![]()
To Danmarks Sosialdemokratiske Parti
Environmental problems from other plastics are very little investigated, because of focus on PVC. Danish Technology Institute has commisioned from the Environmental Agency in Denmark a series of scanning litterature studies of other plastics. These studies indicate a lot of problems linked to other plastics generally and illustrates the need for deeper comparative studies.
We will point at the need for studiing additives used in alternative plastics to PVC, like brominated fire retardants used in so called halogen free cable (which could emit brominated dioxins) and uranium, which is used as catalyst in ABS-plastic.
A general problem for all plastics is addition of heavy metals in
form
of pigments. European industry still uses environmental suspect
pigments
containing cadmium, chromium, copper and lead.
These heavy metals create environmental problems by disposure,
both
by use as stabiliser or pigment in the plastic.
Concerning outphasing of the polymeric material PVC we agree that this should be done for short lived products (< 1 year), because this will have a positive effect on the reduction of HCl in the waste disposal furnaces.
A wider outphasing must be seen in relation to the
chlorine/alcali balance,
otherwise there will be a risk for increased global environmental
problems
linked to chlorinated solvents and pesticides. 2/3 of chlorine
produces
in Sweden is used in PVC. This is a stable and environmental safe
way of
treating chlorine, compared to the alternatives (CFC, chlorinated
solvents&pesticides).
Chlorine has to be handled because the consumption of alcali
increases
and will increase due to activities in the Al- and paperindustry.
By technological
improvements as removal of toxic ingredients and establishment of
recycling,
PVC can with advantage be used in longlasting products (pipes
etc.). We
refer to our fact sheet, which shows in more detail our views.
There are used a lot more environmental- and health suspicious heavy metals in plastics, than what is said in the proposal. This is the case, both for additives for PVC and other plastics. We will mention pigments used in all thermoplastics, as:
Yellow (Barium, Titanium, Antimony, Nickel, Chromium, Zinc,
Cadmium,
Lead)
Green (Chromium, Cobalt, Titanium, Nickel, Zinc)
Blue (Cobalt, Chromium and others)
Brown (Chromium and others)
Red (Cadmium, Selenium, Lead, Chromium, Molybdenum and others)
In addition, heavy metals are used in plastics for other purposes. It will be too much to cover that item in this letter. As an example we will mention that Swedish Telia for environmental reasons wish to change their PVC cards with ABS. ABS can contain uranium, depending on the producer. Bellona anticipate that this was not known to Telia when substitution was launched. This illustrates the need for as much knowledge for the alternatives as we have for PVC today.
However, an offensive and realistic environmental policy for both Denmark and the EU will be a general ban on all suspicious heavy metals in all plastics, otherwise it will not have a positive environmental effect.
Bisphenol A is the main component in this chapter, which is the
most
potent oestrogen imitator. This substance was already in 1936
discovered
as endocrinic disturbing.
Bisphenol A is as separate additive in a lot of plastics, which
have
direct contact with food and humans, as in internal lacquering of
Al-cans
and in fillings for dental work. Bisphenol A should primarily
phased out
[in food applications], secondarily in products with human
contact. In
that case it are other plastics than PVC, which primarily should
be phased
out, or they have to be improved.
Concerning the phtalates DEHP, DINP, BBP and DBP, we wonder why
it is
just 4 of 20 commercial used phtalates, which should be phased
out. To
our knowledge from studies on different effects, it are not these
4 phtalates,
which are worst concerning environment/health.
The uncertainity about the effects are great and Bellona thinks
it's
needed to initiate a better aimed research on this chemical group.
This
must be independent of potential law regulations against PVC, as
long as
phtalates are used for other purposes and because the level in the
environment
is occasionally high.
The Environment Agency's comparison document between PET and PVC
reveals
that there are also other plastic related sources for human
exposure of
phtalates.
PET, which is used all over Europe as mineral water bottles, is
based
on phtalates. Analyses taken on water and mineral water stored on
PET show
high values of phtalates in the drinking water. This bottle
content can
be health related suspicious and should therefore be investigated
more
closely.
Already in 1993 the Environment Agency got this information.
The dimension and potential health risk for human exposure of
phtalates
from beverages in PET have not been satisfactory investigated. It
has been
focused on effects from phtalates in flooring and other products,
which
have never been in contact with foodstuff.
The dioxin emissions from the burning of household waste and hospital waste, is first of all due to the technical standard of the burning ovens and not the chlorine content. The dioxin problems Denmark has with the waste handling equipment, can be fully solved by upgrading the burning technology.
Otherwise we will point at the fact that in the Nordic area, the dioxins come primarly from the metal melting industry. In Norway the main source is coming from the production of Mg, Fe and Ni, when in Sweden it comes from recycling of steel and Al-scrap.
With kind regards
Environmental foundation BELLONA
Rune Haaland
U bent op niveau 1 van de Chlorofielen pagina's
Created: 2 June, 1996.
Last update: 27 April, 2002.
Final update: 31 March, 2019