CalumCarr on .... Whatever

Trafigura: Claude Dauphin to be Prosecuted????

2012-01-30T17:45:00.001Z

Greenpeace has reported that Claude Dauphin, one of the founders of and largest shareholder in Trafigura, can be prosecuted for his part in the Probo Koala incident. Dauphin has 2 weeks to appeal.

In July 2010, I reported that:

‘Claude Dauphin – Trafigura’s chief executive - escaped prosecution on the basis that he found out about the Probo Koala’s waste only in mid-August 2006, days before the waste’s dumping.’

Leaked emails showed he was aware long before mid-August 2006.

A rough translation of the Greenpeace press release is shown below:

Criminal prosecution of Trafigura’ s president

Amsterdam January 30, 2012— After a long procedure with objection and appeal up to the highest Court of the Netherlands, the Court of Appeal Amsterdam has today decided that the Public Prosecutor may prosecute Trafigura’s president Claude Dauphin in the case of the Probo Koala.

Dauphin may actually be prosecuted for leading the illegal export of the waste from the Probo Koala to Ivory Coast.

Evidence that - also thanks to research of Greenpeace - has become public in recent years shows that the President-Director of Trafigura, Claude Dauphin knew and was involved from the beginning till the end, from the generation of the toxic waste till the delivery of the waste to Ivory Coast. Previously leaked e-mail correspondence between Dauphin and staff of Trafigura shows that the multi billion oil trader was aware that the experimental caustic washing process carried out aboard the vessel Probo Koala would generate toxic waste. It was also known by the company that such toxic waste could only be processed in a few places and that it would be expensive. It was also known within the company that the export of waste from the European Union was prohibited.

In the opinion of Greenpeace it was therefore a deliberate circumvention of legislation. The judges also came to that conclusion and the Amsterdam Court of Appeal only recently (December 23, 2011) found the company Trafigura guilty on the deliberate and illegal export of waste from Europe to Ivory coast.

Greenpeace is pleased that the highest boss of Trafigura is now accountable for a judge. Marietta Harjono, Greenpeace: "Dauphin was personally involved and knowingly accepted the risk of causing harm to human health and the environment by transferring the toxic waste to Ivory Coast."

[The original can be read here]

We await developments with great interest.

Music in the Morning Playlist

2012-01-30T07:20:00.001Z

The YouTube playlist for all music featured during 2012 is available

here

Music in the Morning No. 240 – Mountnmonkeys

2012-01-30T06:00:00.000Z

For the third time I feature this group – see here and here.

When I featured them in my Sunday Morning Coffee show I wrote this,

“We move away from the stars, the incredibly talented, the TV programme and return to where music lives, music belongs: with ordinary people, playing together, passing on tunes and skills, enjoying their music in their own homes.

Real music. That’s what I celebrate today and I celebrate all those who play and jam at home, with friends, but I do so in the company of The MountnMonkeys.

Never heard of The MountnMonkeys? Don’t worry, neither have they. As far as I am aware they don’t have a name: they just enjoy a jam.

Why then “The MountnMonkeys”? Because one of the players posts their videos under the name of “MountnMonkey” and, so, I christened them. They all live in and around Huntington in West Virginia.”

I hope you enjoy their music.

Mountnmonkeys Cold, Frosty Morning

There must be so much talent hidden away like the Mountnmonkeys.

Music in the Morning No. 239 with a Love Song

2012-01-29T06:00:00.000Z

Not just a love song; not just any love song but a song of God’s love and our love of God.

Not just any song of God’s love and our love of God but The Love Song of the Welsh Revival.

I knew the song but not its background.

I knew nothing of the Welsh Revival of 1904/1905.

‘Just after eleven o'clock on a Wednesday evening a hundred years ago, a solo voice rang out with the beautiful Welsh hymn "Here Is Love Vast As The Ocean". Maybe a thousand people were in the Chapel at the time, leaning over the galleries, packing every pew and squeezing into every spare corner. They'd been here for more than four hours, in a service of intense emotion.

Meetings like it were taking place across Wales night after night, with fervent prayer and passionate singing - and similar disregard for the clock. They both excited and appalled, left many puzzled and some frightened, but it was reckoned that in less than a year, over a hundred and fifty thousand people had made a new commitment to Jesus Christ.

Whole communities changed, as men and women found themselves drawn into a powerful experience of God; and sparks from their awakening were soon to ignite fires in more than a dozen other countries.

And the hymn that soloist struck up spontaneously, about "love vast as the ocean", was heard so often that it became known as "the love song of the revival".’ [Source]

Listen to this wonderful hymn – the original would be in Welsh – and then I’ll tell you some more about the revival.

Here is Love, Vast as the Ocean Robin Mark

This is SO inspiring! This alone could bring people to God!

‘On December 31st 1903 and January 1st 1904, Joseph Jenkins a minister in New Quay Cardiganshire, who was undoubtedly a key man in the Revival, held a "Deeper Spiritual Life Convention". Joseph had been seeking an enduement of power, and shared the testimony of his experience of the Holy Spirit engulfing him as a flame of fire. This was to impact his Church.

On February 14th, in a Sunday service at his Chapel, a young woman named Florrie Evans stood to her feet and publicly confessed "I love the Lord Jesus with all my heart". As she spoke these words the Holy Spirit seemed to fall on the meeting. Many say this was the real beginning of the Revival. A move of God took place in that Church, as after-church meetings were held to seek the Lord's presence and empowerment, and God began baptising - initially young people, mainly girls and women in their teens and early twenties - with the Holy Spirit, and the fire quickly spread to other young people in the Cardiganshire area.‘ [Source]

The story itself is inspiring but there’s more.

‘As revival fire spread across Wales in late 1904 and early 1905, although no official records were kept of the actual number converted, 150,000 is considered a very conservative estimate, during the first six months! People's lives were transformed by the thousands. This was indeed, a sovereign move of God's Holy Spirit!

Whole communities were turned upside down, and were radically changed from depravity to glorious goodness. The crime rate dropped, often to nothing. The police force reported that they had little more to do than supervise the coming and going of the people to the chapel prayer meetings, while magistrates turned up at courts to discover no cases to try. The alcohol trade was decimated, as people were caught up more by what happened in the local chapels than the local public houses and bars. Families experienced amazing renewal, where the money earning husband and father, the bread winner, had wasted away the income and sowed discord, but now under the moving power of the Holy Spirit, following the conversion to be a follower of Jesus Christ, he not only provided correctly for family needs, but was now with the family, rather than wasting his time, and wages, in the public houses of the village or town. Souls were saved, individual lives were changed and Society itself was changed. Countless numbers were converted to Christ.

There are men and women still in churches today whose parents or grandparents' testimonies were that they were converted in the Revival in 1904 or 1905. Not only were individual lives changed by the power of the Holy Spirit, but whole communities were changed, indeed society itself was changed. Wales again was a God-fearing nation! Public houses were now almost empty. Men and women who used to waste their money getting drunk were saving it, giving it to help their churches, buying clothes and food for their families. And not only drunkenness, but stealing and other offences grew less and less, so that often a magistrate came to court, and found there were no cases for him.

Men whose language had been filthy before, learnt to talk purely. It is related that not only did the colliers put in a better day's work, but also that the pit ponies were so used to being cursed and sworn at, that they just couldn't understand orders being given in kind, clean words! Yet, still the work output increased. The dark tunnels underground in the mines echoed with the sounds of prayer and hymns, instead of oaths and nasty jokes and gossip.’ [Source]

I think we’re long overdue another such revival!

And now I must go because I must return to sing along again and be with God!

Music in the Morning No. 238 – Karl Doty and Kip Jones

2012-01-28T06:00:00.000Z

Today’s music is very, very different.

The piece – Argon – written by Doty, a member of the classical music group, ‘A Far Cry’, was played as an encore to ‘A Far Cry’ concert in June 2011.

I was entranced but I recognise that you may not take at all to the sound. To find out what you think you’ll need to listen.

Karl Doty and Kip Jones Argon

There is something almost religious about the sound. I just love this.

Music in the Morning No. 237 – Gerry Rafferty

2012-01-27T06:00:00.000Z

Just over one year ago, Gerry passed on For those who remain his music is testament to his greatness.

Today, he welcomes you with a simple little tune but one which may indicate his struggles. Certainly his words will strike many of us as being very real.

Gerry Rafferty Where I Belong

Where I Belong

Each day is harder to get through
My head it is spinning, I don't think I'm winning the race
Whenever I think of the future
I just see the one thing that might bring a smile to my face.

To be where I belong
Is the force that keeps me going on.

Sometimes life seems to slow down
I try to move faster 'cause disaster is hot on my heels
Maybe I don't have to worry
Perhaps I'll keep learning concerning the way that I feel.

To be where I belong
Is the force that keeps me going on.

Each day is harder to get through
My head it is spinning, I hope that I'm winning the race.

I have loved this song for so many years but had lost it for most of them …. if that makes sense.

Music in the Morning No. 236 – KT Tunstall

2012-01-26T06:00:00.000Z

Another Scot brings you magic this morning. Sit back, lie back or whatever. Simply enjoy.

KT Tunstall The Entertainer

Music in the Morning No. 235 – Julie Fowlis

2012-01-25T06:00:00.000Z

A strange language this morning even to me, a Scot, but Gaelic is beyond me. Fortunately, the other language, music, is open to us all.

Enjoy.

Julie Fowlis Biodh An Deoch + others unknown

Ah! Understood all of it!

Music in the Morning No. 234 – Bach & Mischa Maisky

2012-01-24T06:00:00.001Z

This morning’s piece is a hugely popular one. I’m sure you’ll love this!

Bach - BWV 1007, Cello Suite No.1, I. Prelude Mischa Maisky

Fabulous. I closed my eyes and …..
Well, where did this take you?

Trafigura: Appeal to Dutch Supreme Court

2012-01-23T18:28:00.001Z

At some point in the last few weeks, Trafigura has posted to its website a response to the Dutch Appeal Courts upholding of the guilty verdicts. I append a small portion of that response below:

“On 23rd December 2011, the Dutch Appeal Court confirmed the acquittal but maintained the two convictions. These matters involve complex technicalities and significant legal issues, so Trafigura duly lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court of the Netherlands. Trafigura is satisfied that the acquittal was upheld, but disappointed that the company was not completely cleared. We continue to believe we acted properly and used the correct procedures.” [source] [My emphasis]

So the saga is not over yet.

“We continue to believe we acted properly and used the correct procedures.”

Where is the truth between the two views – Trafigura’s and the Dutch courts?

In December I wrote a series of posts highlighting gaps in our knowledge - I called them Truth Gaps – because it appeared to me that Trafigura’s knowledge of the waste and its actions in Amsterdam and beyond were irreconcilable. Clearly something was missing, we were missing some knowledge to make their knowledge and actions reconcilable.

For those who may have missed these posts I append a portion of one.

“Here I summarise what we know Trafigura knew about the caustic washing of coker naphtha before Trafigura committed the Probo Koala to sail to Amsterdam. Alongside this I put their actions in Amsterdam (before, during and after the visit). I contend that the two are irreconcilable and can only become reconcilable when more information, more truth comes into the public domain.

This extra truth, which we don’t have yet, I call the ‘truth gap’. It’s what we need to understand Trafigura’s actions. Without the new truth we can speculate but speculation leaves us open to Carter-Ruck getting in touch.

Far better to highlight and keep highlighting the truth gap.

Far better to highlight and keep highlighting those areas which don’t stack up.

Far better to ask and keep asking Trafigura to answer questions.

Far better to highlight and keep highlighting those questions Trafigura does not answer (if there are any).

Enough of this. It’s time to identify the truth gap in Amsterdam.

What goes into the Truth Gap?”

I have my views about where the truth lies and what goes into the Truth Gap but only you know your views.

Music in the Morning No. 233 – Eddie Vedder and Mark Seymour

2012-01-23T06:00:00.001Z

A brand new song to me. There are lots of versions but this was, by far, the most atmospheric. Mark Seymour, the composer, guests with Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam for this brilliant rendition.

Eddie Vedder and Mark Seymour Throw Your Arms Around Me

I hope that wasn’t too energetic for you as you broke the night’s cover.

Music in the Morning No. 232 – CalumCarr and John Barry

2012-01-22T06:00:00.000Z

I’ve made it onto the greatest musical show on earth!

Yes! That’s here, if you didn’t already know!

You don’t get to hear my voice or my music but you get John Barry’s music with my words subtitled. There is no way I could inflict my voice on me, far less on your delicate ears.

The music, ‘John Dunbar Theme’ from the film ‘Dances with Wolves’, featured 5 weeks ago or so but, as I listened to the music, words appeared in front of me as though they were being given to me. I wrote them down and made the video.

I hope you enjoy.

CalumCarr and John Barry Teach Me, Lord Jesus (John Dunbar Theme)

Did you manage to sing along as the words appeared? Bet you did a better job than would I.

I know it’s not the easiest music to sing but, as I alluded to earlier, I had no option. I didn’t choose to write words to the music: they appeared.

Music in the Morning No. 231 – Hiromi

2012-01-21T06:00:00.000Z

Hiromi?

Who?

I hadn’t heard her music nor even heard of her until I stumbled across this video. I stumble across, fall into, so much fabulous music this way. I was gobsmacked, grabbed, by her brilliance and sheer exuberance.

Never! Absolutely never, have I heard music remotely like this and I mean this in an immensely positive way.

Pachelbel can never have been played like this!

Pachelbel with guts!

After this build-up I would be disappointed if you didn’t love this too but I must be realistic: some will love and some won’t.

Sit back for 8m 30s of ……

Pachelbel: Canon in D Hiromi

I did tell you! Hiromi is brilliant.

Need to listen to this again? I can’t get enough of Hiromi!

Music in the Morning No. 230 – Handel

2012-01-20T06:00:00.000Z

What a welcome for the new day!

Handel Concerto grosso for two violins, cello, strings and basso continuo in B minor Op. 6 No. 12 HWV330 Mvts 3 to 5

Have a lovely day!

Music in the Morning No. 229 – Fiona Apple

2012-01-19T06:00:00.000Z

I had never heard of Fiona before this video popped up. If you are in the same position, please listen because this track is a classic … or rather it should be.

Fiona Apple I Know

Told you! A classic!

Scottish Referendum: How Many Questions?

2012-01-18T18:14:00.001Z

Much has been made in the last week or so about the confusion which would arise if more than two options were given because the voting form would look something like the one below.

[Note: we can argue over the exact words used. I have chosen words quickly to illustrate the issues]

There is no doubt that, were the questions posed in this way, confusion could arise.

Therefore, say many Unionists, only a straightforward Yes/No option should be presented.

One possibility could be:

Is that it then? There is only the Yes/No option!

No!

Imagine the following layout.

With this layout, if there is a majority for independence then the results for 3. and 4. are ignored.

If there is a majority for retaining the Union then 3. and 4. are counted.

The results from a layout such as this gives the parameters of negotiation.

Is this too complicated?

Shouldn’t be!

This exact layout was used in 1997 for the Scottish Devolution referendum. I’ve put the actual questions from that referendum into my layout.

[Remember: in the 4 different layouts I have chosen words quickly to illustrate the issues]

Here we have it!

No confusion and a fuller range of options considered.

Were some trying to muddy the waters unnecessarily?

That is for another day!

Music in the Morning No. 228 - Ray LaMontagne

2012-01-18T06:00:00.000Z

Sad, sad start to this morning ……

…… but do listen to a master.

Ray LaMontagne Are We Really Through

Aaaaaah!

Scottish Referendum: Vote Britain ????

2012-01-17T06:26:00.001Z

The case is compelling.

[Courtesy of Alan Bissett]

UPDATE: Thought I’d give you the words.

People of Scotland, vote with your heart.

Vote with your love for the Queen who nurtured you, cradle to grave,

Who protects you and cares, her most darling subjects, to whom you gave

the glens she adores to roam freely through, the stags her children so dearly enjoy killing.

First into battle, loyal and true. The enemy’s scared of you.

That’s why we send you over the top with your och-aye-the-noo Mactivish there’s been a murrrderrr jings! crivvens! Deepfriedfuckinmarsbar wee wee dram of whisky hoots mon there’s a moose loose aboot this smackaddict

Vote, Jock. Vote, Sweaty Sock. Talk properly.

Vote with those notes we scrutinise in our shops.

(might be legal tender but looks dodgy to me)

Vote for the Highland Clearances. Baaaaaaaaaa.

Vote for nuclear submarines in your water.

Vote for the Olympic Games you didn’t vote for

(but you’ll pay for it, you’ll pay for it).

Vote Conservative. Vote Lib Dem. Vote Libservative. Vote Condabour.

Vote with the chip on your shoulder.

Vote Labour. New Labour. Old Labour. Scottish Labour.

(Get back in line, Scottish Labour, HQ in Solihull will issue their commands shortly,

Just keep the vote coming in from up there thanks goodbye,

Subsidy junkie).

Vote for any argument you construct in your defence being ‘anti-English’.

Vote for Scots who make their career in Scotland being ‘unambitious’.

Vote for enjoying your own culture being soooooooo parochial.

Vote God Save the Queen and that bit about us crushing you all.

Hush. There there.

Vote for Scotland being refered to as a ‘region’, like, say, Yorkshire? Or East Anglia?

Vote for our voices dominating your media, but in no way telling you what to think.

Take a drink. Go on, son, take a drink.

Vote for oil revenue, which we ensure flows directly from us into you.

Vote for being told you’re the only country in the world that could not possibly survive and that without us you’d fall to pieces like children abandoned in the wild, caked in faeces.

Vote Daily Mail and Rupert Murdoch and

illegalimmigrantskilledPrincessDiana and

London London London most exciting city in the world darling

(Glasgow is a very violent place, is it not. Do you have art?)

Vote wth your heart. Vote Empire. Vote tradition.

Vote for our proud shared history of

enslavingothernationsandstealingtheirnaturalresources

Bringing Wealth and Prosperity to the World!

being on the right side just once and that’s only because it was against yer actual fucking Hitler

Vote for the #ScottishConspiracy at Westminster

(who really runs the show here eh – Blair, Brown – got your own in that time, we aren’t allowed to vote in Holyrood but there’s Archie McPhee pulling wee strings in our parliament when we wouldn’t even think about interfering in how you run your own affairs but while we’re at it, this referendum eh? A so-called referendum, is it? Have it now, make sure it looks like this)

Vote for very, very, very rich people patronising you.

Vote for Glasgow having the highest knife-crime rate and lowest life expectancy in Europe

due to our generosity. You may thank us at your leisure.

Vote for the absence of your history in our schools.

All Brits together.

Vote for our shock at your ingratitude!

Vote for us saying ‘Eh? Eh?’ when you open up your porridge mooth.

Vote for bafflement about why you want the England football team to lose.

We always want the Scots to win (except in referenda).

Vote for psychopathic villains with your accent in a soap opera.

Vote for tuition fees and student loans, ensuring that the brightest of your working-class

(since you still insist upon the term, although Our Leaders had it banned)

will one day rise and take their place in this great land.

Vote for us deploying strategic references to Braveheart to dismiss you all.

Vote for Robert Burns being called by Paxman ‘sentimental doggerel’.

Vote for The Iron Lady. Such a strong leader, gave this country backbone

(you didn’t really want the unions, industries or council homes, just made the place look tatty)

Vote for a deregulated banking class, lionising of the hardworkingwealthgeneratingjobcreatingentrepreneurs

who you will in no way refer to as ‘greedy, selfish bastards’. Give them your taxes.

Vote for foreign wars.

Yes, sadly, some of you will die. But you will return to a hero’s welcome

Jock

the Union Jack, proud symbol of integrity and honour, draped across your coffin

while your mother, dabbing at her eyes, recalls the words she learned in school

in Kircudbright

‘There is some corner of a foreign field that is forever England.’

Vote with your heart.

Music in the Morning No. 227 – John Butler

2012-01-17T06:00:00.000Z

A guitar solo. Not just any guitar solo but an absolutely brilliant one. I hope it’s not too early for you to appreciate magic.

John Butler Ocean

If only …..

If only ….. I could play one chord!

No!

I’ll have to be an expert listener!

Music in the Morning No. 226 – Old Crow Medicine Show

2012-01-16T06:00:00.000Z

Sing-along music; jump-up-and-dance music may not what you want first thing in the morning but this will shake away any cobwebs. Don’t hold back; let it all hang out!

Old Crow Medicine Show Wagon Wheel

Right! Now I can put back all those bits which did hang out …. and move on with my day with a spring in my step.

Scottish Independence: Telegraph Cock-up?

2012-01-15T16:03:00.001Z

Lifted from today’s Telegraph.

This just has to be deliberate!

[UPDATE: ach, they’ve gone and corrected the ‘mistake’!]

Music in the Morning No. 225 – Dougie MacLean

2012-01-15T06:00:00.000Z

There have been many, many versions of this song but Dougie does his composition justice in this video. I would love this song even if it weren’t about my country because it speaks of our homeland wherever that may be.

Sit down, sit back, relax and be transported!

Dougie Maclean Caledonia

Sorry about the delay: I’ve just returned from being transported.

Scottish Independence: Telegraph Behind the Times

2012-01-14T22:45:00.001Z

The Daily Telegraph has published an article by an Iain Martin with the strap line below.

Read the article if you wish but it’s absolutely typical of the garbage produced this week by the so-called national media. I mention the article not because of this though.

I clicked on Martin’s name to get more info about him and this is what I found.

Gordon Brown !

The Labour Government …. in 2012!

I shouldn’t have been surprised by this level of incompetence because, as I said above, it’s absolutely typical of the garbage produced this week by the so-called national media.

And there’s another two years and more of this to come.

Music in the Morning No. 224 – Chris Wood and Andy Cutting

2012-01-14T06:00:00.000Z

We change form to hear a couple of reels from two fabulous English folk musicians. I’m sure you’ll love this.

Chris Wood & Andy Cutting La Contredanse / Jules Verret’s Reel

Aaaah! Each time I hear this I soften inside …. not too much, mind you!

Scottish Referendum: Open Letter to David Cameron

2012-01-13T09:53:00.001Z

Fortunately not my words but those of Kenyon Wright who may be unknown to many but was a key figure in developing the blueprint for Scottish devolution [see here and here].

‘Dear Prime Minister

The superficial nature of your proposals on the referendum simply proves that you have little understanding either of Scotland's constitutional tradition and history, or of the mood of the people of Scotland.

There are two major reasons why most Scots will, I believe, firmly reject your ideas.

The first is constitutional. In the 'Donald Dewar Room' in the Scottish Parliament there is an important document from 1989. It bears the signatures of the great majority of Scotland's MPs and of our local authorities, of representatives of civil society, the trades unions, the churches and much of the business community. Signed at the first meeting of the Scottish Constitutional Convention in March 1989, it is the fundamental principle on which the Scottish Parliament is founded. It is called 'A Claim of Right for Scotland' and states simply: 'We hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the people of Scotland to determine the form of government best suited to their needs'.

It is clear and unambiguous, and reflects a principle deep in our history, that the people, not the Crown in parliament, are sovereign. The nature, questions and timing of any referendum are matters for the Scottish people and their parliament.

The day before the new Scottish Parliament met for the first time, I handed that document over to Donald Dewar and David Steel. I said then that one day that Claim of Right would come into its own if any Westminster government attempted to impose any constitutional development on Scotland. That day has come.

Second, there are important democratic reasons to reject your proposals. Despite the fact that the electoral system in Scotland, which I had a hand in devising, was intended to be proportional and therefore to ensure that no party got an overall majority; to our surprise the SNP achieved that. This means quite simply that the present Scottish Government is more democratically representative of Scotland than yours is of the UK.

As early as 2009, I proposed to the then SNP minority government that any referendum should include a third or middle option, which I defined as 'Secure Autonomy' rather than 'Devo Max', on the grounds that 'power devolved is power retained'. There are many views, but the point is that there is a growing debate in Scotland over all these issues, and the details of the referendum, whenever it comes, will certainly reflect that debate. It is not for you to
pre-empt that process.

The Constitutional Commission of which I am president, which is politically non-aligned, has published a draft constitution for Scotland, and is initiating a nation-wide discussion not just of the referendum, but on the very different kind of democracy, already partly embodied in the present Scottish Parliament, we aspire to be. We hope to ensure that the options in the referendum are clearly understood as involving something more than simply a shift of political power. The people will, I believe, understand the full implications for Scotland's democracy of each of the options, be they two or three.

Yours sincerely

Kenyon Wright'

Kenyon Wright is president of the Constitutional Commission

I found these words at newsnetscotland who themselves borrowed them from the Constitutional Commission.

Music in the Morning No. 223 – Lisa Hannigan

2012-01-13T06:00:00.000Z

What a treat this morning!

A simple song but an incredibly beautiful song from Lisa Hannigan.

Lisa Hannigan Lille

Before launching her solo career, Lisa sang with Damien Rice and we should be thankful that she took that decision.

She brings us music of the angels!

Music in the Morning No. 222 – Drever, McCusker, Woomble

2012-01-12T06:00:00.000Z

A Scots welcome this morning: Kris Drever leads on this lovely song but with others alongside.

This is magical!

Drever, McCusker Woomble The Poorest Company

THE POOREST COMPANY

When the wind feels like the words are breathing in and out of me,
And I'm standing beside you, there's a shadow where a man should be,
I would be glad enough if wherever I might be,
People would remember we're woven in a tapestry.

When we steal what we can, with the courage to be free,
And I've found where I belong among the poorest company.

When the wind feels like the world, a useless spinning orrery,
A country round its shoulders, a flag raised on a gallows tree,
I won't let it get me down. I know there are people now
Who bind together what they do and live their lives like I want to.

When we steal what we can, I take everything I see,
And I've found where I belong among the poorest company.

When we steal what we can, with the courage to be free,
And I've found where I belong among the poorest company.

Beauty!

Brilliant!

I had another song lined up for this slot but then I found this gem.

Scottish Independence

2012-01-11T14:52:00.001Z

Last year, in the aftermath of the Scottish elections, I republished a post from 2007. With the prominence being given to Scottish independence or, at least, to the referendum I repost again.

“In May 2007, just after the last elections to the Scottish Parliament I gave my views on Scottish independence. Given the SNP’s recent victory - a majority of seats – to the same institution and the ‘national’ press’ rediscovering Scotland I thought this was an appropriate time to revisit my 2007 post.

Much of the most recent debate is characterised by ill-informed comment and prejudice. I will not contribute to this pointless approach and I believe my post is as relevant today as it was then and, so, I copy the post in its entirety. [If you want to read the comments to the original post you can find them here.]

Several weeks ago Lord Nazh asked if I believed in Great Britain or a free Scotland (along with Ireland and possibly Wales)? I read this question as asking. “Do I believe politically in an independent Scotland (with the possibility that some or all of the other three countries could be independent) or do I believe in the United Kingdom (of four countries)?”

At last I can answer him.

There are two issues I need to consider: my national identity and the politics of the situation in the light of that identity.

Let us consider my national identity. In a previous post I wrote:

“…. I consider myself Scottish and then British but, if asked, I couldn’t find words to describe even my Scottishness. I just am Scottish. I was born here. I have always lived here. As far back as I have traced – about 1750 - all my ancestors were born in Scotland. I feel British but this is a poor second to my Scottishness. I don’t feel European, ever. I know I am officially a European but the concept of Europe as an entity of which I am a citizen means nothing to me.

Some might suggest that, because I live in Edinburgh, I will have more in common with those in other large cities, for example, London or Manchester, than I do with those living in remote parts of Scotland. Certainly, my lifestyle is more similar to those in metropolitan areas than it is to those in remote Scotland but I do not identify, in any way, with other metropolitan dwellers whereas I do identify with other Scots regardless of where in Scotland they are.

Therefore, my Scottishness is undefinable – it just is – and, similarly, my Britishness just is.”

and

“If I were told that my Scottishness had to be subservient to my Britishness I couldn’t and wouldn’t do it. It isn’t as though I spend my time considering Scottishness – I rarely do - but asking me to relegate my Scottishness would be like asking me to give up my right hand so that my left hand became more important. I can’t because it’s part of me. Only by performing this simple thought experiment can I get an understanding of those for whom religion is more important than their Britishness and the difficulty they would have making their religion subservient to Britishness.”

I am quite clear: I am Scottish first and then British is a distant second. In the weeks since I wrote the above piece I make one significant addition: I am Scottish, I feel Scottish, I only feel Scottish but I am British because I know logically that I am British. I do not feel British in the way that I feel Scottish. In fact, I do not feel British.

Now how does my identity affect how I view the United Kingdom and its four component countries?

Given that I feel Scottish but only know that I am British it is inevitable that I see, feel and identify with Scotland as a country but only know, without feeling, that Britain / UK is a country. Therefore, logically, I expect that those born in England and Wales will see the position similarly. I omit Northern Ireland from this because I imagine some will see Eire as their country whereas others will see Britain as their home.

This is probably an appropriate place to say that I harbour no anti-English or anti-anyone feelings: I arrive at my position simply through my feeling of Scottishness.

From my youngest days, I have known Scotland to be a country in its own right but a country subsumed in a larger composite country (United Kingdom). Perhaps surprisingly I never dreamt of Scotland being an independent country. Just as I accepted without question that Scotland was a country I accepted without question the need for Scotland to remain within the Union. This was just how things were.

Even when the Scottish Nationalists were having success in the 1970s with their “It’s Scotland’s oil” campaign I remained a Unionist convinced that Scotland could not survive independently. It was as though the Nationalists were pushing a dream, an unrealistic and unrealisable dream. Through the years my views remained static: even devolution didn’t move my thinking although I was very much in favour.

Looking back I think my position has been that my heart would have been happy with an independent Scotland but my head has seen sufficient negatives to reject the idea. As time has passed my heart is unchanged but in my head now I am prepared to listen to the arguments in favour of, and against, independence: arguments which are solid or flimsy depending on one’s original standpoint. Therefore, I am left with inconclusive arguments about the likely success (or otherwise) of Scottish independence and the safe position, under these conditions, would be to stay in the Union but I don’t want the safe option anymore. For me the time has come when we should give independence a go and make it work. Will Scotland be better off immediately after independence? I don’t know. The success, or failure, of an independent country, of its economy is dependent on so many factors most of them outwith the control of the country that predicting the future is futile.

There is a risk but, in time, I believe we would prosper. We should take the risk.

We won’t go for it, of course. Our inherent conservatism plus the level of fear engendered by unionists will ensure a majority for maintaining the Union. I can imagine that I too would worry more and become more fearful about the future as independence beckoned. That I am not champing at the bit for independence suggests that, despite my support, I am not wholly committed. Major doubt must still remain. Sometime I will explore this area.

Even if Scotland did vote for independence moral and legal questions would abound. Could Scotland become independent on the basis of a vote of its electorate only? If so, imagine the roles reversed and the electorate of England voted for English independence whilst Scots wanted to remain in the Union: what would Scots say? I suspect that we would complain about being cast adrift by our larger partner with no opportunity to influence the decision.

If voters in both countries needed to vote, would Scots not complain that their future was dependent on voters of another country as would the English if the roles were reversed: obviously an intolerable situation.

Therefore, neither approach can be deemed as acceptable but if I had to choose one approach I would have to take the view that only the electorate of Scotland has the right to determine whether or not Scotland becomes independent with equivalent positions applying in the other UK countries.

In a long-winded way I have now answered Lord Nazh’s question.

Yes, I believe in an independent Scotland with any or all of the remaining countries having the right to proclaim independence but I do not necessarily want independence now.

At the same time, I see the UK as the composite entity of individual countries but I do not have any emotional attachment to this composite country. However, until one of the constituent countries wants to split from the UK or until I am committed fully to independence, I am happy to accept the UK as my known, but unfelt, country.

I would change only one small portion of my original thoughts: I am more likely to vote in favour of independence now.”

Now in 2012 my position has changed.

I am committed fully to independence.

Whatever the future holds – good or ill – let it be as a proud and independent Scotland.

Music in the Morning No. 221 - Eric Larkins

2012-01-11T06:00:00.000Z

After 12 months of silence this series restarts with 5 minutes of beauty in the presence of Vivaldi and Eric Larkins. I had never heard of Larkins: he is a classical guitarist, clearly, and music teacher from Atlanta.

I close my eyes and I find …..

Vivaldi: Concerto in D Major RV. 93, 2nd Movement - Largo

….. my soul!

May you find beauty and peace within.

Music in the Morning Returns Tomorrow

2012-01-10T07:16:00.001Z

After almost a year away, the series, ‘Music in the Morning’, returns tomorrow.

To get you in the mood, here is the last post, from January 2010.

Music in the Morning – Saturday – No. 220

Let’s go to Largo again this morning.

Bach: Double Violin Concerto D minor BWV 1043 M2 Largo Ma Non Tanto

Trafigura: More on Guilty Verdict

2011-12-23T17:54:00.001Z

Herewith more information on the guilty verdict from de Rechtspraak

Fine imposed on Trafigura

Amsterdam , 23-12-2011

In appellate proceedings the Amsterdam Court of Appeal has rendered judgement today in the criminal cases against Trafigura Beheer B.V. (Trafigura), Amsterdam Port Services B.V. (APS) and the municipality of Amsterdam. The Court of Appeal sentenced Trafigura to a fine of €1,000,000.

Probo Koala
The issue in these cases is a tanker, the Probo Koala, on charter to Trafigura. On board the Probo Koala washes of contaminated naphtha were carried out for Trafigura. Trafigura offered the waste materials generated in this process to APS for processing. The composition of this waste turned out to contain substances the processing of which would lead to substantially higher costs than had been agreed on. When it turned out Trafigura was unwilling to pay these higher costs, APS wanted to return this waste and to that end pump it back into the Probo Koala. This was forbidden by the police, the Public Prosecution Service and the municipal environmental health department as the Probo Koala was not a recognized waste processor. After APS had had consultations with the municipal environmental health department, this department agreed to the waste being pumped back into the Probo Koala after all, and the tanker subsequently headed to Ivory Coast with the waste.

Trafigura
The Court of Appeal considers proved that Trafigura failed to disclose the hazardous character of the waste to APS, and moreover that Trafigura illegally exported the waste to Ivory Coast after it had been given back by APS. For this the Court of Appeal, like the Court of first instance, imposes a fine of €1,000,000. The Court of Appeal believes the requirements on waste producing companies are justifiably very strict when it comes to the handing over and disposal of this waste in an environmentally sound manner. This is an important aspect of worldwide socially responsible entrepreneurship. The fact that as a globally operating group of companies Trafigura could not have been unaware of this weighs heavily in the Court of Appeal’s judgement. In its judgement the Court of Appeal has also taken into consideration the wave of negative publicity and the damage to Trafigura’s image it caused; this, as well as the positive contribution to global welfare in the form of the Trafigura Foundation. In its judgement the Court of Appeal has also taken a ruling of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas into account.

APS
The Court of Appeal also considers proved that APS handed over waste to the Probo Koala, being a non-recognized processor, and in doing so has violated the Environmental Management Act [Wet milieubeheer]. Like the Court of first instance, the Court of Appeal considers APS not liable to punishment, however, as APS could go by the notification of municipal environmental health department that this handing over was permitted. APS is therefore discharged from further prosecution.

Municipality of Amsterdam
The Court of Appeal, like the Court of first instance, establishes that the municipality of Amsterdam has immunity from prosecution as the granting of permission to pump back waste or failure to take enforcement action is an action performed in the scope of an exclusive administrative responsibility assigned to the municipality. Prosecution of the municipality of Amsterdam is therefore barred.

Trafigura !!

2011-12-23T16:00:00.001Z

Trafigura: Still Guilty

2011-12-23T14:23:00.001Z

I have emerged from my self-imposed hibernation but for a few minutes only.

The Dutch Appeal court found Trafigura guilty of the illegal export of waste to Abidjan and imposed a fine of 1 million euros: the same fine was imposed last year when Trafigura was found guilty of this offence.

Greenpeace has issued a press release which you can read in Dutch here but I append a better translation courtesy of Greenpeace Google Translate’s version in English. [Note: Post originally published with Google Translate version of press release]

‘Court confirms: Trafigura exported highly toxic waste
Amsterdam, 23 December 2011

The Appeal Court has found Trafigura's guilty of illegal export of waste from the Netherlands to Africa and for "concealing the harmful nature of the waste for life and health" when the company submitted it for processing in Amsterdam. It has fined Trafigura ? 1 million. Greenpeace is pleased that the international environmental crimes committed by Trafigura has been punished by the Dutch court. The decision of the Amsterdam Court of Appeal does justice to the international Basel Convention, that is intended to protect countries with weak environmental legislation against waste dumping.
The Basel Convention provides protection for people and the environment against the hazards of waste. "This decision is a warning to all companies that see Africa as a cheap dump for waste. The court confirmed that the Trafigura chemicals were harmful and highly toxic waste', according to Marietta Harjono, the toxics campaign leader for Greenpeace, which reported the environmental offence in 2006.

Trafigura, the world's second-largest oil trader, smelt a fat profit in 2006 when it bought very low quality coker naphtha with the aim of desulphurising it at sea in tankers like the Probo Koala using a controversial processing method. The waste disposal company APS was lined up to process the unusually odorous and toxic residue in Amsterdam, but Trafigura refused to pay the disposal costs and opted for export to Africa and spent months hawking it round different ports. The Dutch Forensic Institute analysed samples of the hazardous toxic cocktail of naphtha, sodium hydroxide, benzene, sulphide and mercaptide. For a knock-down price, this stinking mess was dumped in and around the densely-populated slums surrounding Ivory Coast's capital, Abidjan. More than a hundred thousand local residents reported health problems. The country's government reported 16 fatalities and paid damages to relatives in 2007.
Since the illegal dumping operation came out in August 2006, Trafigura has spared no expense or effort in squirming out of a conviction and blocking the search for the truth.

The Netherlands is a tax haven for companies like this with international operations, believes Greenpeace. It should stop rewarding perpetrators of environmental crimes like Trafigura with tax incentives to set up offices in the country. Greenpeace has worked for years on the establishment of the Basel Convention and, in 2006, it instigated proceedings against Trafigura, which has registered offices in the Netherlands, for the illegal export of the toxic waste from Amsterdam and the dumping of the waste in Africa. The environmental organisation stands up for the protection of people and the environment, for example by contributing to international treaties and regulations.’

Going Back to Sleep Now …. with Music

2011-12-15T06:37:00.001Z

After one month awake I am tired and it’s time for me to go to sleep. I can’t keep my eyes open long enough to finish my series of posts on Trafigura, not even for the Trafigura appeal verdict which is due today (Dec 15).

There is only one way for me to fall asleep and that is with music. Perhaps you’ll enjoy the music too.

The Carnival Is Over The Seekers

Hey, That’s No Way to Say Goodbye Leonard Cohen

No One Knows I’m Gone Tom Waits

Some Tyrant Kate Rusby

UPDATE @ 23 January 2012: The original video which showed next was removed by its uploader. I have replaced it with my video of the same music but with my words sub-titled.

Teach Me, Lord Jesus [John Dunbar Theme] CalumCarr and John Barry

Turn Your Eyes Upon Jesus (chorus) Hillsong

Thank you for sharing my waking moments.

Will I awaken again?

Very, very occasionally!

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 14 – Minton and NFI

2011-12-13T06:37:00.001Z

A series of posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.

There was serious intent behind my last post but here I will look at the issue of how the toxicity of the Probo Koala’s waste is reported by Trafigura. Trafigura may well have its own unpublished studies but two reports stand out as giving information on toxicity: the ‘super-injuncted’ Minton report and the NFI report [English version here].

‘Minton’ is a rich source of valuable information despite Trafigura saying of it:

‘Trafigura commissioned Minton, Treharne & Davies Ltd (Minton) to prepare a document, based on purely theoretical information, on what may have happened in Abidjan. This was later to become known as the ‘Minton Report’.
In fact, the Minton Report was never finalised as its contents were importantly superseded within a matter of days by comprehensive analyses of the actual slops. This analysis was carried out by the Netherlands Forensic Institute (NFI), …’ [My emphasis]

and

‘The draft report put forward various generic hypotheses on the effects of certain chemicals and gases, including hydrogen sulphide, which, as it transpired in later analysis, were not present in the actual slops in its molecular form. Yet Minton’s hypotheses would later be seized upon and irresponsibly misinterpreted in certain sections of the media.’

Trafigura are correct when they say that the Minton report must be read carefully but there is important information which is relevant to the Probo Koala’s waste but we must be aware too of the limitations of the NFI Report.

My impression is that the NFI has become almost the bible of Trafigura’s waste with the answer to any question contained within.

Not the whole truth !

I regard the NFI report very, very highly but we must remember that their study was initiated by an odour incident in Amsterdam and, as such, their interest was in volatile compounds which could be released from the waste during the treatment carried out in Amsterdam. NFI analysed both organic and aqueous phases but, for their modelling on the movement and toxicity of volatile compounds once released in to the atmosphere, only the aqueous layer was considered. [None of the organic layer was discharged or treated. ‘The composition of the oil phase is not dealt with here as it was not discharged at APS and, additionally, it was not processed in the DAF.’ NFI English version page 27]

Importantly, the NFI report focuses exclusively on the composition of the waste and its effects in Amsterdam.

What (might have) happened in Abidjan is not touched upon in the report.

Certainly we have a good understanding of the composition of the waste and the effect of pH on the release of hydrogen sulphide but we must be aware of reading too much into NFI’s modelling of volatile compound movement and effect. NFI were dealing with bulk waste – aqueous only – whose pH was known and in only one tank. Even then the process appears horrendously complex and riven with assumptions about weather and the rate of release of volatile compounds.

They could not, and did not, study waste as it was dumped in Abidjan - in many sites of varying size, depths and situations.

We can use the NFI report to help understand what might have happened in Abidjan. Let us do that but let us not be blinded to its shortcomings in the Abidjan situation.

Let us look at how both reports deal with one compound: sodium hydroxide (caustic soda)

The NFI report does not mention the toxicity of aqueous sodium hydroxide in the waste because it was of no concern to their studies but in Abidjan those who came into direct contact might well have been affected by its corrosive properties.

Minton says this:

‘3.1 Sodium hydroxide (NaOH, aqueous solution) is corrosive and can cause severe burns on contact with skin. Any inhalations of mist would lead to burns within the respiratory system.’

The aqueous layer of Trafigura’s waste was contaminated aqueous sodium hydroxide. What Minton says is relevant but Trafigura has virtually removed the Minton report from discussions on the basis that it was hypothetical and superseded by the NFI report.

Neither report is appropriate for the situation in Abidjan: both give pointers and both are severely limited.

Both must be used but with great care.

If the waste contained nothing but aqueous sodium hydroxide it would be considered toxic and dangerous to humans.

My toxic challenge has not yet been taken up by any Trafigura executive. The challenge remains open.

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 13 – Toxic Challenge

2011-12-12T08:57:00.001Z

A series of posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.

I offer a Toxic Challenge to Claude Dauphin, Eric de Turckheim or any Trafigura executives who wish to support their company!

‘The facts are that the material was water, gasoline and soda and were not dangerous for human beings.’ [Eric de Turckheim BBC Newsnight 16 August 2007 @2m 02s See video here. Video now available on YouTube @2m 09s]

‘Toxicity is a matter of concentration and location. Lots of everyday things could be defined as toxic, such as after-shave. Even milk is considered toxic if released into an inappropriate environment.’ [Page 23 - Trafigura and the Probo Koala]

Not the Whole Truth!

THE TOXIC CHALLENGE

Let’s put these two Trafigura statements to the test. I’m sure Trafigura could make this happen: they have pots of money whereas I am just a poor man.

Find two swimming pools

Fill one up with full fat milk

Fill the other with waste similar to the Probo Koala’s Abidjan waste: spent caustic plus some gasoline.

I’ll jump in, swim and stay in the milk-filled pool for one hour.

One or all of you can jump in, swim and stay in the spent caustic pool for one hour.

I’ll be fine. I might even drink some of the milk.

How will you be?

Will you drink any of your liquid which is ‘not dangerous for human beings’?

[Remember we need to make sure that none of the waste from the pools – yes, including the milk - is dumped without appropriate treatment.]

Trafigura: Flaw in MARPOL?

2011-12-11T20:29:00.001Z

This post is a follow-on from my last post – Trafigura and MARPOL - and here I examine if Trafigura’s use of MARPOL as a defence against the illegal exporting of waste shows up a flaw in how MARPOL operates.

Rather than use Trafigura as an example, which might leave me open to criticism or more, I consider the hypothetical cases of the three Carr brothers:

Angus: absolutely straight and a stickler for the law

Billy: abides by the law but operates where the best profit is to be found.

Calum: a chancer! Lives for and loves profit. Rules are there to be broken

I have chosen the fictional Carr brothers for this story so that I can write without fear. Any resemblance to a person or company is entirely coincidental. I write only to highlight a flaw in MARPOL.

Each of us runs a separate trading company buying and selling liquids for markets worldwide. Surprisingly, each of us found very similar deals in which a cheap but dirty feedstock was purchased, chemically altered and then traded. Unfortunately, the waste from the chemical alteration was very toxic, very difficult and very expensive to treat, there being only a few sites worldwide capable of disposing of the waste.

This is the situation with which each of us had to deal.

Angus wouldn’t consider going outsider Europe for the chemical alteration. In fact, he found a Dutch company willing to carry out the process and another Dutch company to treat the waste. 'Cost me an arm and a leg’ he said, ‘but still made a good profit’.

Billy found the same Dutch companies but wasn’t prepared to pay the going rate and so he looked for alternatives. Billy discovered that he could make more profit by carrying out chemical alteration on board a tanker, sailing to market and disposing of the waste under MARPOL but at a port which he knew could and would dispose of the waste safely. ‘Magic deal, magic profit’.

Calum [the ‘real’ Calum is dead straight but in this story I’ve allowed him to be a disreputable and immoral chancer] found the same Dutch companies, wasn’t prepared to even consider them, decided - like Billy - to use a tanker as a floating chemical plant. The waste wasn’t much of a problem to me. I twigged early on that I could characterise the waste as MARPOL Annex 1 and Annex 2 waste. That was all I needed. The tanker sailed to market and on the way back home stopped off at a MARPOL port which couldn’t treat the toxic waste properly but was allowed to receive MARPOL Annex 2 waste. ‘Take that, brothers. Job done. Profit beyond dreams. The waste? I complied with the law.’

Each us had the same waste to dispose of. Angus and Billy made sure that the toxic waste was treated absolutely properly because it was very toxic. I, Calum, on the other hand, sneaked the waste through under MARPOL at a port where the cost was low, the treatment poor and the toxic waste potentially dumped near a town . I wasn’t bothered because I was covered by MARPOL. What happened to the waste was irrelevant once I had discharged it to the port.

If Trafigura win their appeal in Amsterdam - all waste produced on board ship is subject only to MARPOL regulations - then Calum’s approach is legal although I had no regard for the proper treatment of the waste nor for the safety of those who received it, treated it and definitely not for anyone else who might come into contact with the waste.

My brothers were responsible and made a good profit.

I acted irresponsibly, immorally and without regard for anything or anyone other than my profit.

From mid-December, my example might be legal.

Close this MARPOL loophole NOW!

Trafigura and MARPOL

2011-12-09T20:39:00.001Z

Before you start, I’ll apologise because this post is DRY: it’s the background which then allows me to write an important post in which I will ask if MARPOL is fit for purpose. In that second post you’ll have the pleasure of meeting the three Carr brothers - Angus, Billy and Calum. But first, let’s get the basics done!

MARPOL is very important to Trafigura, a major charterer of vessels, by enabling its ships to dispose of their normal wastes at any port which is a signatory to MARPOL. This they can do without notice and at any convenient port. This facility keeps the world’s shipping moving efficiently.

MARPOL is important to the sea because, without the ease of disposal in port, much more waste would be dumped at sea.

MARPOL is very important to Trafigura in another way but, before I cover that, let me say a little about what MARPOL is. Rather, let me append what Trafigura has to say.

‘The handling of ship generated waste, including slops, is regulated by the international convention MARPOL 73/78, [ marine pollution] which is …. one of the most important international marine environmental conventions and it was designed to minimise pollution of the seas, including dumping of oil and exhaust pollution. Its stated object is: ‘to preserve the marine environment through the complete elimination of pollution by oil and other harmful substances and the minimisation of accidental discharge of such substances’.’ [Emphasis is mine]

and

‘Under the MARPOL Convention, each state has the obligation to ensure that it has the necessary facilities to handle ships’ waste efficiently and safely and each vessel has to maintain an oil log book detailing movements in its oil cargoes.’

and

‘All ships flagged under countries that are signatories to MARPOL are subject to its requirements, regardless of where they sail, and member nations are responsible for vessels registered under their respective nationalities.’

MARPOL, therefore, ensures that appropriate facilities exist for the disposal of ships waste and once discharged responsibility for the waste switches from the ship to the port and its national requirements.

In the Dutch courts last year, Trafigura argued that the Probo Koala’s waste was produced on board ship and was, thus, subject to MARPOL. The court disagreed stating caustic washing did not fall under the normal operations of a ship and so MARPOL did not apply.

In the absence of MARPOL, the BASEL Convention applied and, therefore, the court said, that Trafigura needed an export licence to ship the waste from Amsterdam to Abidjan. There were other legal arguments. [If you are a glutton for punishment you can read three of my posts here, here and here]

Trafigura is challenging its conviction in the Dutch courts with a verdict due in mid-December. Although I argued for BASEL applying and not MARPOL, I concede, based on my limited knowledge, that Trafigura has a strong case if not a compelling one.

If MARPOL were to apply, Trafigura could have disposed of the Probo Koala’s waste at any MARPOL port regardless of whether there were adequate facilities to treat the waste.

That would not seem right even if it were legal and, as I said at the beginning, I’ll explore this in my next post. Look out for Angus, Billy and Calum Carr!

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 12 – 3000 Mile Truth Gap

2011-12-08T22:04:00.001Z

A series of posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.

‘Trafigura had absolutely no reason to believe that the operation in Abidjan would be mishandled.’

‘Indeed, there was nothing to suggest its [Abidjan’s] facilities or personnel were unable to treat the slops from the Probo Koala.’

So said Trafigura in their 38 page document, ‘Trafigura and the Probo Koala’.

Not the whole truth!

Let’s look at other quotes from Trafigura from late 2005 to early 2006.

‘We have already spoken to all the main storage companies, US / Singapore and European terminals no longer allow the use of caustic soda washes since local environmental agencies do not allow disposal of the toxic caustic after treatment.’ [Naeem Ahmed Dec 2005]

‘Caustic washes are banned by most countries due to the hazardous nature of the waste (mercaptans, phenols, smell)

suppliers of caustic are unwilling to dispose of the water since there are not many facilities remaining in the market.

There is a company in Rotterdam that burns such waste in a high stack chimney and charges are approx $200/kg and could have up to 1000kg of sludge after a treatment operation.

Under EU law you no longer allowed to transport such waste across EU borders.’

[All from Naeem Ahmed in Dec 2005. Claude Dauphin was copied into email]

‘Will still need to find a company that will take the waste’

[Naeem Ahmed in Dec 2005]

‘There is only one specialist disposal company in Rotterdam they charge $250/kg but not allowed to drive across EU borders.’

[Naeem Ahmed Dec 2005]

‘We should also be talking to specialist Chemical clean up companies about the process of clean up afterwards ….’ [James McNicoll Dec 2005]

‘I don’t know how we dispose of the slops and I don’t imply we would dump them

but there must be a way to pay someone to take them.’

[Both from Leon Christophilopoulos March 2006]

‘We are coming up with some problems regarding treating/disposing of the PMI naphtha out of Brownsville

We are now limited to caustic washing on a ship.

La Skhirra where we were washing/discharging will not let us discharge this material anymore.

We also still haven’t tackled how we dispose of the washings on board the vessel washing the cargo.’

[All from Leon Christophilopoulos Apr 2006. Claude Dauphin copied in]

and Trafigura:

describe their waste to be typical MARPOL waste which could be treated at any sophisticated port with reception facilities

never identified Abidjan as a port with the specialist facilities needed to treat their waste

said, ‘Indeed, there was nothing to suggest its [Abidjan’s] facilities or personnel were unable to treat the slops from the Probo Koala.’

Again, as we saw in Amsterdam, Trafigura’s pre-knowledge of the process and its waste is totally incompatible with their later actions and words.

There is a truth gap the size of the distance between Amsterdam and Abidjan.

Only Trafigura can fill this gap with their knowledge, with truth. Until they do it will fill with speculation.

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 11 - Abidjan and MARPOL

2011-12-08T18:17:00.001Z

A series of posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.

I stay with the third paragraph on page 4 (the 1st page of text) for this short extract [in Trafigura’s own document: Trafigura and the Probo Koala.]

‘The Ivory Coast was also a MARPOL signatory and Abidjan was explicitly registered to handle slops disposal.’

Page 8 states in similar fashion:

‘Given that the Ivory Coast is a MARPOL signatory, it is entirely appropriate that the port was equipped to handle slops.’

There is an issue of whether MARPOL applies to the Probo Koala’s waste: this is part of Trafigura’s appeal in Amsterdam. I’ll deal with this later.

Once more I agree with all of these two quotes but, unfortunately, they are:

Not the whole truth

These sentences suggest to me that Abidjan was capable of receiving and treating all forms of slops. One might even read into this that Abidjan was qualified to receive and treat the Probo Koala’s waste.

But this isn’t true. Let’s ignore the Probo Koala for a moment.

MARPOL requires only that a port has the facilities to receive slops. There is no requirement that ports have the facilities to treat and dispose of all forms of slops. A ship’s obligations require it to only discharge its waste into a port reception facility. Its obligations end with the transfer to port facilities.

As a major charterer of ships, Trafigura would know marine law and MARPOL inside out and should have known that once wastes were received by a port they moved into that nation’s waste programme. Trafigura should also have known that many countries do not have effective national waste programmes.

An acknowledged expert in MARPOL and other waste ‘treaties’, the late Louise Angelique de La Fayette, wrote:

‘Unfortunately, even where port facilities are adequate, there often remains a problem after ships’ wastes are discharged in port, due to inadequate disposal facilities on land for all kinds of waste. Many developing countries (and even some developed countries) do not have well-functioning general waste management and disposal systems.’ [Sound Management of Wastes Generated at Sea: Environmental Policy and Law, 39/4-5 (2009)]

Now remember that the Probo Koala’s waste was known by Trafigura to be difficult to dispose of with few sites worldwide willing and able to dispose of spent caustic.

Trafigura’s statements above are reassuring but Ms de LA Fayette’s paper alone should remove Trafigura’s certainty.

Did Abidjan have ‘well-functioning general waste management and disposal systems.’?

There are so many ‘Not the whole truth’s in this tale that I can hope to list only a few. In my next post I’ll look at another reassuring sentence from Trafigura on this same topic.

Trafigura: Enforcing the Truth Gap

2011-12-08T10:42:00.001Z

This is a little diversion albeit an important one. On his excellent blog Richard Wilson posts – under Parliamentary Privilege – an extract from the testimony of Alan Rusbridger of the Guardian to the Culture Media and Sports Committee which Rusbridger describes the pressure put on the Guardian by both Carter-Ruck and Bell Pottinger.

This is not new information – there is little new information unfortunately - but it is extremely relevant because of the current revelations about Bell-Pottinger.

Thanks Richard!

Please read Richard’s post.

Using exactly the same Parliamentary Privilege I append a different part of Rusbridger’s evidence to the Culture Media and Sports Committee.

‘Along with others of the European media and the BBC, we have recently been subject to what we regard as a prolonged campaign of legal harassment by Carter-Ruck on behalf of London-based oil traders, Trafigura.

Trafigura arranged the illegal dumping of 500 tons of highly toxic oil waste in the West African country of Cote d'Ivoire. Thousands of the population of Abidjan, the capital, subsequently became ill and, after a bitterly fought law suit, Trafigura has now been forced to pay a degree of compensation to the victims.

Carter-Ruck, like such other firms as Schillings, are trying to carve out for themselves a slice of the lucrative market known as 'reputation management'. This is not about the perfectly proper job of helping people or organisations gain legal redress when they have been mistreated by the press.

It is a pitch to work with PR firms to pressurize and intimidate journalists in advance on behalf of big business. It exploits the oppressive nature and the frightening expense of British libel laws.

Carter-Ruck's boasts on their website are appended [APPENDIX 1].

After the toxic waste dumping in 2006, Trafigura embarked on what was essentially a cover story. They used Carter-Ruck and PR specialists Bell Pottinger, working in concert to enforce their version on the media.

The cover story was that Trafigura used a tanker for normal 'floating storage' of gasoline. They had then, they claimed, discharged the routine tank-washing 'slops', which were harmless, to a disposal company, and had no responsibility whatever for the subsequent disaster.

In fact, Trafigura had deliberately used a primitive chemical process to make cheap contaminated gasoline more saleable, and knew the resultant toxic waste was impossible to dispose of legally in Europe.

The Guardian experienced an intimidatory approach repeatedly in the Trafigura case. Other journalists at BBC Newsnight, the Norwegian state broadcaster NRK and the Dutch newspaper Volkskrant, told us of identical threats. The BBC eventually received a libel writ. NRK were the subject of a formal complaint - eventually rejected - to the Norwegian press ethics body.’

Many are certain, as is Rusbridger, of the truth of the Trafigura saga. They saw the truth gap and, I assume, saw no way to bridge that beyond the view expressed by Rusbridger. I understand why this view is held and why that view remains dominant and will do so until Trafigura fill in the gap with truth.

I posted about Rusbridger’s evidence in March 2010 and I close with the last sentence of that post.

Legal action, or the threat of legal action, does not turn untruth into truth or, for that matter, truth into untruth.

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 10 – Abidjan and Slops

2011-12-08T08:41:00.001Z

A series of posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.

After a few posts away I return to Trafigura’s 38 page document, “Trafigura and the Probo Koala”. I am still on page 4, where I was for posts 1 to 5 in this series but I’ve moved to the third paragraph a portion of which I have appended.

‘Abidjan is not a remote, third world backwater as implied by some media reports: it is a major African port and industrial city, the country is a major crude oil producer and exporter, it has a refinery adjacent to the port and other modern industrial facilities. In addition to the handling of wastes from refining oil, slops have been discharged there without incident many times before by international companies, including oil majors.’ [My emphasis]

I do not disagree with any of this provided I omit the words ‘without incident’ : I have no information to support or deny this. With this proviso I accept that Trafigura has written the truth.

Later in the same document - page 8 they write in a similar vein.

‘Since 1965, the port had been handling oil-related cargoes for a number of major oil companies and was therefore experienced in operations relating to slops from vessels.’

Again these are words I agree with but ….

A huge truth is hidden.

Not the whole truth!

I wrote about this very issue in the third post - Not the Whole Truth 3 – ‘An Everyday Occurrence’? – and I make no apologies for reproducing much of that post here. What I wrote then is directly relevant to Trafigura’s statement about Abidjan.

_____

The highlighted sentence in the context of the paragraph implies, in my view, that the Probo Koala’s waste was of a type normally or routinely discharged – ‘an everyday occurrence’ - but the waste was far from routine and Trafigura’s emails show they knew that it was not routine waste.

In December 2005, Naeem Ahmed sent an email – cc-ing Claude Dauphin – which stated:

‘I have approached all our storage terminals with the possibility of Caustic washing and only Vopak Fujairah and Tankmed La Skhirra our (sic) willing to entertain the idea, and currently perform this operation at FRCL (Fujairah) only. This operation is no longer allowed in EU / US / Singapore.

Caustic washes are banned by most countries due to the hazardous nature of the waste (mercaptans, phenols, smell) and suppliers of caustic are unwilling to dispose of the water since there are not many facilities remaining in the market. There is a company in Rotterdam that burns such waste in a high stack chimney and charges are approx $200/kg and could have up to 1000kg of sludge after a treatment operation. Under EU law you no longer allowed to transport such waste across EU borders.’

Here Trafigura are looking at caustic washing the coker naphtha on land but they are struggling to find any company to do so because the process is banned or because the waste is difficult and expensive to dispose of.

According to the Judgment of the Dutch Court, “The washing of gasoline is an industrial process that, up until that point, had always been carried out in appropriate installations on land, …”

I have seen no evidence that caustic washing of coker naphtha had ever been carried out on board ship before Trafigura used the Probo Koala.

If this was the first time this process had been carried out on board ship, then disposal of the Probo Koala’s cannot be described as ‘an everyday occurrence’.

If ‘suppliers of caustic are unwilling to dispose of the water since there are not many facilities remaining in the market’ then disposal of the Probo Koala’s waste cannot be described as ‘an everyday occurrence’.

If ‘Caustic washes are banned by most countries due to the hazardous nature of the waste (mercaptans, phenols, smell)’ then disposal of the Probo Koala’s waste cannot be described as ‘an everyday occurrence’.

‘(A)n everyday occurrence’?

Not the whole truth !

The information in this post not only shows ‘not the whole truth’ it begs the question, ‘How could Trafigura not ensure that the waste was disposed of by one of the ‘not many facilities remaining in the market.’

_____

Here we have the same ‘Not the whole truth’ in Abidjan as in Amsterdam. Surely the same missing information, the same missing truth, will allow us to understand the dichotomy. Trafigura, if it so wished, could put the missing truth into the public domain today.

Well?

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 9 – Amsterdam Truth Gap

2011-12-07T20:38:00.001Z

A series of posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.

In my 8th post in this series I said that “My next post will give more details of what NFI’s modelling predicts for the effects of odour release from APS.” Apologies! I felt that the point was made in No. 8 and that any more was overly labouring the issue.

Here I summarise what we know Trafigura knew about the caustic washing of coker naphtha before Trafigura committed the Probo Koala to sail to Amsterdam. Alongside this I put their actions in Amsterdam (before, during and after the visit). I contend that the two are irreconcilable and can only become reconcilable when more information, more truth comes into the public domain.

Far better to highlight and keep highlighting the truth gap.

Far better to highlight and keep highlighting those areas which don’t stack up.

Far better to ask and keep asking Trafigura to answer questions.

Far better to highlight and keep highlighting those questions Trafigura does not answer (if there are any).

Enough of this. It’s time to identify the truth gap in Amsterdam.

What goes into the Truth Gap?

Trafigura: Greenpeace Responds to Criticism

2011-12-07T14:36:00.001Z

Almost 3 weeks ago I published a post which detailed criticism of Greenpeace and the news media with whom they cooperated. Although I didn’t agree with the criticisms, in the interests of balance, I posted.

Today I put online an English translation of Greenpeace’s response which is a slightly modified version of their own Dutch release from 18 November. An English version has been available through Google Translate but was difficult to read. Please take the time to read this article: many issues are addressed although I must add the caveat that the views expressed are those of Greenpeace.

There will be some who say that my publication of this translation confirms I am in the pocket of Greenpeace. No! If you are in doubt please read, for example, my initial post of 3 weeks ago in which I gave a platform to criticism of Greenpeace. I have my views but I try to write in a balanced way although that can be difficult when questions are not answered, where a truth gap exists.

Greenpeace give their views on the:

- work of Karel Knip and Jaffe Vink both of whom have written in support of Trafigura and criticising Greenpeace and others.

- toxicity debate surrounding the Probo Koala’s waste

- question of whether hydrogen sulphide could have been released in Abidjan

- question of the number of fatalities – if any – in Abidjan

- conspiracy theories of Knip and Vink: Greenpeace and media

- use Trafigura make of the law

Please read the article – online here. I would do a disservice if I picked more than this last paragraph:

‘Trafigura is lucky to have opinion leaders like Vink and Knip. Constantly banging on about things that are impossible to establish now - such as the precise details of the impact of the waste on people and the environment - is a distraction from the basic issue at stake: the fact that Trafigura should never have dumped the waste in Ivory Coast in the way it did.’

I need to clarify the last 18 words

‘the fact that Trafigura should never have dumped the waste in Ivory Coast in the way it did.’

We all know that Trafigura itself did not dump the waste in and around Abidjan: that was done by Company Tommy. I believe the article is saying that Trafigura should never have taken its waste to Ivory Coast. Please read these last 18 words in the way I have described.

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 8: Not Low Risk in Amsterdam

2011-12-06T19:05:00.001Z

A series of posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.

In July last year, a Dutch court found Trafigura guilty of hiding the real nature of the Probo Koala’s waste when it arrived in Amsterdam [See AFP]

I reported previously how the Probo Koala’s waste did not meet the acceptance criteria for APS’ quote; how Trafigura could / should have known that this was the case.

Because they misled APS, according to the Dutch court, Trafigura’s waste went into the low- risk treatment stream.

In the first post of the series I wrote:

‘According to the NFI Report, upon which Trafigura has relied to support its views,

“The waste water from the Probo Koala was accepted by APS as low-risk material.”

but it wasn’t “low-risk”.’

In this low–risk stream the pH of the aqueous waste was reduced to a point at which hydrogen sulphide could be released. NFI used modelling techniques to predict the effects of the release of hydrogen sulphide and other compounds on the surrounding area under different weather conditions, different amounts of waste treated and different amounts of mercaptans and hydrogen sulphide released.

My next post will give more details of what NFI’s modelling predicts for the effects of odour release from APS but here I give only one prediction.

‘Discussion of scenario B: 3.6 g/s mercaptans and 0.25 g/s H2S
In all weather conditions there was an unpleasant smell up to a large distance from the source (approx. 1.5 km) as a consequence of exceeding the VRW for (mainly) mercaptans. This distance may
extend to 7 km in the most unfavourable circumstances (for spreading) (D 1.5). In this part scenario there is probably no overshooting of the AGW in the surroundings. In this scenario the area with possible effects from exceeding the AGW for mercaptans (nausea and headaches) is restricted to APS’s premises.’

NOTE 1: Of all the predictions this is the one with the smallest effect. All others give greater effects.

NOTE 2: VRW = This is the concentration of a substance that would most probably be experienced by most of the exposed population as a nuisance. Above the VRW level, slight, rapidly reversible health effects are possible. The VRW is often the concentration at which exposed individuals begin to complain of their awareness of exposure. Complaints of smell.

NOTE 3: AGW = This is the concentration of a substance at which irreversible or other serious health damage may occur due to direct toxic effects. Nausea and headaches.

These predictions were made on the basis of the amount of Trafigura’s waste NFI believed was actually treated. If larger or smaller amounts had been treated then the effect might have been greater or smaller respectively.

Even if, as APS assert – see last post, none of the Probo Koala’s waste was processed the treatment conditions – addition of acid and dilution with water - were such that hydrogen sulphide would have been released when its treatment started.

What is clear is that by telling ‘Not the whole truth’ Trafigura risked a more serious incident in Amsterdam.

I leave you with this quote from page 36 of the translated NFI report.

‘It is established that the processing of one or more litres of Probo Koala waste can cause the VRW to be exceeded, irrespective of the type of weather.’

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth - Update to Nos. 6 & 7

2011-12-06T13:06:00.001Z

Yesterday I reported that, according to the NFI report, the Probo Koala’s waste almost certainly caused a release of hydrogen sulphide at the Amsterdam facilities of APS, the company to whom the waste was discharged.

Late last night I received some information – not from APS or Trafigura – that cast doubt on one aspect of the NFI report.

Based on the NFI report, the public prosecutor in Amsterdam last year apparently highlighted the release of hydrogen sulphide from the Probo Koala’s waste but APS stated in court that none of that waste was processed and, therefore, the hydrogen sulphide released did not come from the Probo Koala’s waste.

Even if the APS view is correct, and this is not known yet, my reading of the NFI report shows that the Probo Koala’s waste would have produced hydrogen sulphide had it been treated.

There is, therefore, some confusion about what actually happened and I await more information before I can judge the seriousness of the doubt. Until I get this information I will leave posts 6 and 7 unchanged other than putting in a link to this post.

UPDATE 6 Dec@ 17.40: You may wonder why I flagged up this issue, why didn’t I leave it.

I hope this doesn’t seem high and mighty but truth matters, my integrity matters!

Very, Very Occasionally with Per-Olov

2011-12-05T19:26:00.001Z

Two videos from the classical guitarist, Per-Olov Kindgren. I’d never heard of him either! But … wow!

J S Bach Air on a G String Per-Olov Kindgren

and then

Astor Piazzolla Milonga del Angel Per-Olov Kindgren

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 7– More Hydrogen Sulphide

2011-12-05T18:48:00.001Z

A series of posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.

[Update: 6 Dec 2011 @ 13.10 Please read this post in conjunction with the update posted here]

I apologise again for my circumspection: I do not want Carter-ruck to come calling because I have libelled Trafigura and so I write what I can defend.

If you haven’t read Part 6 then you should do so now because then this post will make more sense, I think. After the heaviness of Part 6 this is a light and simple post.

In Part 6 I wrote that hydrogen sulphide was released in Amsterdam from the facilities of APS when the Probo Koala’s waste was in the system. Because of the size and complexity of APS’ plant the scientists at NFI – see here for their report in English – could not state with absolute certainty that the Probo Koala’s waste was the cause although they were confident that it was.

But there is more ‘Not the Whole Truth’ to the hydrogen sulphide story!

In their document, “Trafigura and the Probo Koala” on page 24 Trafigura pose and answer a question.

‘So where did this idea of hydrogen sulphide come from?
The hydrogen sulphide allegations came in large part from a misinterpretation by the BBC and other media entities of a report carried out on samples of the slops out by the Netherlands Forensic Institute (NFI).

In the course of testing for composition, the NFI acidified a part of the sample to a pH of 1. Under those extremely acidic conditions, conversion of the sulphides and bisulphides can occur, thereby creating and releasing hydrogen sulphide.

The NFI Report stated that the slops registered a pH of 14, a reading that was extremely alkaline. Crucially, there is no evidence to suggest that conditions at any of the Abidjan dump sites were sufficiently acidic to effect a change in the slops that would mean that the slops would generate hydrogen sulphide to such an extent that they could have caused harm to human health as alleged.’

Not the whole truth!

Trafigura answer the question to show that hydrogen sulphide couldn’t have formed in Abidjan after dumping but they might also have chosen the extract I used in Part 6 - from page 27 of the same NFI report:

Don’t worry about ‘DAF’ – a process within APS’ treatment or the sample numbers. Again I have emphasised a portion.

‘If compounds spread through the air, only gases and volatile compounds are significant. Regarding the Probo Koala waste water, this involved hydrogen sulphide (H2S) and methyl- and ethylmercaptans.

At pH 14 (the pH of the Probo Koala waste water), however, these compounds dissolve well in water. Only after the addition of sufficient acid can they be removed. The pH of samples [4-1A] and [4-2A] svos from the DAF (svos 1.019 and 1.021) is 7.8.

The pH is the result of adding acid during the neutralization stage of the DAF process and from the large quantity of water from Tank 9 with which the Probo Koala waste was most probably mixed and whose pH value will generally be much lower than 14.

At a pH of 7.8 volatile mercaptans and hydrogen sulphide may be released as gases, but that does not mean that this occurs to 100%’

and said hydrogen sulphide couldn’t have formed in Abidjan but it did in Amsterdam.

Here was another opportunity to put more truth into the public domain but Trafigura didn’t take it.

Not the whole truth!

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 6 – Amsterdam Hydrogen Sulphide

2011-12-05T18:05:00.001Z

A series of posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. I don’t allege that the “Not the Whole Truth”s are deliberate.

[Update: 6 Dec 2011 @ 13.10 Please read this post in conjunction with the update posted here]

Hydrogen sulphide was released from the Probo Koala’s waste. [Update 5 Dec 2011 @ 18.57: For my protection I need to remove the absolute certainty in that opening sentence by adding ‘Almost certainly’ at the start. I was circumspect elsewhere in the post but I missed this. Apologies.]

In Amsterdam.

Yes! In Amsterdam!

I don’t recall anyone mentioning this before. Of course, I could be wrong. Certainly I have found no record of Trafigura stating that hydrogen sulphide was released from the Probo Koala’s waste during APS’ treatment. If they have then I’m sure they’ll correct me.

I had missed this nugget many times previously but then, at last, I saw!

Trafigura make much of the fact that, because of the alkaline nature of the waste, hydrogen sulphide could not be released from the waste dumped in Abidjan. Their source is the much-quoted NFI report which, incidentally, was commissioned because of the smell from – almost certainly - the Probo Koala’s waste in Amsterdam and not because of the waste’s dumping in Abidjan.

I haven’t found any mention by Trafigura that the Probo Koala’s waste caused the release of hydrogen sulphide in Amsterdam nor even that the PK’s waste might have caused the release.

Not the whole truth!

I go back now to Trafigura’s 38 page document, “Trafigura and the Probo Koala”. The first 5 posts came from the first 6 sentences in this paper but I move forward …. for this post only but I apologise here for the complexity of the post. This was necessary for my legal protection. I can’t afford to make any unsupported allegations.

On page 7, Trafigura writes about the impossibility of hydrogen sulphide release in Abidjan:

‘The NFI Report stated that the slops registered a pH of 14, a reading that was extremely alkaline. At this level it was impossible, firstly, for the material to contain hydrogen sulphide in its molecular form ….’

and on page 23:

‘The NFI Report found that the slops were highly alkaline which means that they could simply not have contained hydrogen sulphide in its molecular form. As stated by the NFI witness (FJM Bakker) in the Amsterdam criminal proceedings of 11th May 2010 the slops have ‘to be diluted millions of times before hydrogen sulphide is released, or you must add acid’.’ [My emphasis]

and adding acid is exactly what happened to the slops in Amsterdam!

Page 27 of the NFI Report (English version) states. [Don’t worry about ‘DAF’ – a process within APS’ treatment or the sample numbers] Again I have emphasised a portion:

‘If compounds spread through the air, only gases and volatile compounds are significant. Regarding the Probo Koala waste water, this involved hydrogen sulphide (H2S) and methyl- and ethylmercaptans.

At pH 14 (the pH of the Probo Koala waste water), however, these compounds dissolve well in water. Only after the addition of sufficient acid can they be removed. The pH of samples [4-1A] and [4-2A] svos from the DAF (svos 1.019 and 1.021) is 7.8.

The pH is the result of adding acid during the neutralization stage of the DAF process and from the large quantity of water from Tank 9 with which the Probo Koala waste was most probably mixed and whose pH value will generally be much lower than 14.

At a pH of 7.8 volatile mercaptans and hydrogen sulphide may be released as gases, but that does not mean that this occurs to 100%’

The explanation given by the NFI witness for the release of hydrogen sulphide from the Probo Koala’s waste actually happened .… in Amsterdam.

The same page of the report also states:

‘Conclusion: methyl- and ethylmercaptans and hydrogen sulphide are in all probability the most important compounds released on 3rd July.’

While the Probo Koala’s waste was in APS’ facilities, hydrogen sulphide was released.

The NFI scientists carried out an extremely rigorous analysis of the odour incident - I have confidence in their work – but they do not say with absolute certainty that the cause of the hydrogen sulphide release was the Probo Koala’s waste. They conclude:

‘It may be posited that, in view of the considerations contained in the analysis report, the results of the comparative analysis are a better fit with hypothesis 1 (the components encountered in the samples from the DAF installation come from Probo Koala/Main VII) than with hypothesis 2 (the components encountered in the samples from the DAF installation come from another source).’

That the scientists use ‘better fit’ might lead some to argue that without certainty the Probo Koala cannot be found guilty. I think the scientists cover this off.

Also in the conclusions to the report the risk to human health is considered and here only two scenarios are considered and each involves the Probo Koala’s waste.

Although there is no certainty, the only position which is written with any confidence is that in which the Probo Koala’s waste was the cause of the incident. Nowhere in the report, I believe, is succour given to the counter-argument.

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth - Post Delayed

2011-12-05T16:26:00.001Z

Apologies.

I had hoped to have another post up yesterday (Sunday 4 Dec) but, because of the potential sensitivity to the claim I make, I am checking and rechecking my facts.

I do NOT intend to leave myself open to Carter-Ruck!

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 5 – Price Hike & COD

2011-12-03T21:29:00.001Z

A series of posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.

In the first four posts I haven’t got past the first paragraph in Trafigura’s 38 page document, “Trafigura and the Probo Koala” – on page 4 after the index but I move forward now …..

…. to the second sentence (highlighted) in the second paragraph. Below is the entire paragraph – remember this is the 5th post in the series and I’m only on the sixth sentence of the paper.

Trafigura appointed a licensed operator, Amsterdam Port Services BV (APS), to handle the treatment of the slops. After receiving the slops on their barge in Amsterdam, APS increased its price for treatment of the slops by 3,000% without justification. [My emphasis] Trafigura rejected APS’ offer and departed Amsterdam for Paldiski, Estonia where it was due to collect a cargo.

Not the Whole Truth!

I don’t know the basis on which APS increased the price 30-fold but the agreed waste did not meet the specification: not by a long, long way.

APS stipulated that the Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) value – a simple measure of water quality and of its polluting ability - should be less than 2000 mg/l but the average value, as reported by NFI (Netherlands Forensic Institute), was 600000 mg/l. [For a definition of COD see the end of this post.]

The Probo Koala’s waste exceeded the stipulated limit 300-fold (or by 30,000%). On this basis alone, APS had a right to review the charges.

Later in Trafigura’s document - on page 7 - is this:

‘APS claimed the Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) level of the slops was higher than the figure than they had anticipated but provided no test results to substantiate the claim.’

APS expected that the waste’s COD would not exceed 2000mg/l as agreed by Trafigura. APS may not have provided test results but the first result they gave - 500,000 mg/l – now looks to have been accurate. I must state also that APS later gave a much lower figure of 20,000 mg/l.

Trafigura should have expected the waste’s COD to exceed the limit set by APS. I found on the web this information about the range of CODs to be found in spent caustic:

[From spentcaustic.com]
’Typically 10,000 to 100,000 mg/L
Low: 3,000 mg/L
High: 200,000 mg/L’

The very next sentence on page 7 is:

‘In reality, while high, the COD level of the slops material was irrelevant ….’

Not the whole truth!

The COD level did matter.

The NFI Report (Dutch version here; English translation here) – 2nd last paragraph in Section 8.2 states

‘As an example it was calculated what the dilution factor would be on the basis of the COD criteria, taken from page 3 of the TCR. There a maximum of 2000 mg/l is given for the COD (Chemical Oxygen Demand).’

This figure is taken from the data for a similar installation in Rotterdam. The Report states that design changes and/or experience may lead to a different maximum at APS.

The maximum COD of 2000 mg/l above is the same maximum given in the APS quote which Trafigura accepted. The NFI Report continues:

‘The COD measured in the Probo Koala waste varies from 450000 (measured by ATM, see svo 3.002), 650000 measured by APS 4, to the value 720000 mg/l measured by Omegam and cited in this report; the average is 600000 mg/l.’

The Probo Koala’s waste massively exceeded the maximum level with which the process could cope. The Report goes on:

‘This means that the waste water from the Probo Koala must be diluted by a factor of 300 to remain within the limits of the original design criteria.’

The average measured COD was 600000 mg/l which when diluted by 300 ==> 2000mg/l: the design limit.

Not the whole truth, indeed!

___________________________

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)

In environmental chemistry, the chemical oxygen demand (COD) test is commonly used to indirectly measure the amount of organic compounds in water. Most applications of COD determine the amount of organic pollutants found in surface water (e.g. lakes and rivers) or wastewater, making COD a useful measure of water quality. It is expressed in milligrams per liter (mg/L), which indicates the mass of oxygen consumed per liter of solution.

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 4 – Smell Again

2011-12-02T14:08:00.001Z

A series of posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. [UPDATE: added 21.30 on 3 Dec 2011: I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.]

In the first three posts I haven’t got past the first paragraph in Trafigura’s 38 page document, “Trafigura and the Probo Koala” – on page 4 after the index. I stay with this paragraph for more about the smell [see post 1], mention of which is missing from Trafigura’s description of the attempted discharge of waste in Amsterdam.

‘In 2006 Trafigura time chartered the Probo Koala, a tanker, for the transportation of oil products. The vessel carried out a procedure for caustic washing on several cargoes of one such product, coker naphtha, and needed to discharge a relatively small amount of residual waste (often referred to as ‘slops’). Coker naphtha is a commonly available and widely traded product. The discharge and treatment of slops and waste materials from all vessels, including crude oil and product carriers, is an everyday occurrence around the world.’

But they did know about the smell. In the last post I quoted a Trafigura email. Here I use an extract:

‘Caustic washes are banned by most countries due to the hazardous nature of the waste (mercaptans, phenols, smell)’

Trafigura knew in December 2005, almost 6 months before the Probo Koala docked in Amsterdam, that the waste would be smelly.

Naeem Ahmed, who sent the email and knew that the waste would be smelly and disposal expensive, was also the person who emailed APS to get a quote for the discharge. He makes no mention of the smell. He doesn’t query the cost.

Not the Whole Truth !

The APS quote was $36 / cubic meter but the cost Trafigura knew they would have to pay at the specialist company in Rotterdam was $250000 / cubic meter.

Not the Whole Truth !

“On July 23 last year, an Amsterdam court also found Trafigura guilty of hiding the cargo's real nature when it arrived in Amsterdam. Judges however acquitted the company of forgery.” [Courtesy of AFP]

Not the Whole Truth !

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 3 – ‘An Everyday Occurrence’?

2011-12-02T12:17:00.001Z

A series of posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. [UPDATE: added 21.30 on 3 Dec 2011: I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.]

In the first two posts I concentrated on the second sentence in Trafigura’s 38 page document, “Trafigura and the Probo Koala” – on page 4 after the index. I move on but not far: the same paragraph but the fourth sentence. I show the entire paragraph but with the fourth sentence highlighted.

‘In 2006 Trafigura time chartered the Probo Koala, a tanker, for the transportation of oil products. The vessel carried out a procedure for caustic washing on several cargoes of one such product, coker naphtha, and needed to discharge a relatively small amount of residual waste (often referred to as ‘slops’). Coker naphtha is a commonly available and widely traded product. The discharge and treatment of slops and waste materials from all vessels, including crude oil and product carriers, is an everyday occurrence around the world.’

The fourth sentence is absolutely true and, as a sentence standing isolated from others, I disagree with not one word …..

…. but yet it conceals a huge truth.

In December 2005, Naeem Ahmed sent an email – cc-ing Claude Dauphin – which stated:

‘I have approached all our storage terminals with the possibility of Caustic washing and only Vopak Fujairah and Tankmed La Skhirra our (sic) willing to entertain the idea, and currently perform this operation at FRCL (Fujairah) only. This operation is no longer allowed in EU / US / Singapore.

Caustic washes are banned by most countries due to the hazardous nature of the waste (mercaptans, phenols, smell) and suppliers of caustic are unwilling to dispose of the water since there are not many facilities remaining in the market. There is a company in Rotterdam that burns such waste in a high stack chimney and charges are approx $200/kg and could have up to 1000kg of sludge after a treatment operation. Under EU law you no longer allowed to transport such waste across EU borders.’

According to the Judgment of the Dutch Court, “The washing of gasoline is an industrial process that, up until that point, had always been carried out in appropriate installations on land, …”

I have seen no evidence that caustic washing of coker naphtha had ever been carried out on board ship before Trafigura used the Probo Koala.

If this was the first time this process had been carried out on board ship, then disposal of the Probo Koala’s cannot be described as ‘an everyday occurrence’.

‘(A)n everyday occurrence’?

Not the whole truth !

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 2 – Small

2011-12-02T07:04:00.001Z

The second post – first here - in the series of, hopefully, short posts in which I highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. [UPDATE: added 21.30 on 3 Dec 2011: I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.]

In the first post I looked at the second sentence in Trafigura’s 38 page document, “Trafigura and the Probo Koala” – on page 4 after the index – and I stay with that sentence here.

That sentence states:

“The vessel carried out a procedure for caustic washing on several cargoes of one such product, coker naphtha, and needed to discharge a relatively small [Calum’s emphasis] amount of residual waste (often referred to as ‘slops’).”

‘Small’ is a word with magical properties; is wonderfully non-specific; has no units; its meaning in the eye of the beholder. Each of us will form a view as to what is ‘a relatively small [Calum’s emphasis] amount of residual waste’ .

What might ‘small’ mean?

litre, gallon, bucketful, barrel, tonne, few tonnes?

In Amsterdam, Trafigura asked to discharge up to 350 cubic meters (cbm) - approx. 350 tonnes, 350,000kg. [Updated at 09.30 on Dec 2 2011 to show volume discharged was 350cbm and not 250 as initially stated. Trafigura’s request for a quote shows 250cbm as the maximum but on their website they state that 350cbm was actually discharged]

350cbm? ‘Small’? Seems a lot to me. Eye of the beholder, you see!

The Probo Koala’s waste tanks could hold 948cbm of waste and so 350cbm is 37% of its waste capacity. Not really small. Certainly, in terms of the volume of gasoline the Probo Koala could transport – approx 50,000cbm – the volume of waste discharged is small but 350 tonnes is not what I would term ‘small’.

But let us not forget that the volume of waste discharged in Abidjan was 508cbm.

‘Small’ ?

Not the whole truth !

and remember from the 1st post the key missing information was ‘smell’ [these 12 words added at 09.35 Dec 2 2011]

Trafigura: Not the Whole Truth 1 – Smell

2011-12-01T11:16:00.001Z

In this first of a series of, hopefully, short posts I will highlight areas where Trafigura, or those whose writing is supportive of them, does not tell the whole truth. There will be truth, possibly a lot of truth, in the statements I look at but all is not as it seems. [UPDATE: added 21.30 on 3 Dec 2011: I don’t allege that the ‘Not the Whole Truth’s are deliberate.]

Today I look at a statement from Trafigura’s 38 page document, “Trafigura and the Probo Koala”.

The second sentence of the document – on page 4 after the index – states:

“The vessel carried out a procedure for caustic washing on several cargoes of one such product, coker naphtha, and needed to discharge a relatively small amount of residual waste (often referred to as ‘slops’).”

Truthful? Yes!

The whole truth? No!

Waste accrued from the normal operations on board ship is called ‘slops’ but waste from caustic washing is called ‘spent caustic’ or as a Trafigura employee called it, ‘toxic caustic’.

The difference in terminology is not simply semantic.

According to the NFI Report, upon which Trafigura has relied to support its views,

“The waste water from the Probo Koala was accepted by APS as low-risk material.”

but it wasn’t “low-risk”.

There were complaints of a “bad smell”, “irritating smell” and “stench”.

Where did this smell come from? The Probo Koala and its spent caustic waste.

How do I know this?

The NFI Report .… again [I have appended the relevant part of the NFI Report at the end of the post but should you want to read the whole report you can find it here where I put it online]

but Trafigura doesn’t tell us about the smell!

Not the whole truth !

__________________________________

This section below is copied from the Introduction to the NFI Report

The following information has been obtained from the reporting officer: 1
In response to serious complaints of a bad smell on the morning of 3rd July 2006, in the vicinity of the petroleum dock in Amsterdam’s western port area, among other places, the fire brigade carried out an investigation into the source and presumed cause of the smell.

At around 11:00 that day, the fire brigade established that the irritating smell was being caused by Amsterdam Port Services (APS). Gases with a mercaptan smell were emanating from the DAF (Dissolved Air Flotation) installation (a component of water purification) and possibly from acceptance tank 9 at the APS site. According to APS’s internal analysis forms and day logs it appears
that that morning 316 m3 of waste water from acceptance tank 9 (hereinafter also ‘Tank 9’) were being processed in the DAF. It was established by APS employees that there were more than 500 ppm hydrogen sulphide (H2S) present in the DAF.

It was established that, from 2:30 onwards on 3rd July, approx. 500 m3 waste water was unloaded from collection vessel Main VII into APS’s Tank 9. The load was sampled at approx. 2:00, and while samples were being taken from the starboard and port tanks 1 and 3 of Main VII APS employees complained about the stench coming from the sample flasks. The content of the starboard and port tanks 1 and 3 of Main VII appears to have come from the marine vessel Probo Koala.

Trafigura: “Everything …. Determined by Money”

2011-11-30T18:24:00.001Z

I have just come across an article in which the Dutch prosecutor in Trafigura’s appeal said - Google Translated -

But in the whole file is no clue to finding that Trafigura itself but at some point is concerned about the possible consequences of its actions on the environment or human health, says the prosecution. "Everything in this case was and is determined by money."

Very, Very Occasionally - Mmmm

2011-11-30T11:19:00.001Z

Two very different pieces but both are just mmmm!

Duke Ellington & John Coltrane In a Sentimental Mood

Two magicians at work.

The second video is part of the music sample which comes with Windows 7.

Debussy: Maid with the Flaxen Hair Richard Stoltzman

Well done, Microsoft for bringing me this lovely music!

Trafigura’s Appeal: Jurisdiction Confusion

2011-11-29T06:57:00.001Z

One line which Trafigura has taken in its defence is very simple: so simple in fact that I think it deserves to be known more widely. [For background info on the case see here and here]

Apparently, Trafigura assert that the Dutch courts have no jurisdiction because Trafigura is not a Dutch company because her HQ is only based in the Netherlands as a PO box. Her real operational decisions are taken in the UK and Switzerland.

If true, Trafigura’s line is:

We have our headquarters in Holland as a PO box only and are not subject to Dutch laws.

We have our headquarters in Holland as a PO box only and are subject to Dutch tax laws.

An interesting concept!

Can we use this argument to get Trafigura to pay more UK tax?

Trafigura: 2010 Guilty Verdict – More Info

2011-11-28T17:01:00.001Z

I have more information about last year’s trial at which Trafigura was found guilty of illegally exporting waste from Amsterdam to Abidjan.

One of the key points, which I have debated with Gary Busch, is whether the Probo Koala’s waste from washing coker naphtha with caustic soda arose from a normal operation of a ship. Busch shared Trafigura’s thinking.

Despite Trafigura’s claim, the court found that the process was NOT a normal operation of a ship.

Some of the court’s reasoning is outlined below. [This is a translation from Dutch and there are a few glitches but I have left the translation ‘as is’.]

“It appears that in this case, the washing process was carried out on board a ship, since the ship was obviously no longer welcome on land.

On 18 April 2006, [name 21, Christophilopoulos] wrote the following in an e-mail addressed to his co-workers at Trafigura, the subject line of which read "PMI shit": "We are coming up with some problems regarding the treating/disposing of the PMI naphtha out of Brownsville. We are now limited to caustic washing on a ship"(lxxxiv). On 27 December 2005, [name 7, Ahmed] sent an e-mail to his co-workers which contained the following: "We have already spoken to all the main storage companies, US/Singapore and European terminals no longer allow the use of caustic soda washes since local environmental agencies do not allow disposal of the toxic caustic after treatment" (lxxxv).

The ship was also no longer welcome in La Skhirra (Tunisia) after the noxious smell incident (lxxxvi).

However, regardless of the reason, this essentially boils down to the moving of an industrial process from land to sea. The ship was not used for its designated purpose as a ship, but instead as a floating factory which was carrying out a process for which it was in no way necessary for the ship to be at sea since all of the resources necessary may be obtained on land.”

In the current appeal, Trafigura will be arguing that the reasoning, shown above, is wrong.

In March last year I blogged,

“but the focus, I think, will be on their knowledge and intent before the dumping of the waste ….”

“It is unfortunate that this court case will come down to the meaning of ‘normal’ and will not look at Trafigura’s knowledge and intent.

Trafigura: Greenpeace Criticism – Thoughts

2011-11-28T14:57:00.001Z

A week ago I reported that Greenpeace had been accused of exercising undue influence on the Trafigura – Probo Koala affair. I struggle with time to write and so I can’t comment in detail on the criticism and so I make a few points only.

The critical articles and book (henceforth ‘articles’) were well-timed, I imagine, to coincide with the start of Trafigura’s appeal against the guilty verdicts found at a 2010 trial in Amsterdam. I cannot know if, and I do not claim that, the release of the articles was coordinated but in a world where PR is incredibly important I would not be surprised to find that their release was timed, if not coordinated, to coincide with the appeal. Many books and articles are timed for maximum impact.

There is no doubt that, through Carter-Ruck and Bell-Pottinger, Trafigura has managed the flow of information about the Probo Koala incident with the selective release of documents and comment. I know from my own experience with them that most of my requests for documents and comments were ignored.

Trafigura will assert, I am sure, that they did so to protect their good name from being unjustifiably sullied. Others may have a more negative view but, with a restricted amount of information in the public domain, getting to the truth - so that one can publish safely – is very difficult.

In these circumstances one should not be surprised that media organisations in the UK, Netherlands and Norway came together with Greenpeace to pool their knowledge. This was a very sensible decision. In a global market multinational cooperation is necessary.

I give just one example where the restricted amount of information makes life difficult.

Trafigura’s internal emails show that they knew in December 2005 that the waste from caustic washing of coker naphtha was toxic, expensive to treat and they could not find a shore-based facility to carry out the process. In December 2005 a treatment cost of $250,000 per tonne was the going rate but in June 2006 in Amsterdam such was the Trafigura’s description of the waste that they were quoted $36 per tonne. For more information about the costs of treatment see an earlier post.

Trafigura has not answered questions raised by these emails.

I know because I asked Trafigura.

Dr Busch, a regular commenter here and occasional writer on Trafigura, refuses to answer questions about the effect of Trafigura’s knowledge on their subsequent actions on the basis that he cannot know the truth and that he deals in facts and not opinions. He may deal in some facts but he ignores those which are inconvenient to him and the case he makes.

I know because I asked Dr Busch.

Now why would Trafigura not answer questions on this subject? Is it not in their interests to give a simple explanation and have the question disappear?

By not answering Trafigura then beg another question. Why do they not answer?

I wrote earlier,

“with a restricted amount of information in the public domain, getting to the truth - so that one can publish safely – is very difficult.”

I can have my own thoughts – that’s all I can have - about how to reconcile these two apparently irreconcilable facts but I cannot publish them in case Carter-Ruck come calling.

Trafigura: Pinocchio, Where Are You?

2011-11-25T19:03:00.001Z

My ‘friend’ – on-line adversary is more accurate – Dr Busch has consistently promoted a pro-Trafigura / anti-green view which he supports by saying he deals in facts and not opinions whereas the other side ….. You’ll know what I mean if you get to the end of this post.

Today he published an editorial on his website which I find ….. Well! Let’s just say that he and I couldn’t be further apart. For ease I’ve appended his words at the end of this post.

In time, I will reply but, until then, you’ll need to make do with his words. I often think they do my job better than I.

I pose one question.

Whose side has a long nose?

http://www.ocnus.net/artman2/publish/Editorial_10/Pinocchio-The-Patron-Saint-of-Green-Activism.shtml

Pinocchio: The Patron Saint of Green Activism
By Dr. Gary K. Busch 25/11/11 Nov 25, 2011 - 3:26:36 PM

There is a theme of dishonesty and disingenuous claptrap which runs through much of the pseudo-science of Green activism. Recognition of this fact began to permeate the consciousness of the civilised world when in November 2009 an anonymous hacker of a server at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia copied thousands of emails and computer files to various locations on the Internet showing that an august body of international climate scientists, the IPCC, had exaggerated its findings and lied about the implications of its false or incomplete research.. This was just before the international summit on climate change. This incident, known as “Climategate” was very embarrassing to the Green community and to the media circus which had attached itself to an untrammelled pursuit of Global Warming. The specious claims associated with the scientists’ findings were shown to be less than accurate and the opprobrium these same scientists had apportioned to their scientific opponents, who doubted the veracity of the IPCC findings and conclusions, was inordinate.

Despite a few busy days of stories in the world media about Climategate, there was soon a media consensus that in their unqualified scientific judgement, the leaked emails were a bum rap for the scientists and that the bulk of the evidence was compelling, despite being unsubstantiated and unable to withstand scientific scrutiny. This Green activist disaster porn apparently sold more papers than rational scientific analysis and insistence on rigorous proof and replicability. Melting glaciers and forlorn polar bears became emblematic of the problem.

No doubt there is evidence of global warming in some environments; that is not the point. The point is that in apportioning the blame and responsibility for creating global warming, these specious scientists attribute the phenomenon to human consumption of fossil fuels, etc. The argument, despite the disaster press and the activists, is not if there is global warming but whether this is a naturally occurring phenomenon (as is has been for several hundred millennia) or if it is attributable to malign human interference. This has been made prominent in the public consciousness by a media which concerns itself with a concentration on the manifestation of the evidence of global warming and not a rational analysis of how it was caused or if there is any linkage between the putative effects of human intervention without concentrating on its causes. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc is a fallacy whether it is worked forward or in reverse.

This attention to apparent effects rather than cause distorts rational thinking about the problems and skews the course of the solutions. The world has been asked to spend billions of dollars in the search for alternative energies; the creation of vast inefficient and unsightly wind farms; accepting nuclear energy plants despite the lessons of Fukushima and Three Mile Island; and acting as a brake on industrial development and renewal when urgently needed jobs and investments have already been impeded by the credit crisis. This is a media crisis not just a scientific one. The recent exposure of additional false science as the next climate summit approaches has not dimmed the media’s pursuit of the drama and attractive of newer disaster scenarios.

However, this manifestation of media hyperbole is not only important to an examination of climate change. In a Dutch court there is a similar problem being addressed right now. In 2006 the company Trafigura delivered a small quantity of some marine slops which had accumulated in its ballast tanks, composed of gasoline and caustic soda (the stuff used to clear the drains in your house), to a licensed disposal agent in Amsterdam who was to dispose of the slops as per the international rules on the disposal of marine wastes. This Dutch company started to discharge these slops and found that they smelled; which is not unusual for solutions with a high sulphur content. The Dutch company asked for a much higher rate for disposing of the cargo than had been agreed. The company decided that this was unreasonable and had the slops returned to the ballast tank (as it didn’t affect the cargo-carrying capacity of the vessel). For some reason the Dutch retained a barge with sixteen tons of slop on board a barge which has remained in Amsterdam without harming anyone.

The vessel left Amsterdam to pick up a gasoline cargo in Estonia and then delivered that cargo to Nigeria. Having discharged the cargo in Nigeria without incident it then was sailing back to Europe and decided to remove the ballast waste in Abidjan, one of the biggest and most advanced ports in Africa with its own oil refinery, gas plants and bitumen refinery. Its port agent in Abidjan arranged for a licensed company to dispose of the slops and the vessel emptied its slop tanks by pipe to the agent’s trucks and sailed off. The local agent didn’t dispose of the slops properly and dumped the wastes on existing foul and contaminated waste dumps in a few areas of Abidjan.

The smell hadn’t improved so it was initially recognisable. Greenpeace and some other environmental activists decided that this discharge was toxic to humans and a hazard to the population. They led a campaign of media hysteria which grew more fanciful by the day. Soon they were saying that thousands of people were affected; that fifteen or even more people were killed. It was, of course untrue but that didn’t impinge on their consciousness or that of the media with their teeth into a good story. Disbelief was suspended and an international media frenzy continued.

The international media was joined in the uproar by the other green activists. They refused to look at the scientific analysis carried out by the Dutch authorities who showed, as was later proven in court in the UK, that the substances were not toxic at all and would have caused flu-like symptoms at worst. Several journalists won international prizes for pursuing the lies and misrepresentations about the case without any reference to the truth or the science. The problem, once again, was that an apparent environmental effect had happened and that the activists and the media decided that the blame for this should lie with the company, despite all the scientific evidence that showed this was not true.

The company was fined by the Dutch authorities on the basis of contrived evidence and misrepresentation and is now appealing the fine. Greenpeace, the author of this false evidence has form in lying to the Dutch Government. A prominent Member of Parliament, Richard De Mos, a leader of the ruling PVV (Freedom Party) in Holland introduced a motion in the Dutch Parliament on 23 November 2011 which called for the regulatory body which supervises NGOs in the country, de Vereniging Fondsenwervende Instellingen (VFI), to examine the various bodies it evaluates for the transparency, reliability and quality of the information distributed by these groups. In particular he cites Greenpeace for having a track record of lying to the Dutch Parliament over the Brent Spar case and the Trafigura case. Recently Greenpeace has been shown to have gone beyond mendacity to felony by digging a hole under the railroad tracks which were to be used to transport nuclear waste materials.

Both the VVD (Liberals) and the PPV have asked the State Secretary of the Environment to examine Greenpeace (which is headquartered in Amsterdam) to see whether it should be allowed to operate in the country any more. Greenpeace has benefitted from a great deal of tolerance by the Dutch authorities, In 1995 Greenpeace lied to the Dutch Parliament and the world that the floating platform Brent Spar was going to be scrapped by sinking it in the North Sea while containing 5.500 barrels of oil which would cause an ecological disaster. They persisted in this lie and were supported by a frenzy of publicity in the international press. Even the normally reflective “New Scientist” carried the story and provided credibility. Unfortunately for Greenpeace the Norwegians commissioned a survey of the platform and found that there was no oil at all. Greenpeace grudgingly retracted its claims, although most of the media were less forthcoming with their retractions. A contemporary journal (International Harpoon) pointed out that the “Brent Spar was indeed a «defining moment for the environmental movement» because it opened the eyes of the world to Greenpeace’s fallibility. This was supposed to have two important knock-on effects for environmentalism as a whole. The first is that pressure groups must be held accountable if they do not tell the truth. Rather than trying to delete its mistakes from the history books, Greenpeace should offer an unqualified apology, and consider itself on probation with the media. The second is that the media must become more vigilant and sceptical when it comes to choosing sources. For every piece of misinformation that is exposed, how many others go undetected? “

In 2009 Greenpeace published 50,000 fake copies of the International Herald Tribune pretending that there was agreement on the climate change proposals by the world leaders. It was false and misleading. Greenpeace justified this with the famous line “We can’t change the science. We need to change the politics.” The Trafigura case was part and parcel of Greenpeace’s lack of restraint in promoting itself by exaggeration, untruths and misleading publicity. This is why the Dutch Government is now considering banning them from Holland.

However, they could not achieve this on their own. There are many groups in the public eye who lie and mislead by their statements. The problem is that the uneducated and intellectually challenged media take up these fantasies and give them wings. The editors don’t care. It sells papers or has people turn to their stations. Worst comes to worst, like the BBC, they have to give a mild recanting of their folly. The lie lives on and taints the science, the companies, the NGOs and the governments.

Surely it is time that some of the NGOs and the media accept some responsibility for the provision of truth to those who follow their output. It isn’t likely but it is completely unjust and unfair. The Dutch have the right idea. If they lie and mislead they have no place in a civilised country.

Source:Ocnus.net 2011

Forgiveness

2011-11-22T19:34:00.001Z

Until truth matters

Until justice matters

Until death matters

Let us not proclaim our values

Let us get down on our knees and beg forgiveness

I wrote these words more than four years ago but they are as relevant today as they have ever been.

Very, Very Occasionally – Too Good to Share

2011-11-22T18:06:00.001Z

This is where I find myself. I cannot find anything to complement the wonderful music in the video below.

Damien Rice had a major hit with his composition, “The Blower’s Daughter” - I love it too - but this cover is just ……

Ana Carolina & Seu Jorge – Brazilian each – collaborated on a magical version which was given the Portuguese title, “É isso Aí”.

Enjoy!

Ana Carolina & Seu Jorge É isso Aí

I didn’t understand a word of that but I understand it all !

Very, Very Occasionally - Sheer Beauty

2011-11-19T10:41:00.001Z

Definitely more frequent than the title suggests, this post is suffused with the sheer beauty of the most wonderful music!

A Marcello Concerto for oboe and strings - Mvt 2 Adagio in D minor

When I close my eyes and let the music enter my soul I feel God is there – as though I were praying.

Schubert Serenade from Swan Song D957

[Originally for tenor and piano, arranged for cello and piano in D minor. Anne Gastinel, cello; Claire Désert, piano]

I am stunned!

Very, Very Occasionally– Some More Moon

2011-11-18T13:29:00.001Z

I’m cheating by still calling this series “Very, Very Occasionally” but …..

Despite the maddening behaviour of YouTube here are two more videos for you to enjoy.

Miles Davis Moon Dreams

The magic of the man clear to see!

Fats Waller By the Light of the Silvery Moon

Ah! I have been touched!

if you are lucky, you will be too.

If YouTube Took over Your Home!

2011-11-18T09:16:00.001Z

Once I loved YouTube …. but no more!

I found so much music I loved! I saved the music to playlists to keep the videos organised and to let others listen to my selections!

I loved you …. but no more!

You changed - lots of small changes – until now you are unrecognisable.

My love for you has died …. but I still want you back!

Recently, YouTube has made many, many changes in the ways in which users manage their playlists and all of them, or least the vast majority, have reduced functionality. I’m now at the point where YouTube doesn’t allow me to add any video to certain playlists.

Rather than go through the actual process let me try to explain in terms of your house.

Imagine all your power switches.

You come home one day and find that the switches are in the correct rooms but they’ve been moved to the ceiling. You can still use them if you get a pole and stretch to the ceiling to switch the power on. You’d wonder what had happened. What was the point of changing what already worked?

But there’s more!

Once you’ve adjusted – but still unhappy - to the previous change you find that all the power sockets have been moved into one room. They’re in a logical order but to switch the lights on in the toilet (say) you have to go into the spare bedroom (say) where all the switches are now. You can do it but what was once easy is now much, much more difficult.

You accommodate this …. with difficulty.

But still YouTube is not finished.

Soon you find that the sockets are still in the spare bedroom but they’re no longer in a logical order. They’ve been randomised.

Imagine being desperate to go to the toilet but you have no idea which switch is the one you need!

By this stage you wonder what madman has taken over YouTube to totally screw the simple organisation of power sockets.

But the madman hasn’t finished yet. It’s incredible but he has more torture.

The next time you need to switch a socket on and go into the spare bedroom you find that the sockets are still in random order but lots of them are missing. You still have a bathroom light but no means to switch it on.

This is what YouTube has done to me and all who use playlists! One of my most recent YouTube playlists is still there, I can play videos from it, but I cannot add any more videos: there is no switch.

But still they haven’t finished.

Occasionally, just very occasionally the toilet switch will appear. I won’t know that it has unless I check all the randomised switches. This morning I could pee with the light on but when my son went two minutes later the switch had disappeared.

Can you understand why my love for YouTube has gone?

All I want is my YouTube back.

She doesn’t have to be as she was before.

Just stop messing with my head.

YouTube, I want to love you but you have driven me away, almost driven me mad with sheer frustration.

What have I done to deserve your hateful actions?

I want to love you again but ….

I can’t unless you come back to me!

Please, YouTube come back to me!

Trafigura: Calum - A “Useful Fool”?

2011-11-17T16:00:00.001Z

No blogger likes to be ignored and so comments are like gold dust especially to an intermittent blogger like me.

Today I received a smidgeon of gold dust: Gary Busch with whom I’ve had many online conversations about the Trafigura – Probo Koala saga left a comment – not the most polite or respectful I’ve had - on a recent post in which, he asked if I was a “useful fool”.

The easy and flippant way to answer is to say, “No! I am a useless fool” but flippancy sits ill with my new-found faith and so I answered respectfully.

Below is his comment (with a couple of typos corrected).

“I read your piece with interest. I have gone through much of the correspondence between us and I am puzzled about one thing. You claim to be a seeker of truth and an impartial observer but you seem to have access to a whole lot of documentation and reports, some of which have not been found in public circulation.

Can it be that you are not neutral at all but a hack writing for Greenpeace, the obvious source of these documents?

Is your neutrality a blind to avoid attracting a lawsuit for libel or are you just a 'useful fool' whom Greenpeace and the other ecofreaks use for the dissemination of their ill-advised allegations?

In short, who are you really working for?”

If only Gary had access to my stats he’d know that no self-respecting organisation would leak anything to me. Pointless! Pissing into the wind!

But still my occasional posts are tweaking one tail, at least.

I sent this back to Gary.

I will ignore your jibes and address your serious points.

"who are you really working for?"
I am a blogger - now an infrequent blogger - and I write on subjects that interest me. I write for NO-ONE but me!

You say "Is your neutrality a blind to avoid attracting a lawsuit for libel"? I have been in contact countless times with Trafigura. If they felt that my writing breached limits I have no doubt they would tell me regardless of any neutrality. They have never approached me about the accuracy or inaccuracy, fairness or unfairness of my writing. Either I am too small to bother about or I have never breached their limits.

You say "you seem to have access to a whole lot of documentation and reports, some of which have not been found in public circulation." Clearly we should concentrate only on those which you say "have not been found in public circulation." I try to be rigorous and link to my sources. Certainly I have not had privileged access to any information from any source whatsoever. Where information has been given to me - for example, from both Trafigura and their lawyers, Macfarlanes - I have referred to them and made that publicly available, if possible.

Let me have a list of the reports etc about which you are concerned and where I refer to them and I will try to identify the public source.

Please tell me what information, reports etc you are concerned about and I will try to tell you where I found them. [Calum’s comment: I did say the same thing twice – apologies] If you want copies of any which you can't find then please ask and I will forward.

I’ll let you know when I hear back from Gary.

Trafigura: Negative Influence of Greenpeace

2011-11-17T15:33:00.001Z

Karel Knip has written an article in Dutch (unfortunately for me) in which he details the influence of Greenpeace on the Trafigura-Probo Koala case which they and the key reporters of the saga did not mention. Peter Olsthoorn also writes about this – again in Dutch.

I have used Google Translate on both articles and picked out what appear to be the key points.

- Martyn Day who represented the Ivorian victims in the English courts was, for years, chairman of Greenpeace UK

- the prosecution lawyer who led against Trafigura in the Dutch courts worked for Greenpeace between 1993 and 1995

- an Ivorian investigation commission employed a Greenpeace lawyer Jasper Teulings as advisor

- Greenpeace had easy access to parts of the Dutch criminal and UK civil case files ”from which 'bad” information was distilling”.

As I was writing this I found that my old ‘friend” Gary Busch had published an English translation but with his own title. You can find that here but for ease I append it below.

Corrupt EcoFreaks and Their Journalist Supporters Lied
By Karel Knip, NRC (Holland) 14/11/11

“Europe poisons Africa”- was painted on the Probo Koala by Greenpeace activists in September 2006.

There was no toxic disaster, but it was a stench incident that was caused by the Probo Koala in the Ivory Coast in August 2006. Less than 2 weeks after Jaffe Vink has explained this in his book, new consensus arose. The smelly fumes from the waste did not reach life threatening concentrations, there were no deaths, no injuries. Even environmental organisation Greenpeace, leading in the battle against Trafigura (owner of the waste), admits that there is no evidence for great misery in Abidjan.

How could the media coverage be so wrong? The master thesis “Journalism Poison and Influenza in the Ivory Coast” by Bibi Bleekemolen of the University of Amsterdam explicit appoints Greenpeace as the source of aggressive intonation. Maybe not completely correct: terms as ‘toxic dump” and toxic deaths” already circulated before the organisation uttered the sound, but Greenpeace eagerly kept on using them. It is clear that Greenpeace established a firm grip on the information around the Probo Koala.

Only three weeks after the first reports about the “toxic disaster” were sent to Europe, photos of Greenpeace activists appeared who prevent the Probo Koala from leaving the port of Estonia with their action ship Arctic Sunrise. To make it clear the “Greenpeace toxic patrol” painted “Europe poisons Africa” on the ship. That was a strange conversion, because ten days earlier the scientific bureau of Greenpeace in Exeter indicated that it was not likely that the fumes would reach deadly concentrations.

In Estonia, the tone changed permanently, also thanks to the European environmental commissioner Stavros Dimas who visited the Arctic Sunrise. From the bridge he stated that the waste was “heavily poisonous” and the behaviour of Trafigura “criminal”, after which he thanked Greenpeace for their efforts. A couple of days earlier Greenpeace filled a complaint at the DPP. The Volkskrant announced that “the poison” from the Probo Koala originate from an even severe manner than expected: refining at sea. That were the results of a draft desk study that investigated the theoretical effects of the waste who third parties mistakenly had passed on as a real reconstruction. In the meantime “local authorities” announced toxic death on toxic death

At the end of September 2006, Greenpeace was in great form. It was almost obvious that an Ivorian investigation commission employed a Greenpeace lawyer Jasper Teulings as advisor. Subsequently when the Ivorians want to locate a law firm to support 30,000 victims of the stench incident, Teulings recommends the London firm Leigh Day & Co. They put lawyer Martyn Day on the case. "It could also have been another lawyer”, says campaign leader Marietta Harjono of Greenpeace. "It was a coincidence." Perhaps not: Martyn Day had been chairman of Greenpeace UK for the last ten years. He is still with Greenpeace. Who will gossip about that? What the outsider sees is that the group of journalists that formed itself around Greenpeace never said a word about it. Just as discrete the Greenpeace background of DPP Luuk Boogert, who in Holland lead the criminal procedure against Trafigura, was kept silent. During his training as a DPP from 1993-1995 he worked for Greenpeace as a lawyer. Here also a wrong insignation would not be appropriate, only the conclusion that " the group" never said anything about it.

Do an advisor, a lawyer and PP form a network together? A member of parliament can be added there. There was nobody as aggressive as the MP Diederik Samson, former campaigner of Greenpeace. It is him who gets Ibeanu, the Special UN Rapporteur on the "toxic dump" to parliament in 2008. It is not documented how many politicians met this Nigerian. But he certainly he met Marietta Harjono. And Martyn Day.

The period between 2006 and the first Probo Koala court case in 2010, was characterised by sudden explosions of shocking news which pushed Trafigura into the defence. A campaign. Somethimes the news exploded in the UK, somethimes in the Netherlands. The source seemed invisible, until you look more closely. The news always came from the Amsterdam criminal file or the London case file. The files were not inaccessable. Martyn Day requested parts of the Amsterdam criminal file for his civil case in London. There, anyone interested could get the files at the UK court, because that is possible in the UK. If you know that they are there. It is through this route that Greenpeace delivered the infamous revealing internal emails to the group of journalists. The NFI chemical analysis of the waste probably ended up at the BBC like this. Those familiar with the procedure [requesting legal documents] probably use it more frequently. You can also think about other shorter route. The shortest route becomes visible in the official "Complaint" filed by Greenpeace in The Hague in 2009. The complaint appears to be based for a part on the criminal file and the civil case file. Not much investigative journalism is required. The group of journalists got this information neatly presented to them. And that the Dutch court in the end commented on the campaign with its unproven conclusions, was also not mentioned by the group of journalist. Just as the cost claim by Martyn Day. Which amounted to GBP 105 million, more than three times the compensation paid to the Ivorian "victims".

Trafigura: Guilty

2011-11-15T20:18:00.001Z

As Trafigura’s appeal against one guilty verdict starts it is worth considering a small but very important aspect of the Probo Koala incident.

In December 2005 Naeem Ahmed, of Trafigura, wrote this email about the disposal of waste from the caustic washing of coker naphtha.

$250 for each and every kilo of waste.

$250000 for each and every 1000kg (approx 1 cubic meter) of waste.

The very same Naeem Ahmed who noted the very high cost of waste disposal said this to APS (the company to whom Trafigura intended to discharge the waste).

and he got this quote back from APS.

€6675 for 250 cubic meters approx. €27 for each and every cubic meter. At today’s exchange rate €27 = approx. $36

The APS quote was $36 / cubic meter but the cost they knew they would have to pay at the specialist company in Rotterdam was $250000 / cubic meter.

Clearly there must be a mistake!

Trafigura, being a company which operates responsibly, would realise there was a serious mistake and correct APS and ensure the waste was disposed of correctly.

“On July 23 last year, an Amsterdam court also found Trafigura guilty of hiding the cargo's real nature when it arrived in Amsterdam. Judges however acquitted the company of forgery.” [Courtesy of AFP]

Trafigura Appeal Probo Koala Guilty Verdict

2011-11-15T19:05:00.001Z

Yesterday saw the start of Trafigura’s appeal against the guilty verdict and fine imposed on them for illegally exporting waste from Amsterdam to Abidjan.

In the same case the prosecution are appealing against the acquittal of the City of Amsterdam and Amsterdam Port Services.

You can find more information on the guilty verdict here.

I will update you as and when I find something interesting.

Very, Very Occasionally - Praise!

2011-11-14T10:24:00.001Z

After my last post – finding faith in God – with videos which I had played countless times this post should surprise none. More of the same!

At some point my posts will reflect my wider love of music.

Ever since I started posting primarily about music - almost 2 years ago now – music has been incredibly important to me: I have been touched and moved countless times but now I am consumed - in the most wonderful way - by my faith and its music.

First up is Hillsong again with music and words by Reuben Morgan.

You are My Strength Hillsong

Rarely have I felt so at peace and so at one with the audience [or congregation]!

We finish with a new version of the23rd Psalm – by Stuart Townend. Already in the few weeks of church-going I’ve heard this twice and it is magical.

23rd Psalm (Stuart Townend version) ex Songs of Praise

Until the next time.

Where will my music love be then?

Very, Very Occasionally - Faith

2011-10-25T16:56:00.001+01:00

Despite my hundreds of posts this is a very strange post to write.

After more than 60 years, most of them being a trenchant atheist, I find myself with faith, a faith which seems to have crept up and snared me. ‘Snared’ and I am not in the least bothered. I am at ease.

How could this happen?

Every logical fibre in my body, and there are many, still tells me that there is no God but logic has no place here.

What has this to do with music?

I was at two church services recently, before last Sunday, and at each I felt apart, outside: the service had no meaning. I stood for each song but didn’t sing. I couldn’t sing when the words were nothing to me. Last Sunday, however, I stood and closed my eyes. The song I had never heard before but at the first singing of two particular lines:

“And I will fall at Your feet.
I will fall at Your feet”

I shivered and had goose-bumps. Throughout all my posting of YouTube videos I must have viewed / listened to more than 2000 videos and, whilst I have been moved, I have never had an experience like Sunday’s.

I had to find the song; I had to remember these lines. Yesterday, I could barely remember but I had enough words and eventually I found:

This is Our God Hillsong

I was engulfed. I listened and listened and listened and listened and still I was engulfed. After many hours and many videos I still couldn’t break away – not that I wanted to.

To help me on my way I need to listen to this, another Hillsong video, which I must have just about worn out!

With All I Am Hillsong

Into Your hand
I commit again
With all I am
For You Lord

You hold my world
In the palm of Your Hand
And I am Yours
Forever

Jesus I believe in You
Jesus I belong to You
You're the reason that I live
The reason that I sing
With all I am

I'll walk with You
Wherever You go
Through tears and Joy
I'll trust in You

And I will live
In all of Your ways
Your promises
Forever

Jesus I believe in You
Jesus I belong to You
You're the reason that I live
The reason that I sing

Jesus I believe in You
Jesus I belong to You
You're the reason that I live
The reason that I sing
With all I am

I will worship
I will worship You

Jesus I believe in You
Jesus I belong to You
You're the reason that I live
The reason that I sing

Jesus I believe in You
Jesus I belong to You
You're the reason that I live
The reason that I sing
With all I am

I will worship
I will worship You

Where am I now?

I don’t know other than I am not where I was only a few days ago …. but that’s OK.

Trafigura – Old Story Pops Up Again

2011-10-14T21:15:00.001+01:00

Once again a very interesting article about Trafigura and its super-injunctions appears. There is a difference this time: it is written by a partner, Nigel Tait, in the law firm, Carter-Ruck, who acted for Trafigura.

In case any have forgotten, Trafigura is the oil-trading company which was on receiving end of widespread, and many would say ‘well-deserved’, opprobrium when the waste products of the Probo Koala were dumped in and around Abidjan. The Probo Koala was used, by Trafigura, as a floating treatment plant in which coker naphtha was ‘washed’ with sodium hydroxide to produce gasoline of a quality which didn’t meet European standards but could be sold legitimately in parts of Africa. The waste from this treatment was dumped by Company Tommy in Abidjan.

The main thrust of the article I ignore but the following paragraph is worth picking up on,

‘The injunction concerned a draft report which had been stolen from Trafigura’s offices and then passed to the Guardian – “the Minton report”. The stolen document had been commissioned by Trafigura’s Solicitors, and was prepared by John Minton of an environmental consultancy at their request, in the immediate aftermath of the incident in the Ivory Coast. [Calum’s emphasis] It was also a report based not on any factual investigation or analysis but based on hypothetical ideas as to what may have happened to the slops from the Probo Koala in the Ivory Coast. So, the “report” was in fact a confidential, legally privileged document which had been stolen and illegally passed to the Guardian. The report had also been quickly and authoritatively superseded by a Dutch government analysis of the actual slops themselves, and there had therefore been no need for Trafigura or anyone else to rely on it any further.’

Only after the waste was dumped and the incident became public did Trafigura commission Minton to carry out a desk study of the possible products of the sodium hydroxide washing of the coker naphtha.

But Trafigura knew, before the treatment was carried out on the Probo Koala, that it produced waste which was difficult to dispose of. Their own emails highlight this.

Given this difficulty would it not have been reasonable for Trafigura to have had a

- desk study carried out before treatment started on the Probo Koala

- study carried out on the waste after treatment and before the attempted disposal in Amsterdam

Would a responsible company not have undertaken these two actions?

Trafigura did neither.

Very, Very Occasionally - Moon

2011-10-12T21:44:00.001+01:00

Slightly under the weather today, been sitting at pc most of day and so two posts in two days.

Two great songwriters with their versions of the moon.

First up is Jimmy Webb, the writer of many classics such as Up, Up and Away, By the Time I Get to Phoenix, Wichita Lineman, Galveston, and MacArthur Park.

The Moon’s a Harsh Mistress Jimmy Webb

Readers will know I’m a fan and won’t be surprised to find another from Tom Waits.

Grapefruit Moon Tom Waits

Very, Very Occasionally - England

2011-10-11T09:22:00.001+01:00

Two very different tracks, but each magical, await you.

First up is an instrumental composed by the brilliant Russ Barenberg and played by the Transatlantic Sessions House Band.

The Drummers of England

Now we have Billy Bragg fronting The Imagined Village talking about today’s England.

Hard Times of Old England The Imagined Village

Very, Very Occasionally - Awake

2011-09-22T08:41:00.000+01:00

I woke when I heard these two pieces. So inspiring! So beautiful! But then this is Bach!

If you don’t love this then, I’m afraid, you are asleep .… or worse. :)

Bach Cantata BWV 140 - Wachet auf, ruft uns die Stimme

Bach Cantata BWV 140 - Sleepers Wake

Tenor: Peter Schreier

Very, Very Occasionally …. White

2011-09-03T17:31:00.001+01:00

What a good stumble! I came across my all-time favourite song (first video) …. and another which runs it close (second).

Showing my age here!

Whiter Shade of Pale Procul Harum

Nights in White Satin Moody Blues

Very, Very Occasionally …. Music

2011-08-13T19:30:00.001+01:00

Two wonderful tracks from the “Under One Sky” project in which John McCusker collaborated with twelve outstanding musicians.

Lavender Hill Roddy Woomble (vocals)

Hush a Bye John Tams (vocal)

Trafigura: Home Run?

2011-05-17T20:15:00.001+01:00

Saturday December 3, 2011 is a date to put into your diary!

Why?

By then will we all have to accept that Trafigura is in the clear over the dumping of the Probo Koala’s waste?

No?

What then?

I’ll say no more.

Scottish Independence

2011-05-17T18:47:00.001+01:00

In May 2007, just after the last elections to the Scottish Parliament I gave my views on Scottish independence. Given the SNP’s recent victory - a majority of seats – to the same institution and the ‘national’ press’ rediscovering Scotland I thought this was an appropriate time to revisit my 2007 post.

Much of the most recent debate is characterised by ill-informed comment and prejudice. I will not contribute to this pointless approach and I believe my post is as relevant today as it was then and, so, I copy the post in its entirety. [If you want to read the comments to the original post you can find them here.]

Several weeks ago Lord Nazh asked if I believed in Great Britain or a free Scotland (along with Ireland and possibly Wales)? I read this question as asking. “Do I believe politically in an independent Scotland (with the possibility that some or all of the other three countries could be independent) or do I believe in the United Kingdom (of four countries)?”

At last I can answer him.

There are two issues I need to consider: my national identity and the politics of the situation in the light of that identity.

Let us consider my national identity. In a previous post I wrote:

“…. I consider myself Scottish and then British but, if asked, I couldn’t find words to describe even my Scottishness. I just am Scottish. I was born here. I have always lived here. As far back as I have traced – about 1750 - all my ancestors were born in Scotland. I feel British but this is a poor second to my Scottishness. I don’t feel European, ever. I know I am officially a European but the concept of Europe as an entity of which I am a citizen means nothing to me.

Some might suggest that, because I live in Edinburgh, I will have more in common with those in other large cities, for example, London or Manchester, than I do with those living in remote parts of Scotland. Certainly, my lifestyle is more similar to those in metropolitan areas than it is to those in remote Scotland but I do not identify, in any way, with other metropolitan dwellers whereas I do identify with other Scots regardless of where in Scotland they are.

Therefore, my Scottishness is undefinable – it just is – and, similarly, my Britishness just is.”

and

“If I were told that my Scottishness had to be subservient to my Britishness I couldn’t and wouldn’t do it. It isn’t as though I spend my time considering Scottishness – I rarely do - but asking me to relegate my Scottishness would be like asking me to give up my right hand so that my left hand became more important. I can’t because it’s part of me. Only by performing this simple thought experiment can I get an understanding of those for whom religion is more important than their Britishness and the difficulty they would have making their religion subservient to Britishness.”

I am quite clear: I am Scottish first and then British is a distant second. In the weeks since I wrote the above piece I make one significant addition: I am Scottish, I feel Scottish, I only feel Scottish but I am British because I know logically that I am British. I do not feel British in the way that I feel Scottish. In fact, I do not feel British.

Now how does my identity affect how I view the United Kingdom and its four component countries?

Given that I feel Scottish but only know that I am British it is inevitable that I see, feel and identify with Scotland as a country but only know, without feeling, that Britain / UK is a country. Therefore, logically, I expect that those born in England and Wales will see the position similarly. I omit Northern Ireland from this because I imagine some will see Eire as their country whereas others will see Britain as their home.

This is probably an appropriate place to say that I harbour no anti-English or anti-anyone feelings: I arrive at my position simply through my feeling of Scottishness.

From my youngest days, I have known Scotland to be a country in its own right but a country subsumed in a larger composite country (United Kingdom). Perhaps surprisingly I never dreamt of Scotland being an independent country. Just as I accepted without question that Scotland was a country I accepted without question the need for Scotland to remain within the Union. This was just how things were.

Even when the Scottish Nationalists were having success in the 1970s with their “It’s Scotland’s oil” campaign I remained a Unionist convinced that Scotland could not survive independently. It was as though the Nationalists were pushing a dream, an unrealistic and unrealisable dream. Through the years my views remained static: even devolution didn’t move my thinking although I was very much in favour.

Looking back I think my position has been that my heart would have been happy with an independent Scotland but my head has seen sufficient negatives to reject the idea. As time has passed my heart is unchanged but in my head now I am prepared to listen to the arguments in favour of, and against, independence: arguments which are solid or flimsy depending on one’s original standpoint. Therefore, I am left with inconclusive arguments about the likely success (or otherwise) of Scottish independence and the safe position, under these conditions, would be to stay in the Union but I don’t want the safe option anymore. For me the time has come when we should give independence a go and make it work. Will Scotland be better off immediately after independence? I don’t know. The success, or failure, of an independent country, of its economy is dependent on so many factors most of them outwith the control of the country that predicting the future is futile.

There is a risk but, in time, I believe we would prosper. We should take the risk.

We won’t go for it, of course. Our inherent conservatism plus the level of fear engendered by unionists will ensure a majority for maintaining the Union. I can imagine that I too would worry more and become more fearful about the future as independence beckoned. That I am not champing at the bit for independence suggests that, despite my support, I am not wholly committed. Major doubt must still remain. Sometime I will explore this area.

Even if Scotland did vote for independence moral and legal questions would abound. Could Scotland become independent on the basis of a vote of its electorate only? If so, imagine the roles reversed and the electorate of England voted for English independence whilst Scots wanted to remain in the Union: what would Scots say? I suspect that we would complain about being cast adrift by our larger partner with no opportunity to influence the decision.

If voters in both countries needed to vote, would Scots not complain that their future was dependent on voters of another country as would the English if the roles were reversed: obviously an intolerable situation.

Therefore, neither approach can be deemed as acceptable but if I had to choose one approach I would have to take the view that only the electorate of Scotland has the right to determine whether or not Scotland becomes independent with equivalent positions applying in the other UK countries.

In a long-winded way I have now answered Lord Nazh’s question.

Yes, I believe in an independent Scotland with any or all of the remaining countries having the right to proclaim independence but I do not necessarily want independence now.

At the same time, I see the UK as the composite entity of individual countries but I do not have any emotional attachment to this composite country. However, until one of the constituent countries wants to split from the UK or until I am committed fully to independence, I am happy to accept the UK as my known, but unfelt, country.

I would change only one small portion of my original thoughts: I am more likely to vote in favour of independence now.

Very Very Occasionally ….

2011-04-24T23:58:00.001+01:00

….. I will find something I must post and find the time and commitment to do so.

Tonight I have gorgeous music from the guitar of Russ Barenberg. I have put together a video from his music and some photos of mine under the pseudonym ‘SwirlingCalum’ and under the aegis of my ‘Swirling Light Productions’.

_____

UPDATE @ 25 April 11.05 Just as well that I post only very, very occasionally. I got the title of the music wrong both here and on YouTube. I used ‘Original’ in the title rather than ‘Ordinary’. This has now been corrected.

_____

Enjoy!

The Hymn of Ordinary Motion

Russ Barenberg, Jerry Douglas and Edgar Meyer

When will I return again?

Very, very occasionally.

Who?

2011-01-31T07:48:00.001Z

With talent massively outweighed by arrogance and ignorance Calum takes his leave for the last time.

Music in the Morning – Saturday – No. 220

2011-01-29T06:00:00.000Z

Let’s go to Largo again this morning.

Bach: Double Violin Concerto in D minor BWV 1043
Mvt II, Largo Ma Non Tanto

Deceit of the Eyes: Revealed

2011-01-28T08:36:00.000Z

The top picture was posted with the title “Sailors’ Retreat”. Then I posted on Tuesday suggesting that the readers’ eyes had been deceived.

Today I reveal all!

Sailors’ Retreat (immediately below) and below that the original photo.

For all the world we see lights in homes but we have only white rocks very close to the water line. Darkening leaves visible only the brightest parts of the rocks which then appear as specks of light. The title, “Sailors’ Retreat” may have reinforced the view that we saw lights from homes.

The lights set the scale. We appear distant from the shore because we have decided the specks show houses but actually we are very close to the uninhabited shore.

I didn’t think that this manipulation was working until I saw the lights and then ….

Thus is a picture transformed and our eyes deceived.

Music in the Morning – Friday – No. 219

2011-01-28T06:00:00.000Z

An incredibly popular piece but that’s because it is brilliant …. and many, many years ago it was played at my Dad’s funeral.

Handel: Largo (from Xerxes)

London Symphony Orchestra