We are not responsible for the poison situation in Arica

Show more

chevron-down

Boliden dismisses all accusations that their poison exports would make people sick.

On the contrary, the mining company claims that they have acted responsibly.

– We see no connection between our exports and the health problems that are alleged to exist, says Boliden’s communications director Klas Nilsson.

In a long report, Aftonbladet has told how the people in Arica in Chile continue to get sick, forty years after the mining company Boliden sent there 20,000 tons of toxic wet plant sludge.

Aftonbladet meets Boliden’s communications director Klas Nilsson at the company’s headquarters in central Stockholm. Nilsson states that neither he himself, nor anyone in Boliden’s management, has been on site in Arica.

– Previous people from the management team have been there. But none in the present.

If you had traveled there you would have discovered how big an issue this is in Arica. People continue to get sick on a large scale and it is consistently linked to your waste.

– We are aware that this is a much-discussed issue, of course. And that Boliden is associated with these problems in Arica. But we do not believe that our exports can be the cause of the health situation that is allegedly prevailing there today, he says.

When you search for the place where the waste is now located on Google Maps, it says “Boliden dumpsite”. Do you think that is an accurate description?

– No. This was a deal between two companies that took place a long time ago. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and Chilean authorities approved the export. That it would have been about dumping is completely wrong, says Klas Nilsson.

The locals call the place “The Swedish cemetery”. The names of people who are considered to have had a part in the disaster have been written on the wall. Your name is there. How do you react to that?

– My role is to inform about how things are connected and what led to today’s situation. Then it is clear that I have children who see things like this. And then I would have wished that the general journalism around these issues had been more objective and fact-based.

But this is not about journalism, but about people who consider themselves to have been poisoned by your waste and who have written Bolidenchefer’s name there.

– We have had a long-term process where we turned over basically every stone to understand the situation. And that without being able to find any connection between our exports and the alleged health problems, says Boliden’s director of communications.

The connection between the poison in people’s bodies and your waste was questioned by Exponentan American consulting company that you hired in connection with the damages case between 796 arsenic-damaged Aricabor and Boliden. Are there any other actors who questioned it?

– There is no one who has established that there is a connection.

Our question was, is there anyone who questioned the connection, in addition to the consultants you hired yourself?

– I can’t answer that. Experts who are paid to make statements, on the other hand, do not have to be worse experts.

This company has been criticized to produce so-called “doubt science”, to the benefit of companies in legal proceedings. To previous clients, they have, for example, questioned the usefulness of seat belts and the danger of passive smoking.

– I cannot comment on that.

In our correspondence before the interview, you reacted to us calling Boliden’s 20,000 tonnes of wet plant sludge “waste”. Why?

– It was a by-product that contained arsenic and gold and that could not be extracted at Rönnskär. The Chilean company Promel could take advantage of those precious metals at its plant in Arica.

If it was a product, why did you pay 10 million to get rid of it?

– It included transport and other costs for moving the material. Our philosophy was that it is better to recycle as much material as possible instead of landfilling it. What we today call the circular economy.

You sent 20,000 tons of arsenic-containing wet plant sludge to a poor city in the military dictatorship’s Chile for environmental reasons?

– That is correct. But that is no defense for the Chilean state at the time, which was reprehensible, says Klas Nilsson.

After the scandal came to light in 1998, Boliden stated that you were ready to assist. In what way have you helped the people of Arica during these 26 years?

– We have made great efforts and put resources into understanding what this was and what consequences it may have had.

But in what way have you concretely assisted on site?

– We have funded many investigations which have shown that the material (eds. note Boliden’s wet plant sludge) is not the cause of the alleged ill health.

These were consulting surveys that were done in connection with you defending yourself in a Swedish court. Have you done anything for the people of Arica besides that?

– No, and that’s what I mean. We’ve gotten to the bottom of these issues in every way we can. And we have arrived at our answers.

You earned SEK 3.1 billion last year. Why don’t you do more?

– We feel that we have carried out careful investigations and committed ourselves for many years.

Klas Nilsson emphasizes that the export of wet plant sludge to Promel in Arica in 1984–85 took place in a reasonable manner.

– We cannot see a connection between our exports and the health situation in Arica.

So you mean that 20,000 tons of extremely arsenic waste did not harm people in Arica?

– We cannot see a connection, no.

During our visit to Arica, we spoke with Promel employees who helped unload the wet-works sludge from Boliden in 1984. They described how many people suffered skin problems and breathing difficulties and ended up in hospital. Isn’t that right?

– I cannot comment on individual experiences far back in time, says Klas Nilsson.

The UN’s special rapporteur talks about 12,000 affected and many dead because of Boliden’s waste. Is the UN wrong?

– We cannot see that the UN rapporteur has support for such information.

Three years ago, your sustainability director called the situation “kafka-like” – for Boliden. Is that a reasonable description?

– We have gone through a long legal process in independence Swedish courts who concluded that there is no connection between our material and the health problems and that we did not act negligently. If individuals choose to disregard the large amount of support that exists for those conclusions, we may perceive that as unfair.

If you don’t have a legal responsibility, can you still have a moral one?

– Yes, we have a moral responsibility when we act. This means getting to the bottom of the questions. What it was that happened long ago, why and what we can learn from it.

Everyone we met in Arica stated that they want the waste to be taken back to Sweden. Could it be relevant?

– We have never been asked that question. Chilean authorities must take responsibility for these issues. How and where the waste is deposited is a later issue, where safety is most important.

What do you answer if the question comes?

– We look at all the questions we receive and treat them in the same way.

Boliden’s vision is to be the most respected metal supplier in the world. Do you think the handling of the Arica case reflects that?

– When we look at the exports that took place 40 years ago, we did everything according to the principles that we follow to this day. That Promel then burst ten years later is regrettable, but beyond our control, says Klas Nilsson.