TED Case Studies
US-BAngladesh Waste Trade
1. The Issue
Toxic waste from developed countries
is being dumped illegally in many developing countries. In spite
of environment conventions, domestic laws, and recognition of this
dangerous problem, this dumping continues to endanger the health of
humans and their habitat. This case focuses on the toxic waste
that the U.S.-based Stoller Chemical Company facility shipped to
Bangladesh in 1992. The company mixed hazardous waste materials
with fertilizer and sent it to Bangladesh where farmers put it on
their fields. Some of the waste was recovered but some was also
placed on the fields of poor Bengali farmers. Bangladesh
demanded that the United States take back the shipment and
similar products were denied entry in Australia. Ironically, the
shipment was financed by the Asian Development Bank.
2. Description
In March, 1992 the Gaston Copper
Recycling Corporation of South Carolina shipped 1,000 tons of
cadmium and lead contaminated dust to a Stoller Chemical Company
facility in Jericho, South Carolina. Stoller mixed some of the
waste product with its fertilizer and exported 3,000 pounds of the
mixture illegally to Australia and Bangladesh. The exports lacked
the proper manifests and permits "required under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act and without notifying the
Environmental Protection Agency under the TSCA." A third
company, Hy-Tex Marketing, acted as the broker for the
fertilizer. The waste fertilizer was made with "baghouse dust" and
contained hazardous levels of lead, which causes neurological
problems in children, and cadmium, which causes kidney problems and
cancer.
Bangladesh does not have any impoundment laws against waste
imports. The shipment was not inspected at the docks for its
contents, and was allowed to enter the country. In June, 1992 the
U.S. government indicted Stoller and the other companies involved
in the scandal but, did not require the return of the waste product
from Bangladesh. The U.S. Embassy in Bangladesh warned the local
government about this matter in November, 1992, but the warnings
were not sufficiently strong and came too late.
Greenpeace reported that most of the waste fertilizer sent to
Bangladesh was distributed throughout farms in the country by
October, 1992. Since then, the Bangladesh government has
reportedly stopped the distribution of the remaining waste
fertilizer and has established a commission to further
investigate the matter. Meanwhile, environmental groups in both
countries called for the fertilizer to be returned to the United
States. The Bangladesh Embassy in Washington, DC recognized that
there were some Bangladeshi's that might have been harmed by the
toxic fertilizer.
Anne Leonard of Greenpeace's Toxic Trade campaign said that
international waste trade cannot be regulated and should be banned
outright. Although some developing countries and
environmental groups want to ban waste trade, it cannot be done
realistically, because such resolve is unacceptable to the
developed countries. The Basel Convention, created in March 1989,
under United Nations Environment Programme, was intended to solve
problems such as this (see BASEL case). Under the Basel Convention
these exports would not have been permissible.
3. Related Cases
KHAIN case
JELLYWAX case
JAPANPL case
SOMALIA case
FLORIDO case
BASEL case
4. Draft Author: Rina Dey
5. Discourse and Status:DISagreement and COMPlete
The disagreement was finally resolved, but some contamination
still exists. 6. Forum and Scope: BANGLadesh and
BILATERAL
The Asian Development Bank (ADB) was involved in the case
and actually financed the shipment in the first place. As
compensation, the ADB is now conducting a study to determine the
effects of the fertilizer in Bangladesh. According to
Greenpeace, about 25 percent was distributed and 75 percent of the
fertilizer resides in warehouses.
7. Decision Breadth:2 (USA and Bangladesh)
8. Legal Standing:LAW
The case includes elements of both Bengali domestic law on
imports and U.S. domestic law on exports. Further, it also relates
the Basel Convention.
9. Geographic Locations
a. Geographic Domain:ASIA
b. Geographic Site: South Asia [SASIA]
c. Geographic Impact: BANGLadesh
10. Sub-National Factors: NO
11. Type of Habitat: TROPical
12. Type of Measure:Import Ban [IMBAN
]
13. Direct v. Indirect Impacts:DIRect
There are
both import and export bans at issue in the case. 14.
Relation of Trade Measure to Environmental Impact
a.
Directly Related to Product: YES WASTE
b. Indirectly Related to Product: NO
c. Not Related to Product: NO
d. Related to Process: YES Pollution Land [POLL]
15. Trade Product Identification:WASTE
The waste products included lead and cadmium, the products of
baghouse dust, mixed with fertilizer. Baghouse dust "collects in
large air filters attached to copper smelting furnaces and is toxic
because it contains lead and cadmium. It is therefore classified
as hazardous waste..."
16. Economic Data
17. Impact of Trade Restriction: LOW
Since the export was illegal in the first place, new laws
would not necessarily stop the trade in wastes. What is needed is
proper administrative and enforcement measures.
18. Industry Sector:WASTE
19. Exporters and Importers:USA and BANGLadesh
20. Environmental Problem Type:Pollution Land [POLL]
To the baghouse dust, water and sulfur was added and the dust
pelletized. The firm producing the pellets (Stoller
Chemical Company) was in bankruptcy and, needing income,
allegedly accepted a bribe to accept the ship the product. The
product was shipped both to Bangladesh and Australia with proper
import papers. Australia impounded the shipment, but in
Bangladesh it entered the country. About 25 percent was
distributed to farmers who put the solution on their fields. The
company is not civilly liable in Bangladesh and can use part of the
fine to dispose of the waste properly.
21. Name, Type, and Diversity of Species
Name: MANY
Type: MANY
Diversity: 2,074 higher plants per
10,000 km/sq
(Bangladesh)
22. Resource Impact and Effect: LOW and PRODuct
23. Urgency and Lifetime of Problem: LONG and 100s of
years
The fact that the waste was dumped on fields means
that the toxic substances have worked their way into the food
chain. Thus, the impact will be felt for a long time.
24. Substitutes: Bio-degradable [BIODG] products
25. Culture:NO
26. Trans-Boundary Issues:NO
27. Rights:YES
The dumping of the waste was and is a threat to human
health. Concentrations of baghouse waste has been linked to a
variety of health impacts. When this is concentrated in
agricultural products then the threat is even greater since the
hazardous materials are passed from soils to foods that humans
consume.
28. Relevant Literature
Bergesen, H. O.; Norderhaug, M.; and Parmann, G. Green Globe
Yearbook 1992. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1992.
Greenpeace. Toxic Trade Update 5/2 (Washington, DC: Second
Quarter, 1992).
Greenpeace. Toxic Trade Update 6/1 (Washington, DC: First
Quarter, 1993).
"Two Firms, Manager to Pay $1 million for Shipping Waste Made
into Fertilizer" International Trade Reporter 211 (BNA,
November 3, 1993): A-2.
References
1. Technically, Southwire Corporation, the largest wire maker and
copper recycling company in the United States was sentenced for
violating 8 misdemeanor counts of Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA). Also sentenced was a company in which Southwire is a
majority holder, Gaston Copper Recycling Corporation of Gaston,
South Carolina.
2. "Two Firms, Manager to Pay $1 million for Shipping Waste Made
into Fertilizer" International Trade Reporter 211 (BNA, November 3,
1993): A-2.
Go To Super Page
Go to All Cases
Go to TED Categories
I. Identification