THE PRESS TUESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1986. Dumping toxic wastes

Press, 12 August 1986, Page 20

THE PRESS TUESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1986. Dumping toxic wastes

The irresponsible and illegal dumping of a drum of tear-gas at the eastern rubbish transfer station on Sunday highlights again the threats to health and to the environment posed by hazardous or toxic materials that have become so much a part of modem living. Two rubbish workers were admitted to hospital after breathing the gas which escaped from a drum of chloropicrin that had been left at the transfer station under other rubbish. A third staff member was taken to hospital, but sent home after a period of observation. Things could have been worse. Sunday’s incident was the worst of its kind at the transfer station since it was opened 22 months ago, but by no means the first. Signs at the station say that hazardous or toxic wastes will not be accepted, but they turn up in the rubbish from time to time all the same. It is almost impossible to stop, particularly if the offending material is hidden among other rubbish when delivered, and almost impossible to trace the offenders later. When the station was closed after Sunday’s gas leak, three other containers of potentially dangerous substances were found in the pit.

Reprehensible as the illegal dumping may be, and careless of the health and safety of others as it certainly is, it is just a part of a much larger problem. Each year about 7000 tonnes of dangerous waste must be disposed of in New Zealand. About a tenth of this presents moderate to high levels of danger to life. Yet New Zealand still does not have a national policy on the disposal of such wastes. Much of the material is simply discarded at council dumps or poured down the nearest drain. Some of the more deadly wastes, because they cannot be concealed or simply poured away, find their way into illegal dumps scattered round the countryside. One such dump was uncovered near Eyrewell forest, in North Canterbury, a

couple of years ago. These dumps are doubly dangerous because the materials are in no way supervised. They pose a grave danger to children and others who might stumble across them. Further, the materials may seep into underground water supplies. The number of such dumps might be expected to increase in the absence of appropriate, lawful means of disposal and in the face of increased vigilance at council tips and rubbish transfer stations. Even where local bodies make some provision for dumping toxic wastes legally, the cost is usually high, especially if the local authority is attempting to recover the cost of extra work to make the dump safe, such as lining a pit to prevent seepage. Surveys of local-body dumps have shown that they can contain solvents and thinners, paints, and paint residues, herbicide and pesticide residues, lead, mercury, and cyanide, and many other poisons. Even on the sketchy information to hand, the danger is appreciated and the new Ministry for the Environment is meant to be developing a pollution control plan for waste management. It would not be true to say that absolutely nothing is happening, but no records are being set for speed either. The problem has been talked about for years with little to show for the talk.

In the meantime, local authorities — and in Christchurch that means the United Council as well as the territorial local authorities — cannot afford to sit and wait for either amalgamation or a national waste management plan. Turning away dangerous materials from dumps and rubbish transfer stations does not remove the problem. Unless some lawful outlet is provided for these wastes, the local authorities are encouraging the creation of unlawful dumps, time bombs of corroding drums and deadly poisons. The problem must be faced squarely and promptly.