The saga of the experts on the Saras smokestacks

Reckless quarrel

Saras is not there and denounces him in turn for a "reckless quarrel". This is where a real saga of experts called by the judges begins to evaluate the reasons for what was happening in Porto Foxi, 400 meters from the oil fence.

Walzer

The first expert indicated by the Court, Bruno Cau, does not even go up the stairs of Piazza Repubblica, reads the contenders and resigns without ever having even accepted the position of Ctu, the technical consultant appointed by the judge. It does not go well even with the second, Ignazio Abis, who renounces in full hearing. They try again with an engineer, Nicoletta Mattana, who in May 2015 was appointed by the Court of Cagliari to resolve, technically, the story that contrasts “Davide” with “Goliath”.

The question

The judge's question is as concise as it is clear: "After a description of the places, tell the Ctu if the elements best indicated in the quote are present in the soil and in the waters where the company for which the cause is located, to an extent exceeding the legal threshold" . The phase following that assessment is set out in the same question: «in the affirmative: identify the epoch to which the“ contamination ”dates back; ascertain whether the contamination is attributable to the “more likely than not” activity of the defendant (Saras ed) ». The questions rather than thorns in the side are piercing hammers, the same ones that must be used to probe the ground around the farm. To understand there is the type of pollution and the consequent origin. The expert of the Court seems willing to clarify. The coring points are chosen, the prevailing winds are evaluated, the danger centers and the nature of the contaminant are located. The conclusion of the first phase is put in black and white with a lot of signature at the bottom of the court technician.

There is pollution

There is pollution, laboratory tests say. The first report sent to the Judge writes it without half measures: "the sampling carried out showed the exceeding for some metals of the legal limits imposed by Legislative Decree 152/2006, or of the contamination threshold concentrations in the soil". The conclusion is written: "Following the tests carried out, the soil of the farm is contaminated with vanadium and zinc". The causes remain to be defined. For zinc, the consultant argues: "the exceeding of the contamination threshold concentration is in all likelihood due to a concentration of this metal in the sediments of the pond due to the deterioration of the rainwater gutter in the greenhouses".

Vanadium

For vanadium, on the other hand, there is no escaping: "The overcoming of the contamination is confirmed by what was determined in the study carried out by the Sardinia Region on the industrial site of Sarroch". The technician is not unbalanced on the timing of pollution: "It is not possible to establish the time of contamination except through a study based on empirical data and mathematical models that would take long times and high costs". On the causes of the pollution, the assessment is evasive enough: "It can be assumed that the detected contamination derives from the fallout of atmospheric particulate, transported by the wind, containing the pollutant found used in the production processes". The conclusion is entrusted to caution: "However, it is not possible with absolute certainty to attribute the pollution found to the defendant (Saras ed)". The Judge acknowledges and transmits, as required by law, the pollution data ascertained to the Region, Province and Municipality. Nothing or almost nothing will happen, except that the Consultant immediately after that first phase writes to the Judge and communicates his resignation to the continuation of the assignment, incompatible with his new job.

New gearbox

In February 2019, a new twist, Judge Monica Moi does not want to give up and decides to get to the bottom of the matter. For the new investigations in the field, he gives a technical consultancy assignment to the engineer Battista Grosso.

The turnaround

The technician, heavily opposed by the counterpart up to asking for its revocation, after 22 months, comes to a conclusion: "the surface soil of the company site has concentrations of the contaminants sought below the norms except for vanadium whose limited exceedances are, in all probability, attributable to specific characteristics of the geological formations, at a regional and non-regional scale and in the absence of investigations in the deep soil ». Monica Moi, the judge called to settle a game as imposing as it is untouchable, is not there. On October 25 last he wrote it in an ordinance that has the trappings of rejection: "the contradictory nature of the results reached by the two consultants makes it advisable to renew the ctu subject to the appointment of a board of experts". It is explicit in the decisions.

Revocation and new college

At the first point of the device he orders: «Revoke Eng. Battista Grosso ». For the college of new consultants he decides to go beyond the Tyrrhenian Sea and appoints professors Alessio Ceccarini and Tarita Biver, from the Department of Chemistry and Industrial Chemistry of the University of Pisa. By November 8, it is written in the ordinance, they must accept with a lot of "declaration in which they swear an oath of good and faithfully fulfill the functions entrusted". Not a detail. The saga of technical consultants, however, in the land of Saras is not over yet. The next hearing is already set for next November 19th. At stake is a case of public health and environmental pollution that goes far beyond the dispute between a farmer left without tomatoes and the oil stills of the Moratti family. A titanic clash still to be written.