It has all the hallmarks of a classic Western —
farmers in cowboy boots fighting against a big gold mine, led by a
gruff-talking Australian boss, in the dusty heartland of Thailand.
But the
struggle over the Chatree mine and its impacts on local health really comes
down to a lack of clarity in Thailand over what levels of naturally occurring
toxic substances are considered safe.
Australian
company Kingsgate Consolidated owns 48 per cent of the mine.
Chairman
Ross Smyth-Kirk said he was frustrated the debate over alleged contamination
could hamper the company's efforts to extend their mining license, which
expires next month.
"Not
only has nobody died, nobody has even been sick or shown any symptoms of
anything and yet we still go on with this giant farce," Mr Smyth-Kirk
said.
"If
the stupidity of these people [protesting] was to come to light, it would have
amazing economic ramifications for this area."
A recent
visit by four government ministers to the site drew about 3,500 supporters and
at a separate event, about 500 protesters turned out.
Opponents
said the mine had poisoned local residents, crops and livestock.
"We're
not against development but we can't trade development for people's lives, for
sickness and suffering," campaigner Suekanya Sintornthammathat — the last
resident left in Ban Khao Mor, the village closest to the mine's boundary, said.
One
protester at the ministers' meeting held a placard saying "Get Out
Australia Capitalists", while a small girl clutched a handwritten sign
showing her levels of arsenic, manganese and cyanide.
The
levels of heavy metals have been used by both sides to push their very
different agendas.
Gold at what cost?
The
Chatree mine is located 280 kilometres north of Bangkok and is the country's
only major gold mine, employing 1,000 Thai staff.
It is a
low-grade, open-cut operation, meaning its operators blast rock from a huge
mine pit and use cyanide to extract the fine gold particles from the rubble.
The
company's use of cyanide is considered world standard and tests have shown no
problems with the level of cyanide in the bodies of staff or locals.
What has been
more contentious is the manganese and arsenic — both substances that can cause
serious health problems such as Parkinson's disease and various cancers.
Manganese
and arsenic occur naturally in the soil around the mine.
The
allegation from opponents is that the mine's blasting and transportation of
rocks is increasing the amount of these toxins in the dust and water.
Battle of the blood tests over poisoning claims
A study
overseen by Thailand's Ministry of Public Health last year tested 1,004 people
living near the mine and found 41 per cent had manganese levels '"above
the standard".
About 20
per cent had levels of arsenic "above the standard".
The
problem is there has been no clear "standard" for safe levels of
exposure for these substances in Thailand.
The
Public Health Ministry study used the range of 4-15 micro-grams (ug) of
manganese per litre of blood and 0-50 ug of arsenic per litre of urine, as
benchmarks for what is normal.
By
comparison, Safe Work Australia is more generous, saying arsenic levels below
100 ug/L are considered normal, with readings above 150 considered
"excessive exposure".
Akara
Resources and its major shareholder Kingsgate has not denied the existence of
elevated levels of manganese and arsenic, but said the exposure was normal and
could not necessarily be linked to the mine.
"The
slightly elevated levels of arsenic and other things are only slightly [up],
none of them are earth-shattering, none of them are a problem," Mr
Smyth-Kirk said.
The mine
has also done its own health tests on staff and the community up to 50
kilometres away.
The most
recent results show about 14 per cent of local residents had arsenic levels about
50 ug/L.
More
concerning are the results that show 70-80 per cent of those tested had
manganese levels above 10 ug/L — the level considered by Akara Resources to be
"normal".
Company
management told the ABC anyone with high readings was invited for further
medical checks at the company's expense.
Last year
Thailand's Ministry of Industry asked for a major review of community impacts,
which was done by the international mining industry consultants Behre Dolbear
and paid for by the mine.
It found
"low arsenic/manganese impact" and overall "no negative
impact" to community health.
Arsenic impacts not well understood
In terms
of arsenic two complicating factors have been raised.
One is
that some foods — particularly seafood and rice — are high in arsenic and can
cause short-lived spikes in test results.
The other
is that arsenic comes in two forms — organic arsenic is found naturally in food
and is considered not very toxic, but inorganic arsenic is what is in the soil
and is thought to be much more dangerous.
A test to
isolate which sort of arsenic is in the urine test is more expensive (about $80
a sample) and is not being conducted by either side.
This
means it is difficult to tell how much arsenic is coming from the local diet
and how much might be coming from the mine.
The issue
is complicated and not well understood in the community.
One
former subcontractor at the mine complained of extreme lethargy and showed the
ABC bruises on his torso that he said was evidence of arsenic poisoning.
He could
not remember the name of the doctor in Bangkok who told him he had arsenic
poisoning.
The man
referred the ABC to another doctor occasionally employed by the mine to collect
specimens, but she said the bruising was an unrelated skin problem and his
lethargy was cause by thyroid issues.
Campaigners
claim up to 500 people have become sick and dozens have died, but did not
provide evidence linking ill health to the mine.
Mining could continue for another two decades
The
claims come as the mine's future hangs in the balance.
On May
13, the company's metallurgical license expires and operations could be
stopped.
Thailand's
military government is under considerable pressure in Bangkok over its plans to
limit democratic systems and wants to be seen to care about the concerns of its
citizens in the countryside.
"We
came to listen to everyone," Thailand's Public Health Minister Piyasakol
Sakolsatayadorn said as he fronted protesters.
"You
complain that it's taking a long time but this decision must happen in one or
two months from now, I guarantee it."
Mr
Smyth-Kirk has tired to shrug off the impending decision.
"It's
critical but it shouldn't be a major problem," he said.
Mr
Smyth-Kirk said the mine had about seven years of production life left, but
that the approval of other exploration permits could see operations continue
for two decades.
Many
local residents the ABC spoke to supported the mine for the economic
opportunities it has brought.
"Since
the beginning, when they started clearing the jungle, my three sons have been
working with them," resident Khampan Lue-aye said.
"There
are no health problems, it's all normal — when people are sick, the mine helps
them."
But
farmers opposing the mine are digging in their heels — backed by some academics
and non-government groups in Bangkok — so it's likely the controversy will continue
over the community impacts of gold mining in Thailand.
No comments:
Post a Comment