| Title | Conflict Minerals Rebels and Child Soldiers in Congo | |
| Director(s) | Suroosh Alvi | |
| Date released (year) | 2011 | |
| Production company | Vice | |
| Length | 38mins | |
| Location | Congo | |
| Keywords/tags | Minerals, mining, civil war, violence | |
| Link to film | http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYqrflGpTRE |
|
| Synopsis | The Democratic Republic of Congo is one of the poorest countries in the world and thanks to an insanely complicated mix of politics, armed conflict, and corruption… it’s also one of the most under-reported. It also happens to be home to a nondescript black rock known as Coltan… a vital ingredient in the production of nearly every cell phone and computer on the planet. Without Coltan, our technology-driven lives would come to a screeching halt, and Congo has 80% of the world’s supply. Since the mid nineteen-nineties, armed groups have used these minerals to fund a series of fantastically complicated and horrifically violent wars.
Vice founder Suroosh Alvi travels to the Democratic Republic of Congo and makes one of the most grueling treks of his life to see first-hand where this so-called “conflict mineral” comes from and to meet some of the rebels involved in the seemingly never-ending conflict in Eastern Congo. Source: http://www.vice.com/en_za/vice-news/the-vice-guide-to-congo-1?Article_page=8 |
|
| Reviews/discussion | From the BBC: The Human Cost of Coltan Mining
It was midnight when Elise and her husband were woken by armed men in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Soldiers of DR Congo’s National Army burst into their shack, sent the husband into another room, and then raped the mother of five at gunpoint. “They put their guns on my chest and said: ‘Don’t talk, don’t cry, don’t complain’… then they started to rape me,” she said. The perpetrators were not the feared militia of the FDLR, who are currently the focus of a major military operation in South Kivu. They were from the FARDC – the National Army that now controls this area in eastern DR Congo. It is an area carpeted with minerals such as coltan and cassiterite, which are used in the production of consumer durables and gadgets sold in the rich world. But people are now beginning to ask: what is the human cost of a mobile phone? Scarred for life In Shabunda territory, where Elise was attacked, there have been 112 rapes reported since April, when the military operation started. These official figures are almost certainly just the tip of the iceberg, because most sexual crimes go unreported here. Since 2006 there have been 2,883 recorded rapes in the Shabunda territory. Many of the women have not only been sexually violated but physically scarred for life. And Shabunda is just one territory out of eight in the province of South Kivu – a tiny pin-prick in this vast country. “Sexual attacks peak when there’s fighting,” said Shabunda-based human rights activist Papy Bwalinga Kashama. “The reason the military and militia are fighting is to control the mines,” he said. Civilians get caught in the middle. Control the men with guns who guard and earn tax from the mines, he argued, and you reduce the terrible violations endured by women. It may sound simplistic, but he has a point. Predatory militias In the mining area of Nyabembe, rusting pieces of mining machinery poke out from a thick layer of grass. They reflect a time in the mid-1970s, when commercial mining was carried out in this area – a two-and-a-half hour motorbike ride from the town of Lulingu. Five years of civil war, followed by protracted skirmishes with the militia, saw those operations move out and freelance miners move in. These men are now exposed to predatory militias and also the military who demand a cut from what they dig. When they are not exacting local taxes, the gunmen move into the village and terrify the local population – stealing, killing and raping. “They take what they want, even our women, and there is nothing we can do about it,” sighed Simon, a young teacher who has swapped his school books for a shovel, because it is the only way to make a living. Blood on their hands? Global electronics and metals giants now face uncomfortable questions: Are they inadvertently fuelling the conflict in eastern DR Congo? Are they buttressing a market by sourcing supplies from militarised zones (a practice that is not illegal but ethically questionable)? “There is nowhere and no-one we won’t buy from,” said Masumbuko Moari, who represents middlemen who supply to the big exporters. He laughed when I suggested they might have blood on their hands as a result of buying from the men with guns. “That’s a political issue,” he said, and our conversation ended. With mining being the only game in town, radical change is bound to be resisted. And that is the argument that international purchasers of minerals use, to justify their trade: so many jobs depend on it. ‘Abnormal situation’ During a recent visit to South Kivu, DR Congo’s Prime Minister Adolphe Muzito admitted to the BBC that there was a genuine problem about militarised mining. “We want people and companies to be able to work in good conditions,” he said. “Once the environment improves, the army won’t be in a position to exploit the mines. “It’s an abnormal situation at the moment because the government doesn’t have full control.” The Congolese government faces international pressure to address military exploitation of DR Congo’s mines. It claims to control 80% of the mines but if you are prepared to ride by motorbike for a few hours, or trek through the forests on foot, it is not hard to find mines in the hands of men with guns. Under the wire During US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s recent visit to the country, grand statements were made to get the military out of the mines, but change requires clear political will. “We have to destroy the commercial circus of the mines, by reasserting the control of the state,” said Mabolia Yenga, a mines trouble-shooter who advises DR Congo’s ministry of mines. Commercialising the mining sector is not a magic bullet, but it might be a start if the big operators are closely watched. Mr Yenga believes that for minerals like coltan and cassiterite, a process of certification to ensure the mining does not fund violence – such as with the Kimberley process for diamonds – is long overdue. But such a process would require input from DR Congo’s neighbours, which act as transit points for illicit exports. Neighbours such as Burundi, Rwanda and Uganda have long been accused of benefiting from DR Congo’s mines, operating “under the wire” and gaining from the country’s instability. The Congolese government wants to invite mining companies back in and use the tax revenues from mining to rebuild this shattered country. It is a hard message to sell to a population which has seen virtually no infrastructural growth from its mineral riches – simply war. But it may be a small step to making mining more transparent in DR Congo. It may also help to ensure that some of the 1.8bn mobile phones in the world are a little “cleaner”. Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8234583.stm An excellent book on this topic: Michael Nest, 2011, Coltan. Wiley Press. http://www.polity.co.uk/book.asp?ref=9780745649313 Description A decade ago no one except geologists had heard of tantalum or ‘coltan’ – an obscure mineral that is an essential ingredient in mobile phones and laptops. Then, in 2000, reports began to leak out of Congo: of mines deep in the jungle where coltan was extracted in brutal conditions watched over by warlords. The United Nations sent a team to investigate, and its exposé of the relationship between violence and the exploitation of coltan and other natural resources contributed to a re-examination of scholarship on the motivations and strategies of armed groups. The politics of coltan encompass rebel militias, transnational corporations, determined activists, Hollywood celebrities, the rise of China, and the latest iGadget. Drawing on Congolese and activist voices, Nest analyses the two issues that define coltan politics: the relationship between coltan and violence in the Congo, and contestation between activists and corporations to reshape the global tantalum supply chain. The way production and trade of coltan is organised creates opportunities for armed groups, but the Congo wars are not solely, or even primarily, about coltan or minerals generally. Nest argues the political significance of coltan lies not in its causal link to violence, but in activists’ skillful use of mobile phones as a symbol of how ordinary people and transnational corporations far from Africa are implicated in Congo’s coltan industry and therefore its conflict. Nest examines the challenges coltan initiatives face in an activist ‘marketplace’ crowded with competing justice issues, and identifies lessons from coltan initiatives for the geopolitics of global resources more generally. |
|
| Links to other resources | Dena Montague (2002) Stolen Goods: Coltan and Conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo. SAIS Review 22.1 (2002) 103-118 [Access article in PDF] Click here to help: http://www.raisehopeforcongo.org/Watch more VICE documentaries here: http://bit.ly/VICE-Presents See Blood Coltan:https://ejoltdocumentaries.wordpress.com/2012/11/16/blood-coltan/ |
Tag Archives: natural resources
Africa: States of independence – the scramble for Africa
| Title | Africa: States of independence – the scramble for Africa | |
| Director(s) | ||
| Date released (year) | 2010
|
|
| Production company | AlJazeeraEnglish | |
| Length | 45mins | |
| Location | Africa | |
| Keywords/tags | Africa | |
| Link to film | http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/2010/08/2010831112927318164.html | |
| Synopsis | Seventeen African nations gained their independence in 1960, but the dreams of the independence era were short-lived.
This film tells the story of some of those countries – stories of mass exploitation, of the ecstasy of independence and of how – with liberation – a new, covert scramble for resources was born. |
|
| Reviews/discussion | Whether in bustling cities or remote villages, the 1880s and 1890s were years of terrifying upheaval for Africans. Fleet upon fleet of foreign soldiers armed with new weaponry – and a sense of entitlement – descended, seemingly overnight.
In the space of just 20 years, 90 per cent of Africa was brought under European occupation. Europe had captured a continent. Europe was in the throes of the Industrial Revolution. The advent of the machine was transforming the cities there into the workshop of the world – a workshop in need of raw materials. It was the dawn of industrial-scale production, modern capitalist economies and mass international trade. And in this new industrial era the value of Africa rocketed – not only for its materials and as a strategic trade route, but also as a market for the goods Europe now produced in bulk. But the scramble for Africa was not just about economics. Colonialism had become the fast-track to political supremacy in Europe. Rival European powers convened in the German capital and in February 1885 signed the Act of Berlin – an agreement to abolish slavery and allow free trade. The act also drew new borders on the map of Africa, awarding territory to each European power – thus legalising the scramble for Africa. But with the Second World War – which saw the peak of Europe’s dependency on African troops – a powerful genie was released from a bottle – African nationalism. The tipping point came on February 3, 1960, when Harold Macmillan, the British prime minister, gave his ‘wind of change’ speech. Within 10 months, Britain had surrendered two key African territories and France 14. The rate of decolonisation when it arrived was breathtaking. Seventeen African nations gained their independence in 1960, but the dreams of the independence era were short-lived. Africa … states of independence tells the story of some of those countries – stories of mass exploitation, of the ecstasy of independence and of how – with liberation – a new, covert scramble for resources was born. Source: http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/2010/08/2010831112927318164.html BRICS bloc’s rising ‘sub-imperialism’ Is this the latest threat to Africa? Patrick Bond 2012-11-29, Issue 608 http://pambazuka.org/en/category/features/85609 Like Berlin in 1884-85, the BRICS Durban summit is expected to carve up Africa more efficiently, unburdened – now as then – by what will be derided as ‘Western’ concerns about democracy and human rights. The heads of state of the Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa (BRICS) network of governments are coming to Durban, South Africa, in four months, meeting on March 26-27 at the International Convention Centre (ICC), Africa’s largest venue. Given their recent performance, it is reasonable to expect another “1%” summit, wreaking socioeconomic and ecological havoc. And that means it is time for the first BRICS countersummit, to critique top-down “sub-imperialist” bloc formation, and to offer bottom-up alternatives. After all, we have had some bad experiences at the Durban ICC. In 2001, in spite of demands by 10,000 protesters, the United Nations World Conference Against Racism refused to grapple with reparations for slavery and colonialism or with apartheid-Israel’s racism against Palestinians (hence Tel Aviv’s current ethnic cleansing of Gaza goes unpunished). The African Union got off to a bad start here, with its 2002 launch, due to reliance on the neoliberal New Partnership for Africa’s Development (Nepad) promoted by Pretoria. The 2003 World Economic Forum’s African regional meeting hastened governments’ supplication to multinational corporate interests in spite of protests. In 2011, Durban’s UN COP17 climate summit – better known as the ‘Conference of Polluters’ – featured Washington’s sabotage, with no new emissions cuts and an attempted revival of the non-solution called ‘carbon trading’, also called ‘the privatisation of the air’. (…) Like Berlin in 1884-85, the BRICS Durban summit is expected to carve up Africa more efficiently, unburdened – now as then – by what will be derided as “Western” concerns about democracy and human rights. Reading between the lines, its resolutions will: – support favoured corporations’ extraction and land-grab strategies; – worsen Africa’s retail-driven deindustrialisation (South Africa’s Shoprite and Makro – soon to be run by Walmart – are already notorious in many capital cities for importing even simple products that could be supplied locally); – revive failed projects such as Nepad; and – confirm the financing of both land grabbing and the extension of neocolonial infrastructure through a new ‘BRICS Development Bank’, likely to be based just north of Johannesburg where the Development Bank of Southern Africa already does so much damage following Washington’s script. The question is whether in exchange for the Durban summit amplifying such destructive tendencies, which appears certain, can those few of Africa’s elites who may be invited leverage any greater influence in world economic management via the BRICS? With South Africa’s finance minister Pravin Gordhan’s regular critiques of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF), there is certainly potential for BRICS to “talk left” about the global-governance democracy deficit. But watch the ‘walk right’ carefully. In the vote for World Bank president earlier this year, for example, Pretoria’s choice was hard-core Washington ideologue Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the Nigerian finance minister who with IMF managing director Christine Lagarde catalysed the Occupy movement’s near revolution in January, with a removal of petrol subsidies. Brasilia chose the moderate economist Jose Antonio Ocampo and Moscow backed Washington’s choice: Jim Yong Kim. This was a repeat of the prior year’s fiasco in the race for IMF managing director, won by Lagarde in spite of ongoing corruption investigations against her by French courts, because the Third World was divided and conquered. BRICS appeared in both cases as incompetent, unable to even agree on a sole candidate, much less win their case in Washington. Yet in July, BRICS treasuries sent US$100 billion in new capital to the IMF, which was seeking new systems of bail-out for banks exposed in Europe. South Africa’s contribution was only $2 billion, a huge sum for Gordhan to muster against local trade union opposition. Explaining the South African contribution – initially he said it would be only one tenth as large – Gordhan told Moneyweb last year that it was on condition that the IMF became more “nasty” [sic] to desperate European borrowers, as if the Greek, Spanish, Portuguese and Irish poor and working people were not suffering enough. And the result of this BRICS intervention is that China gains IMF voting power, but Africa actually loses a substantial fraction of its share. Even Gordhan admitted at last month’s Tokyo meeting of the IMF and world Bank that it is likely “the vast majority of emerging and developing countries will lose quota shares – an outcome that will perpetuate the democratic deficit.” And given “the crisis of legitimacy, credibility and effectiveness of the IMF”, it “is simply untenable” that Africa only has two seats for its 45 member countries. Likewise, South Africa’s role in Africa has been “nasty”, as confirmed when Nepad was deemed “philosophically spot on” by lead US State Department Africa official Walter Kansteiner in 2003, and foisted privatisation of even basic services on the continent. In a telling incident this year, the Johannesburg parastatal firm Rand Water was forced to leave Ghana after failing – with a Dutch for-profit partner (Aqua Vitens) – to improve Accra’s water supply, as also happened in Maputo, Mozambique, (Saur from Paris) and Dar es Salaam (Biwater from London) in Tanzania. As a matter of principle, BRICS appears hell bent on promoting the further commodification of life, at a time when the greatest victory won by ordinary Africans in the last decade is under attack: the winning of the Treatment Action Campaign’s demand for affordable access to AIDS medicines, via India’s cheap generic versions of drugs. A decade ago, they cost $10,000 per person per year and only a tiny fraction of desperate people received the medicines. Now, more than 1.5 million South Africans – and millions more in the rest of Africa – get treatment, thus raising the South Africa’s average life expectancy from 52 in 2004 to 60 today, according to reliable statistics released this month. However, in recent months, Obama has put an intense squeeze on India to cut back on generic medicine R&D and production, as well as making deep cuts in his own government’s aid commitment to fund African healthcare. In Durban, the city that is home to the most HIV+ people in the world, Obama’s move resulted in this year’s closure of AIDS public treatment centres at three crucial sites. One was the city’s McCord Hospital, which ironically was a long-standing ally of the NGO Partners in Health, whose cofounder was Obama’s pick for World Bank president, Jim Kim. |
|
| Links to other resources | Thomas Pakenham (1992) The Scramble for Africa: White Man’s Conquest of the Dark Continent from 1876 to 1912. See: http://www.amazon.com/Scramble-Africa-Conquest-Continent-1876-1912/dp/0380719991
World Bank Refuses to Stop Funding African Land Grabs, October 8, 2012, African Globe. Source: http://www.oaklandinstitute.org/world-bank-refuses-stop-funding-african-land-grabs |
We Say No to Fracking – Voices from the Karoo
| Title | We Say No to Fracking – Voices from the Karoo |
| Director(s) | Liane Greeff |
| Date released (year) | 2012 |
| Production company | EcoDoc Africa |
| Length | 10.36mins |
| Location | South Africa |
| Keywords/tags | Education, environmentalism, fracking, protest |
| Link to film | http://youtu.be/JZ6cOlTrLN4 |
| Synopsis | Saturday 28 July 2012 saw a gathering of communities, environmentalists, scientists, children, bikers etc. in Nieu-Bethesda to raise awareness that the people of South Africa are saying NO to fracking. The Rally was organised locally by Mikey Wentworth with support from Climate Justice Campaign and Earthlife Africa Cape Town.
This video was filmed and edited by Liane Greeff of EcoDoc Africa, and produced for EJOLT-CCS. EJOLT is a large collaborative project bringing science and society together to catalogue ecological distribution conflicts and to work towards confronting environmental injustice. EcoDoc Africa is taking the camera to the conflicts and building and sharing a video archive of people’s protests against ecocide on earth. Source: http://youtu.be/JZ6cOlTrLN4 |
| Reviews/discussion | What is Fracking?
Hydraulic fracturing is the propagation of fractures in a rock layer by a pressurized fluid. Some hydraulic fractures form naturally—certain veins or dikes are examples—and can create conduits along which gas and petroleum from source rocks may migrate to reservoir rocks. Induced hydraulic fracturing or hydrofracturing, commonly known as fracing, fraccing, or fracking, is a technique used to release petroleum, natural gas (including shale gas, tight gas, and coal seam gas), or other substances for extraction.[1] This type of fracturing creates fractures from a wellbore drilled into reservoir rock formations. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_fracturing A Pro-fracking argument: Fracking it in South Africa: an argument for shale gas production in the Karoo – By John Schellhase, November 15, 2012 South Africa is in the midst of a heated energy debate. Africa’s wealthiest nation sits on top of one of the world’s largest shale gas reserves. While the government has lifted its moratorium on shale gas exploration, the controversial hydraulic fracturing technique, ‘fracking’, is still restricted as the country weighs environmental risks against opportunities for economic development. Given the clear economic opportunities and the chance to diversify away from coal, government officials should continue their deliberate, but steady progress toward completely removing the ban on fracking in South Africa. In a study of 32 countries, the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) found that South Africa has the 5th largest reserves of potentially recoverable shale gas. At 485 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, the shale reserves in South Africa surpass those of Australia, Brazil, Canada, and Poland, where Prime Minister Donald Tusk has called natural gas his country’s “great chance,” according to the Wall Street Journal. Fracking is a controversial technique. In order to extract gas from shale formations, energy companies drill thousands of meters below ground, then drill horizontally into a shale formation. The rig operators pump water and a mixture of chemicals into the shale at high pressures, fracturing rock formations and allowing gas to flow. Fracking opponents worry that the chemicals involved in the process will contaminate water supplies, threatening both human communities and natural ecosystems. Proponents, such as Ben Grumbles, president of the non-for-profit Clean Water America Alliance, disagree. Grumbles has written, “Hydraulic fracturing can be ‘safe’ when done in the right place, on the right scale, with the right safeguards.” Royal Dutch Shell, Falcon Oil, Sunset Energy, Sasol Oil, and Bundu Oil and Gas are all eager to explore South Africa’s shale basin in the semi-arid Karoo region, which stretches between Capetown and Johannesburg. This area has the lowest population density in the country. But with over 6,000 plant species, 40 percent of which are unique to the area, the Karoo is rich in biodiversity. In February 2011, Susan Shabangu, the Minister of Mineral Resources, instituted a nation-wide ban on shale gas exploration, citing environmental concerns. Pressure from both sides of the issue has only grown louder since Shabangu’s announcement. In March of this year, Treasure the Karoo Action Group, an organization fighting shale exploration, declared, “In the event that Minister Shabangu issues exploration licenses under the current status quo, we will look to the courts for protection.” In May, Energy Minister Dipuo Peters, according to local media reports, called the gas beneath the Karoo a “blessing that God gives us,” adding, “and we need to exploit it for the benefit of the people.” Since September, the government has been sending mixed messages. At first, Collins Chabane, a minister in the President’s office, announced that the moratorium was entirely lifted, but less than two weeks later, Shabangu corrected the record, explaining that the moratorium has only been lifted for “normal exploration” and that fracking remains off-limits. In a speech to parliament, she said, “Hydraulic fracturing – when and if it eventually happens – will be authorized under the strict supervision of the monitoring committee.” President Jacob Zuma has stayed out of the fray. When contacted for comment on this piece, for example, his office redirected the query to the Ministry of Mining. Currently, coal dominates South Africa’s energy landscape, accounting for over 90 percent of electricity production. With proved reserves of 300 billion tons, coal provides the cheap energy South Africa needs to sustain its rapid economic rise. Those reserves can keep the country powered for the next century, but concerns about climate change are driving policymakers to seek alternatives. In this context, natural gas, which cuts greenhouse gas emissions in half compared to coal, has become increasingly attractive. Ichumile Gqada, a researcher at the respected South Africa Institute of International Affairs, believes shale gas exploration in the Karoo should go forward. In an email, she wrote, “Ignoring the massive potential of the resource that might be in place in the Karoo by ‘leaving the resource in the ground,’ as some have suggested, would be unjustifiable in my eyes.” The upside potential of exploration is powerfully attractive. A report released in September by the Department of Mineral Resources described the economic potential of fracking in the Karoo. In a “moderately optimistic” case, the authors estimate that if 30 trillion cubic feet, out of the estimated 485 trillion cubic feet, could be produced the financial windfall would be 1 trillion rand; in other words, a mere 6 percent of potential reserve is worth US $115 billion. The government report also cites PetroSA’s Mossel Bay project, where the production of just 1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas led to the creation of over 1,500 jobs. As incomes in South Africa continue to rise and energy demands increase, the economic logic of shale gas extraction may become irresistible. Local environmental groups such as Treasure the Karoo and international NGOs such as Greenpeace and World Wildlife Fund should transform their message from stopping fracking at any cost to ensuring the highest health and environmental standards possible. Instead of protesting from the periphery, they should work to embed their members on advisory boards and oversight panels. By working with extractive industries instead of against them, civil society groups will have far more influence in shaping the future of fracking in South Africa. For its part, the government must continue to ensure that environmental concerns guide future exploration. Working with industry and civil society, ministers must have clear, forceful regulations in place to guarantee the strictest consequences if energy companies cause environmental harm. It is also time that President Zuma makes an extended public statement on the issue. Shale gas exploration has the potential to drive the next wave of economic growth in South Africa, reducing poverty and creating tens of thousands of jobs over the next decade. While the government must maintain the highest environmental standards for companies wishing to extract shale gas in the Karoo, it has an economic obligation to steadily open shale gas to further development, including fracking. It is time for South Africa’s government to lead the country to a more secure energy future. John Schellhase is a graduate student at the Center for Global Affairs, New York University.
Anti-fracking argument: Fracking cancer risk, September 20 2012 KwaZulu-Natal – SA’s top water research body has warned the government to think carefully about the serious risk of water pollution from cancer-causing chemicals and radioactive compounds from future underground “fracking” operations across huge swathes of the country. A new report by the state-funded Water Research Commission says shale gas rock-fracturing (fracking) will not only happen in remote sections of the Karoo. In fact, the government had already issued fracking exploration permits in six of the nine provinces, including a massive chunk of southern KwaZulu-Natal stretching almost as far north as Pietermaritzburg. The scientists note that future fracking, at depths 4km below the earth’s surface, could be over a much wider area of the country – including most of the high-lying areas south of latitude 29°C in KZN (a line which starts at Mtunzini in the east and stretches inland past Estcourt towards Bloemfontein and Kimberley). The report also identifies a number of risks to human health, water and the natural environment from fracking wells. These risks included: – Widespread pollution of groundwater, rivers and lakes with dozens of cancer-causing fracking compounds and other “highly toxic” pollutants such as benzene, hydrochloric acid and isopropanol. – Accidental release of underground uranium and other radioactive elements into the water and soil. – Underground mini-earthquakes, cave-ins and land subsidence. – Privatisation of parks and other state land where the public is excluded from fracking land and gas fields for safety reasons. – Above-ground air pollution from methane and other shale gas wells. – Lower property values. However, water pollution is the main emphasis of the 84-page Water Research Commission report by Gideon Steyl (University of the Free State chemistry department), Gerrit van Tonder (University of the Free State Institute for Groundwater Studies) and Luc Chevallier (Council for Geoscience). The scientists note that gas-drilling companies in the US have been trying to hide the toxic nature of many fracking chemicals. However, the commission cites a report from the US House of Representatives last year which identified at least 29 commonly used fracking chemicals that were known or probable cancer-causing agents, or were regulated as hazardous to drinking water and air. These chemicals are mixed with water and pumped underground at very high pressure to fracture and crack the rock formations to release buried pockets of methane and other gas formed millions of years ago from rotting mounds of mud, vegetation, algae and other organic matter. Some chemicals included benzene (a known cancer-causing chemical) along with a variety of acids and petroleum products. A study by the University of Buffalo in the US last year also raised concern about the possible release of underground uranium and other radioactive compounds when rocks are cracked up with hydrochloric acid. Another US study published last year showed that the methane gas level in underground drinking water was generally 17 times higher in fracking areas compared with well water where no fracking took place. However, Steyl and his colleagues voiced dismay over the difficulty in tracking down truly unbiased international studies on the impacts of fracking, since most were done by industry and private interests. Even official US government reports claiming no damage to public health or the environment stood in contradiction to numerous adverse reports by US citizens and the US Environmental Protection Agency. The commission researchers note that a single fracking event in a single well used the same amount of water needed to irrigate eight to 10ha of maize during a growing season. Every time a well was fracked, large volumes of chemicals were added to the water-pressure mixture. Although chemicals only made up between 0.5 and 2 percent of the mixture, the volume of hazardous chemicals in a single fracking event could total between 34 000 and 136 000 litres. Even if just 1 percent of dangerous fracking chemicals leaked out of the concrete well drillings during a single fracking, Steyl estimated that 490 litres of hazardous chemicals could contaminate underground water. This could pose “serious hazards” to the environment and to underground water drunk by people and livestock. Despite these concerns, the scientists appear to recognise that fracking is a fait accompli and they have listed a set of 10 recommendations to limit harm. They include compulsory “full disclosure” of every chemical used. Any fracking well should be at least 10km away from residential areas to reduce chemical exposure risks. All drilling records should be freely available to the public, and a thorough baseline study should be done to measure pre-fracking quality of water, soil and air by an “unbiased” body such as a university. Legal action should also be taken against any drilling company after a first offence. They should be forced to clean up damage, and be banned from future fracking in SA. However, even in the US, there were fewer than 10 inspectors to monitor more than 3 500 fracking wells in Pennsylvania. – The Mercury Source: http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/kwazulu-natal/fracking-cancer-risk-1.1387127
Fracking facts An introduction to fracking in South Africa The report also suggested that exploration proceed without allowing for horizontal drilling or hydraulic fracturing, while laws are amended and a monitoring committee is established. Due to the fatal flaws in the applicants’ EMP’s and other considerations, TKAG will be opposing any licences that may be granted in the near future by legal means. High Volume, Slickwater, Horizontal hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking”/”fraccing”, is the controversial technology used for the extraction of unconventional gas, such as shale gas. The technique involves a vertical well that is drilled to a depth of between 2000 m and 6000 m, after which the drilling bore turns to drill horizontally for a few thousand meters. A mixture of 99%-99.5% water and sand, along with 0.5% – 1% chemicals are pumped under high pressure into the well. This process fractures the shale rock layer, releasing the gas trapped between rock particles. Source: http://www.treasurethekaroo.co.za/fracking-facts
|
| Links to other resources | www.ejolt.org |
NWO OIL CORRUPTION destroying Niger Delta
| Title | NWO OIL CORRUPTION destroying Niger Delta |
| Director(s) | AllOverAfrica |
| Date released (year) | 2013 |
| Production company | AllOverAfrica |
| Length | 8.15mins |
| Location | Niger Delta |
| Keywords/tags | Governance, corruption, natural resources, oil, civil war, violence |
| Link to film | http://youtu.be/SJJmMOPT6Kg |
| Synopsis | A Nigerian activist says that corruption is so pervasive in Niger Delta that its politicians have stopped governing and only help in the rape of its resources.
Mother of Nigeria’s finance minister was kidnapped this week amid reports of millions of dollars being looted from Nigeria’s treasury. Also there has been a recent spate of killings in the oil rich Delta State. Press TV has interviewed Ms. Alice Ukoko, Founder of Women of Africa, London about this issue. Source: http://youtu.be/SJJmMOPT6Kg |
| Reviews/discussion | From Wikipedia:
Conflict in the Niger Delta The current conflict in the Niger Delta arose in the early 1990s over tensions between the foreign oil corporations and a number of the Niger Delta‘s minority ethnic groups who felt they were being exploited, particularly the Ogoni and the Ijaw. Ethnic and political unrest has continued throughout the 1990s and persists as of 2007 despite the conversion to democracy and the election of the Obasanjo government in 1999. Competition for oil wealth has fueled violence between many ethnic groups, causing the militarization of nearly the entire region by ethnic militia groups as well as Nigerian military and police forces (notably the Nigerian Mobile Police). Victims of crimes are fearful of seeking justice for crimes committed against them because of growing “impunity from prosecution for individuals responsible for serious human rights abuses, [which] has created a devastating cycle of increasing conflict and violence”.[6] The regional and ethnic conflicts are so numerous that fully detailing each is impossible and impractical. However, there have been a number of major confrontations that deserve elaboration. Nigeria, after nearly four decades of oil production, had by the early 1980s become almost completely dependent on petroleum extraction economically, generating 25% of its GDP (this has since risen to 60% as of 2008). Despite the vast wealth created by petroleum, the benefits have been slow to trickle down to the majority of the population, who since the 1960s have increasingly been forced to abandon their traditional agricultural practices. Annual production of both cash and food crops dropped significantly in the latter decades of 20th century, cocoa production dropped by 43% (Nigeria was the world’s largest cocoa exporter in 1960), rubber dropped by 29%, cotton by 65%, and groundnuts by 64%.[7] In spite of the large number of skilled, well-paid Nigerians who have been employed by the oil corporations, the majority of Nigerians and most especially the people of the Niger Delta states and the far north have become poorer since the 1960s.[8] The Delta region has a steadily growing population estimated to be over 30 million people as of 2005, accounting for more than 23% of Nigeria’s total population. The population density is also among the highest in the world with 265 people per kilometre-squared (reference NDDC). This population is expanding at a rapid 3% per year and the oil capital, Port Harcourt, along with other large towns are growing quickly. Poverty and urbanization in Nigeria are on the rise, and official corruption is considered a fact of life. The resultant scenario is one in which there is urbanization but no accompanying economic growth to provide jobs. This has led to a section of the growing populace assisting in destroying the ecosystem that they require to sustain themselves.[7] The case of Ogoniland (1992–1995)See also: Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People and Ken Saro-Wiwa Ogoniland is a 404-square-mile (1,050 km2) region in the southeast of the Niger Delta basin. Economically viable petroleum was discovered in Ogoniland in 1957, just one year after the discovery of Nigeria’s first commercial petroleum deposit, with Royal Dutch Shell and Chevron Corporation setting up shop throughout the next two decades. The Ogoni people, a minority ethnic group of about half a million people who call Ogoniland home, and other ethnic groups in the region attest that during this time, the government began forcing them to abandon their land to oil companies without consultation, and offering negligible compensation. This is further supported by a 1979 constitutional addition which afforded the federal government full ownership and rights to all Nigerian territory and also decided that all compensation for land would “be based on the value of the crops on the land at the time of its acquisition, not on the value of the land itself.” The Nigerian government could now distribute the land to oil companies as it deemed fit.[9] The 1970s and 1980s saw the government’s empty promises of benefits for the Niger Delta peoples fall through, with the Ogoni growing increasing dissatisfied and their environmental, social, and economic apparatus rapidly deteriorating. The Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP) was formed in 1992. MOSOP, spearheaded by Ogoni playwright and author Ken Saro-Wiwa, became the major campaigning organization representing the Ogoni people in their struggle for ethnic and environmental rights. Its primary targets, and at times adversaries, have been the Nigerian government and Royal Dutch Shell. Beginning in December 1992, the conflict between Ogonis and the oil infrastructure escalated to a level of greater seriousness and intensity on both sides. Both parties began carrying out acts of violence and MOSOP issued an ultimatum to the oil companies (Shell, Chevron, and the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation) which demanded some $10 billion in accumulated royalties, damages and compensation, and “immediate stoppage of environmental degradation”, and negotiations for mutual agreement on all future drilling.[10] The Ogonis threatened to embark on mass action to disrupt their operation if the companies failed to comply. By this act, the Ogoni shifted the focus of their actions from an unresponsive federal government to the oil companies engaged in their own region. The rationale for this assignment of responsibility were the benefits accrued by the oil companies from extracting the natural wealth of the Ogoni homeland, and neglect from central government. The government responded by banning public gatherings and declaring that disturbances of oil production were acts of treason. Oil extraction from the territory had slowed to a trickle of 10,000 barrels per day (1,600 m3/d) (.5% of the national total). Military repression escalated in May 1994. On May 21, soldiers and mobile policemen appeared in most Ogoni villages. On that day, four Ogoni chiefs (all on the conservative side of a schism within MOSOP over strategy) were brutally murdered. Saro-Wiwa, head of the opposing faction, had been denied entry to Ogoniland on the day of the murders, but he was detained in connection with the killings. The occupying forces, led by Major Paul Okuntimo of Rivers State Internal Security, claimed to be ‘searching for those directly responsible for the killings of the four Ogonis.’ However, witnesses say that they engaged in terror operations against the general Ogoni population. Amnesty International characterized the policy as deliberate terrorism. By mid-June, the security forces had razed 30 villages, detained 600 people and killed at least 40. This figure eventually rose to 2,000 civilian deaths and the displacement of around 100,000 internal refugees.[11][12] In May 1994, nine activists from the movement who would become known as ‘The Ogoni Nine’, among them Ken Saro-Wiwa, were arrested and accused of incitement to murder following the deaths of four Ogoni elders. Saro-Wiwa and his comrades denied the charges, but were imprisoned for over a year before being found guilty and sentenced to death by a specially convened tribunal, hand-selected by General Sani Abacha, on 10 November 1995. The activists were denied due process and upon being found guilty, were hanged by the Nigerian state.[13] The executions were met with an immediate international response. The trial was widely criticised by human rights organisations and the governments of other states, who condemned the Nigerian government’s long history of detaining their critics, mainly pro-democracy and other political activists. The Commonwealth of Nations, which had also plead for clemency, suspended Nigeria’s membership in response. The United States, the United Kingdom, and the EU all implemented sanctions, but not on petroleum (Nigeria’s main export). Shell claims it asked the Nigerian government for clemency towards those found guilty[citation needed], but its request was refused. However, a 2001 Greenpeace report found that “two witnesses that accused them [Saro-Wiwa and the other activists] later admitted that Shell and the military had bribed them with promises of money and jobs at Shell. Shell admitted having given money to the Nigerian military, who brutally tried to silence the voices which claimed justice”.[14] As of 2006, the situation in Ogoniland has eased significantly, assisted by the transition to democratic rule in 1999. However, no attempts have been made by the government or an international body to bring about justice by investigating and prosecuting those involved in the violence and property destruction that have occurred in Ogoniland,[15] although a class action lawsuit has been brought against Shell by individual plaintiffs in the US.[16] Source: http://www.wikipedia.com |
| Links to other resources | http://www.ajol.info/index.php/ad/article/view/57152
Watts, M. (ed) (2008) Curse of the black gold: 50 years of oil in the Niger Delta. New York: Powerhouse. Academic discussion: http://www.followthethings.com/curseoftheblackgold.shtml http://www.talkingeyesmedia.org/ Also see The Curse of Black Gold: https://ejoltdocumentaries.wordpress.com/2012/11/16/the-curse-of-black-gold/ |
Hold De Beers Accountable
| Title | Hold De Beers Accountable |
| Director(s) | African Renaissance |
| Date released (year) | 2011 |
| Production company | African Renaissance |
| Length | 3 MINS |
| Location | Cape, South Africa |
| Keywords/tags | Mining, community, natural resources, diamonds |
| Link to film | http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8s6dURw_wTU |
| Synopsis | Short advocacy film documenting community issues in the Western Cape, around the impacts of diamond mining undertaken by De Beers. |
| Reviews/discussion | “Halt the sale of De Beers operations until they fix our area”, says Cape West Coast community.
The imminent sale of De Beers’ diamond mining operations on the Cape West Coast must be halted until full disclosure and proper consultation with all affected parties has taken place, says the community of Hondeklipbaai. The department of Mineral Resources (DMR) is expected to make a decision on the approval of the amended environmental management programme, and the transfer of mining rights to Tranx Hex, within weeks. The community launched an awareness campaign this week, to urge DMR to postpone their decision. Speaking at a media briefing in Cape Town, Hondeklipbaai community leader David Markus said the sale cannot be allowed to continue until they were assured that the companies would honour their obligations to rehabilitate the area. “We make an urgent call on the DMR to hold these companies to account and to not forget the communities that are directly affected. Too often big mining companies exploit the country’s natural resources without undoing the damage they cause”, said Markus. He was speaking at the launch of two documentary videos in which the direct damage to the Hondeklipbaai area can be seen. The community is on the West Coast of South Africa, approximately 300 kms outside Cape Town. Markus was supported by the Bench Mark Foundation at the briefing. Bench Mark Foundation earlier this year asked De Beers Consolidated Mines to make substantial revisions to the Environmental Management Programme Report which will become the only legal tool to prevent a lasting negative legacy from diamond mining in Namaqualand. “The area in Hondeklipbaai is rich in biodiversity, with some species of plants and animals that are not see anywhere else in the world. “This area must be protected and conserved, and we’re not convinced that the current plans will not leave the area exposed to more risks. Their budget for this kind of repair work is wholly inadequate, and it is the people of Hondeklipbaai that will end up paying for it, for generations to come,” said Markus. Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8s6dURw_wTU From Andreas Spath, October 14, 2011: ‘For many people, diamonds have lost much of their sparkle in recent years. The knowledge that so-called blood or conflict diamonds have been used to finance some of Africa’s most murderous wars and civil conflicts has made it difficult to look at the gems as objects of beauty with which to decorate our bodies. The appalling working conditions and human rights abuses associated with some diamond mining operations don’t make matters any easier either. But even in situations where diamonds are mined legally by internationally respected, supposedly law-abiding companies, the impact on local communities and the environment can be devastating. De Beers’ Namaqualand Mines on the West Coast of South Africa’s Northern Cape Province are a good example of this. De Beers started mining diamonds in this area in 1927. Gem quality stones are found here in “alluvial” and “placer” deposits — former gravel beaches and stream channels where the diamonds were dropped by rivers that scoured them from kimberlite pipes located hundreds of kilometers inland and carried them towards the sea millennia ago. By the end of the 20th century, De Beers had extracted some 31 million carats of diamonds from its Namaqualand Mines located along a 150 kilometer stretch of coastline by strip mining parts of the land to a depth of about 40 meters. With profitability falling and the downturn of the global economy, operations were suspended in 2010 and in May of this year De Beers announced the sale of the mines to a much smaller local diamond mining company called Trans Hex. Clearly De Beers has made a lot of money during their more than 80 years of excavating diamonds here, but the legacy they have left for local communities is one of crushing poverty and a devastated landscape. In this short video clip from Green Renaissance, Dawid Markus, a community leader in the small town of Hondeklipbaai, outlines their struggles: Geographically isolated, Hondeklipbaai has around 1,000 inhabitants and a crippling unemployment rate of 80%. In the past, many families relied very heavily on work at the mines, but nowadays there are precious few job opportunities of any kind left. The community has lodged an official claim for the land on which the mines were established, which they consider to be their ancestral heritage. They’ve objected to the sale of the mines, saying there can be no question of transferring ownership when there is an existing dispute over whose land it is in the first place. De Beers’ operations have left the land in an appalling condition. Mining activities have left an area the size of approximately 2,000 football fields disturbed and un-rehabilitated. Although this region is very arid, it forms part of the Succulent Karoo Biodiversity Hotspot, one of 42 areas that are internationally recognized for their rich variety in flora and fauna. This is a very special and fragile habitat that is home to a large number of endemic plant species which occur nowhere else on the planet and 45 of which are threatened with extinction as a result of the mining. It is also the site of one of the world’s largest arid estuarine systems. Under South African law, once a mine is closed down, companies are obliged to provide the financial and other resources to ensure that disturbed areas are returned to a state that is equivalent to or better than it was before the mining started. They are also required to contribute to the social security and development of the communities they leave behind once they close shop, ensuring that alternative land uses are found and employment opportunities are created. Local inhabitants like Dawid Markus, together with labor unions and environmental organizations like Conservation South Africa, the Bench Marks Foundation and the Centre for Environmental Rights have raised grave concerns that De Beers is attempting to avoid these legal obligations by selling off the mines to Trans Hex. They question Trans Hex’s financial and technical capacity to fulfill these obligations and point out that Trans Hex has a very poor record when it comes to environmental rehabilitation of their existing mines in the area. It’s imperative that De Beers, a hugely profitable international corporation, is held to account for the environmental damage it has wrought in this area and that they return it to a sustainable ecological condition as is their obligation by law.’ Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/diamond-mining-leaves-people-and-land-devastated.html#ixzz2POVJwCaK |
| Links to other resources | Diamond Empire film: https://ejoltdocumentaries.wordpress.com/2013/03/31/the-diamond-empire/
Madihlaba, T. The Fox in the Henhouse: the environmental impact of diamond mining on communities in South Africa. In McDonald, D. (ed.) Environmental Justice in South Africa, University of Cape Town Press, CT, pp.156-167
Diamond Mining and the Environment Factsheet: http://www.diamondfacts.org/pdfs/media/media_resources/fact_sheets/Diamond_Mining_Environment_Fact_Sheet.pdf
The Greener Diamond: http://thegreenerdiamond.org/pages/about-conflict-diamonds/impact-on-the-environment.php Blood diamond” regulation system broken – but where to look for blame? By Khadija Sharife and Nick Meynen, http://www.minesandcommunities.org/article.php?a=11968 |
African Environmental Justice: Documentary films 