The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) has directed Empire Cement Ghana Limited to submit a comprehensive plan to relocate its cement grinding and bagging facility away from the Densu Delta Ramsar Site.
In a directive dated October 28, 2026 the EPA gave the company 30 days to present a relocation strategy including alternative industrial sites, implementation timelines, worker protection measures and operational transition arrangements. The Authority also reaffirmed that a Closure Notice issued on September 14, 2026 remains in force.
The EPA said concerns about the facility dates back to June 2020, when it ordered the company to halt construction and identify an alternative location because of land-use incompatibility.
Environmental assessments subsequently identified potential public health concerns, flood risks and the movement of heavy-duty vehicles through surrounding communities. Empire Cement must secure the necessary environmental and land-use approvals for its new location and work with relevant institutions to decommission the existing facility and rehabilitate the site. Unauthorised operations could attract sanctions under the Environmental Protection Act, 2025 (Act 1124).
The EPA’s directive ordering Empire Cement Ghana Limited to submit a plan to relocate its cement grinding and bagging facility away from the Densu Delta Ramsar Site is welcome news. It is also long overdue.
The EPA deserves commendation for taking this step to protect the environment and the health and safety of surrounding communities.
However, the circumstances leading to this directive raise serious questions about how a facility of this nature was allowed to operate in such an environmentally sensitive location in the first place.
A Ramsar site is internationally recognised for its importance as a wetland. Such areas support biodiversity, help regulate water flows and provide essential ecological services. The Densu Delta is no exception.
Locating an industrial facility with the potential to generate dust and other forms of pollution close to such an important ecosystem should have attracted the strictest scrutiny from the outset.
Indeed, according to the EPA, concerns about Empire Cement’s location date back to June 2020, when the Authority ordered the company to halt construction and find an alternative site because of land-use incompatibility. Subsequent assessments also identified potential public health concerns, flood risks and the movement of heavy-duty vehicles through surrounding communities.
This raises a fundamental question: if these concerns were identified years ago, why has it taken this long to reach the present stage?
The proximity of a cement facility to residential communities is itself a matter of concern. Cement grinding and bagging can generate dust, while the movement of heavy-duty vehicles can expose residents to additional risks.
Without effective safeguards, these activities may compromise air quality, public health and residents’ quality of life. The potential consequences for the surrounding wetland make the situation even more troubling.
The EPA’s directive, therefore, must not remain another regulatory announcement without meaningful enforcement. Empire Cement has 30 days to submit a comprehensive relocation plan, identify an alternative industrial site, outline implementation timelines and provide measures to protect workers during the transition.
The Authority must ensure that these requirements are met and that the existing Closure Notice remains in force. The company should not be allowed to resume unauthorised operations while the notice is effective. Equally important is the proper decommissioning of the existing facility and rehabilitation of the affected site.
Beyond this particular case, the government and environmental regulators must examine how industrial permits are granted and monitored. Sensitive wetlands and residential communities should not become places where industrial operators are permitted to establish facilities first, only for environmental and public health concerns to be addressed years later.
There must also be accountability for decisions that allowed such a potentially incompatible land use to proceed despite the environmental sensitivities involved.
The relocation directive is a step in the right direction. But protecting the Densu Delta requires more than a directive; it requires consistent enforcement, transparent oversight and a commitment to preventing similar mistakes.
The EPA must see this process through to its logical conclusion. Environmental protection cannot be an afterthought. It must begin before the first block is laid.
For more news, join The Chronicle Newspaper channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VbBSs55E50UqNPvSOm2z
