Center for Health, Environment & Justice
Donate

Category: Backyard Talk

CHEJ Blog

Categories
Backyard Talk

Flame Retardants Linked to Lower Intelligence and Hyperactivity in Early Childhood

Researcher at the University of Cincinnati presented a paper at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics earlier this month showing that prenatal exposure t o chemicals called polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) is associated with lower intelligence and hyperactivity in early childhood. PBDEs have been used for decades as flame retardants to reduce the impact of fires in everyday products such as furniture, carpeting and electronics.

The authors collected blood samples from 309 pregnant women enrolled in a study at the university to measure PBDE levels. After the children were born, the authors conducted intelligence and behavioral tests annually until the children were 5 years old. PBDE levels in blood were found to be associated with deficits in child cognition at age 5 and with hyperactivity at ages 2 to 5 years. A ten fold increase in PBDE blood levels was associated with about a 4 point IQ deficit in 5-year old children.

Although PBDEs except deca-PBDE are no longer used in the U.S. as flame retardants, they are found in many consumer products bought years ago. In addition, these chemicals are highly persistent in the environment because they do not easily biodegrade, so they remain in human tissue for years and are transferred to the developing fetus from the mother. Dr. Aimin Chen, the lead author of the study, commented that the “study raises further concerns about [PBDE] sic toxicity in developing children.“ To view the abstract of the paper, “Cognitive Deficits and Behavior Problems in Children with Prenatal PBDE Exposure,” go to http://www.abstracts2view.com/pas/view.php?nu=PAS13L1_3550.8.

In related news, officials in Europe in charge of three key international treaties reported that delegates agreed by consensus to a gradual phase out the flame retardant hexabromocyclododecane, or HBCD, which is used in building insulation, furniture, vehicles and electronics. HBCD is the third most commonly used brominated flame retardant world-wide following tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) and decabromodiphenyl ether (deca-BDE). The phase out would begin a little more than a year from now, but there also would be specific exemptions for five years on some construction uses in buildings. HBCD will be added to the Stockholm Convention, which now regulates 22 toxic substances internationally including DDT and PCBs. The treaty takes aim at chemicals that can travel long distances in the environment and don’t break down easily. Delegates also agreed to tougher controls on disclosure of information about exports for two flame retardants, PentaBDE and OctaBDE. For more information, see <http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/nations-agree-to-new-ban-on-flame-retardant-tighter-export-controls-on-other-materials/2013/05/10/8420c5a8-b96d-11e2-b568-6917f6ac6d9d_story.html#license-8420c5a8-b96d-11e2-b568-6917f6ac6d9d>.

[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Categories
Backyard Talk

New Coal “Report Card” Exposes Worst Offenders in Coal Financing

By Andrew Morris

The Sierra Club, Rainforest Action Network and BankTrack last month released a list of the 10 worst offenders in coal financing.  It is no surprise that banks such as J.P. Morgan, Citigroup and Bank of America are on the list, given their copious lending to companies that operate coal-fired power plants and practice mountaintop-removal mining.

The 10 banks highlighted in the report loaned a combined $20 billion to coal companies. While this is a daunting figure, overall usage of coal-fired power has declined by 11 percent since 2011, potentially signaling a slow demise of the practice. Until then, coal-fired power plants continue to be among the more environmentally devastating forms of energy production, with proven links to groundwater and surface water contamination; climate change; and human health problems triggered by toxic levels of mercury and coal dust.

Coal production generates a half trillion dollars in externalized environmental and health costs each year, as noted in a 2011 Harvard School of Public Health study. The costs range from hospitalization for residents of coal communities – who have higher-than-average mortality rates and suffer disproportionately from cancer and other illnesses– to water pollution and toxic waste spills.

The “report card” released by the three groups this week gave the lowest grades to BNY Mellon for its financing of both mountaintop removal and coal-burning power plants; the bank was given “F’s” in both categories. Close behind was Goldman Sachs, which got two “D’s.”

“As the costs of climate disruption for our communities and future generations mount, U.S. banks continue to finance tens of billion dollars for companies that are mining and burning coal we can no longer afford to burn,” Ben Collins, research and policy campaigner for Rainforest Action Network’s Energy and Finance Program, said in a press release.

Categories
Backyard Talk

Citizens Bill to Ban Fracking Waste Injection Wells Introduced

Ohio Community Groups Concerned about Toxic Oil and Gas Waste Work With Lawmakers on a Citizens Bill to Ban Class II Injection Wells

A citizens group coalition, working with State Senator Mike Skindell (Lakewood), and State Representatives Denise Driehaus (Cincinnati) and Robert Hagan (Youngstown) to introduce the Citizens Bill to Ban Class 2 Injection Wells in Ohio. A coalition of 40 local, state, and national groups sent a letter to the lawmakers, urging them to introduce the injection well ban to protect the health and safety of Ohioans.

The initiative was prompted by recent events, including earthquakes in Geauga and Mahoning Counties; the federal indictment of D&L industries for dumping fracking waste; lack of public participation in the injection well permitting process; and multiple news reports outlining the radioactivity and toxicity of oil and gas wastewater flooding into Ohio by the millions of barrels.

Ohio communities should not be declared wastelands for dumping this toxic waste into what amounts to a hole in the ground, putting their children’s health and drinking water supply at risk.

The legislation would ban Class 2 wells used for underground injection of oil and gas waste. The bill would also stop waste from being discharged into Ohio’s waterways after treatment, and make it illegal for municipalities to use the liquid waste from oil and gas operations for dust and ice control on roadways. Citizens contend that none of Ohio’s wastewater treatment plants are equipped to handle the level of toxicity and radioactivity that has been found in fracking waste.

Ohio politicians and regulators have been too lenient on industry disposal of fracking waste. Just because the industry is creating a tremendous amount of toxic waste doesn’t mean Ohio has to find a place for them to dump it. In the absence of truly safe disposal methods, the burden should be placed on industry to come up with safe alternatives or cease to create the waste.

In 2012, Ohio’s 178 active injection wells accepted 13,846,657 barrels of brine and liquid waste. Radioactivity in oil and gas wastewaters has been found to exceed the U.S.EPA safe drinking limits by up to 3,600 times and federal industrial discharge limits set by the Nuclear Regulatory Agency by more than 300 times.

 


[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Categories
Backyard Talk

The vinyl plastics industry: one of the biggest users of mercury in the world


[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”]

A vinyl chloride monomer (VCM) plant in China that uses mercury. Photo credit: United Nations

Dioxins.  Vinyl chloride.  Phthalates.

There are an appalling number reasons why we consider vinyl to be the most toxic plastic on the planet.

One reason that many people don’t realize is that the vinyl chemical industry is one of the biggest users of mercury in the entire world, in fact the #2 user globally, and that use has been increasing in recent years – primarily in China, where many of our vinyl plastic products come from.

China is the world’s biggest user and emitter of mercury and within China, the single biggest users of mercury are the factories turning coal into PVC.

PVC, mercury and chlorine production

The United Nations estimates the chlorine industry has 100 plants in 44 countries across the globe that still use mercury to make chlorine.  The #1 use of that chlorine is to make vinyl plastic, like vinyl flooring, pipes and school supplies.

According to the US EPA, “In the U.S., the chlor-alkali industry is currently the largest private-sector source of stored and in-use mercury, and therefore the largest private-sector source of potential new supplies as a result of future closures or conversions of mercury cell chlor-alkali equipment or plants.”

PVC, mercury and vinyl chloride monomer in China

In China and Russia, mercury is also used to make vinyl chloride monomer, the basic building block of PVC.  And this use of mercury is increasing at an appalling rate.

According to the United Nations, “Vinyl Chloride Monomer (VCM) production using the mercury catalyst process is the second largest demand sector for mercury globally (estimated at 570-800 tonnes annually in 2008). The process has emerged as a cost effective production technique for countries with high availability of acetylene over ethylene as raw materials (namely in China and Russia). It is believed that China represents 80-90 % of global capacity with 89 facilities currently identified.  UNEP has collaborated with China on this important topic since 2008.”

Vinyl plastic industry’s use of mercury on the rise

In 2002, the Chinese PVC industry used 354 tons of mercury. Within two years, that had increased to 610 tons, growing at an annual rate of 31.4%.  It’s been estimated that mercury usage continued to increase to over 1,000 tons by 2010.

No one really knows precisely how much the industry is using today, or how much of that mercury may be getting into the air, oceans and fish we all eat.

Why should we care?

According to the United Nations:

“Mercury is recognized as a chemical of global concern due to its long-range transport in the atmosphere, its persistence in the environment, its ability to bioaccumulate in ecosystems and its significant negative effect on human health and the environment.

Mercury can produce a range of adverse human health effects, including permanent damage to the nervous system, in particular the developing nervous system.  Due to these effects, and also because mercury can be transferred from a mother to her unborn child, infants, children and women of child bearing age are considered vulnerable populations.”

The UN’s most recent assessment identifies the vinyl chlorine industry as one of the biggest sources of mercury on the planet.

If we want to eliminate global use and releases of mercury, one thing we can do is phase out the use of this hazardous plastic that is fundamentally reliable on this global pollutant.  That’s a global strategy we can get behind.

[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Categories
Backyard Talk

A Toxic Kiss?

Are you giving a toxic kiss with leaded lipstick? 

“Testing of 32 commonly sold lipsticks and lip glosses found they contain lead, cadmium, chromium, aluminum and five other metals — some at potentially toxic levels, according to researchers at the University of California-Berkeley’s School of Public Health,” per a USA Today article.  (5/2/13)

“Prior research has also found lead in lipstick, including a December 2011 survey of 400 varieties by the Food and Drug Administration that found low levels the agency said pose no safety concerns. This UC study looked at more metals and estimated health risks based on their concentrations and typical lipstick use.

“Just finding these metals isn’t the issue.It’s the levels that matter,” says co-author S. Katharine Hammond, professor of environmental health. She says some of the toxic metals are occurring at levels that could pose health problems in the long run. “This study is saying, ‘FDA, wake up and pay attention,’ ” she says.” 

For more information, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/02/toxic-chemicals-lipstick/2125325/

Categories
Backyard Talk

Products Contain Toxic Chemicals Of Concern To Kids’ Health

Over 5000 kids products reported to contain chemicals linked to cancer, hormone disruption, and other chemicals that are a concern for kids’ health. Read the new report from Washington Toxics Coalition and Safer States. http://bit.ly/chemreveal

Categories
Backyard Talk

A Mother's Story About Fracking

This is a first hand description by Jodi from PA who was recently dosed with toxic chemical inside of her home that were released from a nearby well pad and gas line. She now has skin rashes on her face, neck and chest. She is nauseous and extremely tired.

Categories
Backyard Talk

Teachers and Students That Inspire

I was invited by a science teacher Kendall Jensen to visit with her students at Roosevelt High School during my travel to assist the Portland, Oregon community group Neighbors for Clean Air. I have visited classrooms often throughout my work at CHEJ. However, this school, its teachers and the students truly inspired me in a way that I left more energized than when I came.

To understand why, you need to understand the environment. The school built in 1921 houses over 680 students. The students come from a low wealth area with 84% of the students receiving free or reduced lunch program, making it Oregon’s poorest high school. A few of the students live in the shelters and are homeless.

Moreover, the school is the most diverse in the state with the student population consisting of 31% Latino, 30% white, 23% African American, 9% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 4% Native American. In a school population where there are so many negative impacts working against students’ ability to succeed, I walked into a room full of students gathered together to take steps to improve themselves and their environment.

Ms. Kendall Jensen a science teacher at the high school has inspired and motivated the students to explore the environmental problems in the community. As I walked into the classroom where we were having lunch and conversation with students about Love Canal and the work that the neighborhood group, Neighbors for Clean Air, was working on the room was full of energy from eager students. No one was getting extra credit; no one was getting any benefit other than the opportunity to learn more about their neighborhood’s air problems.

I would be remiss if I didn’t also share that this was one of the first beautiful spring days in Portland with the temperature in the 70’s, sunny and clear. Yet students motivated by Kendall and their own curiosity came to learn instead of joining their friends for lunch on this beautiful day. Students listened and learned not just about the local toxic air pollution problems but about taking leadership becoming their own advocates and standing up for what they think is right. This High School is in the direct line of toxic air pollution. It is one of Portland’s schools that rank in the top 5% of all US schools with the most dangerous outdoor air quality in the country.

As a mother of four and someone who has spent time with extraordinary teachers like Kendall, it is clear that when students fail it is not because of a failed teacher. Sometime, especially in schools like Roosevelt High School where students face challenges everyday to survive, it the added toxic environment that directly affects their ability to learn and to pass standardized tests. We know with a level of scientific confidence that toxic chemicals in the environment are directly connected to children’s’ ability to concentrate and learn. Children facing daily toxic lifestyles as it is being referred to now – meaning single family households, poverty, drug influences, poor diet and so on – is exasperated by exposures to real toxic chemicals. Clearly the students in that classroom want to learn, want to succeed and want to take control of their futures. They and the school’s teachers need help; they need a healthy environment, with clean air for their students to succeed. Clean air is something that teachers do not have the ability to change on their own. It is the responsibility of the government to give students a chance by both providing the tools and the healthy environment to make success possible. If the students at this school fail it is more likely the fault of the lack of a healthy environment and not the teachers.

Categories
Backyard Talk

Environmental Health: A Social Movement Whose Time Has Come

Guest Blog by Kate Davies

In 1965, when I was 8 years old, my mother was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s lymphoma. She was given less than a year to live. By some miracle she survived, only to be diagnosed with breast cancer some 20 years later. She survived this too, but in 1995 she developed a rare T cell lymphoma. She died in 2007, after fighting these three different types of cancer for over forty years.

My mother’s illnesses influenced me profoundly. As a child, I wanted to become a doctor so I could make her better, but as the physicians failed to cure her, I became more interested in how cancer could be prevented. To find out more, I decided to study biochemistry. After completing a bachelor’s degree and a doctorate, I became convinced that toxic chemicals and radiation played a role in this life-threatening disease. This realization led me to join the environmental health movement.

I suspect that most people join this social movement because, like me, they know someone with an environmentally-related disease or because they live in a community affected by pollution.  This shouldn’t be a surprise.  Social activism is often a result of direct, personal experience.  Although scientific and economic information is important, living with or witnessing an environmental health problem firsthand can inspire activism in a way that facts and figures alone don’t.

The leaders of the U.S. environmental health movement are well aware of this. For the past 35 years, they have intentionally drawn attention to the health effects of toxic chemicals and other environmental hazards. By highlighting the effects of pollution on living, breathing people, they are putting a human face on the issues. Whether it’s a cancer survivor talking about how she copes with daily life or a mom talking about her child’s learning disabilities, the stories of real people dealing with real illnesses make environmental issues much more tangible and immediate.

This is the environmental health movement’s unique strategy. Unlike most environmentalists, who emphasize the natural world, the environmental health movement shines a spotlight on human health and well-being. This may sound like a subtle difference, but it affects how issues are framed and communicated to the public.  More importantly, it makes a huge difference in how the public understands them.

Shining a spotlight on human health has made the environmental health movement successful.  Working mostly at the state and local levels, activists have organized countless communities to protest abandoned toxic waste dumps, oppose new hazardous facilities, raise awareness about local disease clusters and draw attention to environmental injustice. The movement has also won numerous legislative victories. Over 900 toxics policies were proposed or enacted in the U.S. between 1990 and 2009, and between 2003 and 2011, 18 states passed 71 chemical safety laws..

The environmental health movement was born in 1978, just two years before I joined it. As supporters of CHEJ will know, in that year, Lois Gibbs first raised the alarm about the health effects of toxic chemicals leaking from an abandoned waste dump in Love Canal, New York. Organizing her neighbors to demand action, she fought the government and won.

Since then, the environmental health movement has spread across the U.S. and around the globe. Today, about 10,000 environmental health organizations and people are listed on WISER, a worldwide social networking website for sustainability. Almost 4,500 members in about 80 countries and all 50 states form the Collaborative on Health and the Environment. There are now environmental health groups in every major city and state in the U.S.

But despite its success and widespread public support, very little has been written about this social movement. There are many books on the environmental movement, the environmental justice movement and the science of environmental health, but only a handful on the environmental health movement.

My new book, The Rise of the U.S. Environmental Health Movement, is an attempt to remedy this situation and give it the recognition it so richly deserves.  In the book, I describe the historical and cultural origins of the U.S. environmental health movement and analyze the organizations and strategies that comprise it today. By examining what has made this movement successful, the book provides insights into what social movements can do to advance positive social change.

Those of us who are part of the environmental health movement do this work because we are called to do it. For us, there is simply no other choice. As the poet Adrienne Rich wrote:

“My heart is moved by all I cannot save:
So much has been destroyed
I have to cast my lot with those
who age after age, perversely,
with no extraordinary power,
reconstitute the world.”


Kate Davies, MA, DPhil, is the author of a new book called The Rise of the U.S. Environmental Health Movement. She is core faculty in the Center for Creative Change at Antioch University Seattle and clinical associate professor in the School of Public Health at the University of Washington. She has been active on environmental health for 35 years in the U.S., Canada and other countries.

Categories
Backyard Talk

Health Impacts of Mountaintop Removal Mining

Earlier this week, CHEJ released a report on the Health Impacts of Mountaintop Removal (MTR) Mining. This report reviewed the most significant studies on the human health impacts of MTR mining. The health studies described in this report provide strong evidence that MTR mining has impacted the residents in the surrounding communities and that further research is needed to better understand the relationship between adverse health effects and MTR mining.

The studies reviewed in this report show that MTR areas have higher rates of cancer, cardiovascular disease-related mortality, overall mortality, and birth defects, and that the residents of these areas report lower health-related quality of life than residents of any other part of Appalachia.

As part of this report, we commissioned a group of medical and scientific experts called the National Commission on Health Impacts of Mountaintop Removal Mining and asked them to review this report. Commission members included Dr. Jerome Paulson, Professor of Pediatrics & Public Health, George Washington University; Dr. Steven B. Wing, Associate Professor of Epidemiology, School of Public Health at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill; and Dr. Daniel Wartenberg, Professor of Environmental Epidemiology and Statistics, Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in Piscataway, New Jersey.

The Commission strongly supported the findings in the report and developed recommendations to improve our understanding of the interactions between MTR mining and human health. The main recommendation called for “an immediate moratorium on MTR mining until such time as health studies have been conducted that provide a clearer understanding of the associations between adverse health impacts, notably adverse reproductive outcomes, and MTR mining.  In addition, during the moratorium period, appropriate safeguards including remediation and engineering controls should be implemented to mitigate air and water pollution related to MTR mining activities.”

The actions called for by the Commission are in line with recent government initiatives to protect the health of Appalachian communities. In February 2013, Congressional Representatives re-introduced the Appalachian Community Health Emergency Act (ACHE Act, HR 526. If passed this bill would require the Department of Health and Human Services to lead a federal investigation of the reported links between MTR mining and human health impacts. Until such an investigation is conducted, the ACHE Act would require a moratorium on all new MTR permits, as well as on any expansion of existing permits. The ACHE Act would address the primary recommendation of the Commission which is to place an immediate moratorium on MTR mining until such time as health studies have been conducted that provide a clearer understanding of the associations between adverse health impacts and MTR mining

To read the report including the commission’s statement and recommendations, click here.

[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]