PreviousContentsNext

Presentations by agency representatives on pesticide disposal activities

USAID

By J.K. Jensen, Office of Pesticide Programs, USEPA

   The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has been involved in disposal operations in Pakistan and the Niger and has made reconnaissance visits (feasibility studies that provided site-specific, practical disposal recommendations) to Guinea-Bissau and El Salvador.

Pakistan

   In 1987, USAID sponsored a technical evaluation team to travel to Pakistan to study how the unwanted, overaged pesticides stored throughout the country should be handled. The team visited 28 storage sites in the Punjab and greater Karachi area and estimated that they contained a total of 5 000 tonnes of pesticide products and 3 000 tonnes of contaminated materials that required disposal. The team recommended consolidation of stocks and disposal using one of three technologies: a lined landfill, estimated to cost US$8.3-8.4 million; a transportable incinerator, estimated to cost US$17.5-17.6 million; and a cement kiln (no cost estimated).
   Most of the pesticides for disposal were acquired in the 1970s by the Government of Pakistan in support of its programme for free or subsidized distribution. The anticipated demands never materialized and great quantities accumulated in storage. In 1980, the government's new agriculture policy started to withdraw subsidies for pesticides and to shift pesticide procurement to the private sector, resulting in improved acquisition of pesticides over the long term. The shift to the private sector, however, combined with the government's policy of not allowing the use of pesticides shelved for more than two years, significantly contributed to the huge stocks of overage pesticides that require disposal.
   Because of the inherent long-term monitoring problems with lined landfills and the limited portability and potentially harmful emissions of transportable incinerators, the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance of USAID decided to sponsor a pilot project in a rotary cement kiln, with the intention of demonstrating this technology for use in developing countries.
   The objectives of the demonstration were to show that: a cement kiln destroys pesticides efficiently and completely; the cement product is in no way affected by the process; and stack gas emissions are within the range of established standards. One of Pakistan's most modern cement factories, located at Dera Ghazi Khan, the Punjab, was the site of the USAID-sponsored pilot pesticide disposal project. With the agreement of the Environmental Protection Agency of the Punjab and the Ministries of Agriculture, Production and Finance, 13 776 l of organophosphate and 2 940 l of organochlorine pesticides as well as 200 l of an amide were collected from seven storage sites in November 1989. The pesticides were burned during the normal process of cement making in December 1989.
   Project planning involved an environmental assessment and logistics plan. Collection and transport were preceded by safety training of workers and the pesticides were injected into the burning zone as a "cocktail"; the organophosphates at a rate of up to 3 l a minute and the organochlorines at a rate of 1.3-2 l a minute. The burn itself was uneventful and was accomplished over the course of five days. The costs were not calculated, as this was solely a pilot burn.
   A total of 16 916 l of pesticides were collected over a three-day period from seven stores in the Punjab and transported to a cement kiln where they were burned intermittently over the course of five days. Analysis showed that emissions of pollutants regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency of the Punjab did not exceed agency standards. Destruction removal efficiency results were very close to incinerator standards in the United States. Analysis of process samples (dust and clinker) was excellent and the cement product was free of detectable contaminants.
   The following recommendations are made for future test burns:

The Niger

   In 1988, the USAID office in the Niger was approached by the Worldwide Fund for Nature with a report of leaking dieldrin barrels at a site near the Tamgak nature reserve in the northern Niger. The report concerned old stocks of pesticide for locust control. In 1989-90, USAID, in collaboration with the Government of the Niger, safely centralized known dieldrin stocks at two locations in the Niger and the Royal Dutch Shell Companies (Shell) then suggested that dieldrin be removed from the Niger and destroyed at a commercial incineration facility. This resulted in the Niger Dieldrin Disposal Programme which was a joint effort of USAID, the Government of the Niger, Shell and GTZ. The programme, which took place over a 15-month period in 1990-9 litres, collected, removed and safely destroyed 56 000 litres of dieldrin held in the Niger.
   The operation consisted of three phases: the collection of information and a field assessment visit conducted and financed jointly by Shell and USAID; the development of the preparation of the actual disposal plan, an environmental assessment and procurement of delivery contracts for the collection/shipping tanks (isotanks) and support equipment; and the actual collection and consolidation operation that began in mid-May 1991.
   The 56 000 litres of dieldrin left Agadez for Lomè, Togo on 6 June 1991. Political problems in Togo prevented the direct routing of the convoy, made up of four isotanks, one freight container and four support vehicles, to Togo but, in spite of this, the dieldrin did arrive at the port in Lomèvia Benin on 18 June and was loaded on to a ship bound for Europe on 26 June 1991. Incineration of the dieldrin was completed in the Netherlands by the middle of August 1991. There were no significant technical problems in the collection and movement of unwanted pesticides from extremely isolated locations, such as northern Niger, to Europe for incineration.
   The full cost of the Niger programme was approximately US$9.41 per litre of dieldrin destroyed. At least 30 percent of this amount was associated with the first-time development of a disposal programme and an additional 15 percent represented the cost of transporting the tanks and supplies from the coast in Lomè, Togo, to Agadez, the Niger, and back (approximately 4 200 km round trip).
   The following lessons were learnt for future disposal operations:

Guinea-Bissau

   In June 1990, the Government of Guinea-Bissau requested technical assistance from USAID on the importation, storage and handling of pesticides and on a feasibility study of disposal options for unwanted pesticides and their containers. Most, if not all, of the pesticides in Guinea-Bissau were donated by multilateral and bilateral organizations and the European Community. Generally, these pesticides had been stockpiled in the country for many years under poor storage conditions and the government was uncertain of the integrity of the products and their containers. There was no in-country capacity for analysis of pesticide formulations and there were no private-sector activities involving the manufacture, formulation or distribution of agricultural pesticides in Guinea-Bissau.
   USAID made an inventory of obsolete pesticides in Guinea-Bissau. In total there were just over 9 tonnes, of which 6 400 litres14. were carbaryl donated in 1988 for the locust campaign in West Africa. The carbaryl (called Sevin 4-Oil) was formulated for aerial application but, because the locust outbreak was more serious in other West African countries, the spray plane and agitating pump destined for Guinea-Bissau never arrived and the carbaryl was not used. The carbaryl drums were stored in a secure warehouse and were in good condition. The active ingredient of the formulation, however, had settled and the government was unable to get the carbaryl back into suspension. This eliminated the possibility of using the product for other locust control uses, such as to coat grains, make baits or use in ground equipment.
   USAID recommended returning the stocks of carbaryl to the manufacturer in the United States, who would be able to reformulate the product if it was received before the expiry of its shelf-life. The manufacturer had agreed to pay all costs, including transportation, but, in spite of this no-cost option, the government was hesitant to follow through with the return-to-sender option because of the value of the drums. The economic reality is that a new 200-litre steel drum costs from 100 000 to 200 000 pesos (US$50 to $100) in the local market in Bissau. Considering that a semi-skilled worker, such as a government driver, earns about 36 000 pesos a month (US$18), the carbaryl drums are extremely valuable. No feedback has been received as to whether, in the end, the carbaryl was shipped out or not.
   For the relatively small quantities of pesticides other than carbaryl, USAID recommended potentially safe alternative uses and provided sources of additional information in this respect. Many of the pesticides could be used to control pests where the exact dosage rate is not critical. For example, dichlorvos could be sprayed on the inside of walls and ceilings of mud grain storage bins to limit pest infestation, phoxim is registered for controlling stored product pests in granaries and for armyworm control and dicofol can be used against the cassava green spider mite, which was identified in 1990 as a major pest problem in Guinea-Bissau.

El Salvador

   In 1993, the Government of El Salvador identified significant quantities of unwanted pesticides, most of which were in deteriorating containers, at various locations around the country. They were concerned about the risks posed by these unwanted pesticides and uncertain how to assess the risks and develop appropriate mitigation options given the limited resources available in El Salvador. Assistance from USAID was requested to conduct a feasibility study of disposal options.
   The causes of pesticide disposal problems in El Salvador can be linked to overstocking, poor inventory control, questionable results from formulation analysis, lost drum labels and failing containers. Other causes of problems with pesticide disposal are the wastes remaining after a pesticide formulating plant has closed, poor-quality products, poor storage conditions, excessive storage periods, lower than expected pest incidence and the banning of product use. There was no evidence that the disposal problems in El Salvador were caused by pesticide donations.
   The aims of the pesticide disposal feasibility study were to: assess the risks from unwanted pesticide stocks; develop practical, cost-effective management options; provide technical guidance on these options; provide practical facility clean-up guidance; and train government officials in assessment techniques.
   The team conducting the feasibility study was composed of representatives from USAID, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the Government of El Salvador and GTZ. The team visited eight storage/disposal sites located across the country.
   At two sites, 24 800 litres of malathion were stored in containers in good condition. The malathion was purchased in 1989 for locust control and the government was concerned about the condition of the formulation. Subsequent analysis by GTZ verified that the formulation was still good. Conditions at another site appeared worse than they really were because the site was cluttered with empty containers. At three sites, pesticides had been buried.
   The total amount of pesticides identified for disposal was 15 tonnes, comprising: 2 400 litres of methylethyl parathion; 800 litres of methyl parathion; 11 600 litres of liquids with no label; and 200 litres of heptachlor.
   Various disposal options were reviewed and site-specific recommendations for pesticide disposal and storage clean-up were presented to the government for implementation.
   Although there are storage sites in El Salvador where pesticides require disposal, the overall quantity of pesticides identified for disposal and the risks they pose are less than in some developing countries. Under the leadership of trained government personnel using the proposed options, the clean-up of many contaminated sites and the management of unwanted stocks is technically feasible if funding is forthcoming.
   The following are the lessons learnt from this activity:

GTZ

G. Vaagt, Project Leader

   GTZ is operating a pesticide disposal project. Its objective is the development of concepts and proposals for the disposal of obsolete pesticides and their containers in an environmentally acceptable manner.

Major project activities

   The main activities of the project are:

Project design

   The project is a supraregional pilot project with a time frame of 1991 to 1996.
   Expertise and funds for test runs, demonstration and training exercises will be contributed.

Key issues

   The main issues of the project are the promotion of preventive measures, safeguarding activities and the view of pesticide disposal as an element of pesticide management.

Completed operations

   The following pesticide disposal operations have been completed:

   Studies, assessments and proposals have been completed for:

Ongoing activities

   The following activities are ongoing:

General remarks and conclusions

   The following conclusions can be drawn:

   These orientation procedures should be followed:

   A video entitled Pesticide disposal Madagascar was produced by the project.

FAO

H.P. van der Wulp, Consultant

Background

   Background information was provided on the FAO operation in 1993 to dispose of 50 000 litres of dieldrin that was owned by the tsetse control department of Uganda and that could not be used after its use was banned. Slides, a fact sheet, a description of the operation and the lessons learnt were presented.
   The operation was subcontracted to a United Kingdom-based company with a dedicated hazardous waste incinerator. The total cost was US$196 000, which included costs of a preparatory visit and monitoring of the operations by an independent consultant appointed by FAO.
   The total input of international technical experts was three person months, including staff provided under the subcontract with the company (preparations required two persons in Uganda for 10 days and one person at FAO Headquarters for one week; field operations required two persons in Kampala for one week, four persons in the field for one week and one person at FAO Headquarters for one week). Overhead and administrative support at FAO Headquarters are not included in this figure.
   In summary, the scenario for the operation included the following steps:

Preparatory visit

   It took ten days for an FAO consultant and a representative of the contracted company to:

Relevant follow-up activities

   Follow-up activities involved:

Field operations

   Further preparation in Kampala took five days to ensure:

   Travel to Fort Portal (centre of the contracting company) took one day, repacking and on-site clean-up activities five days and transport back to Kampala two days. It was noted that disposal costs are likely to be higher for countries that have a variety of products spread over a number of sites.
   Furthermore, it was indicated that FAO is investigating possibilities for disposal operations in Yemen, Zambia, the Gambia, Senegal and Mauritania under various collaborative arrangements. In Zambia about 60 to 80 tonnes of obsolete and deteriorated pesticides are kept by the Zambian Cooperative Federation (ZCF). These are stored outside, are unsecured, are causing serious contamination and pose a threat to the Lusaka city water supply. The problem has been recognized by government and needs to be addressed urgently. Senegal and Mauritania have an estimated total of 250 000 litres of dieldrin, which is stored in the open in deteriorated drums, some of which are already leaking (see Annex 2 for a summary of disposal operations undertaken).

PreviousContentsNext