The study confirms the serious pollution of the bottom of the port of Syros Hellenic Center for Marine Research (ELKETHE). The question now is what will happen next, since the law prohibits refusal sea ​​pollution, but does not provide for any procedure for contaminants accumulated on the seabed without identifying the culprits. Along with the exhibition, the first “episode” in the dispute between the environmental organization of Syros and the company that has been managing its shipyards for the past three years has also come to an end.

The case began with sampling carried out at the end of 2019 by the organization Aegean breath at the bottom of the harbor (published by “K” 02/20/2022). The results of the analyzes were especially alarming, since for a number of heavy metals the values ​​were much higher than the normal values. This case subsequently caused outrage in the local community, followed by the intervention of the Ministry of the Environment.

While ELKETHE’s water and bottom survey proved to be the only solution to get answers, in the end both South Aegean region as well as Municipality of Syros they declared themselves unable to finance it. Finally, the study was commissioned to ELKETHE by ONEX, which has been managing the shipyards of Syros since 2020. ELKETHE carried out sampling in April 2022 from two of its vessels, both in sea water and at the bottom of the port, on the surface and at a depth of 20 -30 cm.

The study shows a mixed picture. The sea water is in good condition, but the pollution of the bottom is more serious than the first sampling showed. The chromium content in the bottom sediments is 460 ppm (parts per million), i.e. more than twice, i.e. from the ports of Piraeus and Patras and the Gulf of Elefsina. Copper prices were also very high (216 ppm, below only the Piraeus port) and nickel and zinc prices were also high in some places.

The report does not indicate the source of contamination. “Deposit core analysis shows that the sediments correspond to a time period of several decades. The source of pollution should be attributed to multiple anthropogenic activities in the area. It is possible that the high chromium values ​​are due to the earlier operation of tanneries in the coastal zone,” he says. As a general conclusion, the study concludes that “provided the good ecological state of seawater is maintained, sediment quality is also expected to improve over time.”

But are the tanneries the only “recognizable” source of pollution in the port of Syros? “For chromium, this is a very likely source. Otherwise, all the activities that existed at all times in the area, including the shipbuilding repair zone, played a role, ”says Giannis Hatzianestis, oceanographic chemist at ELKETHE and scientific director of the study. “What is certain is that the bottom there has been polluted for at least 50-60 years.”

Despite the extremely unpleasant results on seabed pollution in the port of Syros, the South Aegean region looked… relieved, as it was at the epicenter of a dispute between the Syros Observatory for Environmental Quality and ONEX company about who is to blame for the pollution. “There is no legislation on maximum permissible pollution of the bottom, and the county does not have similar powers, not to mention the Environmental Protection Agency, which has one employee per 2,500 complaints. For us, the issue is considered settled. says “K” district governor George Hatzimarkos.

Now the question is whether the environmental damage will be compensated. Given that pollution cannot be attributed to any specific source, it is not possible to start a process of remediation of environmental damage (based on the European polluter pays principle). The only thing that is changing is that if the harbor is to be dredged in the future, the sediment that will be removed will need to be specially treated and not dumped elsewhere in the sea.

Proceedings

However, an interesting aspect of the case concerns the conflict between the Syrian Environmental Quality Observatory and ONEX. Cause, announcements and interviews of members of the Observatory, who indicated as a possible co-cause of pollution and shipbuilding repair activities. The company sued Observatory (with seven out-of-court claims and three lawsuits seeking damages of 3 million euros). The case went to the House of Representatives and was called “SLAPP”, i.e. a strategic lawsuit aimed at preventing public participation. As a result, the First Court of Syros dismissed one of the three claims and partially granted the other two (as a result of which both parties expressed their satisfaction with the decision). The claim for compensation was rejected, but ONEKS said it would appeal.