Global Trends by Martin Khor
Monday 21 June 2010
Poor nations should also be paid for eco-disasters
The US$20 billion put aside by BP to pay for
the effects of the Gulf of Mexico oil
spill contrasts with the lack of accountability of big companies that
cause environmental harm in developing countries.
Last week, the President Barrack Obama of the
United States succeeded in getting the oil company BP to set aside at
least US$20 bil in a fund to meet claims for losses arising from the
Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
It is both interesting and heartening that a government
is able to pressurise a big company to agree upfront to compensate for
the damage it is causing. The funds will be used to meet claims for
economic losses of local people in the Gulf
Coast states for
loss of income (for example from reduced fishing or tourism) and to
pay the cost of environmental clean up.
Another US$100 million fund will be set up to
pay workers laid off due to suspension of offshore drilling. BP will
also suspend paying dividends so that there is enough cash for the new
Both agreed to this package because of the growing
public anger at the negligence of BP and the government's lack of regulatory
actions, as well as that after two months the oil is still gushing from
the broken BP oil installation.
It has been described as the worst US environmental
disaster. But worse ecological catastrophes have been caused by international
companies in developing countries, with greater loss to life, income
and the environment.
But little if any compensation has been paid by these companies. And
the governments of the countries whose people own the companies usually
turn a blind eye.
The most outstanding case is that of Bhopal,
in which the emission of poisonous gas from the US-owned company Union
Carbide in 1984 affected half a million people, killed 2,300 people
immediately, with another 15,000 to 30,000 dying subsequently and many
thousands of others maimed seriously. Even now the land and water in
the vicinity continue to be contaminated with toxic chemicals that affect
Neither Union Carbide or Dow Chemical which bought the firm in 2001
accepted responsibility for the disaster. The Bhopal factory was sold
to a local firm in 1992. An arrest warrant for Union Carbide's then
chairman Warren Anderson was issued in India but he has
not been brought to trial.
Union Carbide paid US$470 million in a deal in
1989 with the Indian government, but this is a small amount, given the
enormous numbers of people who died, were injured and continue to suffer.
On 7 June this year, an Indian court found 7 former
executives of the Indian subsidiary of the company guilty of negligence
and they were given sentences of two years' jail, which is being appealed
against. The Bhopal residents and their supporters are dismayed
such a light sentence, and that they are still demanding proper compensation.
A second case is Ecuador's Amazon region being contaminated
by oil and toxic waste in amounts far larger than the Gulf Oil spill
so far. The oil and waste was discharged by Texaco (bought over by
Chevron in 2001) when it operated an oil concession in 1964-1990.
The New York Times in May 2009 reported indigenous
people in the area saying that toxic chemicals had leaked into their
soils, groundwater and streams, and that some of their children had
died from the poisoning. It cited a report of an expert (contested
by the company) who estimated that 1,400 people had died of cancer because
of oil contamination.
The indigenous groups have taken
a court case against Chevron for US$27 bil in damages. They accuse
Chevron of dumping more than 345 million gallons of crude oil into the
rainforest. Chevron is also said to have dumped 18.5 billion gallons
of toxic waste in pits in the forests.
Experts claim that the disaster
has devastated their lands, income and health to a degree far larger
than the BP spill in the Gulf. The company paid Ecuador's government US$40 mil in
the early 1990s for clean-up costs, but this amount is seen as much
too little given the immensity of the damage.
US Congressman James P. McGovern,
vice-chairman of the House Rules Committee, visited Ecuador in 2009
and is reported to have written to Obama that “the degradation and contamination
left behind by [Chevron] in a poor part of the world made me angry and
ashamed… I also saw the infrastructure Texaco/Chevron created that allowed
the wholesale dumping of formation water and other highly toxic materials
directly into the Amazon and its waters."
A third case is the Niger Delta in Nigeria,
a major oil producing region in which Shell and other companies operate.
An article in The Observer entitled “Nigeria's agony dwarfs the Gulf oil spill: The
US and Europe ignore it”, describes
spilt oil has contaminated swamps, rivers, forests and farmlands in
“In fact, more oil is spilled
from the delta's network of terminals, pipes, pumping stations and oil
platforms every year than has been lost in the Gulf of Mexico,” wrote John Vidal.
A report by environment groups calculated in 2006 that up to 1.5m tons
of oil – 50 times the pollution unleashed in the Exxon Valdez tanker
disaster in Alaska – has been spilled
in the delta over the past half century. Last year Amnesty calculated
that the equivalent of at least 9m barrels of oil was spilled and accused
the oil companies of a human rights outrage.
On 1 May a ruptured ExxonMobil pipeline spilled more than a million
gallons into the delta over seven days and thick balls of tar are being
washed up along the coast. Local people blame the oil pollution for
the fall in life expectancy in the rural communities to a little above
The article quotes the Nigerian writer Ben Ikari, "This kind of
spill happens all the time in the delta. The oil companies just ignore
it. When I see the efforts that are being made in the US I feel a great sense of sadness
at the double standards.”
It also quotes Nnimo Bassey,
Nigerian head of Friends of the Earth International, "We see frantic
efforts being made to stop the spill in the US.
But in Nigeria, oil companies largely ignore
their spills, cover them up and destroy people's livelihood and environments.
The Gulf spill can be seen as a metaphor for what is happening daily
in the oilfields of Nigeria
and other parts of Africa.”
These cases show a big contrast between what the US administration is doing to hold
a multinational company financially accountable, and how similar companies
that cause ecological catastrophes in developing countries are able
to get away either freely or with grossly inadequate pay-outs.
What the US
administration and Congress are doing to get BP to compensate for the
environmental and economic damage it is causing is commendable and should
Developing countries should learn a lesson from the US and take similar action in line
with the “polluter pays” principle.
And just as importantly, the governments of the home countries of the
multinationals should also act to make their companies accountable for
their actions when they operate in other countries, and to compensate
adequately when they cause environmental damage.
TO MAIN | ONLINE
BOOKSTORE | HOW TO ORDER