Take Action Now!

Below is an action alert to prevent the construction of southern africa's largest hazardous waste incinerator. It is being partially funded by the U.S. Trade and Development Authority. Please send your sign-ons to linda@groundwork.org.za.

BACKGROUND:

Sasolburg is a town in South Africa that is home to a large oil refinery, and its residents are suffering many of the usual health effects associated with oil refineries. Now a proposal has been brought forward to build the largest hazardous waste incinerator in Southern Africa, with the aim of burning, among other things, POPs contaminated wastes such as PCBs and obsolete pesticides.

Such an incinerator is bad in its own right since it will release dioxins, furans and other toxic pollutants that cause injury to human health and the environment. It is especially bad because effective, alternative destruction technologies are available that will not release these pollutants. Under the terms of the Stockholm Convention, alternatives that do not relese dioxins and furans should receive a clear preference. Thus, building this incinerator will also undermine the international community's efforts to work for sustainable alternatives to incineration.

The local community, led by a community based organization, Sasolburg Environmental Committee, and several municipal councillors, is opposing the incinerator. NGO opposition is led by groundWork www.groundwork.org.za, a national environmental justice group and member of GAIA, IPEN and Oilwatch. GroundWork is preparing a detailed technical and legal critique of the incinerator proposal, which is currently going through the Environmental Impact Assessment process, and has requested letters of support from NGOs around the world.

Please sign on to the following letter by sending the following information to linda@groundwork.org.za by August 29, 2001:

Name
Title
Organization
Country
Email address

Thank you.

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE FREE STATE GOVERNMENT, SOUTH AFRICA

Mr. T S Belot
Member of the Executive
Tourism, Environment and Economics
Free State
South Africa


Dear Mr. Belot:

We are writing to ask that you deny permission to the proposed hazardous waste incinerator for Sasolburg. Please consider this letter a submission to the Environmental Impact Assessment process in support of the NGO groundWork and the community organization Sasolburg Environmental Committee.

As representatives of concerned civil society organizations from around the world, we are writing to you because the proposed incinerator would have serious repercussions far outside South Africa's borders as well as serious negative impacts on the local community. As such, it behooves the government to seek less-harmful alternatives. We have many criticisms of the proposed project, of which only a few are detailed here. Others are covered in groundWork's submission.

Incinerators produce a wide range of pollutants, including many -- such as mercury, dioxins and other halogenated hydrocarbons -- which are toxic to humans and capable of long-range transport. Release of these chemicals into the environment is inevitable in the operation of an incinerator, both via air emissions and ashes. In addition to the severe problems these pollutants pose for the local community, they will spread beyond South Africa's borders and heavily impact other communities who have no opportunity to participate in this EIA process.

Incineration is an increasingly obsolete technology, creating pollutant byproducts that are as problematic as the wastes it is intended to treat. As a result, it is just now beginning to be phased out in many countries. Yet transnational companies are hoping to take this technology to other parts of the world where the incineration experiment has not been experienced.

South Africa recently signed the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, which specifically addresses the issue of destruction of POPs waste. The Convention has listed incineration as a very significant source for POPs releases and mandates a preventative approach to processes which produce POPs, including incineration. And, in the case of existing stockpiles, the Stockholm Convention creates grave doubt about the legality and efficacy of incinerators -- due to their inability to completely "destroy or irreversibly transform" hazardous wastes so that they no longer possess the characteristics of POPs.

This proposal would saddle South Africa with outmoded technology at a time when cleaner and more effective alternatives have become available. Under the Stockholm Convention, such alternatives should be given priority consideration. Instead, the Convention clearly prioritizes non-combustion technologies that produce no POPs releases over incineration.

By considering this proposal, South Africa is in conflict with its own laudible commitment to international law and the Stockholm Convention. We look forward to hearing from you in regards to these concerns and hope that you will deny the project and instead work with us to promote safer alternatives. Please send further correspondence care of groundWork.

Sincerely,
{signatories}