WWF - Toxics news

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.”

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

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

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

WWF REACH BRIEFING

2006-12-08

The European Parliament Second Reading vote on the proposed EU chemical legislation REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals), will take place on 13 December in Strasbourg. The last and most controversial issues at stake were sealed in the deal agreed by Parliament, Council and Commission on 30 November.

WWF presents here its overall assessment of what is likely to be the final REACH legislation.

Phasing out of hazardous chemicals (Authorisation)

Crucially, two groups of chemicals will be replaced whenever safer alternatives are available: those that are persistent, bio-accumulative and toxic (PBT) and those that very persistent and very bio-accumulative (vPvB). Examples for these categories are chemicals with DDT or PCB like properties, but also some brominated flame retardants (used in textiles and electronic goods) and perfluorochemicals such as PFOS used in the manufacture of kitchenware or textile finishings.

However, chemicals that are known to cause cancer or birth defects, that affect DNA or disturb the hormone system or cause other serious illnesses (so-called CMRs and hormone disrupting chemicals) will continue to be put on the market even if safer alternatives are available. Authorisation will be granted when the producers can claim that exposure to these hazardous chemicals can be ‘adequately controlled’ (i.e. kept below a certain threshold) so as to pose no danger to human health and the environment. New methodologies for setting such thresholds will be developed for continued use of such chemicals instead of replacing them.

An example of a CMR chemical that would fall under “adequate control” is the phthalate DEHP (used as plasticizer in many consumer articles), which is toxic to reproduction. An example of a hormone disrupting chemical is Bisphenol A, which was found in the blood of many participants – including Ministers and Members of the European Parliament - in WWF’s bloodtesting survey.

The claim that chemicals of very high concern can be adequately controlled has been refuted by numerous scientific studies showing that hazardous industrial chemicals used in consumer products are widespread in house dust, rainwater, wildlife, in our own blood and that of unborn infants. With the substitution principle only applying to a small minority of chemicals, many substances of very high concern will stay on the market even when safer alternatives are available. This loophole represents little change from the current flawed system, which has failed to control the most dangerous chemicals and hinders safe, innovative products from entering the market.

Substitution plans
Some politicians may claim that it is a key step forward that applicants are required to always consider if safer suitable alternatives are available and then provide a substitution plan. Unfortunately a serious flaw is built into the system: substitution plans will only be submitted when an applicant company itself identifies a safer alternative. Third party contributions will not be taken into account until the review. This is therefore an incentive for chemical companies to continue ignoring the existence of safer alternatives.

Providing sufficient safety information (Registration)

Further major weakening of the registration requirements have been avoided in this second round of negotiations in spite of strong pressure from industry.

It is important, however, to keep in mind that safety data required for registration of chemicals have been drastically reduced at first reading, in particular for chemicals produced in 1-10 tonnes per year. As a result thousands of chemicals could thus stay on the market, despite no health information being available.

Access to information for consumers

REACH was supposed to give EU citizens access to information about chemicals to which they are exposed. However, the final REACH text only allows the public to request information about the presence of a limited number of hazardous chemicals in products (those of very high concern).

Therefore, constant vigilance by European consumers will be crucial to push companies to give more guarantees on the safety of their products in spite of the poor regulatory requirements of REACH.

Conclusion

REACH means ‘work still in progress’ for a long time – not only for implementation but because the last trade off in the negotiations resulted in future reviews of many core elements of the legislation, including whether or not to substitute hormone disrupting chemicals, and whether to provide a chemical safety report for 1-10 tonnes per year CMR chemicals. Moving on from business a usual to securing safer products and safer chemicals is still a battle to be won.

Given all the loopholes and legal uncertainty built up in the final REACH text, effective improvements on the current situation will largely depend on the tight scrutiny of the European Chemical Agency, political will of Member States and market pressure for safer products. The very short term perspective taken in the REACH reform is a missed opportunity for the European Union to take a strong leadership in the global market for safer chemicals and products.

CONTACT INFORMATION:
WWF staff will be in Strasbourg monitoring the vote on REACH from Monday the 11th to Wednesday the 13th of December. For interviews or further information, please contact:

-Noemi Cano, DetoX Campaign communications manager. Tel: +32 (0)479 610451
-Ninja Reineke, WWF Senior Toxics Programme Officer. Tel: +32 (0)497 506805

REACH, a deal too far

2006-12-01

European environmental, women’s, health and consumer groups today denounced a deal struck behind closed doors between representatives of the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers on the ‘REACH’ chemicals legislation.

If adopted at the plenary vote, the deal will allow many chemicals of very high concern - including many that cause cancer, birth defects and other serious illnesses - to stay on the market and be used in consumer products even when safer alternatives are available. The groups call on Parliamentarians to strengthen REACH when they vote on the proposal in mid-December.

Last night, Parliament negotiators accepted a deal based on cosmetic changes to the Council’s flawed approach of ‘adequate control’. This approach, championed by the chemicals industry, is founded on the claim that our exposure to hazardous chemicals can be controlled so as to pose no danger to human health and the environment. This claim has been refuted by numerous studies showing that hazardous industrial chemicals used in consumer products are widespread in house dust, rainwater, wildlife, in our own blood and that of unborn infants.

The deal confirms the Council’s position of last December that substitution would apply to persistent and bioaccumulative chemicals. It also allows the public to request information about the presence of a limited number of hazardous chemicals in products.

The groups call on Members of the European Parliament to close the loopholes that will allow chemical companies to continue using very hazardous substances even where safer alternatives are available. The decision that substitution plans will only be submitted when the applicant company itself identifies a safer alternative is an incentive for chemical companies to continue ignoring safer alternatives.

REACH was originally conceived to close the knowledge gap on chemicals and establish an effective and coherent system for chemicals management. However, with thousands of chemicals already exempted from the requirement to provide any health and safety information, and with no systematic substitution for chemicals of very high concern, this overly compromised REACH will provide no real improvement to the current legislation.

Besides a missed opportunity for Europe to take the lead in safer chemicals, a REACH that fails to protect human health and the environment will only further decrease public trust in the chemical industry and in European regulators.

Contact:
Ninja Reineke, WWF Senior Toxics Programme Officer ,
Tel: +32 2 740 09 26

Top hormone disruption scientists worried REACH will fail to protect citizens

2006-11-20

In the final days before the new EU chemicals law (REACH) is finally agreed, and in the light of its continuous weakening, top scientists have raised the alarm bells and warned that, unless strengthened, REACH will fail to protect citizens and wildlife from the most hazardous chemicals.

Having analysed the wording of the current REACH text, Europe’s leading 38 hormone disruption scientists have signed a letter calling for an effective regulatory framework for endocrine disruptor chemicals under REACH. The researchers had been recently invited to a conference in Helsinki under the auspices of the Finnish EU Presidency to discuss the threat to wildlife and people from hormone disrupting pollutants.

The scientists, coming from prestigious universities and research groups from all over Europe, expressed specific concern at the inappropriate phrasing of the proposed regulation with respect to combination and mixture effects of substances interfering with the hormone system . As they say in the letter, “given endocrine disrupting substances can act in an additive manner, precautionary action needs to be taken, even though, in isolation, such a substance may be judged unlikely to cause serious effects at current exposure levels”.

The current Council text requires a too high burden of proof before hormone disrupting chemicals can even enter the authorisation process, which is the control regime for chemicals of very high concern under REACH. The proposed legal base is such that in practice, authorities would have to wait until the damage is done before they can take any action.

In opposition to this, scientists insist that “where scientific evidence shows a substance to have endocrine disrupting properties, there should not be a need to show that serious effects are probable, before this substance is subject to the REACH authorisation procedure.

As the current Council text on REACH stands, substances with endocrine disrupting properties –but also carcinogens and chemicals that are toxic to reproduction- may be allowed to stay on the market, even if safer alternatives are available. In opposition to this, the scientists conclude: ”We believe that where there are suitable safer alternatives to chemicals with endocrine disrupting properties then substitution should be a requirement.”

For more information, please contact:
Noemi Cano, WWF DetoX Campaign, Ncano@wwfepo.org or call +32 (0)2 743 88 06

EU citizens risk falling victim to Commission’s indecision on REACH

2006-11-14

Negotiations on the future EU chemicals law REACH risk heading for failure, after the Finnish Presidency last week presented ‘compromise solutions’ which practically ignore the Parliament’s central demands. Crucially, the Council text still holds that the chemicals industry should get a green light for the continuing use of very hazardous chemicals, including chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects and other serious illnesses, even when suitable safer alternatives are available. This flies in the face of the European Parliament’s demand that suitable safer alternatives should be given preference in the future.

Negotiations between the Parliament, Council and Commission will continue on Monday 20th November. Under normal conditions, it would be the institutional role of the European Commission to draft compromises that help Parliament and Council come to an agreement. However, in the case of REACH, President Barroso seems to have decided to keep the Commission on the sidelines.

So far, the Commission is the only institution that has not yet debated substitution at the highest level. There is growing discontent with President Barroso’s passive approach, and the resulting signs of inconsistency and partiality. Environment Commissioner Dimas repeatedly stated that a legal incentive for substitution would be a win-win solution for environment, health and innovative businesses. Industry Commissioner Verheugen also stated publicly his support for the substitution of hazardous chemicals whenever safer alternatives are available. However, behind the scenes, he is blocking progress.

The European Environmental Bureau (EEB), Friends of the Earth Europe, Greenpeace and WWF urge the Commission to take an active role in the negotiations to prevent a deadlock between Parliament and Council. “The Commission urgently needs to start playing its role as a facilitator, otherwise the Council will continue its sleepwalk towards Conciliation” said Sandra Jen of WWF.

“If the Council wants to reach a compromise with the European Parliament, it has started off on the wrong track. The Presidency offers just a few technical clarifications to what was agreed last year by governments. This can only be called a smokescreen. The Commission must not hide behind it or allow Commissioner Verheugen to block further progress”, said Stefan Scheuer from the European Environmental Bureau.

The Finnish Presidency proposal would still force authorities to allow uses of toxic chemicals even when suitable safer alternatives are available. This was rejected in November last year by the Parliament’s assembly, and again by the Parliament’s lead committee in October this year.
“If the Finnish Presidency proposal is adopted, chemicals causing cancer, reproductive disorders as well as birth defects and hormonal disturbances would stay on the market even though there are safer alternatives available. This means no improvement of the current, flawed system of chemicals management”, said Fouad Hamdan from Friends of the Earth Europe.

“Following recent statements by Industry Commissioner Verheugen calling for strict substitution of dangerous chemicals, we would expect the Commission to move from lip-service to action. If the Commission is serious about promoting win-win situations for health, environment and business, it should support substitution in REACH and help Parliament and Council come to an agreement”, said Jorgo Riss from Greenpeace.

For more information, please contact:
Noemi Cano, DetoX Campaign Communications Manager
Tel: 00 32 (0)2 743 88 06 or Ncano@wwfepo.org

Medics ask for action to protect children against industrial chemicals

2006-11-08

Leading medical journal 'The Lancet' calls for the EU's draft REACH regulation to protect unborn children against possible brain-development disorders caused by industrial chemicals. The author of the new paper, Dr Philippe Grandjean from the University of Southern Denmark, concludes that exposure to industrial chemicals such as pesticides and solvents could cause neurodevelopment disorders in one in every six children. The disorders would include autism, learning disabilities, sensory defects, mental retardation and abnormal muscle tone disorder (cerebral palsy).

As the Lancet paper explains, a few industrial chemicals such as lead and PCBs are recognised causes of neurodevelopmental disorders. Exposure to these chemicals during early fetal development can cause brain injury at doses much lower than those affecting adults. Exposure limits for chemicals should therefore be set at values that recognise the unique sensitivity of pregnant women and young children, and they should aim to protect brain development.

As the new EU chemicals law (REACH) is going through its final stage, Dr Grandjean warned in an interview with EU affairs web portal Euractive that the draft REACH regulation would fail to address the issue properly. He said: "REACH is incomplete because it does not take neurodevelopmental disorders into account". As he explains, "of the chemicals most commonly used in commerce, fewer than half have been subjected to even token laboratory testing. The few substances proven to be toxic to human neurodevelopment should therefore be viewed as the tip of a very large iceberg". He concludes that "the problem is serious enough to get started. This is a typical case where the precautionary principle should apply".

For more information on this story, please see http://www.thelancet.com

WWF & Boots work together calling for strong chemicals legislation

2006-10-27

Boots has joined WWF to call on the EU to ensure that its new chemicals legislation – ‘REACH’ - provides consumers with the best possible protection from potentially harmful chemicals and provides them with the chance to make informed decisions about what they are buying.

As responsible members of society, both organisations believe that a strong REACH is necessary to protect the environment and human health, now and for future generations. REACH must work in practice, for small as well as large businesses, ensuring that where information is available it is readily shared to the benefit of all. The joint WWF-Boots statement published today calls for the following five key steps to be implemented to protect people and the environment: -

1. PLAY IT SAFE: Replace hazardous chemicals with safer alternatives whenever they exist.
2. ENABLE PRECAUTIONARY ACTION ON ENDOCRINE DISRUPTING CHEMICALS in line with expert scientific advice.
3. INFORMATION improves trust: Provide sufficient safety information to identify dangerous chemicals and safer alternatives.
4. A LEGAL GUARANTEE: Ensure the chemical industry’s responsibility for the safety of their products (Duty of Care).
5. TRANSPARENCY for consumer products: Establish a right to know for citizens.

Stephen Johnson, Sustainable Development Manager for Boots said: “Boots is utterly committed to providing the best possible products for our customers. We believe that REACH offers a once in a generation opportunity to ensure that a responsible, scientific and consumer friendly approach is taken on the use of chemicals in every-day products. We are happy to join with WWF in asking the most of this opportunity offered by REACH.”

Paul King, Director of Campaigns for WWF-UK, said: “Boots joining with us to push for a strong REACH underlines the fact that this issue is a major concern for businesses as well as for environmental and health campaigners, we are delighted to be working with Boots on this.”

For further information, please contact:
Rob McNeil senior Press Officer WWF-UK, t: 01483 412 375, m: 07867 697519 e: rmcneil@wwf.org.uk

A toxic Europe? No thank you!

2006-10-25

After more than three years of discussions, EU governments and the European Parliament are entering the final negotiations to adopt a new European legislation on chemicals, REACH. Hazardous chemicals can currently be used in many industrial processes and in many consumer products, even when safer alternatives exist. This situation puts EU citizens and wildlife at unnecessary risk. WWF believes this situation should not be allowed to continue: “A toxic Europe? No thank you!”

If suitably strengthened, REACH will provide a mechanism to identify and phase out the most harmful chemicals and replace them with safer alternatives wherever available. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for the EU to secure safer chemicals for our children and wildlife.

A large majority of Members of the European Parliament has supported this approach in the two key votes on REACH. The Council of Ministers however, has repeatedly ignored this demand from the Parliament and thus from European citizens.

As the European Council position currently stands it will allow some carcinogens and chemicals that are toxic to reproduction and hormone-disrupting substances to stay on the market, even if safer alternatives exist. This gives no guarantee for an effective improvement compared to the current EU chemicals policy.

With this “toxic flag” as a warning, WWF is calling on European governments to fully endorse the substitution principle for all the most hazardous chemicals. Other key improvements adopted by the European Parliament, such as making chemical producers responsible for the safety of their products and ensuring more information is available about chemicals in everyday products, also need to be endorsed.

WWF believes this is key to ensure that REACH will effectively guarantee safer chemicals in Europe and stimulate innovation in the European economy. This is an opportunity no one can afford to miss.

WWF is sending this message to all environment and competitiveness ministers as well as to European Commissioners.

WWF helps Peruvian indigenous community stop wetland pollution

2006-10-22

Lima, Peru – An agreement between the government of Peru, the Achuar indigenous people and Argentinean oil company Pluspetrol will see contaminated wetlands in the Amazon cleaned up after decades of pollution.

According to the agreement, all production waters generated during petroleum extraction operations in the Abanico de Pastaza wetlands in northern Peru are to be re-injected into the subsoil by July 2008. In addition, a US$13 million integrated health fund is to be created by Pluspetrol for local indigenous groups that have been badly affected by 30 years of contamination. The oil company will also provide training to communities to monitor and guarantee a freshwater supply.

The agreement was pushed through by FECONACO (Organization of the Corrientes River Indigenous Community), with key support from indigenous rights NGO Racimos de Ungurahui, as well as WWF.

“This is a unique achievement,” said Fred Prins, WWF Peru’s Country Representative. “The agreement will allow the three parties to work together towards a solution to clean up the environment.”

According to WWF, Pluspetrol has been dragging its feet for several years to re-inject 1.1 million barrels of production water contaminated with heavy metals (mainly lead and cadmium) and hydrocarbons, and has continued to dump its waste into rivers without any treatment.

Recent studies have provided proof of severe water pollution among local communities. Blood testing has shown that most children living in the in the Corrientes river basin, where the wetlands are located, have lead and cadmium concentration at levels above the current guidelines of the World Health Organization.

WWF has also facilitated studies to demonstrate the technical and financial feasibility of a plan that allows safe underground disposal of the production water.

Since 1999, WWF has worked with local indigenous groups in Peru’s Abanico de Pastaza wetlands area to assist in building legal and environmental capacities. The global conservation organization has also helped start an oil contamination monitoring programme and supported several studies that helped Achuar reach the agreement with the Peruvian government and the oil company.

“We will continue working with local communities of the Corrientes river basin to ensure the fulfillment of the agreement, which should bring about a healthier environment for the people living here,” added Michael Valqui, WWF Peru’s Freshwater Programme Manager.

END NOTES:

• WWF led the process that helped create the 4 million-hectare Abanico del Rio Pastaza wetland complex, the second largest Ramsar site of international importance. The site contains an extraordinary diversity of both permanent and seasonal wetland types, with abundant lakes and remnant islands. The Pastaza supports a large population of the palm trees seen only in a few places in Peru, and nearly 300 fish species have been recorded.

• The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands — signed in 1971 in the city of Ramsar, Iran — is an intergovernmental treaty which provides the framework for national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources. There are currently 153 Contracting Parties to the Convention, with 1,629 wetland sites, totalling over 145.6 million hectares, designated for inclusion in the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance.

For more information:
Monica Echeverria, Senior Communications Officer
WWF-US
Tel: +1 202 778 9626
Email : monica.echeverria@wwfus.org

Sebastian Suito, Communications Officer
WWF-Peru
Tel: +51 1 440 5550
Email: sebastian.suito@wwfperu.org.pe

Breast cancer increases: are hormone disrupting chemicals the reason?

2006-10-18

Brussels/London - A new paper concludes that hormone disrupting chemicals (known as EDCs), may be a crucial factor behind the current increase of breast cancer cases. The paper, “Environmental contaminants and breast cancer: the growing concerns about endocrine disrupting chemicals”, has been written by Andreas Kortenkamp, Head of Centre of Toxicology from the School of Pharmacy at London University - an expert on EDC cocktail effects - after WWF UK sought independent scientific advice from him on the subject.

The paper states that less than half of the new breast cancer cases diagnosed can be explained by lifestyle factors and genetics. It argues that the answer to these other increases may lie in hormone disrupting chemicals, with two key factors playing a significant role – first, the “cocktail effect” which is seen when there is simultaneous exposure to several oestrogen mimicking chemicals and secondly, exposure to the chemicals during critical periods, when baby girls are in the womb or during puberty.

As Dr Kortenkamp explained: “A recent study among Spanish women demonstrated that breast cancer risk was associated with the body burden of all estrogenic chemicals, excluding the natural hormones. This is the first evidence that chemicals in our environment, with oestrogenic properties that are ‘accidental’, and not just natural hormones or pharmaceutical oestrogens may contribute to the development of breast cancer.”

The paper highlights the need for strong legislation to control chemicals that have hormone disrupting properties but which are used in everyday products. These chemicals appear in a wide range of products from baby bottles and other plastics to cosmetics. EDCs have been linked to many negative impacts on the health of wildlife – especially in the Arctic – such as impaired reproduction, hormone alterations and cancer.

The EU is currently finalizing a new chemicals law called REACH. WWF has been pushing for REACH to deliver on its original aim: to protect people and the environment from harmful man-made chemicals.

Sandra Jen, Director of WWF’s DetoX Campaign said: “The case for a strong REACH has never been clearer. It would be an outrage for European governments to gamble with the health of their citizens by allowing endocrine disrupting chemicals to continue to be used even where safer alternatives are available. The European Parliament has made it very clear that it wants to substitute hazardous chemicals for safer alternatives and EU ministers must now fully endorse this".

For further information
• Noemi Cano, WWF DetoX Campaign Communications Manager
Tel: +32 (0)479 610451
Email: ncano@wwfepo.org

• Anthony Field, WWF-UK Press Office
Tel: + 44 (0)1483 412379 / +44 (0)7768 867274
Email: afield@wwf.org.uk

Notes to the editors
• A pdf version of the study is available.

REACH – European Parliament committee backs safer chemicals rules

2006-10-10

Brussels, 10 October 2006 – Environmental, women’s, health and consumer organisations see today’s Environment Committee vote on the new EU chemicals law (REACH) as a vital step towards protecting health and the environment from chemical contamination. The Committee strongly supported the substitution of hazardous chemicals whenever safer alternatives are available.

The vote reflects cross-party support for the substitution principle and re-confirms a decision made by the entire assembly last November, which has so far been ignored by the Council of Ministers. It sends a strong message back to the Council that MEPs remain determined that chemicals of very high concern should be replaced with safer alternatives whenever possible. This legal obligation is essential to drive innovation of safer chemicals, in order to end the build-up of harmful substances in our bodies and the environment - one of the key objectives of REACH.

The groups also welcome the Environment Committee’s decision to ensure that a legally binding “duty of care” applies to all chemicals, making chemical producers responsible for the safety of their products, as well as the Committee’s backing for more information for consumers about chemicals in everyday products.

They call on Ministers and the European Commission to endorse the European Parliament’s position in discussions over the coming weeks. Intense pressure from the chemical industry to date has resulted in severe loopholes in the law, say the groups. Now, substitution of all the most hazardous chemicals is the only chance for decision-makers to enable REACH to improve the protection of human health and the environment beyond current legislation.

Contacts
• Noemi Cano, WWF DetoX Campaign communications manager
Tel: +32 (0) 479 610451