Toxic cities: globalizing the problem of waste.

• Date: 22 September 2008
• Author: White, Rob
• Published date: 22 September 2008
• Author: White, Rob

Introduction

THIS ARTICLE PROVIDES A DETAILED CASE STUDY OF A TOXIC EVENT THAT OCCURRED in Abidjan, Ivory Coast, in August 2006. This is a continuing event, in the sense that people are still suffering the full effects and consequences of the toxic waste that was dumped in their city. Meanwhile, the event itself has sparked ongoing legal and political fallout within the West African nation, as well as in Europe, the United Kingdom, and Jamaica.

The significance of this event resides in the fact that it highlights both the larger problem of how to deal with toxic waste and the global character of some forms of "resolving" this problem. As the case study reveals, there are multiple players, diverse interests, and conflicting purposes that underpin toxic waste disposal. The internationalization of the issue, and the globalization of the problem, are integral elements to understanding how events such as the toxic waste dumping in Abidjan occurred.

This article begins by describing what occurred in August 2006, as well as the response of "responsible" parties to the event. A discussion of what happened in the aftermath of the dumping follows. The article concludes with an interpretation of current trends and issues, and the challenges relating to toxic waste disposal now and into the future.

A key message here is that the dumping of toxic and other waste in Third World countries in not exceptional, but rather is part of the normal "contracted out" disposal process common to global capitalism. A worldwide scandal, of sorts, occurred in this instance because of the scale of the disaster. In a similar vein, the high costs of remediation, which involved transferring the waste back to Europe for final disposal, were directly linked to focusing the world spotlight on what happened in Abidjan. Even so, the sheer scale of the disaster was not enough to generate much interest in other parts of the world. This, too, deserves comment.

A Brief Note on Methodology

The impetus for this article comes from the circumstances surrounding my first hearing of the original incident. In the middle of the night in Hobart, Tasmania, in August 2006, I happened to be listening to ABC-News Radio, a news service that broadcasts overseas news services (such as the BBC and Deutsche Welle), as well as Australian-provided news. There was a brief report from the BBC about a toxic disaster in the Ivory Coast. The next morning I turned on ABC radio, then the TV morning news, and there was no mention of the story. I checked the local newspaper. Nothing.

By sheer chance, that day at work I discovered a facility on my computer called "Google Alert." I typed in "Ivory Coast Toxic Waste" and over the next 12 months (and indeed to this day) received periodic reports about the event and its aftermath from news services worldwide. What struck me then, and still does today, was the relative lack of reporting in the Australian media, much less the North American media. In this light, I share the sentiments expressed on-line by one journalist:

While the toxic-waste scandal has garnered headlines around the world, in the United States the story has been largely relegated to tiny squibs in the "World Briefs" sections of newspapers--if it has been covered at all. None of the country's leading newspapers--the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, or USA Today--has run staff-written stories from the scene of the disaster. The story has not been covered by any of the major TV networks. CNN's Anderson Cooper has not rushed off to Abidjan to feel the victims' pain and demand justice on their behalf, as he has with other recent disasters. His cable-news competitors have also missed the story (Kahn, 2006).

In my collection of materials on the Ivory Coast, I noticed that most newspaper reports in the United States did mainly rely upon Reuters or Associated Press feeds. Sporadic stories appeared in media outlets in Holland, the U.K., Germany, Turkey, Vietnam, Angola, South Africa, Jamaica, and the Ivory Coast itself. Stories also appeared in "alternative" news sources such as Inner City Press in the United States and in web-based information sites such as Environment News. As others have observed, there are often media silences when it comes to certain types of environmental crimes, due in no small part to the intersections between the large polluting corporations and the media (see, for example, Simon, 2000).

In this specific instance, there was little consistent coverage. Yet, detail by detail, a picture of what occurred in the Ivory Coast did emerge. Information from many different media sources and from a variety of national contexts provides a fascinating composite portrait of toxic waste in its global context. I read hundreds of pages of media reports, and after a long culling out process, deleted repetition and stories of no consequence. What remained formed the basis for the presentation below.

The bulk of the article is devoted to a detailed portrayal of what happened that fateful August night, and what has happened since. The article thus provides selected but comprehensive "information," rather than a more sophisticated conceptual analysis. This is because I felt it was useful to concentrate on what some social scientists refer to as "thick description" to best elucidate the processes and complexities of the people, behaviors, and consequences of the toxic event. The final section of the article nevertheless provides a series of analytical observations that suggest ways in which we might interpret what happened in this specific case, and more generally what is occurring vis-a-vis toxic waste production and disposal generally.

The Event

In August 2006, some 600 tons of caustic soda and petroleum residues were dumped at 18 open-air public waste sites in Abidjan, the main city of the western African nation of Ivory Coast. Early news reports stated that fumes from the waste had caused nosebleeds, nausea, and vomiting. A terrible stench, smelling of rotten eggs, permeated the city of around five million inhabitants. Most of the waste was dumped in the poorer parts of the city. Among the dumpsites were the city's lagoon-side main garbage dump, a roadside field beside a prison, and a sewage canal.

To date, 16 people are acknowledged to have died due to this event. Over 100,000 people sought medical attention, with around 75 people hospitalized. The source of the complaint was "slops," a general term for cargo and tank-washing residues. In this case, they contained substantial quantities of hydrogen sulfide, sodium hydroxide (caustic soda), and chemicals called mercaptans that smell like garlic or rotting cabbage.

The dumping of these toxic slops involved various international bodies. A Dutch company, Trafigura Beheer BV, chartered the boat to carry its toxic cargo. Trafigura is a global oil and metals trading company. With offices in London and its headquarters in Lucerne, Switzerland, its chief executives include French nationals. The Probo Koala, a Korean-built tanker, is Greek-owned and Panamanian registered; it has a Russian crew. The final disposal of the waste was devolved to a local Ivorian company, Tommy. To remove the waste, the Ivorian government brought in a French cleanup company, Tredi International, because it could only be destroyed using European technologies. Upon returning to Europe, the ship was impounded in Estonia, where a criminal investigation found that samples taken from the ship showed traces of environmentally dangerous poisonous chemicals (Turkish Weekly, in BBC, 2006). The section below provides a chronological account of the disaster in Abidjan, from events leading up to it...