Playing politics with soot and our collective conscience (2), By Dakuku Peterside

…now is the time to work hard to solve the soot problem. The government must adopt a bi-partisan, multi-agency, and collaborative approach to tackle this menace. We must not rest until our airs are clean again and we have a breath of fresh air, literally, in Rivers State and by extension in Nigeria.

Last week, we considered the scientific, social, economic, and environmental challenges of soot in Rivers State, as representative of what is happening in the whole country. We further posited that all levels of government, security and regulatory agencies have disastrously failed to rise to the occasion of discharging their statutory and moral obligations of protecting lives. The minimum expectation of the people is that their government should confront this issue and save citizens from exposure to unnecessary health hazards and needless death. We vehemently and firmly argued the need for all stakeholders to urgently address this most deadly form of air pollution that constitutes a severe public health hazard. Fortunately, even with little or no intervention thus far, the consequence of soot is still benign, in comparison to what will happen in a few years if serious interventions are not carried out by all stakeholders now.

The occurrence of soot is not peculiar to the Niger Delta of Nigeria, so there are models of how soot or air pollution generally was tackled in other parts of the world that we can learn from. Three cases of exceptional air pollution across the globe that posed indeterminate danger stand out – the 1952 “Great Smog of London”, which left 4,000 persons dead in weeks; the two-decade long air pollution of Beijing and other Chinese cities; and the 2018 air pollution in New Delhi, Mumbai, and other Indian cities. These three cases and more offer us historical examples of responses and mitigating strategies adopted in other climes to the challenge of soot and air pollution.

It is the truth that when people are confronted with novel environmental challenges or natural occurrences that threaten lives, as we have in the case of soot, governments usually treat these as emergencies that call for the deployment of all state resources to protect their people. The social contract that defines the state’s relationship with the people comes into play, especially when there is imminent danger. This applies in this case where there is a sense of responsibility and urgency.

Based on our analyses of the responses of the three above listed different governmental approaches to solving the soot problem, we deduced a process that is a typology of a systematic and procedural approach to tackling soot in any part of the world. However, there is need for a bespoke solution adapted to the local circumstances.

The most critical element of this typology, due to the scale and complex nature of soot, is an extensive state and national level Coordinated Action Plan. With the London smog, the parliament enacted a “clean air act” and worked with major stakeholders to turn the tide and drastically reduce air pollution in London. When Beijing faced a similar challenge, the government implemented a State Air Pollution Prevention and Control Action Plan to improve air quality and minimise soot within a defined period. India responded with the Mumbai Clean Air Action Plan. These interventions involved multiple stakeholders, including experts fighting a common cause under one roof, with a defined roadmap and integrated master plan.

Any bespoke solution for this problem in Rivers and Bayelsa States must also have a Coordinated Action Plan drawn up by the governments in conjunction with multi-agency and multi-stakeholder involvement. Like in Beijing, a State Air Pollution Prevention and Control Action Plan targeted at improving air quality and reducing soot pollution within a defined period must be developed and implemented in the states. Ultimately, the challenge of air pollution and soot is beyond what individuals can handle. The final responsibility rests with the government, and governments at all levels must rise to the occasion and save the people the agony of facing death. The Federal, Rivers and Bayelsa State Governments must champion a solution to the soot problem.

The first part of the action plan must be a public advocacy and massive public enlightenment campaign on the health implications of illegal refining, and the consequential toxic air, specifically soot pollution. These information campaigns will aim to influence public understanding of the phenomena and instigate behavioural change. China did the “Beautiful China” campaign, which required all Chinese cities to achieve a given air quality limit, as recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO).

The Action plan will involve establishing an all-around monitoring mechanism for illegal refining, tire burning, and soot generating activities using technology. Strengthening this initiative will require the creation of a 24/7 contact line for intelligence gathering and community feedback. The 24/7 monitoring of these activities using various surveillance and environmental monitoring technology and devices is necessary.

Then there is an urgent need for a toxicity study for human risk assessment and mitigation; and an emission inventory. The emission inventory will help establish the volume, nature, and sources of all air contaminants, to facilitate the design of mitigation measures. This is important, considering the multiple sources of soot, especially those connected to high-level economic activities, such as the petrochemical industries, gas flaring, and fertiliser producers, that have become a behemoth of sorts, and almost beyond state control.

The next part is the provision of supportive legislation at the state and federal levels, and the stringent enforcement of such legislation across board. The government needs to outlaw and criminalise the illegal refining of crude. This will involve state security operatives and a legal system that robustly prosecutes all known cases of such violation of air pollution laws. Although there are relevant laws against air pollution, their enforcement has been weak or non-existence due to the economic complicity of key enforcement actors. Control actions against illegal refiners must be robust, extensive, and comprehensive, while appreciating the sophisticated nature of the illegal refining of oil and the concomitant illicit economy that has ensued from there. It must be extensive, complex and require the cooperation of different levels of government, and multiple agencies. The laws must include stringent punishment and make individuals and communities vicariously liable for illegal refining in their areas.

The Action plan will involve establishing an all-around monitoring mechanism for illegal refining, tire burning, and soot generating activities using technology. Strengthening this initiative will require the creation of a 24/7 contact line for intelligence gathering and community feedback. The 24/7 monitoring of these activities using various surveillance and environmental monitoring technology and devices is necessary.

Besides, multi-agency and community monitoring will complement the work of experts in this overarching surveillance. The government should engage the local people to provide local monitoring. Who is best to enforce and monitor such anti-illegal mining laws other than local people in communities, who bear the brunt of the soot menace? Therefore, the government should provide a Helpline to all locals to report such illegal activities within their communities.

The next part will involve a thorough cleaning of the messed-up environment using technology. Improving the air quality to an acceptable level must be achieved. The US Environmental Protection Agency approved Clean Air programmes that can cut air pollution by 78 per cent and radically improve air quality in each location to protect public health and the environment. The Nigerian government should adopt this. The Ogoni dedicated pollution cleaning programme has been slow and not comprehensive. We should learn from that exercise and use our findings to improve the new clean up exercise targeting soot. There is available technology to clean air pollutants and this can be deployed if the political will and leadership needed to serve the people are available.

Beijing, Shanghai, New York, London, and Mumbai provide ready examples of megacities that successfully mitigated soot pollution or progressively achieved clean air due to innovative collaboration between national and regional governments. In the Beijing case of 2008, from one-year continuous innovative solutions and monitoring, local industrial concerns reduced their excessive pollution and were responsible for cutting out two-thirds of the soot emission in Beijing. Joyce Msuya, Acting Executive Director of UN Environment, posits, “this improvement in air quality didn’t happen by accident. It was the result of an enormous investment of time, resources, and political will. Understanding Beijing’s air pollution story is crucial for any nation, district or municipality that wishes to follow a similar path.”

This pervading psychology, which situates a doctrine of ownership of crude oil within their space, has made youths straddle the borderlines of criminality and agitation for better treatment by all stakeholders in the oil and gas sector. Even if such a claim is justified, illegal fuel refining destroys the environment and lives, and is counterproductive. How much money will non-state actors and non-corporate actors make from these unlawful activities to justify soot’s health, economic and social implications, and costs?

To tackle the three primary sources of soot in Rivers and Nigeria – illegal refining, gas flare/ petrochemical industries, and tire burning – requires technological innovation, capital investments, complex logistics, and enormous political will. Many of the solutions are evident and available, but the failure of governance and leadership creates obstacles to dealing with the problem of soot endangering lives.

There is no doubt that the soot problem is gradually turning into a public health crisis and requires to be treated as such by all stakeholders. The biggest challenge of soot particulate emission is rooted in the fact that it is a complex illegal economy that sustains a substantial population of youths in Rivers and Bayelsa States. The challenge is in providing an alternative economy for these youths to discourage them from engaging in this illegal activity with tremendous health implications. Any attempt to solve this problem must tackle the economic imperatives and provide alternatives. Otherwise, it will be a pipe dream to assume that youth’s dependent on these illegal activities of bunkering and the illegal refining of crude will jettison these activities simply because they are informed to do so. Therefore, I advocate a combined economic solution provided by state and federal governments for youths in these communities plagued with illegal refining activities and all youths involved in one way or another down the value chain.

When the government at the local level plays the Ostrich and pretends that all is well, there is no hope of a sustainable solution soon. The locus of operation and push for a better environment for the people of Rivers State resides with the local people and their government. The popular Ijaw truism is that “he who is sick seeks the doctor”. Rivers State is sick from debilitating and corrosive soot pollution. It needs as much help as it can from the federal government, international organisations, and other stakeholders to tackle the soot problem. But it must be seen by all as doing its best to tackle the problem or at least championing the cause of finding solutions, so that other stakeholders will come in to help.

It is also time the people and government of Rivers State and other states in the Niger Delta stood against the overarching socio-economic and psychological sphere dominated by a sense of entitlement and a desire to justify engaging in dangerous and illegal economic activities, because of the cruel and unwholesome treatment meted out to them by the Nigerian state and international oil companies.

This pervading psychology, which situates a doctrine of ownership of crude oil within their space, has made youths straddle the borderlines of criminality and agitation for better treatment by all stakeholders in the oil and gas sector. Even if such a claim is justified, illegal fuel refining destroys the environment and lives, and is counterproductive. How much money will non-state actors and non-corporate actors make from these unlawful activities to justify soot’s health, economic and social implications, and costs? We must count the actual costs of these activities’ vis-a-vis the supposed gains.

In conclusion, now is the time to work hard to solve the soot problem. The government must adopt a bi-partisan, multi-agency, and collaborative approach to tackle this menace. We must not rest until our airs are clean again and we have a breath of fresh air, literally, in Rivers State and by extension in Nigeria.

Dakuku Peterside is a policy and leadership expert.