DEAR EDITOR: A mere suspicion of smelter poisoning of the local water supply, will ruin interest abroad in Trinidad’s consumer products.
The causes of pollution suspicions would arise from leaks, spills, deliberate discharges/retoolings, landfill, technical disaster, shipping disaster, natural disaster (earthquake/flood/lightening), process (immanent/accrual).
The last cause means that smelter pollution is in fact unavoidable and imminent. One example of this kind of pollution is shown in steel dust pollution that has been occurring at Pt Lisas over many years.
Aluminium dust is notoriously more “sticky”, not just more poisonous. It can not be removed as easily as steel dust. It is bound to contribute to that incidental pollutant build-up over time.
Of course pollution will eventually be the result of some combination of the other factors as well. Flooding is another serious risk. Dykes near Hamburg, Germany, reach 7m (23ft).
Still, the level of inland water-logging/flooding means that, when North Sea storms do not breach the dykes, Hamburg can get flooded. In fact some storms already threaten to overflow the dykes, which used to be lower.
The Gulf of Paria itself may never generate such storms; but sea levels are rising significantly and lands that are low lying, at or below sea-level, tend to be more and more saturated.
A hurricane arriving from the east could easily bring about the inundation of the areas in the south west already pregnant with pollution. Heavy sea has penetrated the Icacos peninsula, almost a mile.
On a per capita basis, Trinidad ranks ninth among more than 200 countries, as one of the worst industrial polluters. It is wrong for the PM to say that measuring pollution on a per capita basis “is misleading”.
He should admit rather that measuring pollution on a per square kilometre basis, or, per square mile, would be more distressing. How would Trinidad rank then?
“Developed” countries have very complex and rigorous health, safety and environmental laws, chemical prohibitions and regulations, medical benefit and treatment arrangements, disaster responses and equipment, insurance’s etc., as well as financial requirements for reclamation that are imperative.
Our land and asphalt are in demand; yet are these the ways to put them to best use and command the right prices? Even if the Commonwealth heads disagree, we did not and still do not need constitutional change and devaluation to get any of this right and ban smelter visas.
Now is the time to withdraw from the smelter development, while it is easy to do it.
Elias Galy, Port of Spain |