You are on page 1of 10


1.1. Global environmental and/or adaptation Issues
Chemicals bring many benefits to societies and represent a vital element of human development. However,
without proper management and disposal practices, chemical substances and wastes pose significant risks to
human health and the environment. Especially insidious are persistent organic pollutants[POP]. Toxic,
degradation resistant and dispersible, they bio accumulate and are deposited in terrestrial and aquatic
POPs are especially regulated chiefly under the 2009 Stockholm Convention. Under the Stockholm framework,
states retain primary obligation to reduce the prevalence and protect against the effects of POPs, with assistance
-financial, technical and otherwise- as necessary from other states, institutions and stakeholders.
Lead (Pb) is one such ingredient, critical in industrial enterprises and consumer products throughout the world.
Lead is a heavy metal that occurs naturally in the form of metallic ore, and also in the fumes of volcanoes, and
can be found throughout the environment (WHO HECA undated). Because of increasing human activity, such
as mining and smelting, and the use of lead in petrol and a myriad of other manufactured products, the level of
lead in the biosphere has risen in the past 300 years (NHMRC 2009).
The toxicological effects of lead have been known since antiquity and in humans lead is rapidly absorbed by
blood and tissue, and then redistributed to the bones (UNEP, 2010). Lead is toxic to multiple organ systems,
adversely affecting the human body in a variety of ways depending on dosage, duration and timing (IPCS, 1995).
Among the most susceptible population groups re young children, women, and people working with lead under
unsafe conditions (Bellinger, 2005; Ide and Parker, 2005).
Lead can seep into the environment and human body from various sources such as gasoline (petrol), recycling
and dumping of car batteries, toys, paint, pipes, soil, some cosmetic and traditional medicine products and many
other sources (WHO/UNECE 2007; ). -as quoted by: Lead Poisoning in Indonesia By Suherni, Intern at The
LEAD Group, for her Masters of Environmental Science, Graduate School of the Environment, Macquarie
University, Sydney, Australia. Additional information by Susy RetnowatiEdited by Anne Roberts and Elizabeth
OBrien, The LEAD Group Incorporated, Sydney, Australia.
For infants and young children, dust and soil contamination is a major pathway to exposure, especially around
lead emitting industries (IPCS, 1995; U.S. CDC, 2002, 2005). Lead may also be inhaled via ambient air,
especially near lead smelters, repair workshops and waste burning (IPCS, 1995), such as in Pakistan where
children near battery workshops showed blood lead levels between 11.4 to 20.00 g/dl higher than the WHO
recommended level of 10.0 g/dl (Pakistan submission, 2010).
Lead exposure in Indonesia remain an understudied phenomenon, but is potentially widespread. Indonesia's
increasing number of industries has been associated with rising heavy metal pollution in several areas, such as
in Jakarta and Dumai Riau. (Amin 2001, Anggarini 2007, Lestari and Edward 2004; quoted by Suherni, Lead
Poisoning in Indonesia) In addition lead may also arrive in Indonesia via imports, as was shown when toys from
China possessed lead levels four tmies higher than the voluntary Indonesian standard (Qamariah, 2007)
Most blood lead studies in Indonesia (Albalak et al 2003, Heinze et al 1998, Browne et al 1999, Adriyani and
Mukono 2004, and Chahaya et al 2005) have focused on blood assessment inurban areas with high traffic
densities and have omitted rural areas (Suherni, Lead Poisoning in Indonesia). Available data indicate that
Indonesian children living in urban areas are at increased risk for blood lead levels above the actual acceptable
limit. In Indonesia as in other countries "activities to reduce pollution (e.g., reduction of lead in gasoline) and
continuous monitoring of lead exposure are strongly recommended". (Heinze et al 1998).
Among the various forms of lead exposure, Indonesia may be experiencing increased harm from used lead acid
batteries [ULABS] recycling.

1.2. Root causes

The predominant battery technology in Indonesia is the lead-acid battery. Research from the Blacksmith Institute
shows that ULABs contain 54% lead and a host of other dangerous chemicals. Owing to economic gain, ULABs
are recycled for their lead. While fulfilling market demand, this recycling holds the potential to cause acute and
chornice harm to human health and the environment, which are especially dangersous against women and
These problems are not only due to the lead but also due to UPOPs or other harmful chemicals which are
unintentionally released due the burning and smelting of ULABS. Research has shown that lead and UPOS
contribute to neurological damage, mental and physical retardation, harm to the immune system, hormones and
fertility (UNEP, 2010; FIND MORE ON UPOPS). Ordinarily, lead exposure from ULAB come from exposure to
the smelting process proper, can contamination in the air, soil and water around smelters [BASIS]. Contamination
from UPOPs (specifically, dioxins and furan) take place through diet and are especially prevalent in meat and
milk (dairy products).
Lead has been used in lead-acid batteries to make up the paste covering the grids on the anodes and cathodes
lead dioxide paste on the negative plate, and metallic lead paste on the positive plate. Recharge cycles for
lead-acid batteries may range in the hundreds before the lead oxide plate becomes contaminated by lead
sulphate and is render unusable.
In 2010, recycled lead accounted for about 45% of the production of refined lead, with ULABs as the principal
input for recycling operations (UNEP, 2010).
Used lead-acid batteries are generally recycled in most countries -including Indonesia- extending resource
lifetime while conserving energy and financial resources. Lead recycling has a large market and reduces leads
toxicity. Generally good, for lead-acid batteries this recycling may be potentially hazardous considering batteries
also contain sulphuric acid and various types of plastics, which may be given off and disperse during recycling.
Due to their economic importance, collection rate for lead acid batteries are projected to be high in both
developed and developing countries (ILZSG, 2001)
Indonesia is particularly vulnerable to an increase in unsafe ULAB recycling practices. A combination of lead
price increase, unemployment and increased vehicle ownership in Southeast Asia has driven the market for
ULAB recycling, in formal and informal smelters (Blacksmith, 2014).
The Indonesian Central Statistics Agency (BPS) reports that Indonesia is experiencing a massive growth in
automotive vehicles (which relies of lead-acid batteries). In 1987 Indonesia had a total of 7,981,480 motorized
vehicles, which jumped to 18,975,344 vehicles in 2000 and 76,907,127 vehicles in 2010. Figures for 2013 show
a total of 104,118,969 vehicles, comprising of around 11,5 million cars, 2 million busses, 5.5 million trucks and
85 million motorcycles (BPS, at This exponential increase
leads to a corresponding increase of ULABS, which current numbers indicate may be discarded at a rate of more
than 100 million units per year.
Lead smelting, the construction of lead-based components and other lead-based industries release hazardous
wastes to the air which may later contaminate soil, water and foods when returned to the earth. Lead is especially
hazardous as it may accumulate for years and may be dispersed as dust or bio accumulate. [UNEP, 2010] In
ULAB recycling, lead exposure may be caused by improper methodology in the collection, transportation and
storage of lead, in addition to the process proper.
Battery recycling may result in lead waste in metallic and chemical forms, as well as dissolved in sulphuric acid
(Basel, 2004). Soil and water (surface and ground) pollution is especially prone to occurring given improper
treatment of acid electrolytes. Breakages during storage and transportation ma also release harmful chemicals.
UPOPs in ULAB recycling are released due to poor or improper burning practices. [UNEP, Basel Guidelines]

Blacksmith Institute reports that most recycling in Indonesia takes place in backyards or garages, without proper
safety equipment. Battery acid is often poured into the ground or nearest water sources, lead fumes particles
and vapours create dust which settles nearby. Known smelting of lead often occur in urban areas, close to human
residence or public areas.
Among the root causes for the high levels of land contamination from ULAB recycling in Indonesia are, the high
number of illegal and legal smelters as well as the lack of knowledge of many smelters leading to widespread
improper practices; this situation is aggravated by the poor regulatory and enforcement framework.
The 2009-2011 Toxic Site Identification Program by Blacksmith in collaboration with UNIDO carried out in
Indonesia identified 149 hazardous waste contamination hotspots in Indonesia; a large percenetage of it from
ULAB smelting/recycling ( with an estimated legal smelting capacity of 100,000 tons and illegal smelting held at
200,000 tons.
In 2010 KPPB analysis was reported to show that lead contamination near 33 alleged illegal lead smelters
showed concentrations of more than 225,000 ppm -far higher than the 400ppm standard (The Jakarta Post, This result is to be expected given the findings of other ULAB
recycling operations, such as the examples in Honduras (Honduras Submission, 2006) and Brazil and Costa
Rica (UNEP, 2010). Concentrations of lead and other harmful chemicals are expected to be similar in
analogous sites.
While the precise number of sites is unknown, KPBB has identified the primary areas where the ULAB networks
meet their end destinations. Among the cities thought to harbor large number of ULAB recycling sites are (KPBB,
Rehabilitasi Lahan Terkontaminasi Limbah Peleburan Aki Bekas) Medan which serves as the conduit for
northern Sumatra, Jakarta and surrounding areas serving southern Sumatra and eastern Java, and Surabaya
serving as the hub for central and eastern Indonesia. What these areas have in common are a relatively close
proximity to primary land and sea hubs, which facilitates the transportation of ULAB and their recycled products.
High numbers are projected.
The high number of identified sites, and sites yet to be identified pose a clear threat to the area immediately
surrounding such operations, with secondary longer term effects spread over an even wider area. As such large
swaths of land are projected to have been or will be contaminated absent corrective action and rehabilitation

1.3. Barriers
1. Lack of available data, on lead smelters, and lead smeltering process in Indonesia.
Most of lead smelters in Indonesia are small, and informal, and unregistered. Hence it is hard to gather data on
them. the process are also very undocumented, and unsafe. KPBB research shows that 71 lead smelters and
used battery disposals are identified in Jakarta and surrounding areas alone. Data for ULAB prevalence in other
provinces is currently limited. However, KPBB have also identified sites of lead exposure in Tegal (Central Java),
Lamongan, Surabaya, Sidoarjo and Pasuruan (East Java) from 8,208 pm to 50,294 ppm.
Among the projected hubs of ULAB recycling above, provinces other than Jakarta has yet to undergo toxic site
identification let alone further studies on the extent of land contamination. While KPBB project several hubs of
ULAB recycling, the extent of operations outside the normal chain of supply is unknown. The conditions,
knowledge and extent of damage is thus unknown in most sites.
As the first step in any remediation project, identification of sites remain a top priority as it may also be used as
reference for future projects and serve to provide a clearer picture of the extent of ULAB operations in Indonesia.
2. Lack of awareness and understanding

Recycling and waste management is unregistered and often conducted with lack of knowledge, recent case in
Cinangka (subject to Blacksmith's remediation project) proves that these practices are dangerous when 18 are
killed, including children, with these unsafe practices. The public at large, especially the poorest of the poor in
the illegal lead smelting areas are not aware of the danger of lead poisoning. They conducted unsafe lead
extraction in unsafe lead smelting facilities, without proper knowledge of lead poisoning, proper tools, proper
waste management and proper health and safety equipment.
The extent of environmental contamination and associated human health risks posed by lead from lead in paint
and unsafe ULAB recycling and smelting in Indonesia is not well understood. Public education programs about
lead in paint and exposure risks are not widespread, and especially rare for underprivileged communities (who
are the main actors and victims of ULAB recycling. People nearby recycling areas, who benefitted from the illegal
facilities, also think that the reason of they getting sick, or their children getting sick are due to other reasons
than lead poisoning.
While ULAB recycling processes may be conducted professionally by formal smelters and other institutions such
as academia. The Clean Water and Waste Water Management Technology Group (KelAir) under the Agency
for The Assessment and Application of Technology (BPPT) have made efforts to make such guidelines publicly
available. However available public information do not provide technical guidelines as comprehensive as the
Basel guidelines -which detail the various dangers and safeguards necessary to protect against contaminationsin Indonesian.
Even with the availability of guidelines, informal smelters have not conformed to adequate safety standards for
a variety of reasons such as: ignorance of the guidelines or associated effects of toxins, financial and time
constraints and economic considerations.
This problem is aggravated by the complex and labyrinthine legal framework related to ULAB recycling and land
3. Lack of financial resources, technical expertise and capacity.
As a signatory country of the Basel Convention, Indonesia is lacking of sufficient resources and/or technical
expertise to fulfil the Basel Conventions requirements and control the importation and recycling of ULABs.
Financial and technical capacity is weak to enforce existing regulations and monitor formal ULAB
smelting/recycling industry for compliance, moreover the informal ones.
Local government and regional offices of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry are yet to be sufficiently
funded and staffed to carry out independent land remediation procedures, and is currently still occupied with the
design of registration processes for products containing lead, awareness raising and supporting permits and
incentives for ULAB recyclers. This has led to the reality that most identification and remediation projects on
ULABs to be carried out by non-government actors supported by foreign aid and expertise.
The leviathan process of remediating lands contamined by unsafe ULAB recycling practices throughout the
Indonesian archipelago remain out of the capability of the Indonesian government, barring support from domestic
and international stakeholders.
3. Non-existence of (limited) regulatory framework concerning Used Lead Acid Batteries (ULAB) and
Unintentional releases of Persistent Organic Pollutants (UPOPs) in ULAB dismantling and smelting
Out of the regulations in force, several problem exists. The umbrella regulations applicable is the 32/2009
Environmental Management Act and the 101/2014 Government Regulation on the management of hazardous
waste. Current regulations on UPOPs and ULAB dismantling and smelting processes are considered incomplete,
and sometimes even, irrelevant. The Ministry of Environment and Forestry is planning to overhaul a Pollutant
Release and Transfer Register as of 2013, still in process. Ostensibly, it will cover and mine data on pollution to
air, water and waste, and their impacts on human and environmental health. Current government regulations on
hazardous waste focus on negative impact to human health. and few mandate truly comprehensive analysis of
the human and natural condition.

In 2014 the Indonesian government issued GR 101/2014 which overhauls the entire waste management system.
Within its transitional provisions, the regulation provides a 6 month time limit for all lower regulations to comply
with its framework. Up to this date, the newest MOEF regulations related to ULAB recycling and land remediation
are still those in force from 2009.
MOEF maintains a database of environmental regulations. Currently, there are no dedicated regulations laying
out the data collection and information systems, none specifically to describe and plan for development in
institutional capacities. Further, no regulation has yet to be created specifically regarding ULABs recycling and
ensuing land remediation efforts. Any efforts still rely on umbrella regulations, subject to the specifics of each
Another concerns overlap and separation in regulations. For example 2009 saw three Ministry of Environment
regulations on hazardous waste, No. 18, 30 and 33. Authority to oversee land remediation are divided into the
Governor and Regent depending depending on the scale, meanwhile development/coaching is divvied up
between the Minister or Governor. Oversight and development are mainly regulated in 30/2009 and added to by
33/2009. Interestingly, 18/2009 mandates permits only to manage waste, and neither 30/2009 nor 33/2009
regulate specific permits for land remediation. When land remediation is carried out close to or within
conservation areas, the Minister of Forestry Regulation No. 48/2009 requires permission from the minister of
forestry with consultation to local communities. The producers/managers of waste are levied with primary
responsibility for remediation and it is unclear how third parties may be involved. Only the Forestry Minister's
regulation makes specific instruction of permits-approval involving the collaboration of local communities.
Another example is that under Government Regulation 101/2014. Land remediation is the primary responsibility
of the waste producer/recycler. This government regulation allows the environment minister, regents and mayors
to compel land remediation at the cost of the polluters, if identifiable. In case of contamination from identified
sources, budget for land remediation should come from the State or Provincial budget depending on prevailing
laws. In theory, this may lead to local governments being hesitant to accept support and funding from nongovernment parties as it may constitute outside funding. While the ratification of the Basel and other
environmental conventions open the doors to third party and third state supports, the uncertain nature of the
incorporation of treaties into Indonesian law may discourage some.
National standardization has not caught up for ULAB recycling. GR 102/200 instructs the government to carry
out standardization programs. Indonesian standards (SNI) may be accessed and requested online, for a fee.
The National Standardization Agency (BSN) has yet to develop a mechanism and permit document regarding
ULAB recycling (standards exist for various components of lead acid batteries, eg. water, sulphate acid
electrolytes). Eco label for lead ingots are likewise unavailable (tin, nickel, carbon steel are available), which may
prove problematic for ULAB recycling from imports (as lead may only be imported in ingot form. Regulation for
ULAB import in whole or part unclear). Further no incentive/disincentive schemes have been implemented as of
date for ULAB trade.
As was noted by prior projects, a strong and specific regulatory framework on ULAB recycling and land
remediation is required.
4. Lack of coordination in licensing for UPOPs concerning ULAB.
Currently the licensing process of UPOPs and ULAB are labyrinthine and complex, requiring a reading of the
entire environmental protection and waste management regulation to obtain an unclear diagram of the
procedures. It is unlikely that many, if any, informal smelters (and some formal) will be able to navigate the
process efficiently.
Permit for ULAB recycling will necessarily require coordination between a number of ministries and local
governments. Cooperation between the various parties regulating permits remain inconsistent. This poor
coordination has contributed to a proliferation of informal ULAB smelters, due to insufficient enforcement

This problem has been acknowledged by the Ministry of Environment and Foresty. They are currently drafting a
new control concept (at least for registration, waste management still requires permits from different agents),
which emphasizes centralized control and reporting. In addition, the ministry is also working on a "community
based participatory approach" for the collection and processing of ULABS.
Development of cooperation will greatly benefit experience in remediation efforts by Blacksmith and KPBB have
resulted in a large number of recommendations for cooperation between government bodies (Hilman, 2015).
Among the most notable are
5. There is no place for ULAB management in the spatial planning .
Spatial planning is critical in designating and identifying zones for specific purposes. Current spatial planning
regulation at the Act and Government Regulation stage provide little guidelines on the placement of especially
dangerous industries. The Ministerial Guidelines for Regency Planning, as well as for Municipal Planning likewise
only deal with waste management in a limited manner (those related to existing sewage and waste disposal
systems). ULAB management has yet to find a niche in national scale regulations.
Given the projected concentration of ULAB sites near supply hubgs, it may not be necessary (but still helpful) to
have regulation at the regency or municipal level. However, given the web of permits, oversight and
implementation connected to ULABs any inclusion into spatial management would perhaps be spearheaded at
least by a Ministerial Decision.
6. Insufficient institutional capacity to carry out Sound Management of lead and UPOP in ULAB recycling.
As noted above, the problem of coordination between ministries and institutions are lacking, in human resources,
and in funding allocated for the activities. Institutional capacity concerning: laboratories and research, health
care facilities, health and safety of work surveillance in ULAB and UPOPs sites are limited.
The infrastructure required for government to carry out monitoring, oversight, testing and enforcement has yet
to be comprehensive. For example, enforcement against illegal ULAB sites in urban areas (Jakarta and
surrounding areas). Aside from the Cinangka case in 2014, few reports of a spotlight or closures of ULAB sites
exists. This in light of the recent TSIP identification of toxic hotspots.
7. No specific epidemiology research for ULAB in Indonesia.
While the adverse health effects of lead and other harmful POPs in ULAB recycling has been documented
internationally, advocacy against ULABs would benefit from contextual epidemiological studies in Indonesian
sites. Given the lack knowledge in many affected communities, these studies would serve as additional materials
as well as reveal whether ULAB recycling has unique effects/circumstances in Indonesia. This study should be
carried out in conjunction with further TSIP activities in strategic sites.
8. No bio monitoring exists in Indonesia, to monitor ULAB and UPOPs.
Indonesia would also stand to benefit from a large scale bio-monitoring program to monitor ULAB and UPOPs.
Assessments for current and projected effects are especially important information for policy makers and
stakeholders. Such monitoring would also help to assess the overall trends occurring in Indonesia.
9. Limited BAT (Best Available Technology)/BEP (Best Environmental Practices) promotion.
Although there are sparse effort of implementing BAT and BEP in Indonesia, promotion of these activities are
very limited. There is a need to promote further BAT/BEP in terms of collection, transportation, storage,
management, usage and pollution control (in terms of scrubber, water treatment/sludge treatment, etc),
environmental rehabilitation, standardization on contaminated sludge/slag, clean technology adoption for
increased battery lifetime research, as well as the use of lithium technology and increased studies on
UPOPs/ULAB emission from current smelters.

Incentives and models must be developed or adopted. Pilot projects may be expanded to become focal points
for future projects. Documentation must be publicly and freely accessible and well-coordinated between various
stakeholders. A focal point for information must be designed to provide the latest, comprehensive information.
10. Limited endeavors to address the impacts of lead and UPOPs in ULAB smelting processing areas.
This includes limited efforts to investigate and document Environmental and Health impacts, increased Biomarker studies and lack of effort to organise risk assessment. This lack of effort is presented by many
stakeholders, and is the by-product of a lack of capacity by stakeholders to comprehend, identify and address
the impact of ULAB smelting in local areas. In areas where stakeholders are potentially interested to remediate,
a lack of networking access, knowledge and funding prevents further process; this discourages other areas from
initiating mitigation efforts.
11. Limited knowledge sharing on ULAB and Unintentional releases of Persistent Organic Pollutants
(UPOPs) in ULAB dismantling and smelting processes.
Smelters (especially Informal smelters) do not have adequate access to contextual technical guidelines. While
future projects will assume the phasing out illegal smelters, we cannot assume they will be phased out in a short
timeframe. A stop-gap measure should be put into place via knowledge sharing for informal smelters. Technical
guidelines such as those created to elaborate on the Basel Convention are not freely available in detail (or in
Indonesian). Guidelines for formal and informal smelters should be prepared assuming the different levels of
human and material resources between the two.
NGOs already exist which may assist in becoming focal points for knowledge sharing between stakeholders.
Training manuals in simple language or videos may be especially helpful to provide persons with literacy
difficulties in understanding the steps they must take to ensure proper management of ULAB recycling.
Government agencies must provide up-to-date information on the regulatory framework and processes in a
manner accessible for the masses and should facilitate similar education programs.
12. Limited data and information regarding the ULAB and UPOPs in ULAB dismantling and smelting
Specific data on the levels of contamination, based on the methodologies of ULAB recycling in Indonesia is
lacking. Given the wide diversity of human and material resources between formal and informal smelters, it may
be useful to conduct research to document their methods and respective impacts. There is also a limited amount
of information as to the duration, ownership method and supply chains of informal smelters. As such, baselines
could be established and estimates could be given to assess future contamination sites.
13. Limited endeavours to rehabilitate Lead/ UPOPs impacted areas
Aside from Cinangka, other efforts to rehabilitate impacted areas have been lacking. The lingering effects of
legacy and active smelters may persist for long periods of time. Given rapid development in urban areas (where
informal smelters are often found), land rehabilitation should take place as soon as possible before development
overtakes the affected lands. Future construction, land transactions and other developments will complicate
future efforts. In addition, the longer it takes before land rehabilitation, the larger the impact will be of the
accumulated lead and POPs. Building on the experience from Blacksmith and KPBB's operations there, it may
be time to scale up and expand future projects.

1.4. Baseline scenario

Millions of chemicals are sold and traded in markets nowadays. According to MOEF's data (MOEF 2013), the
estimation of chemicals in the market stands at 140,000 types of 13 million tons of chemical. studies by MOEF
against 10 companies in 2014, shows that there are at least there are at least 7 types of dangerous chemical
substances at 245,563 tons.

Production volumes of those chemical increased by at least 700 types annually. In the Asia-Pacific, according to
GCO, chemical production is expected to increase by 40% globally from 2012 to 2020. In Indonesia alone,
assuming steady (not increasing as is the case in real life) rates of growth, the 105 million motor vehicles in 2013
could potentially double to 200 million by 2020. This increase potentially leads to a growth in ULAB, and therefore
the market share for ULAB recycling.
Currently, in Indonesia, regulations and policies on UPOPs and ULAB are scattered, and weak. For instance
there is no detailed and clear regulation or policies of lincensing in terms of battery products specification such
as lithium and lead battery. There are no regulations and policies in regard with incentives and disincentives of
ULAB Management. What we have is a scattered regulations of ULAB in various regulations which form a
labyrinthine legal maze for potential legal stakeholders.
Regulations on national standards, and eco-labelling of lead ingot, the lack of spatial planning policies for ULAB,
no fiscal incentives for battery producers and customers to trade in ULABs at certified sites and overall
government support and enforcement against illegal smelters, all contribute to a projected growth of illegal
smelters and stimied growth for elgal businessnes. A lack of specific government loan facilities for small and
medium scale entrepreneurs also hamper development for ULAB businesses.
WHO reports in 2014, quoted by MOEF provides interesting statistics. While low and middle income countries
in the Americas and Europe suffer from 10 and 42 ambient air pollution deaths per 100,000 capita, Southeast
Asia -where Indonesia is located- suffers from 51 deaths per 100,000 capita (slightly lower than the global
average of 54). For the deaths of those under 5 years Southeast Asia suffers from 23 deaths per 100,000 capita;
in terms of sheer numbers an estimated 40,800 children under 5 die from ambient air pollution.
While ambient air pollution death in Southeast Asia ranked third highest, in deaths attributable to household air
pollution Southeast Asia ranked second (close to 90 deaths per 100,000 capita) only to the Western Pacific
(MOEF, 2015).
While identification and testing at ULAB recycling sites are incomplete, what data is available is telling. TSIP
identified (Blacksmith, KPBB) 71 lead smelter and ULAB disposal sites in Jakarta and surrounding areas. 34
Smelters are monitoried with 3 categories: active, legacy and hybernate. Beside in Jakarta and its surrounding
areas, the lead exposure also are happened in Tegal (Central Java), Lamongan, Surabaya, Sidoarjo and
Pasuruan (East Java). Lead contaminated soil in Jakarta and surrounding areas at various level, start from safe
level (bellow 400 ppm refer to WHO safe-theshold level) until dangerous level. In Lamongan soil contamination
was found to be 32,642 ppm and from 8,208 ppm - 50,294 ppm in Tegal.
Soil in sites in the surrounding areas of smelters have soil lead level exceeded the thresshold level (400 ppm)
set by the WHO. 1300 samples of soil show us that the geometric mean of soil lead level is 4,179.98 ppm, with
the range 12.5 ppm (min) and 252,600 ppm (max). Especially vulnerable are those who live or carry out activities
near the smelters.
For example MOEF carried out special research in 2014 on ULAB operations in Bogor against 7-13 yo children.
Studies show 3,863 ppm of lead in the soil, with 3,80-62,10 (13,19-16,83) - NAB 10 g/l in the bloodstream
(MOEF, 2015). Studies against schoolchildren in Cinangka aged 8-14 shows lead contamination levels between
16.20 - 54.70 g/l in 2010 and 10.6 - 63 g/l in 2013 (KPBB, 2015). Another area, Curug -also subject to the
study- reported similar levels of lead contamination.
Concentrations of lead in ULAB recyclng workers are also very high. Studies conducted at 5 locations (KPBB,
2015) show that at least 90% of laborers have blood lead levels above 65 g/l, much higher than WHO standards
of 10 g/l.
While by no means comprehensive, these numbers may serve as valuable estimated baselines for other areas.
Lack of data may be remediated by reference to other studies of ULAB contamination in the international scope.

1.5. Health Effects Baseline

Effects of lead poisoning in Cinangka and Curug are documented (KPBB, 2015).There are numerous examples
of abnormal physic-medical test results. Quick examination found that the people in surrounding areas of lead
smelters suffer from conjunctivitis, footdrop, motoric weakness, wristdrop, dwarf, down syndrome/mental
deficiency, pulmonary rhonki, other disabilities, abdominal pressurized pain; they also suffer tremors. Anecdotal
evidence also suggest that persons there suffer from premature mortality.
Research by MOEF-MerC in 2011 and Blacksmith in 2015 show how various levels of lead poisoning affects the
body. At <15 g/l no adverse health effects have been detected. At 15-24 g/l increased function of erythrocyte
protoprophyrin was found in mean and women. 25-34 g/l have been correlated with elevated blood pressure,
while 35-44 g/l showed decreated function in nerve conduction velocity. Decreased hemoglobin syntehsis and
adverse effects to male and female reproduction are observed at 45-54 g/l, while readings of 55> are correlated
to frank anemia.
Comprehensive epidemiological research at current sites are still unavailable and documentation of quantified
data regarding adverse health effects will have to await future studies.

1.6. Project Baseline

Blacksmith's ULAB project in cooperation with KPBB may serve as baseline for project implementation. From
2001-2004 KPBB have conducted initial studies and mapping for ULAB hotspots in Jakarta and surrounding
areas. In 2009 they presented their data on ULAB and its effects to Blacksmith. From 2010-2012 CLSA
Chairman's Trust began a "Jakarta Initiative to End Lead Poisoning from Car Battery Recylcing, which in 20112014 led to a multi sectoral group action plan for integrated hazardous waste management.
In 2014-2015 UNDP's project with Blacksmith was carried out. The project had several aims: renew data on
lead exposure from ULAB and the ULAB supply chain, increased stakeholder awareness, reduced risk of lead
exposure from paints, recommendations and steps to reduce lead exposure, increaesd local capacity and
learning from best practices.
After an inception workshop on 19-20 August 2014 involving 120 participants from the central and local
governments, businesses, NGOs, academics and local community, industry benchmarking training was
conducted on 21 August while an approved visit took place on 22 August. Site verification shows that several
sites have been repurposed to residential areas while smelting took place intensively in such sites as Pasar
Kemis in Tangerang and Parung Panjan in Bogor. ULAB business in Jakarta is highly influenced by the supply
of waste materials to smelters.
The TSIP database shows that from 34 smelter sites, soil contamination ranged from being under safe limits to
more than 40,000 ppm in Cilincing. At least 15 sites have lead in soil contamination levels higher than prescribed
by WHO. The number of population at risk also increased in several places due to construction of residential
areas, such as in Parung Panjang, Pasar Kemis, Rawa Buaya and Cipondoh.
The project briefly stalled on March 1 2015 due to a lack of approval from the Phillipine government, but was
continued on 9 September.
Among the conclusions and recommendations drawn by this project thus far is the need for an MOEF regulation
on the technical guidelines on issuing permits fof ULAB processing, better oversight against illegal smelters and
endeavor for regulatory harmony betwen the 2008 Garbage Management Act, 2009 Environmental Management
Act and 2014 Government Regulation on Hazardous Waste Management.
Reports also suggest training to transform illegal smelters into legal environmentally safe smelters and providing
support thereto, and limiting the number of illegal smelters and raising awareness for locals and stakeholders.
Several practical actions on sites were also recommended and a number carried out, such as
encapsulation/landfilling with a pilot project in Cinangka, training to treat lead slag with acids and acid water to
comply with environmental standards, and encapsulation in each household whose land is exposed to lead (in
Vietnam). Clean up efforts were also undertaken. Within 6 months of cleanup blood lead levels have declined

by more than 30% and is expected to continue to decline. With a total project cost of 85,000 USD the risk of
exposure has been removed for about 3,000 persons.
Encapsulation in Cinangka was targeted to take 10 months from February - November 2015, with encapsulation
process proper being carried out between late August - October. The encapsulation successfully reduced soil
contamination levels at Cinangka from between <400 mg/kg - 89,700 mg/kg in 2011, down to <1000 mg/kg in
all areas (with most areas exhibiting safe levels).
A large number of other recommendations at the national and local scales were also proposed, and will serve
as useful guidance for future projects.