|
PVC MisInformation
In the words of Kermit the frog
"It is not easy being green". The environment is
extremely important, we have only one and it is necessary for us to
make sure we do not harm it for ourselves and our future
generations. Greenpeace is a necessary voice in protecting our
environment, however it would be more helpful it is was a voice of
reason. One of Greenpeace and other environmental
organisations objectives is to ban PVC products worldwide. The language they use to convey their message is often strong and
emotive and somewhat misleading. In this
article we will put forward the arguments and counter arguments
given by greenpeace and other organisations.
Greenpeace
Greenpeace have dubbed PVC as the Poison Plastic. It is the
use of chlorine in PVC manufacturing that has made greenpeace give
it this name. In the words of greenpeace "God
created 91 chemical elements, man more than a thousand and the
devil created one: chlorine."
Greenpeace and its allies argue that chlorine and all
organochlorines (i.e., compounds containing chlorine)
threaten wildlife and people. They see an outright ban as the
quickest and most effective way to improve environmental quality.
Further, they claim that a "chlorine-free society" is achievable at
modest economic cost.
The
Misinformation
|
Arguments |
Counter Arguments |
|
PVC is difficult to recycle,
resulting in much of it ending up in landfills |
The Vinyl2010 recycling
initiative, undertaken voluntarily by the PVC industry, is to
recycle 50% of collectable, available PVC waste from window
profiles, pipes, fittings and roofing membranes in 2005, and 50%
of flooring waste in 2008
For more information
PVC Recycling Initiative Vinyl 2010.
|
|
PVC releases remaining VCM (Vinylchloride monomer) in food and
water, which can cause cancer. |
It turns out that water from
PVC-bottles gives (an insignificant) 1.9% less cancer,
compared with water from glass bottles in a mega-experiment.
|
|
PVC can cause infant cot death |
This was incorrect. Although
the exact cause of infant cot death is not known one of the many
possible causes is the use of mattresses which catch a lot of
dust. PVC and other plastic layers prevent that.
|
|
PVC can give irritations and allergic reactions |
It turned out to be the contrary:
a lot of hospitals, especially built for allergy patients are
using PVC as the preferred building material, because a lot of natural
materials like certain types of wood and not well treated
natural rubber (latex) can give severe allergic reactions.
|
|
PVC softeners, like phthalates, are linked to cancer and
estrogenic properties |
That may be the case, if you give
massive doses to rats - up to an equivalent of 500 g/day for an
adult human - but after hundreds of tests, not for primates
(apes and humans), because differences in metabolism. PVC,
including phthalates, is the only thoroughly tested plastic
which is permitted for blood bags. In fact, you ingest near
0.1 g of phthalates per year by using PVC, the toxic equivalent
of drinking 0.01 g of alcohol... per year.
|
|
Greenpeace
is campaigning to phase out PVC in favour of more
environmentally friendly alternatives. |
In a study carried out by National
Centre for Business & Ecology (NCBE) their conclusion was
"The study team was unable to
find conclusive scientific evidence linking the production, use
or disposal of PVC compounds where best industry practice is
utilised to substantial harm to human health. Likewise
conclusive evidence of serious environmental harm resulting from
manufacture, use or disposal undertaken to the highest standards
was not found, although past and some current
production/disposal falls short of those standards. Where there
is evidence of harm to human health or the environment, evidence
that PVCs form a major factor set against other processes or
products was not found."
Their comment on the Greenpeace
web site information:
"One problem with
the Greenpeace literature, however, is its lack of selectivity
or of any critical appraisal. All studies, ranging the
methodologically-hopeless to those of the highest quality are
all quoted as if they are equivalent sources of damning
information on the PVC industry"
|
|
Governments and industry are
taking action to eliminate PVC. |
In the mid 90's In some European
towns, states and countries a political ban was voted on the use
of PVC. Several European towns and states, including Berlin,
Lengerich, The Netherlands and Belgium are withdrawing or
softening earlier decisions on banning PVC, after thorough
examination of the scientific evidence, when comparing PVC with
other materials on energy use, the use of non-renewable
resources, air- and water pollution during manufacturing, use,
recycling and deposit. In all cases PVC was found to be one of
the least problematic materials.
In the Netherlands, PVC was
(voluntary) restricted for use in packing, because of the fear
for more dioxins when burned in incinerators. After thorough
research, this was found not to be right and the restriction is
lifted now.
In Belgium there was an ecotax
voted on PVC bottles for mineral water. After two years of
investigation, the scientific analyses of PVC, PET and glass
bottles didn't give any reason to exclude one of these materials
on environmental grounds, so the ecotax is withdrawn now.
A years long study by the German Enquete-Kommission of the Bundestag (the German parliament)
revealed, that there was no reason to exchange PVC for
alternatives, '...an exchange of PVC by other materials is not
recommended. That gives the danger of a shift of problems, even
a possible worse situation'. A lot of towns and states in
Germany are reducing or omitting their anti-PVC-statements now.
In Sweden there was a meeting
between industry, scientists, politicians and Greenpeace about
the future of PVC. All scientists present, including
those of the Swedish EPA, refuted a ban on PVC. Only the
environmental minister stands behind Greenpeace... |
Conclusion
No doubt the arguments will rage on against PVC.
|
 |