Gold-producing countries’ signing on to the Minamata Convention on Mercury, a global treaty aimed at protecting human health and the environment from the adverse effects of mercury, particularly though not exclusively in its use in gold-recovery in the gold-mining industry, may, in some circumstances, be less than effective in pursuit of its objective, according to a recent report published in the US-based science publication, Science Daily.
Notwithstanding the fact that a number of countries, including Guyana, are signatories to the high-profile agreement on mercury use the in mining sector, an article in the Science periodical dated April 23 alludes to “a study of baseline mercury emission estimates reported by 25 countries — many in developing African, South American and Asian nations” asserting that estimates accepted under the Minamata Convention rarely provide enough information to tell whether changes in the rate from one year to the next were the result of actual change or data uncertainty. ”Key variables — like how the country determines the amount of its gold production — can result in vastly different baseline estimates… yet, countries often don’t report this range of possible estimates,” the Journal says. The significance of this revelation raises questions as to whether countries involved in gold-mining may not be ‘sheltering’ under a delusionary protective cloud by assuming that adherence of the tenets of the Minamata Agreement serve to help mitigate mercury poisoning in the gold mining industry.