#1Textiles andtoxic chemicalsGreenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 3Indonesian law gives legalguarantees to every individual togain access to information, and tojustice, in order to fulfil their rightto a healthy environment...❝❞
Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 5#1Introductionand key findings#1Greenpeace International hascommissioned a new investigation thatdelves even further into the hazardouschemicals used in the production of highstreet fashion, going beyond previousinvestigations in China and Mexico.This latest report builds on the Detoxcampaign’s work, which reveals how textilemanufacturing is a major contributor towater pollution in the Global South.Our research focuses on a large textiles facility inIndonesia, where we found that a wide range ofhazardous substances is being discharged directlyinto the Citarum River. The responsible facility isPT Gistex, located near Bandung in West Java –where the modern textile industry is concentrated– with 60% of production located in the CitarumRiver watershed. This factory undertakes polyesterweaving and wet processing such as dyeing,printing, and finishing of polyester.Famous for its batik, Indonesia has a long historyof textiles production. It is currently among the Top10 largest exporters of clothing in the world, whileit was the 11th largest exporter for textiles in 2011.Indonesia is the largest economy in South East Asiaand textiles and clothing accounted for 8.9% of thecountry’s total exports in 2010.1Water also has a special place in Indonesia’s culture.The expression for “homeland” in Bahasa Indonesia,the national language, is “Tanah Air Kita” – whichtranslates as “Our Land and Water”, reflecting thefact that Indonesia is made up of more than 17,000islands.2Tisna Sanjaya3, an Indonesian artist andsocial and environmental activist, speaks of theCitarum River as “the cradle of our nation’s culture”.Unfortunately, these resources face huge industrialdemands, and rivers are also used as a convenientdumping ground for all types of wastes, with theinevitable result that most of the major rivers on Javaare badly polluted.4The Citarum River is the river with the largestwatershed in West Java; it also has a reputationof being one of the dirtiest rivers in the world.5Thevisible problem of garbage and untreated domesticwastewater in the Citarum is severe.6Wastewaterfrom the textile industry is also a major source ofpollution, especially in the Upper Citarum where 68%of industrial facilities produce textiles7, and where thePT Gistex facility is located.Key findingsGreenpeace collected samples of wastewaterdischarged from the PT Gistex facility via threeoutfalls in May 2012.A diverse range of chemicals was identified in thesamples, many with known hazardous properties.8Some examples are toxic to aquatic life, while othersare persistent pollutants, which means they willremain in the environment long after their release.ToxicThreadsimage A boy on the banks ofthe Citarum River, CiteureupVillage, Kabupaten Bandung.
6 Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting ParadiseAs well as finding hazardous substancesfrom the investigated manufacturing facility,this report also reveals that –while the generalpollution of the Citarum River by domestic andindustrial wastewater is acknowledged to be aproblem – the full extent of pollution by hazardoussubstances is largely unknown. Other studies haveshown that heavy metals in sediments are one ofthe pollution problems in the Citarum River, withindustry likely to be a major source. However, noassessments have been made on the industrialsources of other hazardous substances, such asthose identified in this investigation.Regulation of industrial discharges in Indonesia islimited, and there is little enforcement. It is basedwholly on setting allowable limits for a very limitedrange of parameters, with no comprehensivemechanism to identify and phase out the use andrelease of hazardous chemicals. Transparency isalso a problem; in fact, there is no easy accessto information for the public on the monitoring ofwastewaters. Details on discharge permits, thelocation of outfall pipes, and monitoring data tocheck compliance or otherwise, are not universallyavailable.The PT Gistex facility is only one example ofwhat is likely to be a more widespread problemof hazardous substances being releasedin the effluent of textile manufacturers, aswell as other industrial sectors. Indonesia isa country where there is little information aboutthe use of hazardous substances in productionprocesses or their release in wastewater. Some ofthe responsibility for this problem lies beyond thefacilities concerned and government authorities.In particular, nonylphenol (NP) was found inthe wastewater from the main outfall, along withnonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEs). NPEs areused as detergents and surfactants in textilesmanufacturing, and can later degrade back toNP. NP is a well-known persistent environmentalcontaminant with hormone disrupting properties.The previous Greenpeace investigations foundresidues of NPEs in items of clothing soldthroughout the world, showing that they are used inmanufacturing processes in many parts of the textilesector (see Box 1).Tributyl phosphate (TBP), a hazardous chemicalused in the textile industry as a carrier for certaindyes, as a plasticiser, and as an antifoamingagent, was also found. It is toxic to aquatic life, andmoderately persistent. A high level of dissolvedantimony, a toxic metalloid used in polyestermanufacture, was found in the main outfall and oneof the two intermittent outfalls. Other substancespresent included quinoline-related compoundsassociated with the use of dyes, and certainethylene glycol ethers. However, little information isavailable on their toxicity.Wastewater discharged from one of the two smallerintermittent outfalls was highly alkaline (pH14),posing an acute hazard to the receiving river, andorganisms within it in the immediate vicinity of thedischarge, as well as anyone coming into contactwith the wastewater or river water close to theoutfall. Wastewater with a pH value of 14 is verycaustic, will burn human skin coming into directcontact with the stream, and will have a severeimpact (most likely fatal) on aquatic life in theimmediate vicinity of the discharge area. This samplealso contained a high loading of p-terephthalicacid, a raw material used in the manufacture ofPET polyester. The presence of this substanceand the high alkalinity suggests that it had notreceived even the most basic of treatment priorto discharge.Some of the hazardous chemicals found in this studyhave also previously been reported by Greenpeacein industrial wastewaters discharged in China andMexico, including those released directly from textilemanufacturing facilities, and in communal dischargesfrom industrial zones, where a high proportion oftextile manufacturers are located.chapter oneJatiluhurDamCirataDamSagulingDamBANDUNGJAKARTAPT Gistex Textile DivisionThe Citarum River,West Java
Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 7chapter oneBox 1Fashion –a dirty businessThis investigation follows six recent GreenpeaceInternational reports – Dirty Laundry, DirtyLaundry 2: Hung Out To Dry, and Dirty LaundryReloaded; and the more recent Toxic Threads:The Big Fashion Stitch-Up, Toxic Threads:Putting Pollution on Parade and Toxic Threads3: Under Wraps9– which investigated thedischarge of hazardous substances from textilemanufacturing and their presence in clothing andfootwear.Dirty Laundry revealed how a range of hazardoussubstances was being discharged into theYangtze and Pearl River deltas from two textilemanufacturers in China with commerciallinks to many major clothing brands.10Morerecently, as outlined in Toxic Threads: PuttingPollution on Parade and Toxic Threads:Under Wraps, Greenpeace found a range ofhazardous substances discharged from twoindustrial zones in China with a high proportionof textile manufacturers, and from two facilitiesmanufacturing textiles in Mexico.11The other reports tested samples for thepresence of hazardous substances in clothingproducts. Together, these reports demonstratethe release of hazardous chemicals – NPs/NPEsin particular – at two points in the textiles chain.Firstly, that the presence of hazardous chemicalsin finished products shows that they were usedin the manufacturing facilities – this would haveconsequently led to their release in the country ofproduction, as was found to be the case for twofacilities in Dirty Laundry. Secondly, that manyof these substances can continue to pollute theenvironment and waterways around the world,wherever a product is sold and is subsequentlywashed.12
8 Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradisechapter oneThe need for corporateleadershipGreenpeace International investigations uncoveredthat several global fashion brands have had abusiness relationship with at least one part ofPT Gistex Group, the company associated withthe polluting facility (PT Gistex Textile Division) inIndonesia, which Greenpeace sampled in 2012.Gap Inc. (which owns the brands Gap, Old Navyand Banana Republic) has yet to credibly takeresponsibility for its toxic footprint around the world.Over the past year, it has called upon multiple timesby Greenpeace to agree a Detox commitment, andit has been linked to pollution scandals on severaloccasions13. Gap’s lack of responsible actionthreatens the Citarum and other river systems – andthe people who depend upon them – and also bringsinto question whether it is acting as a socially andenvironmentally conscious organisation.Similarly, the Japan-based Marubeni Corporation– which refused to respond to Greenpeace’srequests for clarity on the nature of its subsidiary’sbusiness relationship with PT Gistex Group – needsto take urgent action to ensure that its globaloperations are not causing environmental destructionvia the release of hazardous substances, andincrease transparency about its suppliers and theimpacts of their production processes on the localenvironment.Brooks Brothers – a brand that has providedclothing for 39 out of 44 US Presidents (includingPresident Obama) – has acknowledged a businessrelationship with parts of PT Gistex Group.Greenpeace is urging the company to act quickly toresolve an ambitious Detox commitment.Other companies that have already madecommitments to Detox their supply chains andproducts – including Adidas Group and H&M– have also been found to have had a businessrelationship within PT Gistex Group.Adidas Group failed to reveal in writing the full natureof a direct and/or indirect business relationship with allparts of PT Gistex Group14but acknowledged verballyhaving a relationship with PT Gistex Garment Division.For full details, please see pages 32-33.During the 2012 London Olympics, Adidas Groupindicated that it wanted to be “open and honestand ... show best practices in terms of supply chaindisclosure”.15While these are commendable words,Adidas Group’s current lack of comprehensivetransparency regarding its suppliers and theirreleases – and the brand’s failure to take ambitiouson-the-ground action since its Detox commitment in2011 – undermines the company’s proclamations.It is precisely this lack of transparency within thefashion industry that allows for the deliberate andharmful release of hazardous chemicals by textilesuppliers to continue.Consumers are increasingly expecting brands tobe transparent about their business practices,and H&M’s recent public disclosure of its globalsupply chain is an important and commendablefirst action.16H&M must now follow this up withcomprehensive disclosure of the hazardouschemicals used on a facility-by-facility andchemical-by chemical basis for each of its identifiedsupplier facilities. H&M must also make this pollutiondata accessible (through its suppliers) to the public,using online platforms such as the IPE platform.17Unless companies like Gap Inc., Adidas Groupand Marubeni Corporation act with the necessaryurgency, and work proactively with their suppliers toprovide their customers and those living near thesefacilities with pollution information that they have aright to know, eliminating the discharge of hazardouschemical into our precious and life-giving waterwayswill not progress at the pace required. Withoutinformation regarding what hazardous chemicalssuppliers are releasing into local water systems, thispollution will continue unabated, and the duty ofcare these companies act upon will continue to bequestioned.To help solve the problem of hazardous chemicalscontamination, transparency of information betweensuppliers and brands – as well as full supplierengagement through hazardous substance-use inventories – is essential. Corporate andgovernmental policies to eliminate the releases ofhazardous substances, and their substitution withsafer alternatives, need to be enforced. A crucialnext step for all companies – including the brandslinked to PT Gistex Group – is to swiftly identifyall of the chemicals used across their production
Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 11The PT Gistex facility is located near thevillage of Lagadar, in the Margaasih Districtto the west of Bandung City, which is thecapital of West Java Province and the thirdlargest city in Indonesia. Industry in theUpper Citarum area, which includes theBandung Regency, is dominated by textilemanufacturing, which represents 68%of all the industrial factories in the region,with a total of 446 textile manufacturingfacilities in the Upper Citarum area.20Textiles and apparel are an important partof the Bandung City economy, whichalso includes tourism, technology andplantations/agriculture.PT Gistex established its first plant in 1975 in the cityof Bandung, and by 2007 had eight factories with3,000 employees, producing 12 million articles ofclothing a year and 6 million yards of fabric a month.21It is one of the largest manufacturing companiesin Bandung, focusing on textiles, garments andfashion. Its products are exported all over theworld.22It currently has six facilities in Indonesia,with its head office, textiles and garment divisions inBandung.23The PT Gistex Textile Division investigated in thisreport undertakes polyester weaving, and wetprocessing such as dyeing, printing, and finishingof polyester georgette. The capacity for textilesprocessing was expanded in 2000 to reach 3.5million yards a month.24ToxicThreadsIndonesian polyester textilemanufacturer investigationimage The PT Gistex facility,which discharges wastewatercontaining hazardouschemicals directly into theCitarum River.#2The Citarum River, West Java.Citarum RiverPT GistexTextile DivisionGistexHead OfﬁceB A N D U N G1mileLocation of the PT Gistex facility
12 Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradisechapter twoThe PT Gistex Textiles facility is bordered by farmlandand housing, with the Citarum River to the southof the factory. Effluent from textiles processing isreportedly treated in a wastewater treatment plant(WWTP), which then flows via a terrace to the mainoutfall pipe. There are two other outfalls adjacentto the main outfall, which discharge wastewaterintermittently, although the specific origin of thewastewaters within the facility is not clear. Accordingto Indonesian regulations, any wastewater pipe orpoint of discharge requires a permit25, with specificlimits set for a small range of general parameters.26Inreality, it is very difficult to access individual dischargepermits for any particular facility or dischargepipe. Therefore, the legal status of the PT Gistexwastewater outfall pipes, and the actual permittedlevels of pollutants dischargeable into the RiverCitarum, is not publicly known.All three outfalls discharge directly into the river.Wastewater was observed being dischargedcontinuously from the main outfall during operatinghours, while discharges from the other two weresporadic, and the wastewater differed visibly to thatfrom the main outfall. Immediately downstream, theriver flows over the Jompong Waterfall. Here, localresidents and Greenpeace Southeast Asia activistshave observed large amounts of foam – floatingon black-coloured water – on many occasions,specifically during the dry season. A strong smell,which becomes more intense during the night –particularly for those living in traditional Indonesianhouses rather than brick-built houses – is alsoreported.Box 2PT Gistex – Ahistory of pollutionPT Gistex has been evaluated directly by theIndonesian Ministry of Environment as partof its “PROPER” programme (see Chapter 4for more details). In 2009/10, it was listed as“red”, indicating that it was not in compliancewith environmental regulations27. By 2010/11,its performance had improved and it was oneof several textile factories that was accreditedas “blue”, showing that it had complied withthe required environmental regulations.28However, the only information available to thepublic is this colour classification. Concretedetails of the types of pollutants released, theamounts, the concentrations, and the locationsof the pollutants generated by each activityare not disclosed. It is therefore impossible toindependently verify that monitoring data showscompliance or non-compliance with any of theenvironmental regulations, notwithstanding thenarrow range of parameters covered by them.The exact reason for the non-compliance withregulations in 2009/10 is also not known.In November 2009, a dispute arose betweenPT Gistex and the local community ofMargaasih District. The community was seekingcompensation in the form of health insurancefor the construction of a chimney withoutconsultation, complaining that people weresuffering respiratory effects, such as painfulcoughing, due to thick dust and odour fromthe chimney. According to the residents, wasteand pollution of air and water from the plant hasdamaged the environment for many years. TheHouse of Representatives mediated a tripartitediscussion between PT Gistex, the Ministry ofEnvironment (MoE) and the community. A PTGistex Director was quoted in the local press assaying: “We are convinced that our companyis not destroying the environment, as we havealready gained a blue accreditation from thegovernment (….) though other compensation canbe discussed”.29The outcome of the tripartitediscussion is not known.Industry in the Upper Citarumarea, which includes the BandungRegency, is dominated by textilemanufacturing, which represents68% of all the industrial factories inthe region, with a total of 446 textilemanufacturing facilities in the UpperCitarum area.
14 Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradisechapter twoThe findings of this study also highlight verypoor management of some wastewaters at thisfacility. For example, basic treatment to neutralisethe highly alkaline wastewater and remove thep-terephthalic acid found in the sample from one ofthe smaller outfalls had not taken place. Improvedwastewater treatment, however, will not resolvethe concerns regarding hazardous chemical use.Wastewaters containing NPEs and NP, and certainother hazardous substances including heavy metalssuch as antimony, cannot be treated effectively inconventional wastewater treatment processes.Overall, this study has demonstrated that the PTGistex facility provides a clear example of the useand consequent release of hazardous chemicalsfrom a textile manufacturing facility in Indonesia.While these findings, based on a small number ofsamples from one facility, cannot be representativeof wastewaters released from textile manufacturingfacilities throughout Indonesia, it does providea further illustration of what is likely to be themuch wider problem of the discharge of effluentsfrom this sector containing hazardous chemicalcontaminants.Box 3Nonylphenol (NP) andNonylphenolethoxylates(NPEs)30Nonylphenol (NP): NP is used to manufactureNPEs, among other things. Following use, NPEscan break back down into NP. NP is known to bepersistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic, includingbeing able to act as a hormone disruptor. NP isknown to accumulate in the tissues of fish, as wellas other organisms. NP has also recently beendetected in human tissue.Nonylphenolethoxylates (NPEs): NPEs area group of manmade chemicals: they do notoccur in nature, only as the result of humanactivity. They are widely used as detergents andsurfactants, including in formulations used by textilemanufacturers. Once released to wastewatertreatment plants, or directly into the environment,NPEs degrade to nonylphenol.In Indonesia, the manufacture, use, and releaseof NP and NPEs are not currently regulated ona national basis, even though they have beenregulated in some regions for many years.NP and NPEs were included on the first list ofchemicals for priority action towards achieving theOSPAR Convention target of ending discharges,emissions and losses of all hazardous substancesto the marine environment of the northeast Atlanticby 2020. NP has also been included as a “priorityhazardous substance” under the EU WaterFramework Directive. Furthermore, within the EU,since January 2005 products (formulations used byindustry) containing more than 0.1% of NP or NPEsmay no longer be placed on the market, with someminor exceptions.31Restrictions on the sale of imported textile productscontaining residues of NPEs do not currentlyexist within the EU, or elsewhere, though such aregulation within the EU is currently proposed byone member state, Sweden. In addition, Germanyis proposing the addition of NP and a relatedsubstance, t OP, as substances of very highconcern (SVHC) under the EU REACH Regulation,which would lead to their phase-out (with thepossibility for exemptions).
chapter xxxBox 4Tributyl phosphate (TBP)32TBP has various industrial uses, including as a carrierfor certain dyes, as a plasticiser in plastics andtextiles, and as an antifoaming agent.TBP does not occur naturally in the environment,but has been commonly detected in surface watersand freshwater sediments. TBP is toxic to aquaticlife and moderately persistent, and has previouslybeen detected in wastewaters discharged to surfacewaters from wastewater treatment facilities, includingtextile-manufacturing wastewater.TBP has been classified under the GloballyHarmonised System for classification and labelling ofchemicals as harmful if swallowed, irritating to skinand suspected of causing cancer.Box 5Antimony33In addition to the organic compounds identified,high levels of dissolved antimony were found in thesamples of wastewater collected from one of theintermittent outfalls and from the main wastewateroutfall, along with some additional antimony bound toparticulates suspended in the wastewater.The polymerisation process used to producePET is commonly catalysed by antimony trioxide,which is likely to result in wastewater containingantimony. Furthermore, polyester fibres typicallycontain residues of antimony trioxide used in themanufacture. These fibres have a high surface area,and are often subjected to harsh conditions duringprocessing, when antimony trioxide residues can beexpected to leach out into processing water.Antimony compounds have been associated withdermatitis and irritation of the respiratory tract, aswell as interfering with normal function of the immunesystem. In addition, antimony trioxide has been listedby the International Agency for Research on Canceras “possibly carcinogenic to humans”, with inhalationof dusts and vapours the critical route of exposure.Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 15
chapter threeGreenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 19This pollution also means that the river waterupstream of Saguling Dam is classified as “red”53,unable to support biological functions andunsuitable for leisure activities, aquatic sports andaquaculture54, while water in the Saguling Dam itselfdid not meet quality standards.55In response to pollution of the Citarum River, theMinistry of Environment launched in 1989 the“Program Kali Bersih”, or “PROKASIH”, with the aimof improving water quality through the installationof industrial wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs)and communal domestic treatment plants.Although PROKASIH claimed that levels of pollutionin industrial wastewater discharges had beenreduced56, the water quality since PROKASIH waslaunched in 1989 unfortunately has yet to show anyimprovement, and has even deteriorated. To date,the water quality of the Citarum River has never metthe water quality standards since the programmewas established in 1989.57Following the failure of the PROKASIH programme,in 2007 the Indonesian government prepared anintegrated recovery programme, and outlined aroadmap – the Integrated Citarum Water ResourcesManagement Investment Program (ICWRMIP).58This still operates continuously but with little effect,as the condition of the Citarum River continues todeteriorate.Efforts to clean up the Citarum River received a majorboost in 2008, with the Asian Development Bank(ADB)’s approval of a $500 US dollar million multi-tranche loan package, initially focused on providingsafe water supplies and sanitation facilities for poorfamilies.59It should be noted that the problem ofhazardous chemical pollution being dischargedin complex industrial effluents is not addressedspecifically by either of these programmes.Pollution after:images (on the left)The PT Gistex facilitydischarges wastewatercontaining toxic andhazardous chemicals intothe river; the shores of theCitarum are littered withwaste.image (on the right)A pipe in the Padalarangarea, discharginghazardous chemicals intothe Cihaur river, a tributaryof the Citarumm
Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 21chapter threeRevealing the threat ofunknown chemicalsA previous investigation in 2012 undertaken byGreenpeace Southeast Asia and WALHI Jabar,with the assistance of the Institute of Ecology,Padjadjaran University, and Lab Afiliasi Kimia,University of Indonesia, assessed the impactof industrial pollution on the Citarum. Researchmeasured the quality of river water or dischargedwastewater at 10 locations, from a pristinewellspring at its source, to the end of the river.68Several anonymous industrial discharge canalsor outfalls (also known as “phantom pipes”) weresampled, together with river water and riversediments. As well as measuring concentrationsof heavy metals and other typical water pollutionparameters, the samples were screened forhazardous organic chemicals.Results show the presence of hazardous chemicalsin wastewater samples, including heavy metalssuch as mercury, hexavalent chromium, lead andcadmium. River sediments were also analysed,with the results showing that sediments at somesampling points have elevated levels of chromium,copper and lead.69One or more hazardous organic chemicals werealso detected in some wastewater samples and oneriver water sample. These were:• Phthalates, including DEHP, DiBP, DBP andDEP,70which were detected in five out of the sevenwastewater samples. DEHP, DiBP and DBP areclassified as “toxic to the reproductive system”.71• BHT72, which was detected in six of thewastewater samples and in one river watersample, and p-chlorocresol73, which was detectedin wastewater at one site; both chemicals areclassified as toxic to aquatic life.74The study also highlighted extreme variationsof acidity in the water samples. Water from fourwastewater samples and one river water sample washighly alkaline (between pH9 & 10), a characteristicof some industrial discharges, including someexamples of wastewater from certain textilemanufacturing processes. Textile facilities are knownto be present close to most of these sampling points.In addition, one sample of wastewater was veryacidic, at pH3. Levels of pH above 9 and below6 alter the normal chemical reactions in aquaticecosystems, and can be harmful to aquatic life. Inaddition to the very high BOD75and COD76valuesin some wastewater samples, the investigation alsoshowed that each sampling site was contaminatedwith surfactants. Many of these are toxic, primarilydue to their ability to reduce surface water tensionand impact animals that depend on this. The sourceof the metals and organic pollutants, and the relativecontribution made by the textile industry in the areassampled, is not known, although textile facilities aredominant in the area.This study provides examples of the serious situationfaced by the Citarum River, raising further concernsabout pollution from the discharge of hazardouschemicals, in addition to the heavy metals knownto be present in river sediments. The dischargeof these substances by all industries in Indonesianeeds urgent investigation as a first step towardseliminating their discharge. However, the adequacyof the current regulatory system and its enforcementare also of concern.Most of the major rivers onJava are badly polluted witha combination of untreateddomestic wastes and largelyfrom uncontrolled industrialeffluents.
#4Shifting from controltowards preventionPublic policies to address waterpollution in Indonesia rely on apollution control approach, ratherthan pollution prevention. National andprovincial governments implement qualitystandards and requirements. However,these only cover a limited range ofparameters. Water quality standards definethe maximum levels of a limited range ofpollutants and parameters, to achieve therequired level of water quality in any waterbody, which is then classified as I, II, III or IVaccording to its usage.77Limits on the concentration of certain pollutantsand parameters in discharged effluent from industryare set by a 1995 regulation78for 21 types ofindustry. A further 16 types of industrial activity areregulated by other ministerial decrees. Beyondgeneral parameters such as BOD, COD and TSS,79the standard set for the textile industry only listschromium, phenols, ammonia and sulphides, forthe various types of textiles processing.80No otherhazardous organic chemicals are listed, such asthe NPs/ NPEs found by Greenpeace Internationalin the wastewater samples of PT Gistex, orother chemicals commonly released in textilemanufacturing wastewaters, such as phthalates. Inaddition, there are no limits for heavy metals apartfrom chromium.This system has a number of weaknesses. Firstly,it is based wholly on allowable limits for hazardouschemicals, rather than preventing their use andrelease. Secondly, the standards only cover a verylimited range of parameters and chemicals, which donot reflect the reality of complex industrial effluentsand the range of hazardous chemicals employed bythe textile-manufacturing sector. Thirdly, there is alack of capacity to detect violations of the standards(uncovered by routine or unannounced monitoringby the government authorities, self-reporting bythe industry concerned or monitoring and reportingby the community or the media), and to respondquickly and decisively when violations occur. Finally,there is a lack of easy access to informationfor the public on the results from monitoring ofwastewaters.Access to information –fact vs fictionIndonesian law gives legal guarantees toevery individual to gain access to information,and to justice, in order to fulfil their right toa healthy environment.81Similarly, regulationson water quality state that “every person hasan equal right to obtain information on thestatus of water quality and the managementof water quality and water pollution control”,including the results of monitoring for compliancewith regulations.82Companies are also “obliged toprovide correct information about the implementationof the obligations of the management of water qualityand water pollution control”83in order to assess thecompliance and management of business/activitiesin relation to the legislation.84A more recent law85onthe disclosure of information to the public states thatevery public entity has a right to have open access toinformation.Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 23section oneToxicThreadsimage The PT Gistexfacility discharges industrialwastewater containinghazardous chemicals into theCitarum River.inset Local residents ofCiwalengke Village washclothes and dishes with waterfrom the Citarum River, intowhiich hazardous chemicalsare discharged; manyvillagers suffer skin irritations.
24 Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradisechapter xxxThe so-called Public Disclosure of IndustrialPollution (PROPER) approach in Indonesia wasestablished in 1995, and aims to reduce industrialpollution via public disclosure, despite the factthat it does not require any disclosure on releasesto the environment. It was developed and testedby the country’s National Pollution ControlAgency (BAPEDAL), together with the WorldBank. The programme assesses compliancewith a number of environmental regulations (airpollution, water pollution, hazardous wastesmanagement, environmental impact assessment,and marine pollution), based on self-reportingby companies.86Around 1,750 companies wereexpected to participate in 2009, and an increasein the numbers of companies complying with theregulations is reported.87Parts of the programmeare devolved to provincial governments forimplementation.A colour-coded rating system (gold, green,blue, red and black) is used to grade factories’performance against set benchmarks,corresponding to the different levels ofperformance and compliance with pollutioncontrol regulations. The gold and green ratingsrepresent performance beyond compliance88,while the black rating is poor. Blue is givento companies that are in compliance withregulations. Companies are encouraged toeventually comply with standards by using non-regulatory channels, such as public and socialrecognition of efforts to reduce pollution. Anincentive to improve performance is provided byBox 6The PROPER programme –half-hearted transparency?the national publication of company performanceratings.A study found that the “key means by whichPROPER spurs abatement is improving factorymanagers’ information about their own plants’emissions”, but that public pressure was ofequal importance and “simply supplying newinformation to plant managers without makingthat information public may not be sufficient tomotivate significant abatement”.89However, thePROPER programme is not transparent. Thepublished information is limited to the final resultof the government’s assessment, in the form ofthe colour rank, while the information that thisassessment is based on – the types, amounts,concentrations, and locations of the pollutantsgenerated by each activity – is not published.Therefore, there is no public scrutiny of theaccuracy of the ratings.The PROPER programme is even more seriouslylimited by the very scope of the regulatoryrequirements; the discharge of wastewater is onlyevaluated in relation to the limited parametersin the Government Standards (see above). Forexample, for textiles, most heavy metals andother potentially hazardous chemicals (apartfrom phenols as a general category) are beyondthe scope of these standards, and therefore noreporting on the emission and reduction of thesehazardous chemicals is required to achieve ablue, green or gold rating under the PROPERprogramme.Most heavy metals andother potentially hazardouschemicals (apart fromphenols as a generalcategory) are beyond thescope of the PROPERprogramme rating system.GOODPOORThe PROPER programme’scolour-coded rating system
Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 25chapter fourIn reality, monitoring data on compliance withregulations on wastewater discharges is notreadily available, it is not published by themedia or available on the internet. The responseto requests for information varies between thedifferent national and local enforcement authorities.The process for obtaining information can bebureaucratic; requests may have to be made inwriting to various different authorities.Even the PROPER programme (see Box 6),a government scheme designed to reducepollution from industry by publicising companiesperformance in meeting various environmentalregulations, does not report on monitoring datato show compliance or non-compliance with theregulations.Relaxed regardfor regulationsIt is hardly surprising that the level of awareness,participation, and adherence to the regulationsby industry is still very low in practice. A 2009survey found that only 47.2% (83 out of 176)industrial facilities in Bandung Regency treatedtheir wastewater using a WWTP prior to release.90However, out of those that did use a WWTP, thedischarges of only 40% (33 industries) met theWastewater Quality Standards.91Recently, a total of 29 garment and textilecompanies have received sanctions from theEnvironment Agency (BPLHD) of the province ofCentral Java, as a result of violating regulations onthe carrying capacity, environmental sustainability,and disposal of industrial waste, resulting inenvironmental pollution. The authorities suggestthat many violations of the environmentalregulations are occurring undetected. Duringthe rainy season, when the detection of pollutionincidents is difficult due to the high water levels,contamination is spread further afield in flood-affected areas. However, details about the types ofcontaminants, and whether hazardous substanceswere released, are not provided.92In West Java, 14 companies representing variousindustries – including garment manufacturers –have received administrative and criminal sanctionsfor contamination of the Citarum watershed withhazardous wastes. However, the authorities notethat there are countless other cases of contaminationwith hazardous wastes in the Citarum.93There are also examples of wastewater beingdisposed of illegally, for example via undergroundpipes in the Majalaya district, where it is apparentlyimpossible for the local authorities to trace the sourceof pollution back to the responsible party due to themany different companies discharging into the samepipe.94These examples illustrate that industrial dischargesto rivers in Indonesia are not consistently monitoredfor compliance with the standards, that breachesare a regular occurrence, that sanctions are notenforced frequently, and that illegal discharges canalso take place. If these practices continue, evenwith improved standards that take account of abroader range of hazardous organic chemicals andstrong monitoring and enforcement, pollution byhazardous substances will continue. The principleof “Pollution Control”, in which “acceptable levels”of a pollutant are allowed, is insufficient to protecthuman health and the environment, especiallyagainst toxic chemicals persistent in nature, or ableto bioaccumulate. There needs to be a paradigmshift away from reliance on this reactive approachtowards a preventive one, which eliminates the useof hazardous chemicals at source, through cleanproduction and progressive substitution with saferalternatives.There needs to be a paradigm shift away from relianceon this reactive approach towards a preventive one,which eliminates the use of hazardous chemicals atsource, through clean production and progressivesubstitution with safer alternatives.
Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 29Global fashion brandsand the textiles industryin IndonesiaAfter China and India, Indonesia is thethird fastest-growing economy among theworld’s leading industrial countries (G20),and the largest economy in southeast Asia.Its growth rate is predicted to exceed thatof China and India within 10 years, and itis said to be “determined to become theregion’s production hub and the factory forSouth East Asia”.102Manufacturing is the most important contributor toIndonesia’s GDP, representing more than 27% duringthe 2003 to 2007, and is concentrated on the islandof Java, where more than 80% of total industrialmanufacturing is located.103West Java accountedfor 37% of this figure in 2007, where the highestdensity of employment in manufacturing facilities isin Bandung.104Many industrial facilities are located inthe Citarum River watershed, due to infrastructure,the availability of land and natural resources, andproximity to Jakarta. The various manufacturingindustries that operate in the watershed are primarilytextiles, electronics, pharmaceuticals, leather, andfood.#5section oneBox 7Textiles on theCitarum RiverThere is a long history of textiles dyeing in theCitarum River watershed, named after theabundance of tarum, a plant that has beenwidely cultivated as the source of natural indigodye since the 4th century, and traditionallyused by batik makers. However, the long andcomplicated process required to extract colourfrom the indigo plant meant that, ultimately,batik makers preferred the new syntheticchemical dyes.105Today, the tarum plant is nolonger grown in the Citarum watershed, despitethe fact that the cultivation and processing oftarum and other indigo-based dyes used tobe such a vital part of its culture. No effort hasbeen made to develop newer, more efficient,technology-driven ways to produce indigo-based dyes.Textile manufacturing continues to be vitallyimportant today. Chemical synthetic dyes havelargely replaced the traditional tarum, togetherwith the use of many other synthetic chemicals,some of which are hazardous. Some 60% ofnational textile production takes place in theCitarum watershed106, and the textiles industryhas the greatest number of industrial facilities ofany sector in the Citarum watershed as a whole,representing 46% of all industry.107However,the modern textile industry has also played itspart in the devastation of the Citarum River.section oneToxicThreadschapter siximage Adidas retailer.Pacific Place Mall, Jakarta.
30 Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradisechapter fiveThe modern textile industry has been establishedin Indonesia for many years108, and is highlyconcentrated on the island of Java, and specificallyWest Java109– where low-end, large-scaleproduction takes place – compared to the nichemanufacturing and marketing on the island of Bali.110It is dominated by synthetic yarns, particularlypolyester, and is an important contributor to theeconomy and to employment. Despite problemssuch as outdated machinery and the lack ofcompetitiveness within the region, it still showshuge economic potential.111An estimated 11% ofthe total industrial labour force works in textiles112,representing 1.3 million people as of 2011.113In 2010, textiles accounted for 8.9% of the country’stotal exports114, and textiles, leather products, andfootwear contributed 9% to Indonesia’s GDP in2010.115Indonesia is among the Top10 clothing-exporting countries in the world by value, movingfrom 10th position in 1990 and 2000116to 8th in2011, according to WTO data.117It was also the 11thlargest exporter of textiles in 2011, an increase of16% from 2010.118Various leading international apparel brands useIndonesia as a manufacturing base for their globalexports and about 61% of manufactured garmentsare exported to international markets. In recentyears, exports have increased. According to theMinistry of Trade, exports of textiles and garmentsrose by 19.7% to $12.1bn US dollars between 2010and 2011. The US is Indonesia’s largest market forgarments and textiles, and accounts for 36% oftotal exports, with 15% going to the EU and 5% toJapan.119Woven clothing, underwear, and knitted orcrocheted clothing, together made up nearly 60% ofthe total value of textile exports between 2007 and2011. Recently, there has been an increase in theexport of value-added items such as suits, jackets,dresses and trousers, for both men and women,compared to more basic items.120The discharge of hazardous chemicals intowaterways from the manufacture of clothing forglobal fashion brands in Indonesia is likely to becommon, though as yet unquantified. In additionto the findings of Greenpeace’s investigation intowastewater discharges from PT Gistex (see Chapter2), there is other evidence that the persistent andhazardous chemicals NPs/NPEs are probably beingdischarged by other textile facilities in Indonesia. Sixout of eight samples from garments manufactured inIndonesia that were tested as part of an investigationby Greenpeace International in 2012121were foundto contain NPEs. These included items of clothingsold by Armani, Gap, Esprit, Mango, and Marks &Spencer. The presence of hazardous chemicals suchas NPEs in a product generally indicates that they areused in its manufacture, with a high probability thatthey are being discharged into local water systemswithin manufacturing wastewaters. It is impossibleto identify the exact locations of manufacture fromthe products alone. However, these findings showthat NPEs are used in parts of the textile industry inIndonesia, as well as globally, during the manufactureof products for a host of major international brands.Various leading internationalapparel brands use Indonesia asa manufacturing base for theirglobal exports and about 61% ofmanufactured garments are exportedto international markets.image GAP retailer. SenayanCity Mall, Jakarta.
32 Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradisechapter fiveEvery brand is responsible for ensuring that itsglobal supply chain operations – either directly orindirectly – do not cause the release of hazardouschemicals into the environment. Lacking sufficientoversight of these global supply chains, or claimingignorance about the hazardous chemicals releasedby suppliers providing inputs into productionprocesses around the world, are not acceptableexcuses. Brands have a duty of care to theircustomers and to the local communities forced toshare their water systems with industry, to act ascustodians of these water systems and to ensurethat any water supplies are not treated like privatesewers.During February and March 2013, GreenpeaceInternational sent letters122via courier to theIndonesia-based supplier PT Gistex Group, as wellas to the head offices of the following internationalapparel brands, requesting comment on anybusiness relationship with PT Gistex Group (and/orany of the associated companies PT Gistex Groupdirects and/or controls):Adidas Group, Ascena Retail Group (includesLane Bryant), Brooks Brothers, C&A, DuroIndustries, Esprit, Gap Inc. (includes BananaRepublic, Gap and Old Navy), Guess, H&M,Lecien, Limited Brands (includes Mast Industries),Macy’s, Manhyo KK, Marks & Spencer, Marubeni,Nordstrom, S Oliver, Otto Group (includes OttoSumisho), Pacific Brands Workwear, JC Penney(includes Liz Claiborne), PVH Corp (includesTommy Hilfiger), Specialty Fashion Group, SunCapital Partners (includes Kellwood), The RowLLC, Toray Industries, Triumph International,WalMart, Walt Disney, and Yamamoto Sada.In its March 2013 response to GreenpeaceInternational, PT Gistex Group claimed that it“PT Gistex ... has always [been] concerned forthe environment and our society. Our facility isequipped with wastewater treatment to avoidpolluting the environment.”123C&A, PVH Corp, Limited Brands, Otto Groupand S Oliver have each respectively expressedno known business relationship between eachof their companies and their respective productsand PT Gistex Group and/or any of the associatedcompanies PT Gistex Group directs and/or controls.Connections to multinationaland domestic brands
GreenpeaceInternationalSectionxxxGreenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 33chapter fiveTriumph International states “...Triumph Internationalhas no business relationship with the company youreference, PT Gistex Textile Division, or any of itsaffiliated companies”. Walt Disney Company states:“In response to your initial inquiry, through internetresearch we have identified six facilities we believeto be owned or controlled by PT Gistex. Our recordsindicate that five of those six facilities have NEVERBEEN AUTHORIZED by The Walt Disney Companyfor the production of Disney-branded product. Theauthorization for the sixth facility, PT Gistex GarmentDivision .... EXPIRED in 2010”. Walmart replied thatPT Gistex Textile Division “is not a current, authorizedsupplier to Walmart. Our records indicate that theywere deactivated in 2009 and no orders have beenplaced with them since that time.” Esprit indicated asingle last order via PT Gistex Group, in March 2011.Despite multiple requests to do so, Adidas Grouphas yet to provide Greenpeace with a clear andcomplete explanation in writing of its past orcurrent business relationship to all parts of PTGistex Group.124For example, while GreenpeaceInternational repeatedly requested information fromAdidas Group for any business relationship withany part of PT Gistex Group, Adidas Group onlydenies having a relationship with PT Gistex TextileDivision. However, its most recent supplier lists (asof 1 January 2012, available on its website) includePT Gistex Garment Division, and the relationship withthe Garment Division has been confirmed verbally byAdidas employees to Greenpeace.125Brooks Brothers acknowledges a businessrelationship within PT Gistex Group: “We are notcurrently working with the wet processing part ofthis mill but rather their garment making factory. Ourfabric is printed and imported from another mill inIndonesia.”126H&M’s website127includes PT Gistex GarmentDivision in its current list of suppliers and confirmedits accuracy to Greenpeace.In sum, Adidas Group, Brooks Brothers, GapInc., H&M and Marubeni have had a businessrelationship in the recent past with at leastone part of PT Gistex Group, the companyassociated with the polluting facility (PTGistex Textile Division) in Indonesia, whichGreenpeace sampled in 2012.Neither Ascena Retail Group, Duro Industries,Gap, Guess, Lecien, Macy’s, Manhyo KK, Marks& Spencer, Marubeni, Nordstrom, Pacific BrandsWorkwear, JC Penney, The Row LLC, SpecialtyFashion Group, Sun Capital Partners, TorayIndustries, nor Yamamoto Sada had responded toGreenpeace’s couriered request for comment by thisreport’s production deadline of 9 April 2013.However, export information shows that PT GistexGroup (and/or one of the associated companies itdirects or controls) has had a business relationshipwith Gap Inc. (including its wholly ownedsubsidiaries Old Navy and Banana Republic) andthe Marubeni Corporation.128As of 1 March 2013, the public website of PT GistexGroup included the logos of Mary & Kate Ashley,Esprit, Gap, Guess, Kellwood, Marubeni, andS Oliver, and mentions C&A, Esprit, Kellwood,Lane Bryant, Lecien, Liz Claiborne (controlledby JC Penney), Manhyo KK, Mast Industries(controlled by Limited Brands), Otto Sumisho,Toray, Charles Vogele, Yamasada andYamamoto as “recent customers”.Some of the brands linked to PT Gistex Grouphave made public statements about the needto avoid environmental pollution, or alreadymade a commitment to Detox.129Accordingto their respective websites, some seem to beconcerned about the environmental impact fromthe manufacture of their products. However,this investigation found that their past or currentsuppliers are releasing toxic chemicals intosurrounding water and local river systems.GAP: “For Gap Inc, environmental responsibilitymeans far more than being “green” or selling greenproducts. We view it as connected to every aspect ofour business, from the manufacture of our clothes tohow they are packaged and shipped to the design ofour stores.”130Marubeni: “Preserving the global environment is atthe very core of Marubeni’s business activities.”131Other brands, including Brooks Brothers132, donot publish a position on their environmentalresponsibilities.
This investigation provides a snapshot of thedischarge of hazardous chemicals into one ofIndonesia’s most important rivers. Although thefacility in this report can’t be taken as representative– given the scale of textile manufacturing inIndonesia – such discharges are likely to beemblematic of a wider problem, representing the tipof the iceberg.This report clearly demonstrates that regulationin Indonesia currently fails to provide adequateprotection against widespread pollution.Standards are not comprehensive or stringentenough, and there is little enforcement of thestandards that do exist.Moreover, the discharge of some hazardous,persistent chemicals is taking place despite thepresence of wastewater treatment plants. Anew strategy needs to be adopted to stop suchchemicals being released into the environment– one that ensures the rapid and transparentelimination of the use of hazardous chemicals atsource and their replacement with non-hazardousalternatives. Companies and global brands havea responsibility to go beyond lax and minimalgovernment standards and actively encouragegovernments to improve their regulation ofhazardous substances.The role of brandsThe textile industry has an important role in theindustrialisation and development of many countriesin the Global South. Major brands with supplychains in these countries are in a unique positionto have a positive influence in reducing theenvironmental impacts of textile manufacturing– and in the process to help bring about theshift away from hazardous and environmentallydamaging chemicals across all industries.Transparency of information, between suppliers,brands and the public, as well as full supplierengagement through hazardous substance useinventories and the development of comprehensivelists of chemicals for elimination by brands, areimportant to accelerate the elimination of the use ofhazardous substances and their substitution withsafer alternatives. The criteria and data that defineintrinsic properties of chemicals and classify themfor elimination should be made fully transparent.The government needs to request that the chemicalindustry provides information on the intrinsicproperties of chemicals, which should also bepassed down the supply chain. These measureswould allow the supply chain to make more informedchoices on chemicals use.Brands can also help to change the attitude ofgovernment authorities on the disclosure of basicinformation on hazardous chemicals used or onindustrial discharges. By ensuring that informationon the use and release of hazardous substancesby their suppliers is made available to the public,creating pressure to eliminate the use of suchchemicals, global brands can demonstrate thebenefits of a new and more open system.Time to DetoxIndonesia’s waterwaysGreenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 35section one#6ToxicThreadsimage Industrial wastewaterdischarged into the CitarumRiver by the PT Gistex facility.inset A resident of CiteureupVillage catches fish in theCitarum River.
Following Greenpeace’s Detox campaign, whichstarted in 2011, a number of sportswear and fashionbrands – including several retailers and luxury brands– took up the Greenpeace Detox challenge135andmade individual commitments136to eliminate alldischarges of all hazardous substances by 2020.Each brand or supplier must ensure their individualcorporate commitment to Detox is continuallyupgraded to remain credible according to theincreasing scale and resulting urgency of globalwater contamination. As the deadline for achievingzero discharges draws nearer, the need for moreconcrete implementation plans grows increasinglyurgent as does the need to create a clear list ofchemicals to be eliminated by 2020. Commitmentsof principle need to be accompanied by clear stepsand deadlines on key implementation elements (seeBox 8).The steps taken on the ground to eliminate thedischarge of hazardous chemicals from textilefacilities must also be taken by all industrial sectorsthat contribute to water pollution in Indonesia. Thiswill also require the Indonesian government toimplement comprehensive chemical managementpolicies, so that hazardous chemicals can beregulated and ultimately eliminated.Greenpeace calls on the Indonesian governmentto adopt:1) A political commitment to “zero discharge”137ofall hazardous chemicals within one generation138,based on the precautionary principle and apreventative approach to chemical management.This commitment must have the substitutionprinciple at its core, and include producerresponsibility139in order to drive innovation andtoxics-use elimination.2) An implementation plan to establish:(a) a dynamic priority hazardous chemical list, forimmediate action.140As mandated by the current regulation, there is anurgent need to establish the National Commissionfor Hazardous Materials141immediately. Thiscommission will be responsible for evaluatingchemicals on the market, and recommendingthose that need to be registered to be added to alist of hazardous materials, as either restricted orbanned.Box 8Key steps to Detoxthe textile chainTo effectively tackle the pollution of our waterswith hazardous chemicals, all brands should:• Adopt a credible and ambitiouscommitment to phase out the use of allhazardous chemicals, from their globalsupply chain and all products, by 1January 2020. “Credible” means basedon the unambiguous adoption of threefundamental principles – “precaution”,complete elimination (“zero discharges”),and “right-to-know”.• Walk the talk, in line with the best practicezero discharge individual action plans, by- ensuring their suppliers disclose theirdischarges of hazardous chemicals. Thedata should clearly identify the location offacilities and their respective discharges,chemical by chemical, facility by facility,at least year by year, but preferably morefrequently (quarterly, for example). Thedata should be made public in easily-accessible formats in the local language(for example, by using credible public,internet based information platforms133);- developing and making public a newcomprehensive and transparent 2020phase-out list, based on the bestpractice approach to intrinsic hazardousassessment criteria134;- introducing short-term eliminationdeadlines for the highest priorityhazardous chemicals, backed up bypublication of progress investigations andsupply chain contractual obligations; and- showcasing substitution of hazardouschemicals with safer alternatives viapublicly available case studies.
Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 37chapter sixA dynamic hazardous chemicals list could be derivedfrom the evaluation of a national chemical inventorythrough the use of a comprehensive hazard-basedand transparent screening methodology. Therefore,the process of creating an inventory of chemicals thatis currently being discussed by government mustinclude all chemicals on the market, not only thosealready listed as hazardous materials according tocurrent regulation. The current discharge permitsneed to be broadened to include more hazardoussubstances, their limits should be re-focused towardsthe progressive reduction and ultimate elimination ofthe discharge of all hazardous chemicals, in line withthe “zero discharge” goal above.(b) intermediate targets to meet the generationgoal above; and(c) a publicly available register of data aboutdischarge, emissions and losses of hazardouschemicals. Information from PRTRs can contributeto achieving significant reductions in emissions ofhazardous substances.142All current governmentpermits, research and information on dischargesand releases of hazardous chemicals by industryshould be immediately and easily accessible tothe public. Indonesia’s widely acclaimed publicdisclosure programme, PROPER, must bereformed to require the disclosure of all releases,emissions and losses of hazardous chemicals tothe environment, beyond the very limited scope ofcurrent regulatory requirements. It must, as a bareminimum, provide full transparency by disclosingthe data that serves as the basis for the colourratings of company performance. It needs to havethird party verification and must invite maximumpublic scrutiny.3) Measures to ensure infrastructure and policies arein place to support implementation, including:- identifying priority chemical restrictions;- policies and regulations that require mandatory audits and planning;- the provision of technical help and appropriatefinancial incentives; and- research and support for innovation in greenchemistry.Finally, it will be crucial to ensure the enforcement ofexisting and future more stringent regulations via ahigher number of controls and inspectors and greatertransparency concerning inspections and sanctions.The role of“People Power”As global citizens and consumers we can also useour influence to play a key role in creating a toxic-freefuture.As global citizens we can collectively:• Choose to buy fewer new clothing products, andinstead buy second-hand or vintage clothes wherepossible. This can also involve re-purposing andre-using older items to create “new” pieces for ourwardrobes, taking part in clothes swaps, and evensharing items with friends.• Influence brands to act responsibly on behalf ofthe planet and its people. The need for companiesto make the right choices and protect futuregenerations has never been greater than it is today.All brands need to be challenged on whetherthey have set a date for the elimination of the useof all hazardous chemicals in their supply chainsand products, and on whether they are beingtransparent about their business practices andthose of their suppliers. It is our water, and theseare our products, and we have a right to know whatis in them.• Demand that governments act to restrict theproduction, import, and sale of products containinghazardous chemicals.There’s no time to waste. By acting together we candemand that governments and brands act NOW toDetox our rivers, Detox our clothing and ultimately,Detox our futures.To find out more about how you canmake your voice count visit:www.greenpeace.org/detox
Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise 39endnotesEndnotes1 Business Vibes; Industry Insight (2013). Textile Industry in Indonesia, http://www.businessvibes.com/blog/industry-insight-textile-industry-indonesia,exports in terms of monetary value.2 http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-1839300306/indonesians.html12 February 20133 Biography, Tisna Sanjaya, http://www.sinsinfineart.com/artists/Contemporary/TisnaSanjaya/biography/4 Republic of Indonesia (2003a). Water Resources Management TowardsEnhancement of Effective Water Governance in Indonesia, For the 3rd WorldWater Forum, Kyoto – Japan, March 2003, Section 3.2 Current Status ofCountry Water Resources, Section 3.2 Current Status of Country WaterResources, p.7.http://www.worldwatercouncil.org/fileadmin/wwc/Library/Publications_and_reports/country_reports/report_Indonesia.pdf5 The Citarum is described in many reports and articles as one of the mostpolluted rivers or places in the world, see for example:Fullazaky MA (2010). Water quality evaluation system to assess the statusand the suitability. Environ Monit Assess (2010) 168:669–684. Also seeChapter 3.6 The West Java Province Environmental Control Agency (BPLHD) (2010).Original Title: Status Lingkungan Hidup Daerah. Translated: RegionalEnvironmental Status. Sections: Industrial activities with water contaminationpossibility.7 PUSDATIN Ministry of Industry (2012) Company Directory (Table C2, Toxicout of control)8 Brigden K, Labunska I, Santillo D & Wang M (2013). Organic chemicaland heavy metal contaminants in wastewaters discharged from two textilemanufacturing facilities in Indonesia.http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/Campaign-reports/Toxics-reports/Polluting-Paradise9 Greenpeace International (2011a). Dirty Laundry: Unravelling the corporateconnections to toxic water pollution in China. July 2011http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/toxics/water/Dirty-Laundry-report/Greenpeace International (2011b). Dirty Laundry 2: Hung Out to Dry:Unravelling the toxic trail from pipes to products. August 2011.http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/reports/Dirty-Laundry-2/Greenpeace International (2012a). Dirty Laundry: Reloaded. How big brandsare making consumers unwitting accomplices in the toxic water cycle. 20March 2012.http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/Campaign-reports/Toxics-reports/Dirty-Laundry-Reloaded/Greenpeace International (2012b). Toxic Threads: The Big Fashion Stitch-Up.November 2012.http://www.greenpeace.org/international/big-fashion-stitch-upGreenpeace International (2012c). Toxic Threads: Putting Pollution onParade. December 2012.http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/Campaign-reports/Toxics-reports/Putting-Pollution-on-Parade/Greenpeace International (2012d). Toxic Threads: Under Wraps. December2012.http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/Campaign-reports/Toxics-reports/Toxic-Threads-Under-Wraps/10 Greenpeace (2011a), op cit. Previous research also found that persistenthazardous chemicals such as perfluorinated chemicals and alkylphenols,which Greenpeace detected in wastewaters discharged from textilemanufacturing sites, are widely present in the Yangtze River ecosystem.A Greenpeace study found bioaccumulation of these chemicals in twofish species. The two species sampled are on the daily menu of localcommunities. Brigden K, Allsopp M & Santillo D (2010). Swimming inchemicals: Perfluorinated chemicals, alkylphenols and metals in fishfrom the upper, middle and lower sections of the Yangtze River, China,Amsterdam. Greenpeace International.http://www.greenpeace.to/publications/swimming-in-chemicals.pdf11 Greenpeace International (2012c) & (2012d) op cit.12 Greenpeace International (2012a). The study found that NPE residuesin clothes are readily washed out when laundered.13 Greenpeace International (2012d) op cit.14 Email correspondence between Adidas Group head office andGreenpeace International between 25 February and 27 March 2013, onfile with GPI.15 Adidas Group 2012 Annual Report (accessed 28 March 2013) viahttp://www.adidas-group.com/en/investorrelations/assets/pdf/annual_reports/2012/GB_2012_En.pdf page 11716 H&M website:http://about.hm.com/AboutSection/en/About/Sustainability/Commitments/Responsible-Partners/Supply-Chain/SupplierList.html17 IPE, or the Institute of Public & Environmental Affairs, is anenvironmental NGO in China:http://www.ipe.org.cn/en/pollution/index.aspx18 Right-to-know is defined as practices that allow members of thepublic access to information – in this case, specifically about the useand releases of hazardous chemicals. Implementing right-to-knowrequires full facility-level public disclosure, i.e. reporting, to the public – forexample, on the internet or an equivalent, easily-accessible format. Thedata should clearly identify each facility, its location and its respectivedischarges, chemical by chemical, facility by facility, at least year by year,but preferably more frequently (e.g. quarterly).19 See, for example, the recent report Sustainable Apparel’s Critical BlindSpot, IPE (2012) - pp 18.http://www.ipe.org.cn/about/report.aspx20 PUSDATIN Ministry of Industry (2012) op cit.21 Gistex, Indonesia Integrated Textile Industry, 32 Years Anniversary,1975 - 200722 http://www.gistexgroup.com/ Accessed 22 January 201323 http://www.gistexgroup.com/location.phpAccessed 23 January 201324 http://www.gistexgroup.com/textile.php#Accessed 23 January 201325 Republic of Indonesia (2009). Article 104 of Law No. 32 of 2009,which states that: “Anyone dumping waste and/or materials into theenvironment without a licence as referred to in Article 60, shall bepunished with imprisonment of 3 (three) years and a fine of not more thanRp3.000.000.000, 00 (three billion rupiah).”According to Article 1, point 24, “Dumping (disposal) is the activity ofthrowing, placing, and/or entering the waste and/or materials in specificquantity, concentration, time, and locations with specific requirements tospecific environmental media.” The dumping of waste and/or materialscan only be done with the consent of the Minister, governor or regent/mayor in accordance with their authority and can only be performed at apredetermined location.image Banana Republicretailer. Senayan City Mall,Jakarta.
40 Greenpeace International Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradiseendnotes26 Government Decree Regulation No. 82 (2001), on Water QualityManagement and Pollution Control and Ministry of Environment Decree(1995), Kep-51/Menlh/10/1995, Limit standard for Effluent of IndustrialActivity, 23 October 1995. Limits for Textiles are: Parameters are: BOD5,COD, TSS, Phenol, Chromium (total), Ammonia, Suphides, Oil and Fat, pHand Maximum waste debit 150 m3 per ton textile product27 http://akubisnishijau.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/hasil_proper_2010.pdfAccessed 5 February 201328 Sekretariat PROPER, PROPER 2011, Gistex is no. 547 on the Blue list.http://www.menlh.go.id/DATA/Press_release_PROPER_2011_OK.pdfAccessed 5 February 2013. The following categories include the regulationsthat must be complied with for a “blue” rating: 1. Air Pollution Control 2.Water Pollution Control 3. Hazardous Waste Management 4. EnvironmentalImpact Assessment and 5. Marine Pollution Control. PROPER, SOP andCriteriahttp://proper.menlh.go.id/proper%20baru/Eng-Index.html29 Antara Jawa Barat.com, 13 November 2009. Warga Korban CerobongAsap Minta Ganti Rugi.http://www.antarajawabarat.com/lihat/berita/18568/lihat/kategori/94/Kesra; accessed 5th February 2013.30 For more detailed information and references see Brigden et al (2013)op cit.31 EU (2003). Directive 2003/53/EC of the European Parliament and ofthe Council of 18 June 2003, amending for the 26th time Council Directive76/769/EEC relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certaindangerous substances and preparations (nonylphenol, nonylphenolethoxylate and cement), which entered into force January 2005. It is nowentry number 46 of annex 17 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 552/2009of 22 June 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the EuropeanParliament and of the Council on the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisationand Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) as regards Annex XVII. OfficialJournal L 164. 26.6.2009: 7-31.32 For more detailed information and references see Brigden et al (2013)op cit.33 Ibid.34 Water Environment Partnership in Asia: State of Water – Indonesia.http://www.wepa-db.net/policies/state/indonesia/indonesia.htm35 Blue Planet Project. Our right to water; an exposé on foreign pressure toderail the human right to water in Indonesia, p.7.http://www.blueplanetproject.net/documents/RTW/RTW-Indonesia-1.pdf36 Republic of Indonesia (2003a), op cit.37 Republic of Indonesia (2003b), Section 3.2 Current Status of CountryWater Resources, p.7, op.cit.38 Roosmini D, Hadisantosa F, Salami IRS, Rachmawati S, (2009), Heavymetals level in Hypocarcus Pargalis as biomarker in upstream Citarum River,West Java, Indonesia, p31-36, in South East Asian Water Environment,2009 IWA Publishing.http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Southeast_Asian_Water_Environment_3.html?id=6pahUcse7TcC39 Republic of Indonesia (2003b) op cit.40 Ibid.41 Arifin Z, Puspitasari R & Miyazaki N (2012). Heavy metal contaminationin Indonesian coastal marine ecosystems; a historical perspective, CoastalMarine Science 35(1): 227-223, 2012http://repository.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2261/51708/1/CMS350132.pdf42 Trofisa D (2011). The evaluation of pollution burden and pollutioncarrying capacity of Ciliwung river in the segment Bogor city segment.Original title : Kajian beban pencemaran dan daya tampung pencemaransungai Ciliwung di segmen kota Bogor. Department of Forest naturalresources conservation and ecotourism. Faculty of Forestry. BogorInstitute of Technology. Unpublished/Thesis43 Hong et al (2012). Pollution sources, beneficial uses and managementof Batang Arau and Kuranji River in Padang. Journal of Applied Science inEnvironmental Sanitation, Vol. 7 (3): 221-23044 Sikder MT, Yasuda M, Yustiawati, Suhaemi MS, Takeshi S & Shunitz T(2012). Comparative Assessment of Water Quality in the Major Rivers ofDhaka and West Java, International Journal of Environmental Protection,pp. 1, 12, 13,http://www.ij-ep.org/paperInfo.aspx?ID=10345 The Citarum is described in many reports and articles as one of themost polluted rivers or places in the world, see for example: Fullazaky MA(2010) op cit.Finding a cure for Indonesia’s sick riverhttp://articles.cnn.com/2010-03-18/tech/eco.citarum.indonesia_1_water-source-water-basin-polluted?_s=PM:TECH 6th February 2013.World’s most polluted places:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/31/photos-most-polluted-plac_n_693008.html#s130751&title=Bandung_Indonesia11 most polluted rivers in the world,http://www.takepart.com/photos/10-most-polluted-rivers-world#citarum-river--west-java-indonesiaCitarum River Basin: Roadmap to better water management, leaflet:http://citarum.org/upload/upload/Citarum%20leaflet%20English_Final_small.pdf 7th February 2013.46 Fullazaky MA (2010) op cit.47 Ibid.48 Citarum River Basin: Roadmap to better water management, leaflet,op cit.49 Citarum is a super priority river for Indonesia based on collectivedecision of Interior Minister No.19/1984; Forestry Minister No 059/1984;General Work Minister No 124/198450 Citarum River Basin: Roadmap to better water management, leaflet,op cit.Fullazaky MA (2010) op cit, p.669Jakarta Post (2011), Integrated effort to restore Citarum, 12 April 2011,http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/04/12/integrated-effort-restore-citarum.htmlICWRMIP Cita-Citarum. 2010.Roadmap untuk Pengelolaan Sumber DayaAir Terpadu Wilayah Sungai Citarum, March 2010.http://upload.citarum.org/knowledge/document/Roadmap-Framework-Ind-March-2010.pdf. accessed: 20/02/201351 Fullazaky MA (2010) op cit, p.683, the status of water degradation isexpressed in term of Water Quality Index (WQI)