In the last two to three years there has been a explosion of environmental movements, it is trendy to be on the "green" band wagon. It's nice people and governments are finally recognizing that the environment is deteriating quickly, however their limited actions are having no impact, in fact the environment is continuing to deteriate. Scientists confirm that the earth has reached a tipping point and no longer can it with stand the current course of destruction.
Fossil fuels have been used globally for the last three hundred years, during that time there was what was known as the "industrial age". Coal was the main source of energy, a dirty fuel made worse by the crude technology of the time.
However today the world uses fifty times more fossil fuels globally than it did during the industrial revolution. fossil fuels of today consist of oil, natural gas, and good old reliable coal.
A average home uses natural gas for heat, hot water, cooking, in fact natural gas contributes just as much damaging CO2 and Methane gas as transportation because many houses use natural gas 24/7/365 days a year. Industry in BC uses just as much natural gas in commercial as in residential which doubles to the environmental impact. I was also surprised as hell to find out there are commercial companies still using coal in BC. Can we really trust the rope-a-dope government to look after our environment??
I know when I asked then Mayor Terry Lake if Kamloops could start a airshed program he took offence, stating the province was "shifting responsibility" to the communities. he also said "you can't control air", for which I beg to differ.....the whole point of an airshed program is not to control the direction of the air, but to control and regulate what goes into the air. However his expertise as a veterinarian out weighed my 18 years as a Bio-energy solid fuel technician, and 12 years as a machinist/mechanic/engineer.
The facts are that fossil fuels are vegetation that lived thousand and even million of years ago, plants that soaked up the sun's energy. They also soaked up vast amounts of CO2 and methane gas, burning that fuel releases the energy for the corporations, but it also releases the CO2 and Methane gases which, ( in short) sets out of balance the amount of gasses that is in the atmosphere. Fossil fuel was meant to be stored under ground, if the world is going to get better we are going to have to wean the world to a minimum.
The problem lies in the government and corporations want to keep us hooked on fossil fuels for as much and as long as they can because they control the world. A "fact" that is real, is gasoline is actually a by-product of crude oil, governments need the jet fuel and rocket fuel, the corporations want the premium portions for plastic productions of a billion and one uses. This is why the US automotive manufactures build gas guzzling vehicles, in the states they don't have as high a population density as Japan. As a mechanic It boggles my mind how a truck today with all it's new technology has the same gas mileage of the trucks in the eighties.
We as a North America society are brain washed and addicted to large powerful gas guzzling vehicles, and the corporations and governments love it cause they make tons of royalties and taxes. Why do you think the governments got so rich when the price of oil hit $160 a barrel? And now the price bottoms out and the world is thrown into chaos, it's almost as if the people in power who control the prices did this intentionally....they knew the obscene prices would throw the world into a huge depression.
SOCIETY'S DRUG OF CHIOCE:
Plastics are over whelming the earth, locally there is a huge publicity battle over the use of plastic bags in grocery check out. Reality is it's nothing more than a publicity stunt, corporations like to appear to be turning their evil polluting ways around. Truth is they are actually turning it into a profit and marketing dream. They have convinced people to buy a "green" bag for $1, this gives them a profit while giving the appearance of changing the world. Retail is now using "green" as a marketing tool to market goods or services that are suppose to be environmentally "green". How ever it all seems to be a giant smoke screen, the facts prove things are getting worse by the day because the little bit that is done is not near enough to make a difference.
Every one is looking to technology to save us, looking for new idea's, always looking to the futuristic expensive problem solver. Governments spend millions, maybe even billions doing "gomrey" reports, years go by waiting for results, only to be ignored. It is surprising how often taking a step backwards to old fashion ways solves problems in today's world. For example, using old fashion glass, paper, or even tin is better than plastic. Not only is it "green", it's healthy too as governments are just starting to recognize VOC,(Volatile Organic Compounds) cancer causing agents. Over time chemicals and even artificial hormones leach into the food, storing for long periods of time or cooking food in plastic container's increases VOC's and estrogen hormone leaching in to food causing all sorts of side effects and diseases, yet society has ignored the risks and embraced plastics into our lives with out question.
I have tried to keep my distance from plastic when ever possible, looking for the products in glass when ever possible, in the last year glass has gone all but extinct. Inexperienced tree hugger's and politicians trying to portray action put all their energy and media attention into light weight bags,(and CFL bulbs). It's frustrating to say the least, because years have gone by since this war on pollution began and things have gotten worse. Every food container, every drink container, meat package, deli product uses gobs and gobs of plastic! The plastic craze has yet to peak, more and more plastic food container's and other products are hitting the shelves every day.
ONE DAY CFL's WILL BE BANNED:
And then there's the energy crisis.....Again the media, politicians, inexperienced tree huggers and even some bought off scientists are putting all the resources into conserving energy instead of developing new forms of zero emission,clean green energy. The focus is on conservation of energy, the funds, media, politicians, and technology all go toward reducing energy consumption. Every one is brain washed in to thinking using less electricity is the key, it's going to save our world for generations to come, however the consumption has been growing and will continue to grow off the scale. Corporations come up with the Compact Florescent Light bulb, or "CFL" to make people feel all fuzzy and warm thinking their "saving the world". There is even a law now dictating a total ban of all old fashion filament bulbs by 2012.
Mark my words...there will come a time when CFL bulbs themselves will be banned. Granted there are some benefits but there are also many negatives that need to be considered. It is DISGUSTING! , on a local level our city nor our provincial governments recognize the serious hazards and health risks CFLs pose. Basic tasks need to be taken to reduce the hazards CFL poss, which the city could instigate, like recycling drop off's and proper information available to consumer's so health risks can be reduced. Technology is steadily advancing and there are already several alternatives to CFL available. More media attention to educate, with more drop off points for old bulbs, and information on clean up of broken bulbs.
The Migraine Action Association, a nonprofit organization based in the United Kingdom, says CFL bulbs trigger migraines, either because of flickering light or the low intensity of the light, causing eye strain. Last year, the UK charity Epilepsy Action reported that a small number of people with the illness could have seizures triggered by CFLs. Both organizations were quoted in January in articles published by the BBC News. Governments and corporations won't admit to the health problems, but does that mean health risks don't exists?British citizens will be forced to completely switch over to so-called “low energy” bulbs, or CFLs (compact fluorescent lamps) in three years, despite the fact that CFL’s cause illnesses such as skin rashes, eyestrain, migraine, headaches and even seizures in those who suffer from epilepsy.The fact that they routinely break and are too weak to illuminate a room properly. People will simply use more lamps to offset the bad lighting, thereby completely defeating the object of “low energy” lighting in the first place.CFL’s also fail to work inside ovens, refrigerators, or inside enclosed fittings, such as garages or patios and they are also incompatible with dimmer switches.
But the real agenda behind the farce has nothing to do with saving the planet and everything to do with exploiting people’s legitimate concerns about the environment to enforce regulation of behavior as a curtain raiser for more taxation and control over our personal lives by governments and corporations.
A lighting expert posted these facts:
1. The CRI (Color Rendition Index) is AWFUL with CFLs (and all types of Fluorescent). CRI is important where color is involved: Picking out matching clothes, applying makeup, etc...
2. They should be disposed of properly. This means you should NOT throw them out with the regular garbage, nor can you put them out with the recycling. I question if the trip to a proper disposal center cancels out the energy savings.
3. The frequency at which they operate has been proven over and over again to cause headaches with a portion of the population. people living with epilepsy have to avoid areas where the Fluorescent lighting is malfunctioning (flickering), as this can easily induce seizures.
4. Though it's rare, if one does break, there are very specific and necessary steps one must take to dispose of the broken pieces. These include 3 hours of ventilation, removing pets and children from the room, and if you have the misfortune of having one break on your carpet, you're safest to cut that section of carpeting out. Again, it's rare, but when it happens, you're ***** out of Luck. CFL bulbs contain 5 mg of mercury that when broken create a dusting of poisonous gases in our homes and leach into the water table when disposed of in land fills.
These issues do not apply to incandescent, low voltage halogen, line voltage halogen, metal halide, or high pressure sodium bulbs. For a great and accurate summary, watch the clips {may have to copy and paste till I get this sorted out}
http: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-LOtKIIKcg It out lines (some ) of the problems but it's alarming how governments all over the world are ignoring health and environmental concerns while dictating laws forcing people to use a harmful polluting product. Hear is some more facts that people should look at before they blindly jump on the bandwagon.
Bullshit Propaganda disprove
Exhibit C is a u-tube posting of equating how much energy a CFL bulb saves according to propaganda put out by corporations and governments trying to brain wash the masses into think the CFL bulb is going to save the world.
The statement that a 23 watt CFL is equivalent to 100 watt incandescent bulb is totally wrong, the CFL bulbs are not any where near as bright as a 100 watt bulb. Further more the basis for their energy conservation and benefits are based on every one using 100 watt bulbs. Nobody uses 100W, most of us use 60W as the standard so right off the bat they have ballooned the average user a extra 40W.The propaganda also ballooned by doubling the actual price per kilowatt from $.07 to $ .15 to make it appear a much greater savings. Also State the 100W is left on 24/7/365 days a year, and 40 light bulbs are in a average home. In my home there is one 40 watt light in the kitchen left on the majority of the time and only during the dark cold days of winter. When I need more light I turn on an extra 60W light. Summer time there is enough natural light to only need minimal usage of electric lights for a few hours in the evening.
Equation is as follows: KWH = Watts X hours / 1000 X cost per KWH ( I checked my bill and it averages around .06 cents per.)
CFL 23W X 24(1 day) = 552 / 1000 = .552 X $ .06 = $ .03 per day or $ .99 per month
Incandescent 60W X 24 (1 day) =1440 / 1000 = 1.44 X .06 = $ .09 pr day or $2.59 per month if on 24/7
There is a savings of $1.60 per month, but looking at an average electric bill, lighting counts for 10% of the bill, "they" say "up to" 25% but in reality it's only 10%, 15 for people who waste allot.%.
My bill for a month on equal payments is $60, lighting cost me $6 a month, one third is $2, I would save $4 a month $48 a year switching to CFL bulbs. There is even science, (Exhibit A) that show's the actual amount of electricity that is consumed is much more than listed because of the different type of electricity engineering CFL use.
" I am all for legitimate energy conservation, but I also see a need for old school filament bulbs under certain applications... so why not just make them that much more expensive by taxing them heavily to put them at par price wise with CFL's... while shifting the tax to benefit zero emission energy alternatives? It seems like a better (smarter) way to shift people away from usage rather than an outright ban on the bulb. It is also imperative to provide communities with recycling depots to reduce the environmental risks as well as proper education and regulation if the CFL's are going to be a benefit rather than a cost to the environment. Some alternatives to CFLs that are just as efficient are LED and Halogen, yet there's no government propaganda so few have heard of them."
Review.....problems of CFL light bulbs.
- CFL bulbs do not last ten times as long as incandescent, in fact they do not last any longer, they get dimmer with use.
- CFL bulbs documented facts are they cause seizures, headaches, concentration problems and many other mental
problems.
This has been documented for 30 years now, yet BC schools still use only florescent bulbs....and they wonder why
some kids have a hard time learning....DUH! yah I trust the rope-a-dope government....NOT!
- CFL bulbs contain 5mg of mercury which poses a major health risk if broken in the home and leaching into the water
when dumped in land fills. Currently in BC there is not one provincial or municipal drop off point, some green leader :(.
- CFL bulbs emit radiation that burns skin and cause rashes in some people.
- CFL bulbs initial costs are much greater: $5 for CFL compared to$0.50 for incandescent.
- CFL bulbs sometimes spontaneously combust causing electrical fires with no warning.
In the last ten years the power consumption of an average house hold has increased drastically( 10X's) thanks to life's luxuries and our thirst for the latest and greatest. Just recently, 40 inch LCD and plasma TVs have dropped in price( 40" go for less than $1000), soon every single house hold will own one, many have several.Ten years ago practically everyone had 24" cathode TVs that used 20-50 watts, a big screen plasma uses up to 500 watts. Walk in to any pub to find 5-10 TV's on at once, doctors offices , fast food resturants build Tv's into their displays....the age of energy waste
Computer power usage has been growing off the scale, today's computer use up to 700 watts because the more advanced and powerful the computer's get the more power they need. It's also frustrating nobody even turns their computer's off ....it's bullshit! I have turned my computer off and on several times a day for years with out any problem, yet it's trendy so every corporation and house hold leaves their computer's on 24/7/365. So go ahead and jump on that CFL band wagon and see how far you get.... your grandchildren will have to paint on a layer of clay to go to the beach for the day.
at the same time the TV is on, one of these items is also on; X-box and Playstation III video games use 200 watts of power,
and DVD home theater's use 200 watt's.
Air conditioning has doubled in the last ten years due to increase global temperature, the list goes on and on....the point is, saving $5 a month on lighting while using $20 more in big screen TV's, games, can opener's and so forth is literally taking one step forward and four steps backward. people in today's society are to lazy or short for time to wash dishes, open cans, mix food, or even go to the washroom as soap dispensers, urinals, toilets, and towel dispensers all are electric in most public washrooms...saving 40 watts in lighting compared to using several hundred watts in entertainment and conveniences is bad math, even a fifth grader knows that....so what do we do?
THINK BIG, BEYOND THE BOX:
Conservation of energy alone is not going to make any difference in the world as we know it in the long run. The increase in population and it's thirst for electronic gismo's off sets any minute energy conservation the CFL bulb gain. The answer lies in the acceptance of real alternatives to fossil fuels by governments, but in order for them to do that they need to be weaned from the taxes they have come to demand of us. Current governments are not willing to do that so a new government needs to be formed, weather we are successful or not, if not us then it will wait for a new generation to try and step forward, by then it may be to late.
Truth of the mater is current governments and corporations don't want to stop fossil fuels because it a way of controlling the people with an iron fist. Much of our life and it's actions are based on the cost of fossil fuels,; heat your home, cook your food, bathe, transportation, recreation, and even earn an income.
Think not only of the benefits to the environment but also to all of our lives if clean free energy was available.... technology now exists, (and it has for years but governments have quashed it) solar, wind, magnetic and geothermal. No longer would it cost to heat and light your home, every house hold would have their own generation plant of a combination of solar, wind, and geothermal, with a little Bioenergy (woodstove) thrown in for fun and comfort. In fact you would be paid for excess power generated or power conserved that could be pumped back into the main lines. You would plug your car or bike into a regular 220 outlet so there would be no cost of transportation and no pollution in the environment because battery technology will have developed beyond our current abilities ten fold. Instead of dirty diesel trains and trucks spewing billions of tons of carbon and pollution there will be electric zero friction magnetic trains powered by giant geothermal generating station. No longer would the choice of travel be through the air on airplanes, but on the tubetrain, traveling at 1000 mph to take you across Canada in less time and with out pollution or risk of crashing.... all possible with in 20 years
In the short term, with in a few years our costs to our pockets as well as to the environment could be reduced greatly if we switched to a lessor evil. The key is cheep energy reducing the cost of transportation from $.90L to $.20L? Think for a moment....right of the top, save $500 month for average family in transportation costs. Also every thing in the grocery store, every service that needs to come to your house or business, all those costs would drop dramatically. Taking back control of our natural gas and renegotiate the "freetrade" agreement could cut our heating costs in half, a government run pipeline that is owned by the tax payer, therefor the tax payer could charge himself less...wouldn't you?
Today natural gas is used mainly for residential and commercial which like I said before pollutes just as much as gasoline and diesel, and it is true all fossil fuels are bad for the environment. This is only half true, people have no idea that there are several types of pollution. The band wagon is full of people who know nothing about facts and figures and science , media and corporations create a hype of positive media blitz.
THERE ARE SEVERAL TYPES OF POLUTION TO CONSIDEER:
- CO2....not really a harmful product normally because plants need CO2 to survive, we breath in oxygen and out CO2, while plants do the opposite, one can't live with out the other. The problem is the earth has be striped of vegetation that would normaly soak up CO2, especially compared to thousands of years ago when the earth was thick in vegetation. Modern day clear cutting of forests world wide coupled with the burning of fossil fuels has set out of balance the gases which make up our atmosphere.Plants store CO2, which what essentially coal, oil, an natural gas is made up of; essentially storing the CO2 and methane along with the suns energy from thousands of years ago under ground. Burning fossil fuels releases the CO2 and methane back into the atmosphere and increasing the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere. Remember all fossil fuels are vegetation and animals that lived long ago.
Particulates.....solids that are so light they get swept up into the air.
There are several different types;
- Abrasive carcinogenic like black carbon, from gas and diesel exhaust which create the haze over cities.
- Non carcinogenic like dust, pollen or pet dandruff are not as serious as smoke from a plastic fire or thick blue smoke
from slash burning wet wood, the chemicals structure is more abrasive, allowing leaching into the blood stream.
Toxic Poison....this is the one really doing all the damage, fossil fuels, and mining evolved toxic pollution in the world.
Whether it be the mercury from coal used in manufacturing and power generating, or the toxic chemicals in gasoline
causing acid rain. There are whole water tables in the US, river's, lakes, ground water all polluted with toxic chemicals
from the manufacture of plastics.... "out of sight, out of mind"
Hear in Canada fire retardant chemicals are being found in fish off the coast of BC, not microscopic either....big red chunks!! Killer whales are so full of toxic chemicals scientist are questioning their future survival. Pease wake up to reality! toxic poisons are in the millions of every day uses, every thing from cleaning supply to air fresheners, CFL bulbs to house hold battery's thrown in land fills.
One 1 out of 150 children born in the US have some form of autism, the rate of people with cancer, Alzheimer, and hundreds of other horrible diseases has grown off the scale causing the health care system to be overwhelmed. All of these are a direct result of toxic poison and its wrong, governments are no longer for the people...they are being controled by corparations. All over the world birth defects are now common as the seasons, animals and children being born with defects or extra body parts, twins conjoined.....MADNESS!!
....OK, enough venting, LOL....back to why natural gas is better than gasoline and diesel....most of western and northern Canada is floating on a sea of natural gas, so it could never run out in a thousand years, however the plan calls for a maximum of 20-30 years of reliance. Natural gas does not need to be refined and boiled, greatly reducing the pollution of manufacturing caused by crude oil, right off the bat, this is greatly benefiting the environment. Natural gas only needs filtering, and Canada has no problem doing that. Problem lies in that traitor Mulroney who sold our rights away with "FREE TRADE", it is now law that we as Canadians can not by our own natural gas cheaper than we sell it. We have to be ripped off by our own government simply because the world could not compete with us. Even at the current prices we could develop our own BC pumping stations and convert the majority of vehicles to run on Natural gas at $.20 L. Natural gas is 90% cleaner than diesel and 50% cleaner than gasoline which would again benefit the environment greatly when it is burnt by reducing carbon by 75% and as a bonus CHEAP FUEL!
"The poof is in the pudding" as they say....and I can prove it to you if you are willing to look. There are not to many natural gas vehicles on the road today to look at thanks to government moth balling the movement in the eighties. However there are still a small number of propane vehicles to look at. Simply go to one of the few, (very few, thanks again to governments trying to moth ball propane as well) gas stations that have propane filling stations. Compare your tail pipe to the tail pipe of a propane or natural gas vehicle, you will find the evidence on the inside of the tailpipe.
A gasoline or diesel tailpipe will be black, wipe your finger on the inside of the pipe and it will be covered in black "carbon". This is what the government is taxing, and this is what is causing the "particulate" pollution, and the smog over large cities. Now look at the natural gas or propane tail pipe....what do you see? Answer: nothing, clean as the day the pipe came off the manufacturing plant. This is because natural gas and propane are in a "vapor" state, which is best for combustion, gasoline and diesel are a liquid obviously. The liquids have to be turned into a vapor before it can be burnt. The particulate pollution is a result of only a portion of the liquid turning into a vapor. The black carbon is unburned fuel which is expelled out the tail pipe into our environment. 25% of the liquid fuel is dumped out the tail pipe in the form of carbon, only 5% of propane or natural gas is not burned because of turbulence and air/fuel mixture being out of balance. the benefits are many , not only is the emissions and costs greatly reduced, engines last ten times longer because the carbon from liquid fuels get into the oil and wears out the engine causing it prematurely need replacing. As a automotive machinists, I commonly witnessed propane tow trucks and taxis with over a million Km's. Oil changes are also fewer as oil stays clean for 20 000 km's, this alone would reduce pollution that finds it's way into drink water due to oil being dumped. I have said numerous times before..."details make all the difference."
Zero carbon emissions is why propane and natural gas is allowed to be used inside warehouses by the ever paranoid "worksafe BC". In fact our fearless phony leader, Gordon Camble was out pumping up his pre-election portfolio of "a phony green leader" by giving a grant for natural gas conversions for forklift use in warehouses. Unfortunate it is just a election gimmick as all fork lifts in BC already use propane which is not quite as clean as natural gas, but never the less is already clean and green. Gordon should be pushing for natural gas use in every day transportation uses, but he is afraid to. The truth is governments don't want us to have cheep sources of energy, they don't care if our environment is being destroyed, they get a nice paycheck and pension, and are long gone in 50 years when the world is really screwed. Today's politicians can't see past their own power hungry greed, if they could all those problems my fifth grade teacher talked about 30 years ago would have been addressed wouldn't they? Why would the governments put a huge tax on propane if they wanted to support green energy, why would the governments put heavy regulations, trying to bring the extinction of propane and natural gas? In Kamloops alone propane filling stations have been cut in half in the last year. Shifting strain away form gasoline and diesel will lower the costs and we won't have to rely on foreign oil.
Natural gas is a short term fix, the long term out look is the development of electric cars, solar panels, wind generators, and connettic energy sources like geothermal and zero point energy. Even running cars on water is a reality we will see in 20 years IF we can build a government that will take the initiative to develop alternatives to corporate controlled chaos.
The answer is not energy conservation, the answer is zero emission energy development. solar , wind, zero point and connettic energy is the future, every home will have it's own power generating station, imagine, no more power outages, cost increases or corporate/government controlling your life.
Citizen Solidarity goal is to build a action based thinktank of people from all over the world developing alternative energy sources. Eventually testing and manufacturing, leading the world out of the corporate collaboration of past governments.
The way to a better life is to eliminate house hold bills, free electricity through wind and solar, free transportation charging your electric car from home solar system. Lower the cost of living will do a lot to reduce stress, reduce the work week and allow you to enjoy life and raise a healthy family, and as a big benefit....reduce pollution to practically zero!
As citizens we need to take back our lives from corporations and government control...
...free energy is the key!
Reality check;
How sure are you about plastic in your life?
How long has plastics been in use?
Since the 80's plastics has been used in food and drinking container's, baby bottles and pacifiers, little did we know we were putting poison in our children's system.
VOC's (volatile organic compounds) ; causes cancer and many other diseases in all species
BPA's (synthetic female hormones) ; off sets hormone growth in children
causes girls to mature earlier and boys to be feminine
PBDE ( fire retardants ) : goes directly into breast milk of all species causing hi concentrations of compounds to be absorbed into off spring leading to early deaths and diseases
( researchers prove this to be leading cause of killer whale extinction)
The damage to the air,water and landfill during manufacturing alone is disgusting, never mind the direct VOC pollution going into our bodies causing; God and government only know's what.
Hear are just a couple of the articles:
Choose your plastic water bottles carefully
Unfortunately, most plastic baby bottles and drinking cups are made with plastics containing Bisphenol A. In 2006 Europe banned all products made for children under age 3 containing BPA, and as of Dec. 2006 the city of San Franscisco followed suit. In March 2007 a billion-dollar class action suit was commenced against Gerber, Playtex, Evenflo, Avent, and Dr. Brown's in Los Angeles superior court for harm done to babies caused by drinking out of baby bottles and sippy cups containing BPA. So, to be certain that your baby is not exposed, use glass bottles.
Clear, lightweight, and sturdy polycarbonate plastic bottles are standard equipment for millions of hikers and babies. (They are usually labeled #7 on the bottom; Nalgene is the best-known producer.) Since polycarbonate bottles don’t impart a taste to fluids, many users assume they are safer than bottles made out of other kinds of plastic. But now an accidental discovery has cast doubt on their safety.
The surprise results came in 1998 during an animal study led by Dr. Patricia Hunt, a geneticist at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. Her team was investigating causes of miscarriages and birth defects, which often result from aneuploidy, the loss or gain of chromosomes. A lab worker washed the team’s mouse cages in a harsh detergent not ordinarily used for that purpose. Suddenly the number of chromosomal abnormalities, which had earlier been found in only 1 to 2 percent of the mouse eggs, spiked to 40 percent, setting the researchers on a detective hunt for the cause.
The culprit was found to be bisphenol-A (BPA), a chemical that mimics the hormone estrogen; it had apparently leached from the polycarbonate mouse cages after the washing. Hunt’s team reproduced the accident to make sure, and published its findings in the April 2003 issue of Current Biology.
"We just stumbled into this," says Hunt, "but we have been stunned by what we have seen."
For years, scientists have been finding that endocrine disrupters like BPA can impair the reproductive organs of rats and mice, reduce sperm counts in rats, and bring about changes in tissue that resemble early-stage breast cancer, among other effects. But Nunc International, maker of Nalgene bottles, maintains that its products are "safe for use with human consumables"; cites other research that found no dangerous leaching; and points to a 2002 study in which rats fed a diet containing BPA at levels higher than those in Hunt’s laboratory suffered no apparent reproductive or developmental effects.
Hunt counters that the rat study did not look at eggs or embryos. "The [plastics] industry says this is just rodent studies," she says, "but we know that the human egg is more fragile than the mouse egg. If we wait for really hard evidence in humans, it will be too late."
Normal wear-and-tear and cleaning of polycarbonate plastic bottles in a dishwasher, Hunt says, could cause the chemical to leach, and the amount of leaching increases as the plastic ages and is degraded by use. A separate study published in July in Environmental Health Perspectives confirmed this finding, and also detected leaching from new polycarbonate plastic.
Theo Colborn, author of the groundbreaking book about endocrine disrupters, Our Stolen Future, calls BPA a "very, very sticky problem. This is a product that’s everywhere, and in everything." (In addition to bottles, BPA turns up in dental sealants and the resin linings of many food and beverage cans.) She recommends washing polycarbonate bottles with mild detergent only, and rinsing well. (Thorough washing is crucial for any reused bottle, because of the danger of bacterial contamination.)
Most at risk, says Colborn, are people with developing endocrine systems: pregnant women and newborns, followed by young children, and women who might get pregnant. Hunt says that if she had an infant, she would switch to polypropylene (#5 PP), which is not known to leach harmful substances. (Other plastics that are not known to leach are #2 HDPE and #4 LDPE. "Single use" plastic bottles made of polyethylene terephthalate [#1 PET or PETE] are not recommended for repeat use because of the risk of bacterial contamination from infrequent and insufficient washing.
Or you could avoid plastic altogether and switch to glass or lightweight stainless steel containers.
Unfortunately, most plastic baby bottles and drinking cups are made with plastics containing Bisphenol A. In 2006 Europe banned all products made for children under age 3 containing BPA, and as of Dec. 2006 the city of San Franscisco followed suit. In March 2007 a billion-dollar class action suit was commenced against Gerber, Playtex, Evenflo, Avent, and Dr. Brown's in Los Angeles superior court for harm done to babies caused by drinking out of baby bottles and sippy cups containing BPA. So, to be certain that your baby is not exposed, use glass bottles.
For more information, see "Plastics for Kitchen Use," www.thegreenguide.com.
Chemical in plastic may harm children
A federal report finds ‘some concern’ that fetuses, babies and children are at risk from bisphenol A. But plastics industry officials see no serious risk.
By Marla Cone
April 16, 2008 in print edition A-10
A controversial, estrogen-like chemical in plastic could be harming the development of children’s brains and reproductive organs, a federal health agency concluded in a report released Tuesday.
The National Toxicology Program, part of the National Institutes of Health, concluded that there was “some concern” that fetuses, babies and children were in danger because bisphenol A, or BPA, harmed animals at low levels found in nearly all human bodies.
An ingredient of polycarbonate plastic, BPA is one of the most widely used synthetic chemicals in industry today. It can seep from hard plastic beverage containers such as baby bottles, as well as from liners in cans containing food and infant formula.
The federal institute is the first government agency in the U.S. to conclude that low levels of BPA could be harming humans. Its findings will be used to help regulators at federal and state environmental agencies to develop policies governing its use.
The draft report followed an 18-month review that was fraught with allegations of bias, heated disputes among scientists and the firing of a consulting company with financial ties to the chemical industry.
Some scientists suspect that exposure early in life disrupts hormones and alters genes, programming a fetus or child for breast or prostate cancer, premature female puberty, attention deficit disorders and other reproductive or neurological disorders.
In its new report, the National Toxicology Program, which reviewed about 500 laboratory animal experiments, concluded that there was “some concern” that fetuses, babies and children were at risk from BPA. It rated as “negligible” the concern for adults.
When animal fetuses or newborns are exposed, BPA “can cause changes in behavior and the brain, prostate gland, mammary gland and the age at which females attain puberty,” the agency’s draft report says.
“These studies only provide limited evidence for adverse effects on development and more research is needed to better understand their implications for human health,” it said. “However, because these effects in animals occur at bisphenol A exposure levels similar to those experienced by humans, the possibility that bisphenol A may alter human development cannot be dismissed.”
Plastics industry representatives stressed that the agency found “no serious or high-level concerns.” They call the lab animal experiments inconclusive and flawed.
Steven G. Hentges of the American Chemistry Council’s polycarbonate/BPA group said the findings “provide reassurance that consumers can continue to use products made from bisphenol A.”
“The limited evidence for effects in laboratory animals at low doses primarily highlights opportunities for additional research to better understand whether these findings are of any significance to human health,” he said.
In the key area of reproductive health, the agency reported more concern about the potential dangers to children than its advisory panel did.
The advisory panel in August found “minimal” concern about effects on the prostate and puberty after siding with the plastics industry and disqualifying many animal studies that showed effects. That drew criticism from scientists who conducted the research.
But in the new report, the National Toxicology Program overruled its panel, elevating its finding about human prostates and puberty to “some concern.” It also for the first time expressed concern about effects on human mammary glands, which the panel had not addressed.
The findings “break new scientific ground” by validating the low-dose animal tests, said Anila Jacob, senior scientist at Environmental Working Group, an activist group. It “reflects a significant body of science showing that BPA may play a larger role than previously thought in a host of common health problems, including prostate cancer, breast cancer and early puberty,” she said.
Frederick vom Saal, a reproductive scientist at University of Missouri-Columbia who studies BPA, said the new report was “very, very much in line” with a consensus statement signed by 38 scientists last year that said the chemical could be harming babies’ brains and reproductive tracts.
“This is going to ripple around the world,” vom Saal said. “The bottom line is there really is a convergence of opinion that is occurring.”
Canada is expected soon to declare BPA a toxic substance, which would be followed by proposals to control its use. California and other states have considered but not adopted bans on BPA in products.
A year ago, the Los Angeles Times reported that the government was basing its BPA decision on a summary of the science drafted by a private company, Sciences International, which had financial ties to more than 50 chemical companies and groups. The company was then fired. National Toxicology Program officials audited the report and found it unbiased, so it was used to reach its conclusions.
It never even dawned on me till I did some research but it turns out the PVC piping that has been used in every house for the last twenty years is leaching VOCs into the house hold water systems;
Long-term use of high-density polyethylene drainage pipes could result in prolonged contamination of the water table as well as ecological and environmental damage, a Princeton study warned today.
The study finds that volatile organic carbons are leached into water as a result of high-density polyethylene pipe (HDPE), widely used in the construction of drainage systems, storm sewers, commercial, residential and highway drainage as well as in mining and agriculture.
HDPE is a petroleum-based plastic that is combustible without the use of flame retardant chemicals. HDPE is now being substituted for older materials in storm sewer and drainage projects…
Many VOCs are toxic. VOCs benzene, xylene and toluene are carcinogens and formaldehyde and ethylene are known to harm plants.
