‘ ITS BIG BUSINESS!

• According to the figures currently available, more than 400 million tonnes of chemicals are now being produced annually throughout the world. Among the millions of known chemical substances, around 100,000 varieties are available on the market. Some ten thousand of these substances are hazardous, including about 200 to 300 carcinogenic agents. In addition, thousands of new chemicals are produced and utilized every year (ILO, Chemical Safety, Volume 4 No.1: 3 May 1997) CAUSING A BIG PROBLEM!

According to the ILO, every year more than 2 million people die from occupational accidents or work-related diseases of which some 400,000 are attributable to the effects of hazardous substances in the workplace. By conservative estimates, there are 270 million occupational accidents and 160 million cases of occupational disease (Health and Safety at Work, ILO.1996).

Outline of the presentation i. What are chemicals? ii. Who manufactures them? iii. What are they used for? iv. Are they dangerous? v. What are the challenges facing unions and workers? vi. What can unions do to protect members? vii. Are there any national, regional, and international initiatives to support union actions? viii. Classification and labelling of hazardous substances + Group Exercises

WHAT ARE CHEMICALS?

- Have a definite chemical structure and property - Can occur naturally or can be engineered - Engineered chemicals are more problematic since they are more toxics, non – degradable by natural systems, large quantities in use, used in workplaces and homes

What are chemicals cont’d

• In chemistry, a chemical substance is a material with a specific chemical composition.[1] • A common example of a chemical substance is pure water; it has the same properties and the same ratio of hydrogen to oxygen whether it is isolated from a river or made in a laboratory. Some typical chemical substances are diamond, gold, salt (sodium chloride) and sugar (sucrose). Generally, chemical substances exist as a solid, liquid, gas, or plasma and may change between these phases of matter with changes in temperature or pressure. Chemical reactions convert one chemical substance into another.

WHO MANUFACTURES THEM?

- A few big MNCs who have a monopoly - Very powerful politically and economically WHAT ARE THEY USED FOR?

• Food Production and Processing – control of weeds, insects, disease pathogens, growth control, preservation, etc. • Industrial processing • Health e.g. In control of malaria, bilharzia, water treatment, etc • Transport e.g. Along railway lines, inside planes, • Information technology – in computers, mobile phones, printers, scanners, photocopiers, etc • Mining –e.g. Mercury • Warfare – phosphorus, (Iraq) DDT (WW II), 2-4D, () Glyphosate (Colombia)

ARE THEY DANGEROUS? i. NO DOUBT! – no matter the few minutes of exposure, amount of protective gear, lies from the industry, milk, volume / amount, dilution, etc. THEY ARE INHERENTLY TOXIC FROM THE DAY THEY ARE DESIGNED! THEY ARE INTENDED TO KILL!

FAMOUS CHEMICAL ACCIDENTS Tauccamarca is a remote village in the windswept Andean highlands of Peru, three hours by foot from the nearest road. On October 22, 1999, 24 of the village’s 48 children were poisoned and killed when they drank a powdered milk substitute, part of their school lunch, that had been contaminated by an organophosphate pesticide.1 When the children began to foam at the mouth and writhe in pain, their parents ran carrying them down them down the mountain to the nearest village with a health post. Most of the children died en route in their parents’ arms. Eighteen other children were poisoned but survived. Preliminary evaluations indicate that they may suffer significant long-term developmental consequences of organophosphate poisoning.2 Interviews conducted by the press, the police, and the local Peruvian rights ombudsman’s office give a fairly clear picture of what happened. A village woman mixed a white powdered pesticide into a bag of powdered milk substitute that is served as part of the children’s school breakfast, and left it by her doorway to kill or sicken a dog that had been chasing her chickens. A child walked by, noticed the bag of powdered milk, and brought it to school, where it was mixed with several other bags of powdered milk the next day and fed to the children, with devastating results. The woman, like almost everyone else in her village, speaks only Quechua, not Spanish (the language on the label) and is illiterate. She had no idea of the extreme toxicity of the pesticide. The pesticide in question appears to be methyl parathion, which is imported, formulated, and sold in Peru by Bayer S.A., a wholly owned subsidiary of the German chemical company. Although Bayer denies that methyl parathion was responsible for the poisonings, a Peruvian Congressional Investigative Subcommittee report concluded that there is significant evidence of responsibility on the part of the agrochemical company Bayer and on the part of Ministry of Agriculture. The report recommends that the government and Bayer indemnify the families of the dead children, and recommends significant reforms to remedy Peru’s lax and ineffective pesticide control policy. Methyl parathion is a category Ia, or “extremely hazardous,” pesticide according to the World Health Organization. Nonetheless, in Peru methyl parathion—a white powdered pesticide with no strong chemical odor—was sold in one- kilogram plastic bags, with pictures of vegetables above the label, and no pictogram indicating the acute danger of the product to human health. BOPHAL the Bhopal methylisocyanate disaster in India 1984 The or Bhopal Gas Tragedy is the world's worst industrial catastrophe. It occurred on the night of December 2-3, 1984 at the Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) pesticide plant in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India. UCIL was the Indian subsidiary of Union Carbide Corporation (UCC). Indian Government controlled banks and the Indian public held a 49.1 percent ownership share. BHOPAL cont’d

• A leak of methyl isocyanate (MIC) gas and other chemicals from the plant resulted in the exposure of several thousands of people. Estimates vary on the death toll. The official immediate death toll was 2,259 and the government of Madhya Pradesh has confirmed a total of 3,787 deaths related to the gas release. Other government agencies estimate 15,000 deaths. Others estimate that 8,000 died within the first weeks and that another 8,000 have since died from gas-related diseases. A government affidavit in 2006 stated the leak caused 558,125 injuries including 38,478 temporary partial and ~3900 severely and permanently disabling injuries. ABIDJAN ABIDJAN

• The gas caused by the release of these chemicals is blamed by the United Nations and the government of Côte d'Ivoire for the deaths of 17 and the injury of over 30,000 Ivorians with injuries that ranged from mild headaches to severe burns of skin and lungs. Almost 100,000 Ivorians sought medical attention for the effects of these chemicals. [1] • The substance was claimed by Trafigura to have been "slops", or waste water from the washing of the Probo Koala's tanks. An inquiry in the Netherlands in late 2006 revealed the substance was more than 500 tonnes of a mixture of fuel, caustic soda, and hydrogen sulfide for which Trafigura chose to not pay a €1,000 per cubic metre disposal charge at the port of Amsterdam. The Probo Koala was later turned away by several countries before offloading the toxic waste at the Port of Abidjan.[2][3]

MEXICO

• Explosion of gasoline tank in Mexico City in 1984, ANGOLA

• Among recent chemical incidents it lists are an outbreak of mass sodium bromide poisoning in Angola in March 2008, which affected 467 people SENEGAL

. In February 2009 18 Senegalese children died when a district in Thiaroye sur Mer, Dakar, was contaminated by lead from recycled batteries. NIGERIA

• In 1987, more than 8,000 drums of hazardous waste including the highly toxic PCBs were stored on the property of a Nigerian citizen, Nana, in Koko (a small delta port) by an Italian businessman. Nana was reportedly paid $100 per month for the “service”. GUINEA CONAKRY

• In June 1988, more than 15,000 tons of incinerator ash from the city of Philadelphia, U.S. was dumped on Kassa Island in Guinea Conakry by Bulkhandling, a Norwegian company (Mpanya, M. 1992. The Dumping of Toxic Waste in African Countries: A Case of Poverty and Racism. In B. Bryant and P. Mohai, eds. Environmental Racism: Reviewing the Evidence. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. 204- 214. ISBN: 081338513X) SOMALIA

• During the Somali civil war hazardous waste was dumped off the coast of this African nation by industrialized countries. Later, an Italian (Progresso) and a Swiss firm (Achair Partners) were discovered to have entered into a contract with the Somali government to dump waste in the war ravaged African nation. The contract allowed for construction of an inland hazardous waste disposal facility and a hazardous waste plant (Somalia Waste Imports and Civil War; TED, 1997). This contract was halted following the intervention of Dr. Mustafa Tolba a former Director of UNEP who regarded such companies as Environmental Mafioso BENIN

• In 1988, the Benin government negotiated a bilateral deal with the French government to import radioactive and industrial waste for an advance of $1.6 million and 30 years of economic assistance (Africa Waste Trade; TED, 1997) CHERNOBYL

Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident in Ukraine in 1986, MINAMATA JAPAN MINAMATA JAPAN cont’d

• (Minamata-byō), sometimes referred to as Chisso-Minamata disease Chisso-Minamata-byō), is a neurological syndrome caused by severe mercury poisoning. Symptoms include ataxia, numbness in the hands and feet, general muscle weakness, narrowing of the field of vision and damage to hearing and speech. In extreme cases, insanity, paralysis, coma and death follow within weeks of the onset of symptoms. A congenital form of the disease can also affect fetuses in the womb. • Minamata disease was first discovered in Minamata city in Kumamoto prefecture, Japan in 1956. It was caused by the release of methylmercury in the industrial wastewater from the Chisso Corporation's chemical factory, which continued from 1932 to 1968. This highly toxic chemical bioaccumulated in shellfish and fish in Minamata Bay and the Shiranui Sea, which when eaten by the local populace resulted in mercury poisoning. While cat, dog, pig and human deaths continued over more than 30 years, the government and company did little to prevent the pollution. • As of March 2001, 2,265 victims had been officially recognised (1,784 of whom had died) and over 10,000 had received financial compensation from ChissoBy 2004, Chisso Corporation had paid $86 million in compensation, and in the same year was ordered to clean up its contamination. On March 29, 2010, a settlement was reached to compensate as-yet uncertified victims.

INDIA INDIA INDIA INDIA PHILLIPINES Kamukhaan – A Poisoned Village

Villagers complained of numerous health problems from exposure Kamukhaan, Mindanao, Philippines to the hazardous - a community of 150 families chemicals effected by pesticides used by LADECO banana plantation through aerial & ground spraying. Pesticides/drugs used: Paraquat, Baycor, Decis, Formalin, Furadan & Nemacur EMBROYONIC IMPACT UGANDA -

DDT

UGANDA VIETNAM (2-4 D)

CANADA

• Mississauga railway chlorine transport accident in Canada in 1979,

The disaster was an industrial accident that occurred around 12:37 pm July 10, 1976, in a small chemical manufacturing plant approximately 15 km north of in the region in Italy. It resulted in the highest known exposure to 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p- dioxin (TCDD) in residential populations[1] which gave rise to numerous scientific studies and standardized industrial safety regulations. The EU industrial safety regulations are known as the Seveso II Directive. SEVESO cont’d

The Seveso disaster was so named because Seveso was the community most affected. Seveso is a small town with a population of 17,000 in 1976. Other affected neighbouring communities were Meda (19,000), (33,000), (34,000) and to a lesser extent (6,000) and Bovisio-Masciago (11,000).[2] The industrial plant, located in Meda, was owned by the company ICMESA (Industrie Chimiche Meda Società Azionaria), a subsidiary of Givaudan which in turn was a subsidiary of Hoffmann-La Roche (Roche Group). The factory building had been built many years earlier and the local population did not perceive it as a potential source of danger. Moreover, although several exposures of populations to dioxins had occurred before, mostly in industrial accidents, they were of a more limited scale. SEVESO cont’d

Within days a total of 3,300 animals were found dead, mostly poultry and rabbits. Emergency slaughtering commenced to prevent TCDD from entering the , and by 1978 over 80,000 animals had been slaughtered. 15 children were quickly hospitalised with skin inflammation. By the end of August, Zone A had been completely evacuated and fenced, 1,600 people of all ages had been examined and 447 were found to suffer from skin lesions or . An advice center was set up for pregnant women of which several opted for an abortion, which was legal in special cases, after consultation. Herwig von Zwehl (Technical Director of ICMESA) and Paolo Paoletti (director of production at ICMESA) were arrested. Two government commissions were established to develop a plan for quarantining and decontaminating the area, for which the Italian government allotted 40 billion lire. This amount would be tripled two years later SEVESO cont’d

A 1991 study 14 years after the accident sought to assess the effects to the thousands of persons that had been exposed to dioxin. The most evident adverse health effect ascertained was chloracne (193 cases). Other reversible early effects noted were and liver enzyme induction. The ascertainment of other, possibly severe sequelae of dioxin exposure (e.g., birth defects) was hampered by inadequate information; however, generally, no increased risks were evident. SEVESO cont’d

A study published in 1998[10] concluded that chloracne (nearly 200 cases with a definite exposure dependence) was the only effect established with certainty. Early health investigations including liver function, immune function, neurologic impairment, and reproductive effects yielded inconclusive results. An excess mortality from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases was uncovered, possibly related to the psychosocial consequences of the accident in addition to the chemical contamination. An excess of cases was also found. Results of cancer incidence and mortality follow-up showed an increased occurrence of cancer of the gastrointestinal sites and of the lymphatic and hematopoietic tissue. Results cannot be viewed as conclusive, however, because of various limitations: few individual exposure data, short latency period, and small population size for certain cancer types. A 2001 study[11] observed no increase in all-cause and all-cancer mortality. However, results support that dioxin is carcinogenic to humans and corroborate the hypotheses of its association with cardiovascular- and endocrine-related effects. In 2009, an update including 5 more years (up to 1996) found the expected increase in "lymphatic and hematopoietic tissue neoplasms" and increased breast cancer.[

In November 1986, 30 tons of toxic material was washed into the Rhine River by water used by the public fire department to extinguish a fire at the Sandoz chemical plant and storage facility near Basel, Switzerland.10 A toxic chemical slick 40 km (25 miles) long was created, resulting in widespread destruction of aquatic life, which only began recovering more than a year following the incident. The fire occurred in an un-sprinklered warehouse storing chemicals in a high-piled configuration. Massive amounts of water were poured onto this fire for about 24 hours to effect complete extinguishment as quickly as possible. It was later discovered that nearly all of the water used in fire suppression flowed through storm drains directly into the Rhine.

HEALTH PROBLEMS i. CARCINOGENECITY ii. MUTAGENICITY iii. IMMUNE SUPPRESSANT iv. FOETOTOXICITY v. ENDOCRINE DISRUPTION vi. CHOLINESTERASE INHIBITION vii. REPRODUCTIVE DISORDERS ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS

I. Depletion of the ozone layer contributing to increase in temperature i.e. GLOBAL WARMING. Stratospheric ozone filters ultraviolet radiation from the sun. CFCs contribute more to depletion of the ozone layer. Global Warming is also caused by increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. These reflect more light back to earth. Carbon dioxide is the main greenhouse gas; others are Methane, Nitrogen Oxide and Water Vapour. II. Loss of biodiversity III. Pollution of environmental resources particularly water and air resources IV. Acid rain FINANCIAL PROBLEMS

- Chemicals are expensive, they ‘eat’ a big chunk in company profits thus curtailing ability to provide better working conditions and benefits - The illnesses they cause require expensive and sophisticated medical treatments thus ‘eating’ away the family income / wage - They contribute to climate change – floods, hurricanes, drought , etc have financial implications on workers, companies, national governments WHAT ARE THE CHALLENGES FACING UNIONS / WORKERS? i. Information – not available, available in language not understandable by users, misleading information, unethical information, etc ii. Capacity – even when available capacity to interpret is weak iii. Link to HIV / AIDS and other occupational hazards – link not yet appreciated iv. Link to Climate Change – 2 big and complicated problems combined v. Nanotechnology – not well known vi. Chemicals in products – many products contained hazardous substances. Few are aware all electronic equipment such as computers, mobile phones, TV sets, etc contain substances that can harm their health and environment. Dry cell batteries some which last a day! Deliberate dumping of e-waste from developed to developing countries!

Challenges cont’d vi. Obsolete stocks (deliberate dumping, leaching, incineration) vii. Ratification of ILO Chemical Conventions - not many have ratified these conventions. viii. Illegal dumping and trafficking of hazardous chemicals from developed to developing countries. Many companies in the developed world who deal with export of toxic waste to developing countries.

Challenges cont’d ix. Lack of centres in many countries x. Lack of specialised health staff – first aiders, doctors, labour inspectors xi. Many CBAs do not include chemical safety clauses xii. What to separate exposure at work and exposure outside the workplace. Issue of treatment and compensation.

WHAT CAN UNIONS DO

EDUCATE workers – knowledge is the best solution!

WHAT CAN UNIONS DO? i. Lobby for ratification of ILO Chemical Conventions ii. Build skills of OHSE reps in label interpretation, 1st AID provision, community health monitoring iii. Lobby for establishment of Poison centres, poison registers and emergency responses systems iv. Incorporate chemical safety in CBAs, Codes v. Lobby for seats in national and international structures – POPs, PIC, SAICM

WHAT UNIONS CAN DO (cont’d) vi. Prioritize chemical safety in union programs vii. Monitor compliancy with national, regional and international regulations (show herbicide ad in Asia) viii. Conduct case studies – seeing is believing. Show adverse effects, show alternatives ix. Join hands with supportive NGOs x. Request the ILO to initiate a global programme – same as what they have done in Child Labour (IPEC), Cooperatives (COOPNET), etc. ARE THERE ANY SUPPORTIVE NATIONAL, REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES? National level • National Plans for Sound Management of Chemicals (NIPs) • Occupational Safety and Health Acts • CBAs • Codes • Policies ARE THERE ANY SUPPORTIVE NATIONAL, REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES?

Sub region level

Sub regional initiatives – SADC, ECOWAS, ARE THERE ANY SUPPORTIVE NATIONAL, REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES?

Regional level NEPAD Bamako Convention ARE THERE ANY SUPPORTIVE NATIONAL, REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES?

International level i. ILO Recommendations ii. Stockholm iii. Rotterdam iv. Basel v. SAICM LET US LEARN FROM NOW! CLASSIFICATION AND LABELLING OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES - According to their toxicity, mostly determined through test animals. GHS is discouraging animal tests. Sometimes severe unethical methods observed e.g. cash for testing experiments, using un - suspecting victims

- Lethal doses

- Effect = Length of exposure x toxicity x environmental condition x health status Classification and Labelling cont’d

-Once toxicity is determined, substances are allocated signs, symbols, precautionary statements, safety and risk phrases, warning phrases, numbers

-These assist in informing users e.g. Workers

Communicating with users

1. Where can you get the information? - Label, - Safety Data Sheets (formerly MSDS) - Websites - ILO, ITUC Africa, etc

2. Systems for communicating hazards - Many developed countries have individual or collective systems - Most developing countries do not have systems, they rely on systems from importing countries

Communicating with users cont’d

An example: The EU System - Information through the label or SDS - A good label must have 3 basic qualities: originality, language understood by the user, strength - Its an international as well as EU and national standard that all chemical products must be accompanied by the original label Communicating with users cont’d

Some important Information that must appear on a label: i. Name and address of the manufacturer / agent ii. Active Ingredient (AI =) iii. Date Manufactured and Date of Expiry iv. Precautionary statement against children v. Advice in case of an emergency e.g. Spillage, Swallowed/Inhaled, fire, , etc vi. Condition of use

Communicating with users cont’d vi. Weight / Volume vii. Storage requirements e.g. Compatibility with other chemicals, susceptibility to wetness or pressure, reactivity with oxygen, static electricity, heat or light, etc viii. Health effects – Risk Phrase (R-phrase) ix. Precaution to be taken to prevent exposure – Safety Phrase (S-phrase) x. Product identifier (International Number, ICSC Number) xi. Signs and Symbols of danger

GROUP WORK Exercise 1: A worker who is a paying member has brought to your union office several labels with the following information: - R 39, R 41, R 46, R49, R62, R63 - S 13, S 15, S 20, S 21, S 24, S 30, S 33, S 34, S 39, S 39, S 46, S 62

- Symbols

- ICSC 5, ICSC 1, ICSC 958, ICSC 116, ICSC 78, ICSC 350, ICSC 622 Using information provided, identify the active ingredients, advise the worker on health and environmental effects and how to protect her / himself, others and the environment

GROUP WORK

Exercise 2: Your Safety and Health Representative has brought a container but the label on the container is incomplete. However, the following CAS Numbers are visible. Identify the active ingredient and the ICSC numbers: CAS 50-99-7, CAS 50-81-7, CAS 50-18-0, CAS 50-29-3, CAS 309-00-2, CAS 298-00-0, CAS 2921-88-2, CAS 21908-53-2, CAS 1317-36-8, CAS 122-14-5. Try to identify health and environmental effects of each active ingredient

GROUP WORK

Exercise 3: Establish a chemical company, give it a name, manufacture a product, give it a trade name. The product must have the following properties: - Harmful to the environment - Can cause cancer - Not supposed to add water - Not supposed to be disposed in drainage system - Can explode if it comes into contact with oxygen - Can cause irritation - Is extremely toxic - Is acidic - ICSC Export your product to a country in the developing world (name the country) and construct an appropriate label for your product.

GLOBALLY HARMONIZED SYSTEM (GHS) The existence of different hazard classification, labelling and communication systems resulted into confusion and undermined the desire to safeguard human life and the environment. GHS cont’d

• The Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals or GHS is an internationally agreed upon system set to replace the various different classification and labeling standards used in different countries. The GHS will use consistent criteria for classification and labeling on a global level. Its development began at the United Nations Rio Conference in 1992, when the International Labour Organization (ILO), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and various governments and stakeholders came together at the United Nations. It supersedes the relevant and United States standards. The European Union has implemented the United Nations' GHS into EU law as the CLP Regulation.

GHS cont’d

The goals of the GHS are to enhance protection of mankind and the environment, by: i. Providing an internationally comprehensible system for hazard communication. ii. Providing a recognized framework for those countries without an existing system. iii. Facilitating international trade in chemicals whose hazards have been properly assessed and identified on an international basis. iv. Reducing the need for animal testing and evaluation of chemicals.

GHS cont’d

Under the GHS classification will be done in respect of: i. Physical hazards – mostly based on United Nations Dangerous Goods System ii. Health hazards – adopted health hazards from various existing systems but have specific classifications and symbols for various illnesses iii. Environmental Hazards

GHS cont’d

Principle of Hazard communication under GHS • The problem of trade secret or confidential business information has not been addressed within the GHS, except in general terms. For example, non-disclosure of confidential business information should not compromise the health and safety of users. • Hazard communication should be available in more than one form (for example, placards, labels or MSDS’s). • Hazard communication should include hazard statements and precautionary statements. • Hazard communication information should be easy to understand and standardized. • Hazard communication phrases should be consistent with each other to reduce confusion. • Hazard communication should take into account all existing research and any new evidence.

GHS IMPLEMENTATION

• The goal of the United Nations is broad international adoption by 2008. Different countries will require different time frames to update current regulations or implement new ones. In countries like the United States, for example, there are many facets of the regulatory system that will have to be modified in order to adopt and implement the GHS. Japan's Industrial Safety and Health Law has already been amended to reflect the GHS. In the United States, an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published in the Federal Register on September 12, 2006.[1] The European Commission has published a legislative proposal to change the current system based on Directive 67/548/EEC to one based on the GHS:[2] it is expected that the new regulation will be passed in 2009 and come into force between 2010 and 2015. Australia is well-advanced on preparing regulations to implement the GHS for industrial chemicals, with new regulations expected in 2012. The UN monitors international implementation status of the GHS, and publishes a summary of the current status

THANK YOU