The debate over the latest anti-galamsey strategy took an unexpected scientific turn this weekend when the Chief Executive Officer of the Environmenta
The debate over the latest anti-galamsey strategy took an unexpected scientific turn this weekend when the Chief Executive Officer of the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), Prof. Nana Ama Browne Klutse, defended the use of what she called a “dechemicalization process” to restore polluted rivers — a term that has since sparked a storm of public and scientific scrutiny.
Speaking on Joy FM’s Newsfile on Saturday, Prof. Browne Klutse explained that the Environmental Protection Authority had received and tested several innovative technologies aimed at cleaning heavily contaminated water bodies affected by illegal mining, commonly known as galamsey.
Among these, she cited a nanoparticle-based solution designed to neutralize heavy metals such as mercury and arsenic in water.
Her comments came just a day after President John Dramani Mahama met with heads of environmental and mining regulatory institutions as well as CSOs at the Jubilee House to discuss urgent measures in the ongoing national fight against galamsey.
The meeting followed the president’s declaration that river restoration would be one of the central goals of his administration’s renewed anti-mining campaign.
However, Prof. Browne Klutse’s use of the word “dechemicalization” quickly drew criticism from experts and the public alike, including panelists on the program.
Some scientists argued that the term was scientifically inaccurate, since water naturally contains both beneficial minerals and contaminants. Removing “all chemicals” from water, they noted, could also strip it of essential elements needed for human health.
Environmental analyst Dr. Ekpor Anyimah-Ackah, who joined the discussion, challenged the EPA’s scientific framing.
“How do you dechemicalize a flowing river?” she asked. “You can’t throw chemicals into running water and expect them to stay in place long enough to neutralize contaminants. Water is dynamic — if you pour anything into it, it flows away.”
Legal practitioner and policy analyst Kofi Bentil added that the focus on “dechemicalization” missed the broader ecological challenge.
“If mining is stopped completely, the rivers will naturally renew themselves within five years,” he argued.
“But throwing nanoparticles into a river that continues to be polluted is not a lasting solution. The toxicity of our rivers is far more complex than just turbidity or color — it involves invisible heavy metals that can’t be fixed with simple spraying.”
Prof. Browne Klutse responded that her critics had misunderstood the scope of the EPA’s research, clarifying that laboratory tests had shown promising results.
“We have tried it in the lab and drank the water ourselves,” she said. “In the lab setting, the water is captured before treatment — applying it to large, flowing rivers is another step that requires different techniques. It’s not every chemical that is poisonous; at controlled levels, certain compounds can actually purify water.”
The exchange underscored a deeper tension between scientific feasibility and policy urgency.
President Mahama’s administration has faced mounting pressure to show concrete progress against illegal mining since he assumed office less than a year ago.
Several major rivers, including River Pra, Ankobra, and Offin, remain heavily discolored and contaminated by mining runoff despite repeated cleanup pledges from successive governments.
Critics warn that technical experiments, however well-intentioned, could distract from the root cause of the crisis — uncontrolled small-scale mining that continues to devastate water sources and forest reserves.
Others argue that the environmental institutions, including the EPA, must prioritize enforcement and prevention over speculative technologies.
The EPA boss maintains that her agency is exploring “all possible interventions” to accelerate river restoration.
Yet, with doubts about the practicality of “dechemicalization” mounting, the EPA’s plan has become as much a political test as a scientific one — and for the Mahama administration, the outcome could define whether its war on galamsey finally turns the tide or becomes another failed experiment.
COMMENTS