Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
ated themselves into our lives and into the global economy. Furthermore, dioxins and fur-
ans as unintentional by-products from combustion presented major abatement challenges,
especially in relation to the destruction of obsolete organic chemicals, such as other pesti-
cidesorplastics. TwopeoplefromtheUnitedKingdomplayedimportant rolesatthisstage.
First, John Murlis succeeded in interesting his UK government colleagues in internation-
al controls on POPs. His support was crucial during some particularly difficult moments
in Geneva. When John left for academia, John Rae began to appear at our meetings and
tookonthedifficultroleofdevelopingalogicpaththatwouldunambiguouslyidentifysub-
stances to be controlled by a new protocol at that time and in the future. The logic path he
developed became the foundation of the process for adding new substances not only for the
CLRTAP protocol but also for the later global Stockholm Convention we will soon be ex-
amining.ItwaswhileJohnRaewasdevelopingthisworkthatIfirstbegantoreceivephone
calls from various libertarian lobby groups in the United States. I had never encountered
these organisations before, but I found it very intimidating. The callers were always ex-
tremely polite and they told me they were lawyers interested in the proposals to control
variouschemicals andthattheywererecordingourconversations. Theirinterest waxedand
waned several times during the CLRTAP negotiations and later when the protocol became
operational. I suspected that the questions were related to the evaluation of hazard and risk
in environmental legislation in the United States, but not being aware of that legislation in
any detail, I felt very vulnerable.
By the time we had finished the CLRTAP report in 1994, we felt we had a robust and
practical case for international action on POPs. But what about heavy metals?
Up until now, I have said little about heavy metals and of the work of the CLRTAP
taskforceonthesesubstances.ThisispartlybecauseIwasmuchlessinvolvedinthemetals
work (than with POPs), partly because (with the exception of mercury) metals were nev-
er such a major human circumpolar health issue in the Arctic in comparison to POPs and
partly because the most severe effects of metals in the Arctic were close to local sources of
pollution (again with the exception of mercury). It quickly became evident from the NCP
and AMAP that we needed to pay close attention to three metals: lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd)
Search WWH ::




Custom Search