Project
Foto: Andrés ÁngelStopping the spread of fracking in Latin America
“Fracking” is short for hydraulic fracturing, a process used to extract oil and natural gas from historically inaccessible reservoirs.
Fracking is already widespread in the global North, but in Latin America, it is just beginning. Governments are opening their doors to fracking without understanding its impacts and risks, and without consulting affected communities. Many communities are organizing to prevent or stop the impacts of fracking, which affect their fundamental human rights. But in many cases they require legal and technical support.
What exactly is fracking, and what are its impacts?
A straight hole is drilled deep into the earth. Then the drill curves and bores horizontally, making an L-shaped hole. Fracking fluid—a mixture of water, chemicals, and sand—is pumped into the hole at high pressure, fracturing layers of shale rock above and below the hole. Gas or oil trapped in the rock rises to the surface along with the fracking fluid.
The chemical soup—now also contaminated with heavy metals and even radioactive elements from underground—is frequently dumped into unlined ponds. It may seep into aquifers and overflow into streams, poisoning water sources for people, agriculture, and livestock. Gas may also seep from fractured rock or from the well into aquifers; as a result, water flowing from household taps can be lit on fire. Other documented harms include exhausted freshwater supplies (for all that fracking fluid), air pollution from drill and pump rigs, large methane emissions that aggravate global warming, earthquakes, and health harms including cancer and birth defects.
AIDA’s report on fracking (available in Spanish) analyzes the viability of applying the precautionary principle as an institutional tool to prevent, avoid or stop hydraulic fracturing operations in Latin America.
Partners:
Related projects
Legal Action Temporarily Protects Leatherback Sea Turtles in Costa Rica
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 30, 2005 CONTACTS: Rolando Castro, CEDARENA, (506) 283-7080, [email protected] Anna Cederstav, AIDA / Earthjustice (510) 550-6700, [email protected] LEGAL ACTION TEMPORARILY PROTECTS LEATHERBACK SEA TURTLES IN COSTA RICA SAN JOSE, Costa Rica — By admitting a suit filed by environmental organizations to protect the leatherback turtle, the Constitutional Chamber of the Costa Rica Supreme Court has granted an injunction against construction projects in the Leatherback Turtle Marine Park. The defendants -- the National Technical Environmental Secretariat (SETENA), the Municipality of Santa Cruz, the Ministry of Finance, and the Ministry of Environment and Energy, are charged with violating the constitutional right to a healthy environment. The suit, brought by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) and its Costa Rican participating organizations – the Environmental and Natural Resources Law Center (CEDARENA), and Justice for Nature (JPN) – seeks the effective protection of the park. Specifically, the suit aims to halt construction of beach houses and tourist developments within the national park area, and to prevent the government from authorizing potentially detrimental construction before the lands dedicated to the park have been protected. The leatherback turtles are ancient reptiles surviving from the age of the dinosaurs. The species is highly endangered; with Pacific populations threatened with extinction within a decade, and as such is protected under various international treaties and the Costa Rican legislation. The presence of humans and particularly lights from houses, disturb turtles coming ashore to lay eggs and prevent the hatchlings from finding their way to the sea, thus posing a severe threat to the reproduction and future viability of the leatherback turtle. The Costa Rican Congress created the Leatherback Turtle Marine Park in 1995, to protect critical habitat where the leatherback turtle is known to reproduce. The park includes the most important remaining nesting beaches on the Pacific Coast of the Americas -- The Carbon, Ventanas, Langosta, and Grande beaches. In fact, eighty percent of the leatherbacks that nested in the 2001-2002 seasons in Costa Rica did so in the Park. Other Costa Rican nesting beaches, such as Flamingo, and Tamarindo, have already been destroyed by the lack of coastal environmental planning. “The Leatherback Marine Park should be protected from poorly planned development,” said Anna Cederstav, AIDA Program Director. “Costa Rica has an important opportunity to protect this species, which is not only part of our global environmental heritage but also a valuable economic resource for the nation.” In a 2004 report, the Costa Rican General Attorney’s office urged the authorities to not permit construction in the Park, citing impacts on the leatherbacks. The recommendation has not been heeded. The NGOs assert that the government has failed to fulfill their obligations to protect the Park and endangered marine biodiversity. The Santa Cruz Municipality should defend local interests and guarantee environmental protection within its jurisdiction. SETENA must ensure that development does not damage fragile ecosystems and protected areas. The Ministry of Environment is responsible for expropriating and conserving the land within the national park limits, and the Ministry of Finance is supposed to dedicate the necessary funds. “The injunction against construction and further permitting sends a clear message to SETENA and the Municipality that in the case of National Parks, governments must act with caution and not approve projects that threaten the ultimate goal for which the parks were established,” said Rolando Castro, attorney with CEDARENA. “We trust that the Constitutional Court will decide in favor of the leatherback turtle, a species that the court has previously determined to be a shared and highly migratory resource. The Park has great potential for scientific and tourism purposes and is an important source of local income.” This case will prevent irreparable damage to the area designated as National Park while the expropriation proceeds, and will establish an important precedent in that there are many other parks, not only in Costa Rica but throughout the Americas, that face similar threats.
Read moreHealth Risks in La Oroya are Higher Than Expected: Lead and Lead Compounds Classified as Carcinogens (Spanish text)
PARA PUBLICACIÓN INMEDIATA: 8 de febrero de 2005 Contactos: Carlos Chirinos, SPDA, +51-4211394, [email protected] Eliana Ames, LABOR, +51-2616515, [email protected] Anna Cederstav, AIDA, +1-510-550-6748 (EEUU) RIESGO DE SALUD EN LA OROYA ES MAYOR DE LO PENSADO: PLOMO Y COMPUESTOS DE PLOMO CLASIFICADOS COMO CANCERÍGENOS. LIMA, PERÚ – El 31 de enero de 2005, el Departamento de Salud y Servicios Humanos de los Estados Unidos publicó el Informe Semestral sobre Cancerígenos, el cual incluye por primera vez el plomo y todos los compuestos con contenido de plomo como sustancias que probablemente causan cáncer en seres humanos. Este informe enlista las sustancias cancerígenas en dos categorías, aquellas “conocidas como cancerígenas para el hombre,”y aquellas “con probabilidad razonable de ser un cancerígeno para el hombre.”Debe resaltarse en este Informe la inclusión del plomo y de los compuestos del plomo en la categoría de “probabilidad razonable de ser un cancerígeno humano”. Esta nueva clasificación de plomo y todos los compuestos de plomo se ha basado en datos epidemiológicos de estudios en humanos y en evidencia sustancial de estudios en animales experimentales. Por ejemplo, se demostró que la exposición al plomo aumenta la presencia de tumores en los riñones, el cerebro, el sistema hematopoyético y los pulmones en ratas y/o ratones (IARC 1980, 1987). Todavía no se entienden completamente los mecanismos por los que el plomo causa cáncer, pero los estudios realizados en seres humanos que estuvieron expuestos por su ocupación al plomo, han sugerido que el plomo daña los cromosomas o el ADN, lo cual puede causar cáncer (ATSDR 1999, NTP 2003). El plomo es liberado en el ambiente predominantemente por procesos industriales. Dentro de estos procesos, las fundiciones de plomo por sí solas son actualmente la fuente principal de las emisiones de este metal pesado, contabilizando más del 78% de todas emisiones de plomo en 2001 en los Estados Unidos (EPA 2003). Además de incluir el plomo y sus compuestos en la clasificación de sustancias con “probabilidad razonable de ser un cancerígeno para el hombre”, en noviembre de 2004 la Agencia de Protección Ambiental (EPA) de los Estados Unidos anunció el inicio de un proceso de recopilación de información necesaria para revisar los estándares de calidad de aire respecto del plomo. El estándar actual de los Estados Unidos de 1.5 ug/m3 como promedio anual, el que sirvió de base a los estándares fijados para el Perú en 2003, no ha sido revisado en más de veinte años, por lo que no toma en cuenta la información científica más reciente y esta alejado de los estándares internacionales. De hecho, el estándar de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) es de 0.5 microgramos de plomo por metro cúbico en el aire, siendo hasta tres veces más estricto que el de los Estados Unidos. Estas ultimas dos acciones del gobierno de los Estados Unidos evidencian la rigurosidad necesaria con la que se viene asumiendo el tema del plomo, debido al alto riesgo que este conlleva para la salud humana. En contraste, en el caso peruano resulta particularmente preocupante la situación de ciudades como La Oroya y otras poblaciones ubicadas en áreas de influencia minero metalúrgicas en donde se producen concentrados de plomo, por las altas concentraciones de este contaminante, que claramente representan un riesgo para las personas. No hay duda entonces de la urgencia de implementar medidas eficientes para evitar el aumento del riesgo para la salud humana, incluso la posibilidad de sufrir cáncer, que enfrentan las personas que viven y trabajan en estos lugares.
Read moreU.S. Congress Conditions: Spraying in National Parks
Astrid Puentes, AIDA (510) 550-6753 [email protected] Gastón Chillier, WOLA (202) 797-2171 [email protected] US CONGRESS CONDITIONS ANTI-NARCOTICS SPRAYING IN COLOMBIAN NATIONAL PARKS OAKLAND, CA, DECEMBER 10, 2003 — For the first time, the US Congress has officially acknowledged that US funds for the “Plan Colombia” drug eradication program may be used to spray coca and poppy crops located in Colombian national parks and other natural protected areas. However, the Congress conditioned funding for such spraying on compliance with Colombian law and a determination by the Department of State that “there are no effective alternatives to reduce drug cultivation in these areas.” The decision is part of the 2004 appropriations bill for the Andean Counterdrug Initiative, a key element of the US “War on Drugs” in Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. The authors of the bill that will be voted in January of 2004, agreed that while there is concern that coca growers are moving into Colombia’s national parks, aerial fumigation in the parks and reserves should be used only as a last resort. Instead, Congress favors alternatives such as manual eradication, training and equipping the police to protect the parks, and relocating families that have moved into these areas. “The policy of using aerial spraying to eradicate illicit crops poses significant threats to human health and the environment,” says Astrid Puentes, Legal Director for AIDA. She adds that “The conditions imposed by the US Congress are a step in the right direction, though to truly protect the environment in Colombia we must ensure that the eradication forces begin complying with Colombian laws and stop trying to weaken them.” Each year, Congress has conditioned the State Department’s use of funds for the spraying program on actions intended to help protect human rights and the environment. As in previous years, the Congress required that in 2004 the State Department certify that: the use of these herbicides in Colombia does not pose unreasonable risks or adverse effects to humans or the environment; the eradication program complies with the Colombian Environmental Management Plan; and the governments investigate and fairly compensate meritorious complaints about health harms and the destruction of legal crops. For the first time, however, the Congress also referred to and conditioned the spraying of national parks and reserves. In 2001, Colombia’s environmental authorities specifically excluded national parks and natural reserves from the regions that are subject to aerial herbicide spraying. Instead, they ordered that manual or mechanical means be used to destroy coca and poppy crops in these areas. The authorities also prohibited the spraying of significant buffer areas surrounding the parks to avoid harms from spray drift or accidental spraying. These special protections are in line with the Colombian Constitution and environmental laws that establish special protections for these environmentally sensitive areas. Therefore, spraying in natural parks and natural reserves in Colombia is clearly illegal. Nevertheless, the Colombian National Anti-narcotics Agency that collaborates closely with the US Department of State has sprayed in Colombia’s national parks. Moreover, in June 2003, the Colombian National Council on Narcotics attempted to legalize such spraying. This action is being contested in Colombian courts for violating the Constitution and other laws. According to Anna Cederstav, a scientist with AIDA, “A policy that creates no viable economic alternatives for farmers simply perpetuates the cycle of farmers cutting forests to plant coca and the government spraying herbicides to destroy the fields. The US and Colombian governments should make a good-faith effort and give manual eradication and alternative development projects a chance to work, instead of relying on massive aerial spraying and military campaigns to destroy the crops.” She adds that “As the US Congress has now recognized for the National Parks, spraying should be the last recourse, but unfortunately it is the only one that has been systematically implemented until now.” The extensive spraying of potent herbicides could have devastating environmental impacts in the National Parks of Colombia, one of the most biodiverse nations on the planet. Important regions of the Amazon basin, the Tropical Andes, and the Chocó coastal rainforest are all located in Colombia. These vital ecosystems are being destroyed not only by illicit drug cultivation, but now also by the eradication program.
Read more