Neighbors United for a Healthy Environment (VUDAS) vs. State and Porta Hnos. S.A. Company for bioethanol production (Argentina)

Location

Córdoba Argentina

Status
Resolved on appeal
Start date
June, 2016
Date of judgment or latest existing decision
July 5, 2024. Porta Hermanos informs the Court that it has notified the Environment Secretariat of the Province of Córdoba that it initiated the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), required with the Processing Number 0785005111024.
Summary

In 2012, the Porta Hermanos SA factory expanded its facilities to begin producing ethanol derived from the milling and fermentation of genetically modified corn (bioethanol). This production shift encroached upon various communal spaces in the San Antonio and Inaudi neighborhoods where it is located, and profoundly altered the community's social dynamics.

Likewise, shortly after the factory began operating, the community began to suffer countless health problems, which intensified and worsened over time, causing many residents to have to leave the neighborhood.

This expansion and productive change of the factory was carried out without complying with the Environmental Impact Assessment procedure and therefore without Porta having an Environmental License to operate.

Given this scenario, in 2016 a collective environmental protection action was filed before the Federal Court against the National State   with the purpose of ordering it to adopt the pertinent measures to stop the atmospheric environmental pollution derived from the manufacture of Bioethanol by the company Porta, and particularly, to urgently declare its closure and definitive shutdown for lacking legal authorization by not having fully completed and prior to its construction and operation with the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

After three years, on December 23, 2019, the Federal Court of Córdoba No. 3 partially granted the claim and ordered Porta SA to prove, within 90 business days, that the EIA procedure had been carried out and thus the Environmental License had been obtained.

This ruling was appealed by both parties, and the appeal was resolved by the Federal Court of Appeals, Civil Division II, Chamber A, on December 15, 2020, which upheld the previous ruling in its entirety. The ruling was challenged by the plaintiff and Porta through an Extraordinary Federal Appeal (REF). On May 5, 2021, the Federal Court of Appeals of Córdoba denied the REF. In response, a Writ of Amparo was filed with the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (CSJN), which was admitted.

On August 20, 2021, Porta submitted a written statement and supporting documentation claiming to have demonstrated compliance with the lower court's ruling (conducting the Environmental Impact Assessment). In response, on September 16, 2021, Federal Judge No. 3 ruled that "it was NOT proven that it was merely an audit and not the EIA procedure required to obtain the corresponding and mandatory Environmental License for the company's operation."

As a result, Porta filed an appeal. On December 1, 2022, the Federal Court of Appeals upheld the appealed ruling, again ordering Porta to provide proof of having conducted the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

In response to this ruling, Porta again opposed the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and filed an appeal, which was denied by the Court of Appeals, and then filed a complaint with the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (CSJN). Porta, in a written statement, informed the Court that on July 1, 2024, it had notified the Secretariat of the Environment of the Province of Córdoba that the EIA had been initiated and assigned Processing Number 0785005111024.

Climate element

Porta Hnos. SA is the only company in the world that produces bioethanol from genetically modified corn, and the factory is not registered as a manufacturer of this product at the national level. This case demonstrates the judicial system's negligence in enforcing the General Environmental Law against a practice that causes severe and irreparable damage.

It is important to note that the case relates to environmental remediation and compensation for those affected, but it was also focused on highlighting how bioethanol production is closely linked to other environmental problems such as the use of agrochemicals in the cultivation of transgenic corn and deforestation .

Biofuel production, in general, has climate impacts associated with indirect changes in land use. This is because the development of large-scale facilities for the production of compounds such as bioethanol generates significant impacts when the increased demand for agricultural inputs for these projects encourages the expansion of arable land, causing profound transformations in the natural environment.

The production of chemical compounds derived from agricultural inputs increases the demand for plant crops, which in turn raises their prices. This phenomenon incentivizes farmers to expand production, either by converting food crops into industrial crops or by transforming forests, grasslands, and other natural ecosystems into agricultural land. The impacts resulting from these dynamics are severe and irreversible.

  • Destruction of natural habitats, which seriously affects biodiversity and climate change mitigation.

  • Loss of fertile soil due to erosion and the intensive use of fertilizers and pesticides. These products, typically rich in nitrogen, generate emissions of nitrous oxide (N₂O), a greenhouse gas 298 times more potent than CO₂ in its ability to trap heat. Around 6% of global GHG emissions come from the application of fertilizers in agriculture.

  • Degradation of water quality, with harmful effects on aquatic ecosystems and local communities. Excess fertilizers, agricultural and industrial waste in rivers and lakes cause algal blooms. When these algae die and decompose, they consume oxygen and create dead zones in bodies of water. Anaerobic decomposition (without oxygen) produces methane (CH₄), a gas 25 times more potent than CO₂.

Additionally, this type of project can negatively impact food security by reducing the availability of crops intended for human consumption, affecting food prices.

Claimants
  • Neighbors United in Defense of a Safe Environment (VUDAS).
Defendants
  • Ministry of Energy and Mining of the Nation
  • Porta Hnos SA Company
Supporting organizations
Foundation for the Development of Sustainable Policies (FUNDEPS)
Women of the South Fund and Plurales
Territorial context

Córdoba is one of Argentina's 23 provinces and is located in the central region of the country. It is the second most populous province after Buenos Aires and a key economic, industrial, and tourist hub. Its capital, the city of Córdoba, is the second largest in the country and an important cultural and educational center.

The San Antonio neighborhood in Córdoba, Argentina, is an old neighborhood that was once mostly countryside and is now contained within the urban grid. It has a population of approximately one thousand inhabitants. A large number of these inhabitants have been affected by the plant.

Bioethanol in the middle of their neighborhood has meant a severe disruption to their daily lives, forcing them to live next to a mega-industry that operates 24/7 (three shifts) 365 days a year, with a constant flow of trucks transporting raw materials (corn) and the final product (ethanol), adding to the constant noise from the corn milling, vibrations, emissions of highly toxic gases and microparticles, as a consequence of the ethanol production process.

Rules and principles invoked
  • National Law No. 26,093 on Biofuels.
  • Principles of prevention and precaution
Instance
Judicial
Actor type
Vulnerable groups
Topic
Air pollution
Intergenerational justice
Environmental protection
Violation of human rights
Defendant type
Private enterprise
Grounds for claim
Local legislation
Implementation status
En proceso de implementación