*

*
Sandhill crane

Sunday, October 5, 2008

Jump Higher - Run Faster!




Two interesting bits on the environment this week.

The Environmental Protection Agency formally announced this week that it would not set drinking water safety standards for Perchlorate, a rocket fuel chemical that has been shown to cause thyroid problems in newborns, pregnant women and young children.

The agency issued a news release saying that it had "conducted extensive review of scientific data related to the health effects of exposure to perchlorate from drinking water and other sources and found that in more than 99 percent of public drinking water systems, perchlorate was not at levels of public health concern. Therefore, based on the Safe Water Drinking Act criteria, the agency determined there is not a 'meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction' through a national drinking water regulation."

The agency apparently used maximum safe perchlorate contamination levels 15 times higher than what the agency suggested was safe in 2002. By that standard, the EPA estimates that more than 16 million Americans are exposed to the chemical at a level that is unsafe.

According to the Washington Post, White House officials had extensively edited the EPA's perchlorate rule-making documentation to remove scientific data highlighting some of the risks associated with the chemical, which has been found in water in 35 states. The Defense Department and Pentagon contractors who face legal liability stemming from rocket fuel contamination have lobbied for six years to avoid a federal drinking-water standard for perchlorate.

Once again, we see an administration that lets industry dictate safety standards to the American People. Deregulation worked so well with the investment banks, didn't it?

I am always sadly bemused when Americans look at tests that show bad chemical effects on animals and assume that they won't hurt human beings. Is it our semi-pro god like status? Are we not all made of very similar organic material?

The other issue that came to light was that Californian's bodies have twice as much of the flame-retardant chemical PBDE in their blood and as much as 10 times more of them in their homes than elsewhere in the country, researchers say.

This from the Los Angeles Times:

Older children and infants, who may be more susceptible to the harmful effects of the chemicals, can have several times as much as adults, the research team reported Wednesday in the journal Environmental Science & Technology.

The chemicals, known as polybrominated diphenyl ethers, or PBDEs, have been shown in animals to cause thyroid hormone disruption and to interfere with developing reproductive and nervous systems.

Widespread use of the chemicals began with the passage of a California law 30 years ago requiring furniture and bedding to withstand 12 seconds of contact with an open flame without igniting. To meet the standard, foam and similar materials contain as much as 12% PBDEs by weight.

U.S. furniture manufacturers stopped using one form of PBDE -- thought to be the most hazardous -- in 2004, but it is still found in imported furniture. A state law that would have banned a second form of PBDE did not pass in August.

The chemical is released from furniture in dust produced by abrasion and normal wear. Children get larger doses because they come in contact with the fine dust on floors and frequently put their hands to their mouths.

"The health effects are of particular concern for babies, children and pregnant women," said environmental epidemiologist Ami Zota of the Silent Spring Institute in Newton, Mass., who led the study.


I say the glass is actually half full - at least we will be more flame resistant!

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Sunday
October 5, 2008
12:58 P.M.

Dear Robert:

I just responded to your blog (for September 27th?) with regard to Paul Newman.

Hope that you and Leslie are well, and are having a good day.

All the best,

J

Anonymous said...

Sunday
October 5, 2008
2:26 PM

Dear Robert:

Joe Biden could take lessons from your last email in brevity.

XXOO,
J

Blue Heron said...

Dear Joe,

As it was grumpy's post you responded to and not my own, I think it was the benign neglect one might show a stepchild.

R

Anonymous said...

Your reply to my reply is “too clever by half.” I could hardly parse it. Sounded like a Saran Palin sentence turned inside out.

J