Posted on October, 13 2004

A report published today by the Nordic Council of Ministers, shows that the total direct costs of REACH to the chemical industry is 3.5 billion Euro over 11 years – 0.06 per cent of the chemical industry’s sale revenues.
 
Even a strengthened REACH (see editors note) would cost only 4.0 billion Euro. "The true costs of REACH" by Professor Frank Ackerman and Rachel Massey of Tufts University, Boston USA, which examines the costs of REACH throughout Europe, concludes that "Economic analysis confirms that costs of this magnitude are unlikely to harm European industry, while several studies have suggested that the health and environmental benefits of REACH will be substantial."
 
The report also finds that "European industry will gain the competitive advantage from being the first to move toward cleaner and safer production and use of chemicals."
 
Professor Ackerman also puts into perspective the often repeated industry claim that 80 per cent of the costs will fall on 20 per cent of producers (a claim which WWF has never seen substantiated by any study). His report finds that even this disproportionate burden would actually cost only between 0.20 and 0.39 per cent of the sales of the fine and speciality chemicals sector.
 
‘The True cost of REACH’ states "if the chemical industry fully passed on to its customers the direct costs of REACH…..the resulting price increases would be well within the range of price changes routinely experienced by business. The conclusion that the total costs of REACH are too small to cause noticeable economic harm remains true across several studies, regardless of which of the cost estimates and methodologies are chosen."
 
In a scathing review of the chemical industry-funded REACH cost analysis conducted by Arthur D.Little, Professor Ackerman finds that the costs of REACH are exaggerated by a factor of at least 35!
 
"Exaggerated industry claims about the cost of chemical law reform have already caused REACH to be considerably weakened" said Karl Wagner, Director of WWF’s DetoX Campaign. "Now the tactic appears to be to delay REACH for as long as possible. Unless the EU Council and Parliament get a move on in adopting a strong REACH their failure to properly control chemicals in time could cause the sort of misery and suffering already witnessed by the lack of speedy action on tobacco and asbestos." 


For further information:
Julian Scola,
WWF DetoX Campaign,
Tel: +32 2 743 8806,
E-mail: jscola@wwfepo.org

 
Note to editors:
A strengthened REACH is assumed in "The true costs of REACH" to include: requiring chemcials produced in the quanties of 1-10 tonnes to have the same tests as those demanded of chemicals produced in quantities of 10-100 tonnes; requiring Chemical Safety Reports of all chemicals produced in volumes above 1 tonne a year (the current draft only damnds reports of chemicals produced above 10 tonnes a year); expanded and strengthened testing of intermediates.