MATRIX RECYCLED This UK e-waste recycling giant recirculated mercury through the workplace via a defective ventilation system, resulting in gross exposures to the workforce.

One of the UK’s largest recycling firms and its director have been fined a total of £145,000 for “shocking” safety breaches that exposed workers to mercury fumes.

Twenty employees of Electrical Waste Recycling Group Ltd (EWR), formerly known as Matrix Direct Recycling Ltd, had levels of mercury in their system above UK guidance levels at the site in Huddersfield, and five of them showed extremely high levels following the exposure in the 10 months between October 2007 and August 2008.

Several workers had reported ill health as a result, including a pregnant worker who was concerned her unborn baby was at risk.

The firm recycles electrical equipment including fluorescent light tubes containing mercury and TV sets and monitors containing lead.

Bradford Crown Court heard that ventilation problems at the plant meant employees were being exposed to potentially harmful emissions from both substances. Mercury vapour was released when the lighting tubes were crushed. Because carbon filters were not fitted on the purpose-designed machine, the contaminated air was itself recycled and pumped back into the premises. One of the ducts pumped contaminated air directly into the office area.

The firm is involved in litigation with the American suppliers of the processing equipment over the missing carbon filters which would have stopped any mercury emissions, the court was told.

On 5 February 2010, EWR was fined £140,000 and ordered to pay £35,127 costs after pleading guilty to criminal safety breaches, including three separate breaches of the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002, and one breach of the Control of Lead at Work Regulations 2002. 

Company director Craig Thompson, 38, was also fined £5,000 after pleading guilty to a criminal breach of the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002. The judge decided not to disqualify Thompson from being a director. The court was told he had financial difficulties, including debts of £80,000.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE), the UK government’s workplace safety enforcement agency, issued the company five Improvement Notices and one Prohibition Notice – putting an immediate stop to work -  in relation to the incident. Although the company’s own daily tests identified high levels of mercury at the premises, the closure of an oven used to dispose of the chemical failed to solve the problem and by August 2008 HSE had issued the prohibition and improvement notices against the company.

Prior to the prohibition notice, HSE staff had tested the urine of 35 employees at the premises and found 20 had higher than recommended levels of mercury.

Barrister Robert Smith QC, for the companies, said since the prohibition notice was served the firm had spent £350,000 installing an effective emission filter system and a further £281,000-a-year was being spent on additional managers and supervisors. He told the court tests on staff conducted in January 2010 showed all were under the recommended levels.

After the hearing HSE inspector Jeanne Morton said: “This is a shocking case involving a large number of employees, many of them young and vulnerable, who were suddenly faced with the worrying possibility of damage to their long-term health. The risks associated with handling toxic substances like mercury have been known for generations, so it is all the more unacceptable that something like this has happened. The company failed to see the risks created by their recycling work and failed to develop effective plans for safe working. They also did nothing to check their workers’ health after exposure.

“Workers have a right to expect a reasonable level of protection in the workplace, and employers have a legal duty to provide it.”

Max Folkett, site inspector for the Environment Agency, added: “We have worked closely with HSE and other organisations during the investigation which led to this prosecution. Electrical Waste Recycling Group Limited requires an environmental permit from us for the recovery and processing of hazardous waste and we routinely inspect the site to check the company is complying with the permit. We suspended the permit following this incident in August 2008, removing the risk of mercury escaping from the site, because of our concerns the operation posed a serious risk of pollution from mercury.”

Toxic metals use, far from declining, appears to be staging a comeback. Lead use has increased dramatically in recent years. And increased production of electronic equipment worldwide is set to see the use of lead soar over the next decade.

The long term downward trend in mercury production stalled in 2006 and 2007. Latest figures, published in the 2009 edition of the authoritative World Mineral Production, show 1.4 million kilograms were produced in each of these years, a figure the report suggests is an underestimate.

GREEN COLLAR Workers suffered mercury poisoning at this UK recycling firm.

The world could be facing an epidemic of poisonings by highly toxic metals you’d be forgiven for thinking were a hazard of yesteryear – and all in the name of the environment. The problem arises from new uses for the toxins in “green” products or from a disregard for health and safety in recycling and reuse operations.

Lead is the most notable comeback kid. Use of the metal, which can cause cancer, neurological, reproductive and a host of other problems, has increased dramatically in recent years. And increased production of electronic equipment worldwide is set to see the use of lead soar over the next decade.

The hazards come both in lead’s production and use, and in the profitable but often poorly controlled practice of recycling – over 50 per cent of lead used today is recycled.

And now it looks like mercury, the metal that turned hatters’ mad, is to have a major revival. The long term downward trend in mercury production stalled in 2006 and 2007. Latest figures, published in the 2009 edition of the authoritative World Mineral Production, show 1.4 million kilograms were produced in each of these years, a figure the report suggests is an underestimate.

As the mercury use in medical equipment declines on environmental grounds – it’s been the subject of a long-running and successful campaign by Health Care Without Harm – the same metal is being pressed into routine use in soon to be mandatory low energy lightbulbs, supposedly also on environmental grounds.

Old style incandescent lightbulbs are being phased out across the European Union by 2012. But the mercury risk from the “environmentally friendly” alternative is so apparent the UK government recommends evacuating the room for 15 minutes if you break one.

That’s not an option if your job involves recycling mercury-containing lights, as workers at the UK-based Electrical Waste Recycling Group found to their cost.

Workers at the Huddersfield factory became sick with mercury poisoning in a “blatant” examples of management neglect of health and safety. Staff at the company, which recycles hazardous electrical equipment including TVs and light tubes – old style fluorescent tubes also contain mercury – suffered headaches, stomach upsets and mood swings.

Mercury poisoning can damage the brain and other organs, leading to personality changes and even low level exposure may cause brain and other neurological cancers.

On 23 November 2009, at Bradford Crown Court, company director Craig Thompson, 38, admitted two charges of failing to discharge his duty in relation to hazardous substances. The company, which is one of the UK’s leading recycling firms, said it would be pleading guilty to all 10 health and safety charges. The director and the firm will be sentenced in January 2010.

At an earlier hearing at Huddersfield Magistrates’ Court, the breaches were described as “very grave offences indeed” by Health and Safety Executive inspector Jeanne Morton. She added: “This is a blatant example and one of the worst failings of health and safety management seen for a long time.”

The factory filtration system was not working and had pumped air containing mercury vapour and lead into the factory office, she said. Tests on 34 workers revealed that 20 showed mercury “way above the limit expected in the general population.” Thompson knew about the high levels of mercury as he was given readings carried out by his own staff but he “ignored” them and the poisoning continued, the court was told.

Some workers were hospitalised. Ryan Wilkes, who worked at the firm for 10 months, began passing blood after just six weeks in the job and suffered headaches and mood swings. “I had tests and they found I had 57 times more mercury than should be there,” he told local paper the Yorkshire Post. “I was hospitalised for two nights. It is not something you expect an employer to put you through.”

Colleague Andrew Makison, 26, suffered anxiety attacks, a possible symptom of mercury poisoning. He believed the exposure may have damaged his brain and is seeking medical advice. “Friends say I keep blanking out. I may have something wrong.” He added: “Production was more important than health and safety.”

Mr Makison, who carried out mercury readings at the plant, said he alerted Thompson about the “off the scale” figures. “I got told off for talking about mercury,” he added. “A colleague was pregnant and was worried about her baby. She was in tears.” The woman has since given birth and tests are still being carried out to determine if the child has suffered any damage.

The clamour to go green is seeing the introduction to workplaces of risks from new hazards, old hazards and entirely unassessed potential hazards, and from there into the environment and consumer products. But policymakers are demonstrating a serious case of green fever, talking environmental talk without much thought about what they are really doing and why.

Green jobs are a great idea. Less environmental pollution is essential. Energy saving measures must be introduced to preserve resources and stem climate change.

But “green” initiatives that lead to increased use of highly toxic substances and an upturn in the risk from occupational and environmental exposures are not green, they are reckless. It’s not so much a case of a lack of joined up thinking. It’s a lack of considered thought at all.