ReportWire

Tag: plastics

  • What To Know About The Train Derailment And Toxic Chemicals In Ohio

    What To Know About The Train Derailment And Toxic Chemicals In Ohio

    [ad_1]

    On Feb. 3, trains carrying toxic chemicals including butyl acrylate and vinyl chloride derailed in East Palestine, OH, leading to a chain of events that have been scrutinized for their impact on theenvironment and local residents. The Onion tells you everything you need to know about the train derailment and toxic chemicals in Ohio.

    Q: Where is East Palestine?
    A: Hop on I-76 and keep driving till you hit the permanent smoke cloud, you can’t miss it.

    Q: What caused the derailment?
    A: Officials are reportedly investigating whether the train was drunk.

    Q: What is butyl acrylate?
    A: A sweet-smelling, colorless liquid that shouldn’t be inhaled, ingested, or federally acknowledged.

    Q: What is vinyl chloride? 
    A: A type of chloride popular in the ’60s and ’70s that has made a recent comeback among chloride snobs.

    Q: Didn’t railroad workers want to strike last year to improve things like train-inspection conditions, but President Biden blocked them to protect corporate interests? 
    A: Well, sure, but it made railway shareholder dividends go up.

    Q: This won’t delay my shipments of cheap consumer goods, will it?
    A: God no, this is America!

    Q: How are government officials helping the people of East Palestine?
    A: By collaborating on a series of pamphlets highlighting the benefits of cancer.

    Q: How can Norfolk Southern Railway rebound from this fiasco?
    A: They’ll certainly need to consider layoffs.

    Q: What is being done for employees impacted by the derailment?
    A: Biden has urged any affected railroad workers to give themselves time to recover using their ample paid time off.

    Q: What will the long-term effects of this disaster be?
    A: A golden age of class-action lawsuit commercials in 10 to 15 years.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Common Plastics Chemical Tied to Higher Diabetes Risk in Women

    Common Plastics Chemical Tied to Higher Diabetes Risk in Women

    [ad_1]

    By Cara Murez 

    HealthDay Reporter

    THURSDAY, Feb. 9, 2023 (HealthDay News) — Chemicals found in plastic personal care products, kids’ toys, and food and drink packaging could be raising the risk of type 2 diabetes among women, new research suggests.

    To study the impact of these chemicals, known as phthalates, researchers followed just over 1,300 U.S. women for six years to see if exposure contributed to the incidence of diabetes.

    About 5% of the women developed diabetes during the study period.
     

    The researchers found that white women exposed to high levels of some phthalates had a 30% to 63% higher chance of developing diabetes. The harmful chemicals were not linked to diabetes risk in Black or Asian women.

    Exposure to these endocrine-disrupting chemicals has previously been associated with reduced fertility and other endocrine disorders.

    “Our research found phthalates may contribute to a higher incidence of diabetes in women, especially white women, over a six-year period,” said Sung Kyun Park, an associate professor of epidemiology and environmental health sciences at the University of Michigan School of Public Health, in Ann Arbor.

    “People are exposed to phthalates daily, increasing their risk of several metabolic diseases. It’s important that we address [endocrine-disrupting chemicals] now as they are harmful to human health,” Park said in a news release from the Endocrine Society.

    The study, which was published online Feb. 8 in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, received funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, the SWAN Repository, the National Center for Research Resources and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.

    “Our research is a step in the right direction towards better understanding phthalates’ effect on metabolic diseases, but further investigation is needed,” Park added.

    More information

    The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has more on phthalates.

     

     

    SOURCE: Endocrine Society, news release, Feb. 8, 2023

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • EU sets out plan to cut back packaging waste

    EU sets out plan to cut back packaging waste

    [ad_1]

    Say goodbye to mini shampoo bottles.

    The EU wants to slash the amount of packaging waste produced across the bloc, banning everything from mini hotel toiletries to throwaway plastic wrapping around some fresh fruit and vegetables.

    The proposal is part of the European Commission’s circular economy package, legislation aimed at slashing waste and reducing emissions to help the bloc reach climate neutrality by 2050.

    The new rules include mandatory targets for the amount of recycled materials used in plastic packaging and pushes cafés, shops and hotels to switch to reusable, rather than single-use packaging. It calls for all packaging on the EU market to be recyclable by 2030.

    Countries will also be told to set up schemes to increase recycling of bottles and cans: Customers would pay a small additional sum on top of their purchase, which is refunded on the bottle’s return.

    Packaging is a “key environmental concern,” the Commission said in its preamble to the new rules. The sector is one of the “main users of virgin materials,” hoovering up 40 percent of plastics and 50 percent of paper, and accounting for 36 percent of municipal solid waste.

    In 2020, every EU resident generated nearly 180 kilograms of waste, according to new EU data. Paper and cardboard are the main culprit, accounting for 32.7 million tons in 2020, followed by plastic and glass at about 15 million tons each.

    “Without action, the EU would see a further 19 percent increase in packaging waste by 2030, and for plastic packaging waste even a 46 percent increase,” according to the Commission.

    But its proposal isn’t going down particularly well. Industry groups have pushed back hard against higher reuse targets in recent weeks, while NGOs are accusing the Commission of bowing to those demands and watering down its proposal.

    Here are four key points of contention.

    End of single-use

    One key element of the Commission’s proposal is a ban on some types of single-use packaging in the hospitality sector — such as disposable plates and cups, sugar packets and other condiments, or mini soaps and shampoos.

    Businesses won’t let that happen without a fight.

    Ever since a first draft of the new rules leaked last month, they’ve been hammering home the argument that the energy and water needed to clean the reusable packaging would outweigh the environmental benefits of moving away from single-use items.

    A ban would “require a full cost analysis of businesses in particular energy, water and operational costs,” hospitality lobby HOTREC argued in an emailed statement, adding that the cost of those assessments shouldn’t fall to the businesses.

    The rules also set targets for companies to ensure a certain quantity of products are provided in reusable or refillable packaging. For example, 20 percent of takeaway beverage sales made by a café must be served in reusable packaging or using customers’ own containers by 2030, with the target ramping up to 80 percent in 2040. Beer retailers will have to sell 10 percent of their products in refillable bottles by 2030 and 20 percent by 2040.

    That’s another sore point for industry.

    The Commission should “look at the full life cycle impact of all packaging products,” according to the European Paper Packaging Alliance lobby. It argues that “scientific evidence shows that recyclable, single-use, paper-based packaging has a lower environmental impact than reusable systems, in takeaway settings as well as in quick service restaurants.”

    Recycling concerns

    Industry groups also complain that the proposal unfairly favors reusable packaging over recyclable single-use packaging, meaning wasted money on investments in recycling facilities — even though the text seeks to boost recycling in the bloc. There’s a minimum amount of recycled content that must be used in the manufacturing of certain plastic packaging, for example.

    “There’s a real concern for the industry — we don’t know which horse to back now, because the policy itself has conflicting goals,” said Ian Ellington, senior vice president at Pepsico and president of EU soft drinks lobby UNESDA. “I think the likely outcome of that is we would pause some of those investments while we figure out what the regulatory framework is really going to be.”

    Brussels seems to have listened: The rules proposed on Wednesday lay down lower targets on what percentage of packaging must be reusable.

    But now environmental groups are sounding the alarm, saying the EU needs to focus on boosting reusable packaging rather than relying on recycling as the solution.

    Campaigners have argued that positive messaging around recycling could be promoting additional consumption — and additional waste. They also point out that the average recycling rate is only 64.4 percent.

    In rowing back the reuse targets in its current proposal, the EU executive “seems to have fallen into industry’s false promises on investments on recycling,” Larissa Copello, a policy officer for Zero Waste Europe said in an emailed statement.

    Death of marketing

    The Commission’s proposal would also ban “superfluous” packaging, like double walls or false bottoms aimed at making products appear to contain more than they do.

    That essentially means all packaging should be designed for functionality and to minimize the amount of packaging used.

    The idea isn’t going down well with businesses that use distinctive packaging to stand out, such as spirits and perfume manufacturers.

    In a letter to the Commission, several lobbies argued the new rules will lead to “standardisation of packaging and have negative competitive repercussions for EU consumers, brands and industry.”

    “An awful lot of work goes into presenting your products to the market,” said Adeline Farrelly, secretary-general of the association of European manufacturers of glass containers. “The image of your product, the way it looks and feels is a huge part of the value added product.”

    Biodegradable packaging in the crosshairs

    Compostable and bio-based packaging manufacturers will also have to abide by new rules, as such products can jam up recycling processes and take a long time to fully biodegrade in certain environments.

    The Commission has designated a “very small list of products” that should be designed for composting — tea bags, filter coffee pods, sticky labels attached to fruit and vegetables, and lightweight plastic carrier bags — while the rest should go into recycling.

    The compostable packaging industry isn’t happy about that, saying it will seriously hamper their business.

    The new rules are still “effectively … a ban, or sort of very tight control of what can be composted and what can’t,” said Jack McKeivor, the director of public affairs for compostable packaging company TIPA.

    “Why would investors want to invest in it? Why would customers want to buy this stuff if they can’t use it for its originally designated purpose?” he added.

    The move would jeopardize the EU’s “current leadership role in the sector” and “freeze” further research and investments into such products, a coalition of bioplastic companies wrote in a letter.

    The Commission’s proposal will now be examined by the European Parliament and EU countries, but faces a rocky road ahead — a number of MEPs have already sent a letter to the Commission echoing industry concerns.

    [ad_2]

    Leonie Cater

    Source link

  • Plastic recycling a

    Plastic recycling a

    [ad_1]

    Washington — Plastic recycling rates are declining even as production shoots up, according to a Greenpeace USA report out Monday that blasted industry claims of creating an efficient, circular economy as “fiction.”

    Titled “Circular Claims Fall Flat Again,” the study found that of 51 million tons of plastic waste generated by U.S. households in 2021, only 2.4 million tons were recycled, or around five percent. After peaking in 2014 at 10 percent, the trend has been decreasing, especially since China stopped accepting the West’s plastic waste in 2018.

    Virgin production — of non-recycled plastic, that is — meanwhile is rapidly rising as the petrochemical industry expands, lowering costs.

    “Industry groups and big corporations have been pushing for recycling as a solution,” Greenpeace USA campaigner Lisa Ramsden told AFP.

    “By doing that, they have shirked all responsibility” for ensuring that recycling actually works, she added. She named Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Unilever and Nestle as prime offenders.


    Studies find microplastics in human lungs, blood stream; scientists investigating possible health risks

    06:19

    According to Greenpeace USA’s survey, only two types of plastic are widely accepted at the nation’s 375 material recovery facilities.

    The first is polyethylene terephthalate (PET), which is commonly used in water and soda bottles; and the second is high density polyethylene (HDPE), seen in milk jugs, shampoo bottles and cleaning product containers. These are numbered “1” and “2” according to a standardized system in which there are seven plastic types.

    But being recyclable in theory doesn’t mean products are being recycled in practice.

    The report found that PET and HDPE products had actual reprocessing rates of 20.9 percent and 10.3 percent, respectively — both down slightly from Greenpeace USA’s last survey in 2020.

    Plastic types “3” through “7” — including children’s toys, plastic bags, produce wrappings, yogurt and margarine tubs, coffee cups and to-go food containers — were reprocessed at rates of less than five percent.

    Despite often carrying the recycling symbol on their labels, products that use plastic types “3” through “7” fail to meet the Federal Trade Commission classification of recyclable.

    This is because recycling facilities for these types aren’t available to a “substantial majority” of the population, defined as 60 percent, and because the collected products are not being used in the manufacturing or assembly of new items.


    Vinyl goes green

    01:42

    According to the report, there were five main reasons why plastic recycling is a “failed concept.”

    First, plastic waste is generated in vast quantities and is extremely difficult to collect — as becomes clear during what the report called ineffective “volunteer cleanup stunts” funded by nonprofits such as “Keep America Beautiful.”  

    Second, even if it were all collected, mixed plastic waste cannot be recycled together, and it would be “functionally impossible to sort the trillions of pieces of consumer plastic waste produced each year,” the report said.

    Third, the recycling process itself is environmentally harmful, exposing workers to toxic chemicals and itself generating microplastics.

    Fourth, recycled plastic carries toxicity risks through contamination with other plastic types in collection bins, preventing it from becoming food-grade material again.

    Fifth and finally, the process of recycling is prohibitively expensive.

    “New plastic directly competes with recycled plastic, and it’s far cheaper to produce and of higher quality,” said the report.

    Ramsden called on corporations to support a Global Plastics Treaty, which United Nations members agreed to create in February, and move toward refill and reuse strategies.

    “This isn’t actually a new concept — it’s how the milkman used to be, it’s how Coca-Cola used to get its beverages to people. They would drink their beverage, give the glass bottle back, and it would be sanitized and reused,” she said.

    Some countries are leading the way, including India, which recently banned 19 single-use plastic items. Austria has set reuse targets of 25 percent by 2025 and at least 30 percent by 2030 for beverage packaging, while Portugal has also set the 30 percent by 2030 goal. Chile is moving to phase out single-use cutlery and mandating refillable bottles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • High levels of toxic chemical found in sports bras, watchdog warns | CNN Business

    High levels of toxic chemical found in sports bras, watchdog warns | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    New testing on a variety of popular branded sports bras and athletic wear has revealed high levels of BPA, a chemical compound that’s used to make certain types of plastic and can lead to harmful health effects such as asthma, cardiovascular disease and obesity.

    Sports bras sold by Athleta, PINK, Asics, The North Face, Brooks, All in Motion, Nike, and FILA were all tested for BPA in the past six months, and the results showed the clothing could expose wearers to up to 22 times the safe limit of BPA, based on standards set in California, according to the Center for Environmental Health. The CEH, which conducted the testing, is a non-profit consumer advocacy group focused on exposing the presence of toxic chemicals in consumer products.

    Under California law — specifically Proposition 65, enacted in 1986 — the maximum allowable dose level for BPA via skin exposure is 3 micrograms per day.

    The group also tested athletic shirts from brands that included The North Face, Brooks, Mizuno, Athleta, New Balance, and Reebok and found similar results.

    The CEH said Wednesday it has sent legal notices to the companies, which will have 60 days to work with the center to remedy the violations before the group files a complaint in California state court requiring them to do so.

    To date, the watchdog said its investigations have found BPA only in polyester-based clothing containing spandex. “We want brands to reformulate their products to remove all bisphenols including BPA. In the interim, we recommend limiting the time you spend in your activewear by changing after your workout,” the group said.

    Athleta, Nike, Reebok, The North Face and Victoria’s Secret (which owns PINK) did not immediately provide a comment.

    BPA (Bisphenol A) is found in a large number of everyday products, from water bottles and canned foods to toys and flooring. In adults, exposure to BPA has been linked to diabetes, heart disease, cancer, obesity and erectile dysfunction.

    Premature death was also associated with BPA exposure, a 2020 study found. More recently, BPA has also been linked to asthma in school-age girls.

    “People are exposed to BPA through ingestion, from eating food or drinking water from containers that have leached BPA, or by absorption through skin,” Kaya Allan Sugerman, CEH’s illegal toxic threats program director, said in a statement.

    “Studies have shown that BPA can be absorbed through skin and end up in the bloodstream after handling receipt paper for seconds or a few minutes at a time. Sports bras and athletic shirts are worn for hours at a time, and you are meant to sweat in them, so it is concerning to be finding such high levels of BPA in our clothing,” Allan Sugerman said.

    Over the past year, the group has asked more than 90 companies, including Walgreens and socks and sleepwear brand Hypnotic Hats, to reformulate their products to remove all bisphenols, including BPA. Some have already agreed to do so.

    “Even low levels of exposure [to BPA] during pregnancy have been associated with a variety of health problems in offspring,” said Dr. Jimena Díaz Leiva, science director with CEH.

    Although CEH litigates under California’s Clean Drinking Water and Toxics Enforcement Act of 1986, it says the repercussions of its settlements extend beyond California “as it is most often economically infeasible for companies to reformulate for just the California market.”

    “Our legal action has been successful in pushing entire industries to remove certain chemicals from products like children’s candy or toys,” the group said in a statement to CNN Business. “These cases not only serve to protect California consumers but also consumers throughout the country.”

    – CNN’s Sandee LaMotte contributed to this story

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • U of I, UC Santa Barbara and Dow scientists crack upcycling plastics to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, advancing a recent Science study

    U of I, UC Santa Barbara and Dow scientists crack upcycling plastics to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, advancing a recent Science study

    [ad_1]

    Press Release


    Oct 5, 2022

    Scientists from the University of Illinois Urbana-ChampaignUniversity of California, Santa Barbara and Dow developed a breakthrough process to transform the most widely produced plastic — polyethylene (PE) — into the second-most widely produced plastic, polypropylene (PP), which will significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG).

    The new study published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society announces a series of coupled catalytic reactions that transform PE, which is #2 and #4 plastic that make up 29% of the world’s plastic consumption, into the building block propylene that is the key ingredient to produce PP, also known as #5 plastic that accounts for close to 25% of the world’s plastic consumption.

    This study establishes a proof-of-concept for upcycling PE plastic with more than 95% selectivity into propylene. The researchers have built a reactor that creates a continuous flow of propylene that can be converted into PP easily using current technology — making this discovery scalable and rapidly implementable. 

    Why this matters: Preliminary analysis suggests that if just 20% of the world’s PE could be recovered and converted via this route, it could represent a potential savings of GHG emissions comparable to taking 3 million cars off the road.

    “If we are to upcycle a significant fraction of the over 100 million tons of plastic waste we generate each year, we need solutions that are highly scalable,” Damien Guironnet, Professor of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, said. “Our team demonstrated the chemistry in a flow reactor we developed to produce propylene highly selectively and continuously. This is a key advance to address the immense volume of the problem that we are facing.” 

    Read Full Story

    Source: University of Illinois

    [ad_2]

    Source link