Contesting the use of methyl bromide

Mount Maunganui log stacks are still being fumigated using methyl bromide. Photo: Supplied.

A new action group formed to contest the ongoing use of methyl bromide as a fumigant at the Port of Tauranga, is looking at taking legal action against the Bay of Plenty Regional Council.

Environmentalists concerned about the use of methyl bromide gas at the Port of Tauranga marked International Ozone Day with the incorporation last week of the Tauranga Moana Fumigation Action Group.

Methyl bromide is used at the Port of Tauranga mainly to fumigate logs on the Mount Maunganui side.

According to Environment Court documents, the gas is corrosive to nasal passages and the lungs. It is also a neuro-toxin and enters the body through the skin, into the blood stream and into the brain.

It has both acute (fatal) effects from inhalation and also long-term neuro-toxicological effects, including cancers and other neurological issues, state Environment Court documents.

Because it is virtually undetectable by humans, specialist equipment is required to know it is present, and the concentration.

TMFAG treasurer Anna Woolfrey says the membership decided to incorporate because of concerns the Bay of Plenty Regional Council has unilaterally made changes to the Genera methyl bromide Resource Consent.

As an interested party they weren't consulted or advised, when Genera is the company that uses the fumigant on the export log cargoes at the port, says Anna.

'We weren't notified about it. We have lawyers in the group and they are looking at legal action.

'It was about monitoring. They were at that time engaged with us as an interested party, and that kind of spoiled the relationship.”

If the regional council was considering changes to Genera's methyl bromide use Resource Consent, she says it would have called all interested parties so that everyone could have a proper look at it.

Methyl Bromide use at the Port of Tauranga log stacks has come under increasing scrutiny since a second potential operator's application for resource consent was declined on appeal by the Environment Court in February.

Envirofume's application was declined in part because adding another operator was not leading to reduced methyl bromide emissions, which are according to the Montreal Protocol supposed to be eliminated by 2020.

'In the end we consider that there is a fundamental issue in granting a further application to undertake an activity which is currently due to end in 2020 where we have no confidence that the technology utilised will recapture all of the relevant emissions by October 2020. Further, we are not satisfied that the activity can be properly monitored and avoid cumulative effects,” says Judge Smith's decision.

'In our view, the advance towards reduction of emissions has seen little progress since the 1990s, and the Court is surprised to see that there is approximately ten times as much methyl bromide being applied in Tauranga as there was in the 1990s.”

The decision was also critical of current monitoring, saying the existing Genera consent has been exceeded on many occasions, and on some occasions quite seriously.

With a port boundary limit of one part per million, measurements of up to 63ppm have been recorded on instantaneous measurement at the port boundary, and the machine has even recorded instantaneous measurements as high as 221 ppm for reasons that were not explained.

The judge also mentioned an assertion by BOP Regional Council staff that the council had the power to review the conditions of consent, and might do so on a non-notified basis. And that staff had delegated authority to make that decision.

Judge Smith commented that the regional council's significant shareholding in the Port of Tauranga, must raise concerns for transparency and independent monitoring.

The Port of Tauranga used over 200 tonnes of methyl bromide in 2014 and some 176 tonnes in 2015.

New Zealand is the highest industrial user of methyl bromide on a worldwide scale, and has contributed 7.7 per cent of the global human produced emissions of methyl bromide, according to the court documents.

Bay of Plenty Regional Council manager of regulatory services Eddie Grogan says the council identified a three-tier action plan in March this year which includes increased on-site monitoring during fumigations, and a commitment to use independent commissioners for any changes in consents.

In June this year Councillors voted to invest an extra $500k per year in monitoring of air contaminants including methyl bromide, in the Mount Maunganui industrial area.

Much has changed since the environment decision was made in March 2016, says Eddie.

He says the regional council is very careful in terms of keeping its consent authority and compliance obligations separate from the shareholding in the Port of Tauranga via its council controlled organisation Quayside Holdings Limited.

As an example, an application by Genera to change the resource consent was processed independently because of the perception there could be a conflict of interest.

5 comments

Rubbish

Posted on 27-09-2017 11:42 | By peecee09

Of course there is a conflict of interest, to think otherwise is ridiculous. The Regional Council owns over 50% of the Port. It is a major cash cow for the Council and it is a pity that they continue to invest in cash generating assets instead of using it for the environmental benefit of the region. Last year they earned over 40 million dollars from their share of the Port! It is critical that they deal with the use of this poisonous gas now, not later.


Yip

Posted on 27-09-2017 12:02 | By overit

Sounds ugly and needs addressing. Toxic and dangerous.


??? THink

Posted on 27-09-2017 14:13 | By kiwi_brat2003

Its seems people who have environment ideas too look at in the port should really find out where the gas is used in other areas............ Note in glasshouses .... all your highly produced strawberry farms.... why do you think the use the plastic for ???


Log Fumigation

Posted on 27-09-2017 16:07 | By peter pan

I worked in the Port for 20 years all around fumigated logs and don't anyone who has been harmed by the affects of the fumigation,also the money the Regional Council receive helps with loads of projects in the region which would not be possible without the port dividends.


Tanalith

Posted on 28-09-2017 20:18 | By Papamoaner

I would be more inclined to put H3, H4, and H5 treated timber higher up in the risk stakes. I'm not trying to say Bromide isn't toxic, but I AM pointing out that arsenic, a common timber treatment component, is an ACCUMULATIVE toxin. ie; once it enters your body, it's there forever, so the dose you got today is added to the dose you got yesterday or last year, or 5 years ago etc. Tanalised timber is all around us, in the home, the garden, on building sites, airborne sawdust etc.


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.