The Hindu : Safety issues in asbestos industry

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, Mar 04, 2003

Business

Business

Safety issues in asbestos industry

By P. Vikram Reddy

HYDERABAD MARCH 3. The recent clearance of licence for Visaka Industries to set up an asbestos cement (AC) plant in West Bengal, and the likely clearance of four or five licences to others, reportedly in the pipeline, has provided a sense of relief and reprieve for the asbestos cement manufacturers, who have been facing an onslaught from the steel industry (GI sheet manufacturers) for the past two years.

The focus of attack by the steel industry has been on health ground by way of showing concern for the employees and seeking a ban on asbestos cement sheets, which is an estimated Rs. 1,500 crore industry or an output of 14 lakh tonnes annually.

The entire requirement of raw material, chrysotile, about 1.10 lakh tonnes, is being imported every year mainly from Canada, Brazil, Zimbabwe, and Russia to make asbestos cement sheets in 42 factories in India. The sector as such employs between 30,000 and 40,000 workers.

On the other hand, the steel industry produces about 12 lakh tonnes of GI sheets, and is eying the 14 lakh tonnes per annum asbestos sheet market — should a ban ever materialise. It is against this background that the asbestos cement industry feels relieved with the issuance of licences which had been kept pending for two years.

G. Vivekanand, Managing Director of Visaka Industries, and Chairman, Chrysotile Asbestos Cement Products Manufacturers Association (formed five years ago), is quick to point out that the ministry concerned had given the environmental clearance.

The bone of contention has been the three basic asbestos related diseases — asbestosis, lung cancer, and mesothelioma (akin to blue fibre). V. Pattabhi, a consultant with Hyderabad Industries, quoting from four foreign studies, has been trying to show how a `regulated' asbestos industry is absolutely safe from the health angle.

France, for example, had banned asbestos cement sheets based on the health parameters, but Mr. Pattabhi points out that that was based on health results of workers who had largely been affected during the pre-regulation period dating back to several decades.

Now the regulations are stringent and Indian companies are functioning at 0.5 fibres per CC level (against one fibre per CC level limit). If there are any companies not complying with the norms, they should be targeted individually and not the industry as a whole, they point out. Moreover, the health risk factor is not the same for all fibres. According to the Wagner J. C. report, there is overwhelming evidence that crocidolite is the main fibre associated with mesotheliomas. It says the risk is greatest with crocidolite, less with amosite, and apparently less with chrysotile.

And India imports only chrysotile. Chrysotile uncontaminated by tremolite may not have caused any mesotheliomas even at high cumulative lifetime exposures, says Peter Elmes in his `Health Risks associated with chrysotile asbestos' (1994). On the other hand, the Asbestos Information Centre (AIC) recommended prohibition of blue fibre and the Union Government subsequently banned its import in conformity with the recommendations of the ILO and WHO.

Also, asbestos fibre constitutes only 8 per cent of the input, with 35 per cent being fly ash, 45 per cent cement, and the rest water. Mining in States such as Andhra Pradesh is also only of chrysotile. Moreover, earlier, the Central Labour Institute (CLI) studies have not proved the contentions of the steel industry on health concerns, they point out adding that based on the Labour Ministry directive, CLI was conducting another study. To sum up in the words of Pattabhi, "It is dangerous but safe", seems quite apt. It reflects the scenario at the two extremes, where regulations are complied with (then it is safe) and where regulations are not complied with.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Business