Vol. 324 No. 9
asked the Minister for the Environment the number of licensed toxic dumps; the steps being taken to increase the availability of such dumps; if he will give details of the various toxic wastes being dumped in such centres and the amount and type of toxic waste being transported abroad for dumping.
2.
asked the Minister for the Environment if he is aware of indiscriminate dumping of toxic waste throughout the country; and the plans he has to combat this serious problem.
3.
asked the Minister for the Environment whether any arrangements are at present under way to provide for the regulated dumping of toxic waste; whether he is aware of the serious pollution which has occurred because of mercury seepage; and if he will indicate whether any proposals towards centralised locations in different regions for the dumping of toxic waste are under consideration.
I propose with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to reply to Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.
As I have already stated in reply to similar questions, I am aware of the problems that exist at the present time with regard to the disposal of industrial waste.
Under the European Communities (Waste) Regulations, 1979, which came into operation on 1 April last, local authorities are responsible for the planning, organisation, authorisation and supervision of waste operations in their areas and for the preparation of waste disposal plans. The regulations provide local authorities with adequate powers to monitor the disposal of all types of waste arising within their areas and most of them have now commenced such monitoring operations, but I am not aware that any private sites for the disposal of toxic wastes have so far been licensed under the Regulations.
It is important, however, to understand that the primary responsibility for the safe disposal of industrial and toxic waste rests with the producer, and that the regulations provide for prosecution and the imposition of substantial penalties if waste is disposed of so as to endanger health or harm the environment.
If the producer of toxic waste cannot incinerate it or treat it so that it can safely be disposed of on land or at sea, he must send it abroad to a place where there are facilities to deal with it. Precise figures or information are not available on ultimate disposal but I understand that a considerable tonnage is exported to the UK, of which possibly 50 per cent is made up of solvent wastes which may be incinerated or recycled.
Estimates of the different types of waste vary considerably. There is no complete or accurate inventory of toxic wastes being produced in this country. This is hardly surprising because the problem is a relatively new one and there was no statutory obligation to furnish information to anyone. This position has been changed. The coming into operation of the new regulations gives local authorities supervisory and controlling powers.
There are still problems of definition and quantification. There are degrees of toxicity, and the quantities of liquid wastes can vary enormously with the amount of water they contain. The milder toxic wastes can often be disposed of on suitable landfill sites in association with domestic refuse, and local authorities have been requested by my Department to facilitate industry in this regard, where this can safely be done, especially where leachate can be drained into a sewerage system.
The best option for liquid organic or inorganic wastes containing metals is probably disposal at sea in approved locations. Such dumping will be subject to control by the Department of Transport, which will have licensing powers under the Dumping at Sea Bill and will be advised by the Department of Fisheries and Forestry.
If we accept that the bulk of our toxic wastes can be disposed of by landfill, dumping at sea, and some measure of exports for recycling, incineration, and so on, this would leave a relatively small quantity comprising liquid toxic wastes which cannot be treated, those which can be treated and dewatered resulting in a solid cake or sludge, and some other solids. In all, this might amount to 5,000 tons per annum. The options for disposal are:
(a) a "tight" site with no leachate escaping;
(b) a site where the leachate is controlled, monitored and treated, as necessary; and
(c) a "dry" mine in which the waste can be disposed of by acceptable methods as a solid package.
These options are being investigated by a team comprising experts from the IIRS, the Geological Survey Office and my Department. They are seeking a site which would warrant investigation in depth. I expect to receive a report in the near future. However, if Deputies wish to make any suggestions, I would be glad to hear of any promising locations which might warrant examination. If we cannot find a practical and economic solution of this kind, we will have to consider much more expensive options.
As regards non-toxic industrial wastes, Deputies might like to know that apart from the arrangements for disposal on local authority tips, special arrangements have been made by Dublin Corporation for acceptance at Ringsend of certain liquid wastes and sludges which can be processed through the treatment works, and in Cork arrangements are being negotiated for disposal at sea.
Finally, I assume that the reference to mercury seepage in Deputy O'Leary's question relates to a recent press report that traces of mercury were found in Mallow town dump. I have been informed by Cork County Council that 24 empty drums which may have contained traces of mercury were safely disposed of recently on the dump and that there is no evidence of seepage from the dump or of mercury pollution in the nearby river.
I think I heard the Minister say that there is not any licensed dump in the country for the disposal of toxic waste? Is that not a scandalous situation? Will he tell us the immediate proposals he has to set up licensed dumps in this near-emergency situation? I should like him to be somewhat more explicit in explaining how an estimated 20,000 tons of toxic waste are disposed of annually.
The Deputy is not correct when he says I had said there are not any dumps. I said there are not any private sites for disposal of toxic waste licensed so far under the regulations. As far as being explicit is concerned, I thought that four pages of a reply was being fairly explicit.
Am I correct in saying that 20,000 tons of toxic waste is being disposed of annually? We are due an explanation of how that amount of waste is being disposed of.
I have gone into the whole question in great detail. The next question relates to the provision of a toxic waste dump in the Dublin area, which has to be provided. I realise there is a problem but I am tackling it. I mentioned the three options for disposal: a "tight" site without any leachate escaping; a site where the leachate is controlled, monitored and treated as necessary; and a "dry" mine in which the waste can be disposed of by acceptable methods as a solid package. I said that these options are being investigated by a team of experts from IIRS, the Geological Survey Office of my Department. I expect a report from them in the very near future, when I can take further action.
Is the Minister aware of all the dumping of toxic waste being done throughout the country? To what extent does he think the Department have monitored the dumping?
This problem has arisen in recent years because of the rapid industrialisation here. Until recently this was not a difficulty. We are now monitoring the situation under the EEC waste regulations of 1979. Most local authorities are monitoring the situation. It is only now that we are coming to grips with it.
Does the Minister agree, having said it is a problem of only recent creation, that the body which have been directly involved in part in its creation are the IDA — that it is a by-product of industrialisation? Therefore, has the Minister received representations from the IDA on the provision of a toxic waste dump to meet the requirements to which he referred? Can he say when the last representations from the IDA were received by his Department and whether the IDA have indicated that the lack of provision of a safe dump is prohibiting further industrialisation?
There has been continuous contact between my Department and the IDA on this matter. The provision of a dump in the Dublin region by Dublin County Council will meet the needs of the IDA in this region. Obviously it is a matter of concern that we should provide toxic waste dumps and I am working very actively on it.
Are not recently imported companies purchasing sites and disposing of toxic waste on the sites without any permission until they are caught by local residents, when they have to desist after an unholy row? Will the Minister consider introducing legislation to have a licensing system for firms who are disposing of toxic waste in this way? The need is to monitor such dumping rather than the present system under which apparently anyone can dump toxic waste anywhere — they can just go out and despoil the countryside?
There is provision in the EEC regulations for local authorities to license private sites, but my information is that they have not done so. Because of recent controversy, two of the private companies involved in disposal of toxic waste on illegal sites have now stopped their operations. This brings even greater urgency to the need to have action taken at Government and local authority level.
I am not talking about local authorities.
We have already done it in Dublin.
4.
asked the Minister for the Environment if he is aware of the widespread public opposition to the proposed siting of a dump for toxic waste at the tiphead at Dunsink, County Dublin, and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I am aware from press and radio reports that the West Finglas Tenants' Association have formed an action committee to oppose a recent decision of Dublin County Council to provide limited facilities at Dunsink tiphead for reception of restricted quantities and qualities of industrial, including toxic, waste.
It appears to me from these reports that the association are unaware of the restricted nature of the decision and are under the impression that the tip will be used for indiscriminate dumping of all kinds of hazardous substances. This is a completely erroneous view. The council are a responsible body with a long history of care for public health in their area through the services they provide. No councillor would wish to be associated with any project which would be likely to create a hazard to public health.
My understanding is that the council were very much alive to the critical position in which many industries were placed a short time ago. Two major waste contractors decided to cease disposal operations on certain unauthorised dumps. This could have led to factory closures and to illicit dumping of industrial wastes around the country. By helping to solve the problem the county council are safeguarding both jobs and public health in their area. I must point out that there is no statutory obligation on local authorities to accept industrial waste for disposal, but it is difficult to see how the problem can be dealt with in a satisfactory and economical way without their assistance. Accordingly, I wish to commend Dublin County Council on their public-spirited approach and rapid response to a difficult situation.
In accepting industrial waste at Dunsink the council will be operating on a selective basis. No waste will be accepted without prior investigation and certification by the IIRS. It will still be open to the council to refuse any waste if they have any reservations. They are arranging to take their own samples and will have the necessary specialist staff and facilities to exercise proper control. Leachate from this site is already drained into the sewerage system and will, of course, be monitored. Underground water in the vicinity of the site is being monitored already and this will be continued to ensure that there is no deterioration.
I have not dealt in any detail with the special advantage of the site or the precautions being taken because I assume that the county council will provide this information to anybody concerned. There has been some complaint that they did not send a representative to the meeting of the West Finglas Tenants' Association, but I understand that the assistant county manager feels that he should place the matter before the west county committee of the county council before entering into any discussions. The committee's next meeting will be on 4 December 1980.
Does the Minister know if at any stage before this decision was finally taken the residents in the area were directly approached by the representatives of the county council?
I have no information on that.
In view of the experience we have had in Cork in relation to the Ovens dispute surely the Minister agrees that the first thing which should be required, since he referred to it as a Dublin regional site, is to elicit the possible reaction of the residents. Surely, in view of the question being down here, his brief should have that information.
I am aware that Dublin Corporation have arranged to meet a deputation from the West Finglas Residents Association.
A final supplementary. We have done only four questions in almost 15 minutes.
Does the Minister not think that, since the decision is in the functional area of Dublin County Council and that it will be made by them, a deputation of tenants going to see the landlord, Dublin Corporation, will hardly ease the problem since Dublin Corporation have no functional activity in this matter?
I have also said that I assume the county council will decide at the west county meeting about the matter. It is a decision for them if they will meet a deputation from the West Finglas tenants.
