New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Romania's Industrial Legacy Leaves Deep Scars [Slide Show]

Six decades ago, Romanians were promised economic prosperity as their country was industrialized, but in most cases, they were left with collapsed buildings, poisoned soils and disoriented communities

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Photographer and activist István Kósa hopes that lessons from Romania’s past guide its future. Six decades ago, Romanians were promised economic prosperity as their country was industrialized, but in most cases, they were left with little more than “collapsed buildings, poisoned soils and disoriented communities," Kosa said.

For this photo essay, Kósa, a Hungarian photographer and former project manager for a Romanian environmental group, traveled throughout the country, capturing the social and economic consequences of its pollution legacy.

The nation's latest environmental controversy is a proposal to build Europe's largest open-pit gold mine. Thousands of Romanians have protested a draft law that would authorize the Roșia Montană mine, owned by Canadian mining company Gabriel Resources.The government, which has a minority stake in the company worth $4 billion by some estimates, will likely decide the fate of the project this month.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Romania, which contains some of Europe’s most prolific mining areas, boasts staggering unemployment – as high as 80 percent in the villages of Roșia Montană, the mine company reports. But it also bears deep environmental scars from decades of heavy industry and mining. In 2000, millions of gallons of waste spilled from a mine holding pond in northwestern Romania, sending a 30-mile toxic plume of cyanide and heavy metals into the nearby Tisza and Danube Rivers. It left more than 200 tons of dead fish in its wake and caused widespread damage in three countries, in what experts called the worst case of water pollution in Central and Eastern Europe ever.

Supporters of the new mine push for more jobs while opponents worry that it will add to the pollution burden of a nation still struggling with the environmental aftermath of rapid Soviet-era industrialization that began in the 1950s. The mine would use cyanide to extract gold and silver from rock.

Factories and smelters also have left a legacy of polluted land and water. In Copşa Mică, one of Romania's most polluted towns, residents can expect to live an average of 54 years – nine years less than the national average. In addition, 96 percent of children under 14 have chronic respiratory problems, and as many as half of people tested showed signs of lead poisoning, according to the Blacksmith Institute, an international organization dealing with pollution problems in developing countries.

Kósa hopes his photos of the deep scars of Romania's industrial past will remind people that some wounds never heal. If the law authorizing the new mine is adopted, "other similar projects are coming," Kósa said. "And there aren't too many heavy industry success stories in Romania."

This article originally ran at Environmental Health News, a news source published by Environmental Health Sciences, a nonprofit media company.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe