[Press Release 12/5/6]: Canada Bay Council has called on the Minister for Planning Frank Sartor to upgrade the cleanup of Homebush Bay in the light of the discovery of dioxin in Sydney Harbour fisherman and the State Government's own decision to impose a ban on commercial and recreational fishing for consumption throughout the whole of Sydney Harbour.
Channel 7 news reported last night that fisherman Felice Jioia has excessive levels of dioxin. This complements and confirms the findings of ABC TV reported on 19/4/6. The news organisations which funded and reported the testing deserve to be applauded and put to shame the State Government which has failed to do so. However, it is not realistic to expect anyone other than the State Government to organise the cleanup of Homebush Bay. As far as is known, the sole source of dioxin contamination in Sydney Harbour is the former Union Carbide plant on the Rhodes peninsula at Homebush bay. This factory manufactured Agent Orange for use in the Vietnam war. Dr Olaf Papke (Ergo Laboratories, Hamburg) advised the ABC's 7.30 Report that the form of dioxin found in the blood samples tested was TCDD, a “specific isomer” which “is the isomer that is formed during the process of production of Agent Orange.”
This leads inexorably to the trail of pollution from the Union Carbide factory to Homebush Bay to Sydney Harbour to Harbour marine life to the bloodstream of the fishermen and their families.
Sydney Harbour is internationally recognised as one of the finest and most beautiful natural harbours in the world, home to 4 million people, including countless anglers, seafood lovers and water recreationists. What would be the monetary value of the pollution of the entire harbour, from the Heads to Parramatta, asked Cr Rooney, who moved the motion, such as to render it utterly unfit for both recreational and commercial fishing? It is incalculable.
Dioxin persists in the environment and is one of the deadliest poisons known, responsible for birth defects and cancers.
It should be noted that international standards for acceptable levels of dioxin have been tightened in recent years. In light of this and the fact that the spread of contamination through the Harbour and marine life is wider than originally suspected a higher standard of cleanup is urgently required.
The original (and current) remediation plan for Homebush Bay formulated in the 1990s was based on 1990 WHO guidelines and allows for the remediation of a narrow strip of the Bay adjacent to the seawall along the peninsula. This totals 6 hectares of the Bay. The WHO have since (1998) significantly revised downward their recommened maximum acceptable dosage of dioxin. Council's Resolution therefore calls for the remediation to be increased in the form of an additional 6 hectare rectangle more or less directly off the former Union Carbide site. This covers what has been found by previous testing to be a known hotspot of dioxin contamination. This is the most cost effective option, and the minimum that should be done, said Cr Rooney, short of remediation of the entire Bay.
If the State Government objects to the cost of the cleanup, it should seek to recover the costs from the polluter, or pass legislation insuring that in the future polluters are effectively held financially liable for pollution for which they are responsible. The days of Corporations using the environment or the commons as a cost-free dumping ground for pollutants are over. At local government level, developers are required as a condition of consent to post a bond under defined conditions that trees are not killed or that property which does not belong to them (such as roads & footpaths) is fully repaired in the event of being damaged by tractors or bulldozers. A similar mechanism on a larger scale (perhaps operating over years or decades) ought be used by the State Government in relation to industries which are known to carry a risk of polluting or damaging the environment or the commons.
Text of Resolution:
THAT Council, taking into account the following information outlined in Mr Hanly's paper, namely:
a) The World Health Organisation's original (1990) recommendation for a Tolerable Daily Intake of Dioxins of 10 picograms per kilogram of body weight per day was reduced in 1998 to a range of 1 to 4 pg/kg per day with a strong suggestion that countries should try to achieve the bottom end of that range;
b) In about 2003 the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) released an Australian recommendation of a Tolerable Monthly Intake equivalent to 2.3 pg/kg bw / day (70 a month);
c) Subsequent to the current remediation plan being adopted the NSW State Govt has recently (this year) imposed a total ban on commercial and recreational fishing for consumption in the whole of Sydney Harbour due to the detection of unsafe levels of dioxin in fish;
d) The source of dioxin contamination in Sydney Harbour is the former Union Carbide plant at Rhodes;
resolve to write to both the Minister for Planning Mr Frank Sartor and the Member for Drummoyne Ms Angela D'Amore urging them to upgrade the remediation of Homebush Bay by remediating an additional approximately 6ha of the Bay in the form of a square about 50m off the proposed Central Park (as described in 'Option 2' of Table 4.3 'Remediation Scenarios' in Paul Hanly's paper 'Homebush Bay Dioxin Remediation Scope Inadequate' 28/4/2004).
UPDATE: It may be necessary to clarify the remark that "As far as is known, the sole source of dioxin contamination in Sydney Harbour is the former Union Carbide plant on the Rhodes peninsula at Homebush bay."
The research commissioned by the ABC does not establish this as a fact. It does establish specific Agent Orange dioxin isomers have been found in the bloodstream of the tested persons, bit other types of dioxin have been found and it is possible that other industrial sources contribute to the pollution or that 'background' levels of dioxin exist in the environment.
UPDATE 2: As Bill Ryall says (Kate Hughes, 17/5/6), "There are also other areas of the Harbour where dioxin levels are of concern including Rose bay and off Wilson Park at Silverwater." Such areas may not necessarily have been contaminated by the former Union Carbide factory at Rhodes.
1 response so far ↓
Joel Cass // June 10, 2009 at 1:09 pm
You’re a bit behind the times here – barrels of waste containing dioxins were first found on the rhodes site in 2000. Warning signs were posted prohibiting the consumption of fish caught in the area. Too bad the fishermen proceeded to ignore the signs, and channel 7 was game enough to sensationalise their naivety.
As someone who lives in the area I criticise the local and state governments for how little they have regulated the ‘cleanup’ of this site.
The proposed method by walker / meriton was to burn the stuff up. This is not only the least effective approach but also the cheapest. As a resident who lives in the area I am always concerned about the smell and the orange-brown dust that builds up on everything, especially after the first rainfall after a patch of clear weather.
Combustion only addresses (at most) 40% of dioxins present in soil, the presence of water (which is evident from the barrels of steam that arise when the plant is switched on) only makes the process less effective.
If were you, I would get off my arse watching today tonight and actually address the true problem in the area – we’re all breathing in the stuff – and the fact is that the concentrations are low enough and due to the very nature of dioxin poisoning, that it’s effects will not be evident until years after the project has been finished and dusted.