WWF - Toxics: news & resources

Health and Environment NGOs comment on Bisphenol A ban

2010-11-26

NGOs respond to recent reports that the European Commission will ban the use of organic compound bisphenol A (BPA) in plastic baby bottles from 2011.

We welcome this first baby step that the European Commission has taken to ban bisphenol A in baby bottles - but this is not enough.

Bisphenol A is widespread in the environment and in us, and babies are already exposed to it in the womb. So we believe the European Commission should aim to take adult steps and ban this hormone disruptor from all food contact materials such as can linings, and ultimately from all other products relevant for human and environmental exposure, e.g. the use in cash receipts.

By a coalition of European NGO environment and health campaigners working on toxic chemicals:

European Environmental Bureau (EEB)

Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL)

GLOBAL 2000 (Friends of the Earth Austria)

BUND (Friends of the Earth Germany)

WWF European Policy Office

ClientEarth

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)

ChemSec

France nature environnement (FNE)

Women in Europe for a Common Future (WECF)

Inter-Environnement Wallonie (IEW)

For further information:
Ninja Reineke, Senior Policy Officer Chemicals, WWF European Policy Office,
T: +32 2 740 09 26
E-mail: nreineke@wwfepo.org

Hungary could take lead on tackling ticking toxic time bombs from mining

2010-10-11

Kolontàr, Hungary: Hungary, about to take on the EU presidency, could use its position to mount a major push on reducing the human and natural risks of large stockpiles of poorly maintained and regulated mining wastes across eastern Europe, WWF said.

The call comes as emergency operations continue to head off an increasing risk of further large scale flows of toxic aluminium processing sludge from the broken reservoir above the town of Kolontàr. The initial breach of the reservoir walls a week ago killed at least seven, inundated six villages and sent a caustic alkaline plume towards the Danube.

WWF on Friday issued a photograph showing that the reservoir wall was clearly degraded and leaking more than three months prior to the disaster. Work has nearly finished on a secondary dyke, 1500 m long, 30 m wide and 8 m high through and alongside Kolontàr, to reduce damage from any further spills.

"The human and ecological disaster at Kolontàr – the greatest chemical disaster in Hungary's history – has made clear the need to re-assess current regulation of such mine waste sites and begs the question how many other ticking time bombs there are in Central and Eastern Europe," said Gabor Figeczky, interim CEO of WWF-Hungary.

Mining and mineral processing tailings dams – presumably including the Kolontàr reservoir – were listed as a priority concerns in a 2004 comprehensive study on mainly eastern European hazardous and toxic waste sites from the European Commission's Joint Research Center.

Overall, however, it is clear that information on sites, on the risks they present and on what is being done to reduce risks is extremely poor. WWF released a list of recent Danube releases of toxic wastes and some of the major hazard areas last week.

"WWF's list gives an indication of some other possibly dangerous sites in the region but it is by no means provides the kind of exhaustive analysis that is needed," said Andreas Beckmann, Director of WWF's Danube-Carpathian Programme.

From disaster driven policy to risk driven policy

Specifically, WWF is calling on the European Commission and the Hungarian government to complement the work package on sustainable water management with development of an Action Plan for the effective implementation of the EU Mining Waste Directive during Hungary's upcoming Presidency of the European Union, which begins in January 2011.

"This directive is good in that it marks the transition from disaster driven policy on mining wastes to risk driven policy," said Sergey Moroz, policy expert at the WWF-European Policy Office.

"The impetus for the EU's 2006 Mining Waste Directive were major toxic spills at Baia Mare and Baia Borsa in Romania in 2000 and in Donana in southern Spain in 1998. But the new rules introduced by the directive in 2006 failed to treat the Kolantar reservoir's wastes as posing risk to humans and environment."

"Other provisions which may have made a difference to Kolantàr in 2010 - such as third party inspection, monitoring, and reviewing of permits - aren't due to come substantially into effect until 2012."

The Action Plan which Hungary will shortly be ideally placed to push should focus on sites in the new EU Member States in Central and Eastern Europe and include an assessment of risks in neighbouring countries with a potential impact on the European Union, including Croatia, Serbia, Ukraine and Moldova, Moroz said.
.
The Action Plan should include an assessment of risks to humans and environment from all critical mining waste sites; screen all licenses issued for on-going and planned new mining operations with regard to the hazardous substances and their classification, defining immediate measures during the transition period with clear responsibilities for the operators, the respective Governments and the European Commission.

WWF particularly calls for review and amendment of the EU Mining Waste Directive concerning safety, in particular for dams of open tailings. In addition, the European Commission should screen whether the respective EU Directives have been transcribed into national laws and regulations and assess to what extent they have been put into practice.

The Action Plan could be implemented in part as a flagship project within the framework of the new EU Danube Strategy, which is currently being developed by the European Commission and expected to be formally adopted during the Hungary's EU Presidency next spring.

Further information
On the EU Mining Waste Directive and Action Plan:
•Sergey Moroz, Policy Expert, WWF-European Policy Office, +32 499 5397 34
•Andreas Beckmann, Director, WWF Danube-Carpathian Programme, +49 1511 88 54910
On the Hungarian disaster:
•Gabor Figeczky, interim CEO, WWF-Hungary, +36 3067 85 398

About WWF
WWF is one of the world's largest and most respected independent conservation organizations, with more than 5 million supporters and a global network active in over 100 countries. WWF's mission is to stop the degradation of the earth's natural environment and to build a future in which humans live in harmony with nature, by conserving the world's biological diversity, ensuring that the use of renewable natural resources is sustainable, and promoting the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption.

www.panda.org/media for latest news and media resources

Hungary toxic mud disaster could have been avoided

2010-10-08

Kolontàr, Hungary: An aerial photograph taken in June showing a damaged and clearly leaking sludge pond wall shows that the toxic mud disaster in Hungary and subsequent pollution of rivers including the Danube could have been avoided, WWF-Hungary said today.

The sludge pond dam wall burst Monday flooding six villages with toxic red mud. Another victim succumbed to injuries in hospital yesterday and two bodies were found during clean up operations today, taking the death toll to seven with one person still missing.

"This new evidence of the degraded state of the walls and significant leakage more than three months before the incident should be cause for an urgent investigation, not just of this disaster but of the state of Hungary's other toxic sludge ponds," said Gábor Figeczky, the Acting Director of WWF-Hungary.

"This points to neglect and a failure of regulation as a prime contributing factor to this disaster."

The photograph was taken by a team from the company Interspect, who were engaged in taking photographs of sludge pools, open-cast mining, and other potentially dangerous, unhealthy industrial sites.

Company representatives told WWF that the state of the Kolontár reservoir was particularly worrying to them because of its close location to family houses.

Fast investigation of other sludge ponds needed

"It is clearly visible on the photos made in June 2010 that the sludge is leaking and part of the wall of this 10th pool was weakened," Figeczky said. "Ultimately, the wall broke in another place, but what you have here is a very clear signal that it was failing and needed inspection and attention over its full length.

"Red sludge is visible in the havaria channels surrounding the factory, which clearly refers to leakage. The red color is generally from iron oxides not soluble in water – so it doesn't fully indicate the presence and extent of leachate containing other toxic substances in movement in the ditch."

"Since the sludge pools are located very close to houses, and natural values, the state of these pools should have been expected regularly with particularly strict measures. WWF is waiting for an explanation of this failure."

WWF-Hungary urged a fast investigation of remaining reservoirs in the area and others around Hungary, along with an urgent aerial mapping of Hungary's Danube banks..

"Now is the time to assess any hazardous areas in the country that could be a possible threats to human life and the environment" said Figeczky. "These photos show that there are technologies available even in Hungary to detect potential hazards within a couple of weeks.

"We are particularly concerned about the much larger reservoirs at Almásfüzitő, built over earthquake prone swamp land right on the river bank just 80 km upstream from Budapest, where all sorts of other materials seem to have been tipped into the alumina processing waste ponds."

www.panda.org/media for latest news and media resources

European food panel fails to protect EU citizen's health from plastic component, BPA

2010-10-01

Brussels, 30 September 2010 – The Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL), WWF, CHEM Trust and Breast Cancer UK are dismayed at today's conclusion from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) that no stronger protection for public health is needed from the controversial synthetic chemical bisphenol A (BPA). (1)

In June 2010, during the EFSA review process, HEAL and other environment and health groups backed a letter sent to the European food authority by 21 leading scientists (2). It states that: "We believe any objective and comprehensive review of the scientific literature will lead to the conclusion that action is necessary to reduce the levels of BPA exposure, particularly in groups at highest risk, namely young infants and pregnant mothers."

Lisette van Vliet – Toxics Policy Advisor, Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL) says "We are shocked by today's conclusion. With growing evidence that BPA may play a role in major chronic diseases, such as breast cancer and diabetes, reducing levels of human exposure is a necessary and important step. The exposure of the developing foetus in the womb warrants particular attention because BPA can cross the placenta."

Elizabeth Salter Green – Director of CHEM Trust noted "With so many studies showing current levels of exposure to BPA may be harming our children, the time for action is long overdue"

Some leading environmental and health groups have been calling for bans on BPA for several years. More recently, cancer groups in the UK and France, such as Breast Cancer UK (3) and the French League Against Cancer, have launched campaigns.

Clare Dimmer - Chair of Breast Cancer UK stated "we are deeply disappointed at this outcome which assists only those who sell the product and, as breast cancer is already the foremost cancer in Europe, this blatant lack of concern for public health will not help to reduce the incidence of this life-threatening disease."

Bisphenol A is a hormone disruptor that can disrupt estrogen and other hormones. It is used for many consumer products, including polycarbonate babies' feeding bottles, and widely found in people's bodies and the environment.

In the long-awaited EFSA opinion published today, an expert panel stated that they see no need to reduce the tolerable daily intake (TDI). (4) EFSA acknowledges that they cannot rule out BPA related effects of possible relevance such as changes in the brain as these findings cannot be assessed for human health due to shortcomings in the studies. NGOs therefore believe that the precautionary principle should be invoked - given the potential serious and irreversible effects.

Some EU member states, such as Denmark and France, have taken action to reduce people's exposure to BPA. Austria and Sweden have announced they will also take national measures if the EU does not quickly forbid BPA in baby bottles. (5) In June, the German authorities advised manufacturers, importers and users of bisphenol A (BPA) to use alternative substances that pose less risk to human health and the environment in all areas of use that significantly contribute to exposure. (6)

HEAL and other NGOs are calling for stronger regulatory protection of public health at the EU level, but in the absence of this, support national bans. They are also urging regulation of endocrine disrupting chemicals, such as BPA. (7) They continue to recommend that industry makes products "BPA-free".

"Industry must do better than use a hormone disruptor dating from the 1930's which was scrapped due to its inefficiency as a drug and which has now ended up in numerous consumer items instead. BPA-free alternatives are already available on the market. Companies inside and outside the EU are well advised to use them," commented Ninja Reineke from WWF European Policy Office.

Contacts:
Ninja Reineke – Senior policy officer, Chemicals, WWF European Policy Office:
+32 (0)2 740 0926, mobile: 32(0) 497 506805, nreineke@wwfepo.org

Lisette van Vliet– Toxics Policy Advisor, Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL):
+32 (0)2 234 3643, mobile: 32 (0)484 614 528, lisette@env-health.org

Elizabeth Salter Green – Director, CHEM Trust:
+ 44 (0)1823 619002, mobile: +44 (0) 7976 273157, elizabeth.saltergreen@chemtrust.org.uk

Clare Dimmer
+ 44 (0)23 92261208 Clare.dimmer@breastcanceruk.org.uk

Notes to the editor:
1. EFSA updates advice on bisphenol A. 30 September 2010

In October 2009, EFSA was asked by the European Commission to assess the relevance of a new study on possible neuro-developmental effects of BPA and, if necessary, to update the "Tolerable Daily Intake" set in 2007. In March 2010, the Commission asked EFSA to take into account in its risk assessment any other new scientific evidence that may be available and to liaise closely with EU Member States risk assessment bodies on this issue. EFSA website on BPA: http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/ceftopics/topic/bisphenol.htm

2. In June 2010, a joint letter to EFSA from scientists and organisations across the globe expressed concerns and concluded that. based on the available scientific studies, reducing levels of human exposure to BPA was necessary.

3. Breast Cancer UK campaign video and report "No more BPA"

4. The Tolerable Daily Intake is a specific amount in food or drinking water that, according to the current processes of Risk Assessment, can be ingested orally over a lifetime without an 'appreciable' health risk.

5. Regulatory Actions on BPA
- Denmark has introduced a national ban on BPA in materials in contact with food for children aged 0-3 years (infant feeding bottles, feeding cups, packaging for baby food).
- France has introduced a law that forbids BPA in baby bottles, before which a number of French cities had banned BPA-laden baby bottles in city nurseries and day care centres.
- Sweden and Austria have announced it will also take national measures if the EU does not quickly forbid BPA in baby bottles.
- Canada has announced it will add BPA to its list of toxic substances, and banned polycarbonate baby bottles that contain bisphenol A on 11th March 2010.
- USA EPA has announced it will consider identifying BPA on the 'Concern List' as a substance that may present an unreasonable risk . Numerous cities and states have moved or are considering to ban sales of BPA in baby bottles and 'sippy cups' (Chicago, San Francisco, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Maryland). California has announced that it will add BPA to the state's list of chemicals known to cause cancer or birth defects.

6. The German Federal Environmental Agency report and press statement on BPA

7. REACH is the EU chemicals law and stands for Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals. A restriction under REACH can ban on one or more commercial uses or product applications for the EU market, and includes both imports and products domestic to the EU. BPA has been on the NGOs REACH priority list (SIN list, Substitute It Now) since its first launch in 2008. See www.sinlist.org. More information on bisphenol A can be found on the SIN Database.

Commission and Member States Improve Criteria for Hazardous Chemicals

2010-09-23

Brussels, Belgium – Earlier this week the European Commission and Member States decided to improve the approach for identifying chemicals with hazardous properties which are long lasting (persistent) or build up in wildlife and humans (bioaccumulative).

Better criteria for chemicals with (very) persistent, (very) bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT/vPvB) properties, were adopted under the EU's chemical legislation REACH. The previous criteria was considered inadequate by many Member States, the EU Parliament and NGOs because many relevant hazardous chemicals would have been overlooked.

Many chemicals with these problematic properties are still used in production processes and consumer goods and scientists have not only found them contaminating wildlife such as seals, whales, dolphins, polar bears and birds but also humans, including children. They are being passed on from mother to child, down the generations, and even if releases are stopped now, because of their persistence, exposure will continue for many years to come.

The draft Commission regulation still has to be approved by the European Parliament and is expected to enter into force early 2011. Companies will then have to apply the revised PBT criteria in their chemical safety assessments under REACH and have to update their chemical assessments within two years. EU governments and the EU Commission can nominate PBT chemicals for the REACH 'candidate list' in the authorisation procedure and thereby ensure their replacement or tough restrictions over their usage.

'Although the decision has been long overdue, we are pleased to see it provides a better basis for controls and the replacement of these chemicals which represent an invisible burden and a risk to wildlife and people,' said Ninja Reineke, Senior Policy Officer at WWF's European Policy Office.

'Now Member States and the Commission need to step up their efforts in implementing controls over these unwanted substances. Companies are well advised to replace them now with safer alternatives.'

For further information:
Ninja Reineke, Senior Policy Officer, Chemicals, WWF European Policy Office
Tel: +32 2 740 09 26
E-mail: nreineke@wwfepo.org

Stefania Campogianni, Press Officer, WWF European Policy Office
Tel: +32 2 743 88 15
E-mail: scampogianni@wwfepo.org

Chemical cocktails: harmful mixtures upset our hormones

2010-07-29

Scientists around the world believe that increasing rates of cancer, diabetes and infertility could be reduced by removing certain hormone disrupting chemicals from products that we use in our daily lives. But to date although EU politicians have expressed concern, political action has been half-hearted.

This leaflet shows that there are opportunities to better implement chemicals legislation to protect human and wildlife health - they just need to be grasped. It also contains tips how to reduce individual exposures.

20 years on, Arctic unprepared for another Exxon Valdez

2009-03-19

Gland, Switzerland – Two decades after the Exxon Valdez oil tanker struck Bligh Reef and spilt millions of litres of oil into the delicate Arctic environment, governments and industry in the region remain unprepared to deal with another such disaster, according to a new analysis by WWF.

With restrictions on oil and gas development lifted and increased activity making accidents more likely, the global environment group distributed rocks from Alaska's Prince William Sound, still crusted with oil from the accident on 24 March 1989.

The rocks, together with a call for oil and gas no-go areas over sensitive Arctic environments and some of the world's richest fishing grounds, were sent to ministers, officials and media in the Arctic countries still wrangling over arrangements to govern a renewed resource rush to the area.

"While there has been little improvement in technologies to respond to oil spill disasters in the last 20 years, the Arctic itself has changed considerably and is much more vulnerable today," said Neil Hamilton, leader of WWF's Arctic Programme.

"Sea ice is disappearing and open water seasons are lasting longer, creating a frenzy to stake claims on the Arctic's rich resources – especially oil and gas development. Oil spills can be devastating to Arctic marine environments and given the current lack of oil spill response capabilities, we need a 'timeout' until protective measures exist for this fragile, special place."

The report, Lessons Not Learned, recommends a moratorium on new offshore oil development in the Arctic until technologies improve to a point where an adequate oil-spill clean-up operation could be performed.

WWF also recommends that the most vulnerable and important areas of the Arctic be deemed permanently off-limits to oil development.

Such "no-go zones" should be based on the sensitivity and productivity of special priority areas where oil spill response would be next to impossible to clean up or where any spill would cause irreparable long-term damage.

These areas include Bristol Bay in Alaska, America's fish basket accounting for 40 per cent of the national catch; the Lofoten-Vesteralen area in Norway; and the West Kamchatka Shelf in Russia. In all of these places WWF, with the largest global Arctic conservation programme, has teamed up with local people who also oppose the threat oil development poses to rich fishing grounds.

Lessons Not Learned recommends that all Arctic countries conduct comprehensive risk assessments that include industrial activities, shipping, petroleum development and anticipated impacts of climate change.

"Arctic countries should also adopt a comprehensive agreement for any accident and spill response that is Arctic-wide, has needed facilities in place and provides for joint action between countries," Hamilton said.

"The Exxon Valdez spill has been the best-studied oil spill in history and scientists have found that even 20 years later, the damage from the spill continues," said Margaret Williams, managing director of WWF's Alaska program.

"Fishermen's livelihoods were destroyed, many wildlife and fish populations still haven't recovered and the Alaskan economy lost billions of dollars. We can't let that happen in Bristol Bay or anywhere else in the Arctic."

Better criteria needed to define PBT chemicals

2008-12-05

The EU is currently reviewing the criteria for persistent, bioaccumulalive and toxic (PBT) chemicals. To this aim, the European Commission has proposed changes to the Annex XIII of REACH ahead of a meeting in Brussels on Monday, 15th of December.

WWF supported by other NGOs has written to the Commissioner Dimas and Verheugen to criticise the Commission's proposal which fails to improve the criteria in a way that wildlife and people are better protected.

Early next year the Commission is expected to present its changes for a vote by Member States.

First REACH hazardous chemicals list is a drop in the ocean

2008-10-29

The groups welcome the publication of the REACH 'candidate list' and recognise it as a vital tool in speeding up the substitution of hazardous chemicals with safer alternatives. But the organisations say that member states and the European Commission have failed to make the list more comprehensive.

European consumers will be able to walk into a shop, pick up any product off the shelf, from a toothbrush to a laptop, and be informed within 45 days on whether it contains any of the chemicals on the candidate list. But hundreds more substances will continue to be used despite their well-documented harmful qualities.

Restrictions on phthalates (DINP, DiDP and DNOP) similar to those now on the candidate list already exist for toys, but so far no member state has suggested these substances be included in the REACH list. Bisphenol-A, a well-known endocrine disrupter, has also been left out of the list.

Only six EU member states (Austria, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Sweden, the UK) and Norway have so far put forward chemicals for the candidate list. The coalition of public interest groups call on member states and the Commission to expand the list to make it more representative of the hundreds of hazardous chemicals that are currently known.

Among the 15 chemicals that are on the list, brominated flame retardant HBCDD is a common environmental contaminant used in plastics, textiles, electronic goods and three plastic softeners (the phthalates DEHP, DBP and BBP). These plastic softeners are suspected to seriously affect human fertility and are present in glues, inks, cosmetics and toiletries, and in many products made from polyvinyl chloride (PVC).

The groups urge ECHA to adopt strict regulatory controls on these chemicals immediately. Many progressive companies have already started to phase them out, including major players in the electronics sector that have eliminated the uses of brominated flame retardants and PVC.

Notes to the editor:
(1) The REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals) regulation became operational in June 2008.
(2) For a sample letter to request information about a product, see p.9 of: http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/eu-unit/press-centre/reports/your-voice-on-reach.pdf.
(3) The 267 hazardous chemicals selected by ChemSec for the REACH SIN (Substitute-it-now) List 1.0 include substances of very high concern and provide a useful starting point to make the REACH Candidate List more comprehensive. See: www.sinlist.org.

Contacts:
Dr Ninja Reineke – Chemicals senior policy officer for WWF European Policy Office: +32 (0)2 740 0926, nreineke@wwfepo.org.

Chinese central bank and WWF outline greener banking roadmap

2008-09-24

Chinese commercial banks should establish environmental reporting, assessment, management, and risk evaluation systems to promote sustainable development in China, according to a new report today from WWF and the People's Bank of China (PBoC), the country's financial and monetary regulatory agency.

Towards Sustainable Development: Reform and (the) Future of China's Banking Industry from WWF and the central bank's Financial Research Institute is the first high-level report on sustainable development in China's banking sector.

The report stresses the growing importance of commercial banks in China's effort to realize its national sustainable development strategy and provides specific recommendations on environmental policy changes.

It draws lessons from international standards in the finance industry such as Equator Principles (EPs), as well as the experience of international banks including Citi, Deutsch Bank and HSBC. Although there are a few national pioneers and many Chinese commercial banks have established their own environmental policies, the report concludes that most have failed to take concrete action.

While the banking industry is beginning to pay attention to sustainable development, the report calls on governments, non-government organizations, and the finance sector to drive commercial banks' commitment into action.

Over the past few years, PBoC has been driving sustainable banking through its monetary, interest rate and credit policies.

In 2007, the central bank consolidated an environmental database of Chinese companies, requiring commercial banks to review and weigh each applicant's environmental history before granting their credit applications.

In the same year, PBoC along with the Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) and the China Banking and Regulatory Commission (CBRC) established a green credit system. This regulated the availability of credit to companies in violation of environmental laws.

"People's Bank of China is moving along the track set by international experience, while taking into account China's own development strategies," said WWF-China's Country Representative Dermot O'Gorman.

"WWF will continue to learn from, and provide our expertise to, China's central bank to promote sustainable development and green banking policies in China."

Marine poison banned

2008-09-17

A milestone in the protection of the oceans was reached today as a global ban on tributyltin (TBT) - one of the most toxic chemicals deliberately released into the sea - entered into force.

The International Convention on the Control of Harmful Antifouling Systems for Ships obliges its signatories to ensure that no vessels using hull paint containing TBT and other so-called organotin chemicals go under their flag or call at their ports.

"This is a tremendous victory for the marine environment, but one that is long overdue. It has been over forty years since TBT's negative effects were first identified and seven years since the legislation to ban organotins was agreed, yet we have only now achieved a global ban," says Dr. Simon Walmsley, Director of WWF-UK's Marine Programme.

Take-up of the agreement has been slow, with many of the large shipping states having yet to sign and implement the agreement into their national legislation. Whereas WWF is applauding the commitment of the 34 states that have ratified the agreement so far, the conservation organization urges all 168 member states of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to ratify as soon as possible.

TBT is often used in marine antifouling paint, as it swiftly kills organisms such as barnacles, algae and mussels which naturally attach themselves to hard surfaces, including ship hulls, thus reducing the drag effect and lowering fuel consumption.

The problem is that TBT leaks out from the paint and into the surrounding water, affecting marine life and seeping into the food chain where it accumulates and eventually reaches humans through fish consumption.

Heard of sea snails changing sex, or oysters seeing their shell being deformed? These are but two known adverse TBT effects on marine species. The decline of commercially harvested oysters along the Atlantic coast of

France

and the

has been attributed to TBT contamination. TBT has also been found far from shipping lanes in albatrosses, whales and fish.

But we have probably only begun to see the long term effects of TBT and other organotins on marine ecosystems, as the poison is stored in sediments for many years and can re-enter the food chain when the sea bottom is stirred up by passing vessels in ports and shallow areas, or even by storms and dredging activities.

"TBT belongs not in the sea but in the poison cupboard, and this agreement will help put it firmly back there," says Stephan Lutter, International Policy Officer with WWF Germany.

WWF has been lobbying for the ban of TBT for more than a decade. At the end of the 1990's, WWF, together with some leading shipping companies and paint manufacturers, initiated the 2003 Group, whose members voluntarily banned the use of TBT on their vessels and developed toxics-free alternatives.

Scandinavian Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics (WWL) banned the use of TBT in hull paint on all vessels in 2000.

"There are better alternatives which balance the need for antifouling with environmental stewardship. It is our responsibility to use them," says Melanie Moore, WWL's Global Head of Environment.

WWF continues to advocate for all vessels to apply biocide-free non-toxic alternatives.

Fore more information: Stephan Lutter, stephan.lutter@wwf.de and Jessica Battle jbattle@wwfint.org

First improvements on nanoparticles under REACH chemicals law

2008-06-06

Brussels, Belgium – With a decision made yesterday, carbon and graphite will not be exempted anymore from registration under REACH, the European chemicals regulation. Companies will now have to provide health and safety information on these chemicals.

WWF welcomes the vote made by the representatives of EU governments on a European Commission proposal in the REACH committee as this closes a loophole in the European chemicals law. Laboratory studies have in fact linked the extremely small forms of these materials (nanoforms), which are used in the manufacture of a variety of consumer products, e.g. computers or tennis rackets, to serious health risks such as cancer.

According to the global conservation organisation, however, yesterday's vote is just a first step: "REACH still only applies to a production volume of 1 tonne per year per company – an amount not always reached for these small particles," say Ninja Reineke, Senior Policy Officer on Chemicals at WWF.

"We generally need stricter controls for nanomaterials."

EU Authorities supported the Commission's proposal not to oblige industries to provide information on other dangerous chemicals still exempted, such as minerals with asbestos-like properties. WWF criticises this as a missed opportunity, but still welcomes that further industry proposals to exempt more substances with toxic properties have been refused.

The vote comes in the same week of the official opening of the European Chemicals Agency in Helsinki. Within the next three months, if neither Council nor the European Parliament oppose the proposal, these first changes to the REACH law will be adopted.

WWF will continue to be involved in the further developments and try to ensure that REACH is further improved and implemented in a way that protects human health and the environment.

Further Information:
Ninja Reineke, WWF
Tel: +32 2 740 09 26
E-mail: nreineke@wwfepo.org

New European Chemicals Agency must act on hazardous chemicals

2008-05-27

WHEN: The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) will open on 3rd of June 2008 in Helsinki.

WHAT: The task of the European Chemicals Agency is to assure the implementation of REACH, the EU chemicals regulation that entered into force on 1st June 2007 after 8 years of fierce debate.

WHAT IS AT STAKE: The opening of ECHA marks the beginning of the obligation for companies to provide health and safety information on industrial chemicals. However REACH registration only applies to around 30,000 of the more than 100,000 known chemicals - i.e. only those substances produced in amounts of more than one tonne per year. In the following months ECHA will prepare a 'candidate list' for substances of very high concern that will be subject to legal actions such as bans. This list will consist of substances with dangerous properties including those that are proven to cause cancer, impair fertility or bioaccumulate. Industry will be obliged to apply for permission for their use and consumers will have the right to obtain more information on the eventual presence of these substances in the products they buy. Proposals for the first version of the 'candidate' list are expected to be published in early autumn 2008.

WHAT PUBLIC INTEREST ORGANISATIONS ASK: A coalition of European environmental, health, women's and consumer groups is calling for the new European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to give absolute priority to the protection of public health and the environment. While in principle hundreds of chemicals meet the classifications for "substances of very high concern", only a few dozen may be included in the list in the immediate future. The European Commission and ECHA appear to have passed all responsibility for proposing dangerous substances onto EU Member States.

The public interest organisations demand ECHA

• to invest more resources in the creation of a comprehensive list that includes – from the outset - all known hazardous substances. The presence of worrisome chemicals in humans and the environment requires protective measures without delay. An extensive list of candidate substances scheduled for tightened rules in the future would also serve industry as a warning signal to look for and adopt safer alternatives.

• to ensure a fair balance of public or private interests representation in its technical committees as well as full transparency and access to documents on its procedures and decisions. The coalition will closely monitor the work of ECHA demanding transparency and access to information, in the belief that public participation is essential to ensure that REACH becomes an effective tool to protect the environment and public health for generations to come.

For further information:

Ninja Reineke, WWF, tel: +32 2 740 0926, www.panda.org/eu

Gwynne Lyons, CHEM Trust, tel: +44 1603 507363, www.chemtrust.org.uk

Christian Schaible, European Environmental Bureau, tel: +32 2 289 1094, www.eeb.org

Lisette van Vliet, Toxic Policy Advisor, Health & Environment Alliance, tel: +32 2 234 3645,
www.chemicalshealthmonitor.org

Rosita Zilli, Euro Coop, tel: +32 2 285 00 72, www.eurocoop.coop

David Azoulay, Friends of the Earth Europe, tel: +32 2 542 6108, www.foeeurope.org

Nadia Haiama, Greenpeace, tel: +32 2 274 1913, www.greenpeace.org/eu-unit

Nicole van Gemert, Women in Europe for a Common Future, tel: +31-30-2310300, www.wecf.eu

Finally justice on hazardous chemical in electronics

2008-04-01

Brussels, Belgium - WWF welcomes today's ruling of the European Court of Justice against the European Commission's decision to exempt the flame retardant deca-BDE from the ban in electronic products. WWF is relieved that this substance will be finally banned from TVs and computers from July 2008 (as it should have been since 2006).

In 2005 the European Commission had granted an exemption for deca-BDE from a list of chemicals banned in the Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHs) Directive. In 2006 the European Parliament and Denmark, joined by other European countries, took the Commission to Court claiming that the only ground for granting exemptions would be the lack of safer alternatives. This is not the case for deca-BDE, as it can be replaced by other substances or technologies. Today the Court of Justice has overruled the Commission's decision.

"We believe that the persistence of this flame retardant, its presence in wildlife and humans with possible effects on the developing brain demonstrate the urgent need for its ban and, more generally, for better controls on hazardous chemicals," says Ninja Reineke, Senior Officer on Chemicals at WWF.

According to WWF, the remaining uses of deca-BDE should be further addressed in the context of the new EU chemicals regulation - REACH - in view of its total replacement to protect humans and wildlife.

For further information:
Ninja Reineke, Senior Officer on Chemicals at WWF
Tel: +32 2 740 0926
E-mail: nreineke@wwfepo.org

Claudia Delpero, Communications Manager at WWF European Policy Office
Tel: +32 2 740 0925
E-mail: cdelpero@wwfepo.org

My Voice: How You Can Demand Better Protection of Human Health and the Environment from Hazardous Chemicals

2007-05-29

Are you concerned about hazardous chemicals in the environment, and how they may be affecting your health?

Did you know that a new EU law on how chemicals are regulated has come into force?

Known as REACH, this law took nearly nine years to develop, and provoked 'the fiercest lobbying battle in EU history' mainly between the chemical industry and groups representing the interests of health and the environment. During the development of REACH, many people, maybe even you, contacted their governments and representatives in the EU asking for better protection of human health and the environment from the adverse impacts of hazardous chemicals.

Download the brochure and find out how you can demand better protection of human health and the environment from hazardous chemicals (PDF format)

Joint NGOs open letter on REACH

2007-05-25

One week before the European Union's new chemicals legislation – REACH - enters into force (1 June 2007), European environmental, women's, health and consumer groups have warned in an open letter to the European Commission that REACH cannot be celebrated until it is strengthened to provide proper health and environmental protection.

Too early to celebrate REACH

2007-05-25

One week before the European Union's new chemicals legislation – REACH - enters into force (1 June 2007) [1], European environmental, women's, health and consumer groups have warned in an open letter to the European Commission that REACH cannot be celebrated until it is strengthened to provide proper health and environmental protection.

The official start date of REACH symbolically marks the beginning of a new approach to chemicals regulation in Europe. Over the coming years, persistent and bioaccumulative chemicals will be substituted if safer alternatives exist, and companies will have to provide health and safety information for large volume chemicals that they produce or import into Europe.

But thousands of chemicals will escape any requirement to provide sufficient health and safety information. And many chemicals that can cause cancer, birth defects and reproductive illnesses will still be allowed in manufacturing and consumer goods.

Embedded in the REACH legislation are numerous reviews, beginning in 2007 and continuing for the next 12 years. These reviews will give the European Commission and EU member states the opportunity to tighten the legislation in line with last year's demands by civil society and some of the main political parties. However, the reviews could also be used by the chemical industry to further weaken current safety requirements.

In their letter, the environmental, women's, health and consumer groups ask the European Commission to ensure that the newly established European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) operates fully independently of the chemical industry and to make sure that REACH is fully and correctly implemented.

Note:
[1] Entry into force: Titles I, IV, IX, X, XIII, XIV & XV, together with Articles 32, 67 and 115 apply from this date. Directive 91/155/EEC is repealed and article 14 of Directive 1999/45/EEC is deleted.

Between now and June 2008, further technical requirements will be produced and the details of the European Chemicals Agency will be finalised. In June 2008, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) will be fully operational. The chemical industry will then begin to provide safety information for up to 30,000 chemicals on the market. In 2009, ECHA is expected to publish a "candidate list" for the most hazardous chemicals that will be subject to the authorisation procedure.

For further information:
Ninja Reineke, Toxics Programme
WWF European Policy Office
Tel: +32 2 740 09 26
E-mail: nreineke@wwfepo.org

DetoX - Campaigning for safer chemicals

2007-01-15

After years of chemicals mismanagement resulting in the widespread contamination of wildlife, humans and the environment, WWF saw REACH as a unique opportunity to close the knowledge gap on chemicals and secure a safer management system for chemicals in Europe. Influencing the content of the much debated REACH legislation and facing one of the biggest and most powerful industries in Europe over 3 years was certainly a challenge. This 12-page brochure gives an overview of the DetoX campaign carried out by WWF during the entire REACH legislative process.

EU passes new chemical law

2006-12-13

Brussels, Belgium – After years of debate, European lawmakers adopted new chemical legislation that will oblige producers and importers of chemicals to prove that the substances they put on the EU market are safe for consumers.

According to WWF, the legislation, known as REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals), sets Europe on a modest step towards a new approach to chemicals regulation. Companies will now have to provide safety data for chemicals produced above 10 tonnes per year, and there is a mechanism for the substitution of persistent and bio-accumulative chemicals if safer alternatives exist. It also allows the public to request information about the presence of a limited number of hazardous chemicals in products.

"Our lobbying over the last five years, and the hundreds of blood tests we have undertaken, has really paid-off," said Paul King, Director of Campaigns for WWF-UK.

"The EU is now insisting that chemicals that build-up in living organisms and those that linger in the environment for a long time will have to be replaced whenever safer alternatives are available."

However, major loopholes in REACH will still allow many chemicals that can cause serious health problems, including cancer, birth defects and reproductive illnesses, to continue being used in manufacturing and consumer goods, according to WWF and other groups.

Further concessions exempt companies which import and manufacture chemicals in volumes below 10 tonnes a year — 60 per cent of chemicals covered by REACH — from the requirement to provide any meaningful safety data.

In addition, under REACH, many chemicals of "high concern" will be allowed onto the market if producers claim that they can "adequately" control them. But the claim that such chemicals can be adequately controlled has been refuted by numerous scientific studies, including tests undertaken by WWF on the blood of more than 350 people, which showed numerous toxic chemicals to be present in every sample.

"The loopholes and provisions for self-regulation contained in these measures leave REACH very vulnerable to further manipulation by the chemical industry," said Sandra Jen, WWF's DetoX Campaign Director.

There is no guarantee, for example, that information from third parties about safer alternatives to hazardous chemicals will be considered in every case. The new Helsinki-based EU Chemicals Agency will have to be closely monitored to ensure that REACH can deliver.

"Without the necessary support, hazardous chemicals will continue to contaminate wildlife, our homes and our bodies, and REACH will prove a failure," Jen added.

REACH is expected to enter into force in mid-2007.

For further information:
Noemi Cano, Communications Manager
WWF DetoX Campaign
Tel: +32 479 610451

REACH: Alive but not kicking

2006-12-13

Strasbourg, France – A plenary vote by Members of the European Parliament has left the new EU chemicals legislation REACH alive but in a critical condition, according to health, environment, consumer and women's advocacy groups.

'Alive': The legislation, designed to replace rules up to 40 years old, sets Europe on a modest step towards a new approach to chemicals regulation: companies will have to provide safety data for large volume chemicals that they produce or import into Europe, and there is a mechanism for the substitution of persistent and bioaccumulative chemicals if safer alternatives exist.

It also allows the public to request information about the presence of a limited number of hazardous chemicals in products. In the past, companies could sell whichever chemical they liked without providing health and safety information; and hazardous chemicals were only restricted in response to scandal on a case-by-case basis.

'Not kicking': Major loopholes in REACH will still allow many chemicals that can cause serious health problems, including cancer, birth defects and reproductive illnesses, to continue being used in manufacturing and consumer goods. Further concessions exempt companies which import and manufacture chemicals in volumes below 10 tonnes a year - 60% of chemicals covered by REACH - from the requirement to provide any meaningful safety data.

REACH and the new European Chemicals Agency will therefore require intensive care from policymakers over the coming years to ensure that they protect the public from highly hazardous chemicals.

Under REACH, many 'high-concern' chemicals will be allowed onto the market if producers claim that they can 'adequately control' them. The approach of adequate control – and safe thresholds - is premised on a risky gamble, given the unknown effects of chemicals in combination, on vulnerable hormone functions, and on the development of children from the earliest stages of life. Medical associations, consumer groups and innovative businesses across Europe had called for a complete substitution requirement in REACH as the minimum necessary measure against hazardous chemicals.

The loopholes and provisions for self-regulation contained in these measures leave REACH very vulnerable to further manipulation by the chemical industry. There is no guarantee, for example, that information from third parties about safer alternatives to hazardous chemicals will be considered in every case. The new EU Chemicals Agency in Helsinki will have to be closely monitored to ensure that REACH can deliver. Without the necessary support, hazardous chemicals will continue to contaminate wildlife, our homes and our bodies, and REACH will prove a failure.

Contact:
Noemi Cano, WWF DetoX Campaign Communications Manager,
Tel: +32 479 610451