While Tainan County Bureau of Environmental Protection (BEP) quickly removed a reported 410 square meters of severely polluted soil, they also emphasized that the metal will only impact the stem and root development of the rice, and would not impact the kernels themselves, creating no need for concern over "chromium rice." However, this pollution has tarnished the reputation of the rice produced in Houbi Township and again raised concerns over the state of Taiwan's environment.

According to studies by the Tainan County BEP, chromium levels in the affected soil in the Houbi village of Jiatian were as high as 692 parts per million, almost three times the Department of Health standard of 250 ppm.

Long-term ingestion of chromium-polluted foodstuffs can impair liver and kidney function, and in severe cases can pose a cancer risk. As such, the BEP quickly sprang into action, digging out the polluted soil and burning almost 1.3 metric tons of rice.

Meanwhile the Council of Agriculture has released test results indicating that of the 41 rice plants samples from the polluted area, none tested positive for chromium levels higher than 0.36 ppm, little different from rice tested from elsewhere in Taiwan. The results were also lower than British food tests from 1994, which showed levels between 0.1 and 0.9 ppm. Chen Wu-hsiung of the COA has also spoken out to clear the village's name, stating that chromium in soil will only affect rice stem and root development, with the amount reaching kernels absolutely minimal.

Such proclamations have, however, raised doubts from people like Lin Ja-liang, chief toxicologist at the Linkou Branch of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital. These experts have presented reports from abroad showing that there can be dramatic differences in chromium absorption across different varieties of rice, and stated that the government should set out formal testing standards and should not be so frivolous in their treatment of this incident.

The pollution of these crops has had a massive impact on the willingness of consumers and wholesalers alike to buy Houbi rice. After farmers from the area made their way north to make their feelings known, both environmental and agricultural government agencies have not only promised to take more samples of area rice, but also announced a plan to purchase the rice themselves in order to help bolster public faith in the rice and protect the livelihoods of the farmers.

Recycling gone awry

According to investigations by the Environmental Protection Administration, the primary culprit in this pollution incident is slag from the nearby Chao Hsiang Recycling Center, which may have been washed away from the center by the flooding caused by Typhoon Morakot. Environmental groups note, though, that the center is surrounded by farmland and is stored essentially without shelter. In fact, since the center's establishment three years ago, surrounding fields have frequently been rendered unable to support plant life, so this kind of pollution was only a matter of time.

Additionally, while Chao Hsiang is a legally established metal recycler, it is set up in the middle of farmland in clear violation of zoned land-usage principles. Tainan's Bureau of Environmental Protection has twice-once in 2008, once in 2009-levied fines of NT$60,000 against the company; however, they have not ordered it to cease operations. With the reaction this latest incident has incited, however, the bureau has finally come down on the company with the iron fist of the law. Tainan County commissioner Su Huan-chih has admitted the bureau has mishandled the situation, while also promising quick investigations and the firing of those responsible.

While both central and local governments have promised to investigate and take action after this latest incident, the main offender in this case, as with the earlier "dioxin duck" incident, is the slag itself, which indicates the need for a long-overdue review of Taiwan's metal recycling policy.

Managing the metal

Both slag and baghouse ash are waste products created by the electrosmelting process. Baghouse ash, which contains dioxins and heavy metals, is classified as "hazardous waste" and may not legally be recycled. Slag, however, contains relatively lower levels of heavy metals (although not necessarily lower levels of toxicity), and was in the past considered suitable for reuse in paving bridges and roads, along with similar engineering work.

Worryingly, as director of Mercy on the Earth Lee Ken-cheng notes, smelting in Taiwan produces as much as 1 million metric tons of slag annually, but for decades there was no system in place for formal management of this waste. It was only in 2008 that companies were finally required to register online, with the flow of their waste monitored by GPS; and it was only in April 2009 that the government began putting in place systems to manage the flow of slag into agricultural areas, something which this latest incident reveals as being too little, too late.

Toxic baghouse ash, meanwhile, is expelled in quantities as great as 160,000 metric tons annually, and Taiwan's management capabilities in this regard are still severely lacking. According to EPA data, nationwide temporary storage of baghouse ash was as high as 490,000 metric tons as of the end of September 2009. The wanton, even illegal, spewing of this toxic substance has become a thorn in the side of the EPA and a scar on Taiwan's environment.

Shocked into action by this latest episode, the EPA has announced that nationwide slag and baghouse ash pollution will be investigated and a plan for addressing it put forward within a month. They have also announced plans to quickly enter into negotiations with the Ministry of Economic Affairs to look into methods of handling slag reuse in the future by investigating the methods used in developed countries. Slag is expected to be declared unfit for direct use on soil or earthen surfaces, thus reducing the chance of heavy metals polluting the soil.

Better late than never, perhaps. However, Taiwan will not be able to get the industrial pollution genie back in the bottle immediately, and many will be left wondering what new disasters yet lie in wait. Now the government must set about the hard work of defusing this potential ecological crisis, just as they must learn the lesson this incident presents to the nation.