Rotem Amfert Faces Crucial Decision on Polluting Waste Ponds
A critical juncture has been reached in the dispute over the future of Rotem Amfert, an Israeli chemical plant owned by ICL (Israel Chemicals Ltd.). In October, a subcommittee of the National Planning and Building Council will review appeals against a plan that would allow the factory to continue using existing ponds for storing wet phosphogypsum waste for five years. The company argues that Pond 5 will be full by April 2027, and any delay in approving Pond 4 could lead to the plant's closure, impacting approximately 11,000 direct and indirect jobs.
The conflict pits Rotem Amfert's management and workers against local residents and environmental organizations, including Lobby 99 and the Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel. While Rotem Amfert is a significant source of employment, particularly in the Negev region's development towns, it is also identified as one of Israel's most polluting factories. Environmental groups warn of potential contamination of soil and groundwater from the waste.
Rotem Amfert contends that any delay or rejection of the plan will result in widespread layoffs. Moshe Hadad, chairman of the Rotem Amfert workers' committee, emphasized the dire consequences for thousands of families in the Negev, stating, "The workers and the Negev cannot remain in uncertainty for a long time." Conversely, environmental organizations accuse the company of presenting a fait accompli to planning authorities and failing to meet previous timelines for closing and rehabilitating the ponds.
The phosphogypsum waste is a byproduct of phosphate mining and fertilizer production, containing heavy metals. Ponds 4 and 5 were slated for closure and rehabilitation in 1998, but their use has continued. Following the collapse of Pond 3 in 2017, which polluted the Ashalim stream, a safer solution became urgent. A 2021 plan proposed a permanent solution with the construction of Pond 6, but its establishment has been delayed.
The current proposal seeks to temporarily allow the use of Ponds 4 and 5 for five years while Pond 4 is reconditioned and environmental regulations are enforced, pending the operation of Pond 6. Environmental groups argue this is a tactic to perpetuate the use of polluting ponds, while the company insists it is a necessary measure to prevent immediate closure and job losses. The appeals were filed following a district court ruling that, while upholding the plan's procedural integrity, allowed for the appeals to be heard due to the national and fundamental issues involved, including the balance between industrial needs and environmental protection.
