 |
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Chinese RoHS effective in March 2007. The European
Directive on the Restriction of certain Hazardous Substances in
Electrical and Electronic Equipment (RoHS, 2002/95/EC) has by now
has been transposed into national legislation in Member States of
the EU. China has issued corresponding legislation under a law called
"Measures for Administration of the Pollution Control of Electronic
Information Products", but widely referred to as "Chinese
RoHS". It will target the same six hazardous substances which
are regulated by the EU law, namely the heavy metals cadmium, lead,
mercury, and hexavalent chromium as well as the flame retardants
polybrominated biphenyl (PBB) and diphenylethers (PBDE). The marking
is required already in March of 2007, but a date for the ban on
the hazardous substances is not yet clear. Regulations implementing
this aspect of the new law are expected soon. The Chinese law may
have a broader reach than the EU directive: For example, the EU
only regulates the product if you have to plug it in, while the
Chinese draft list of electronic information products includes materials
used in the manufacturing process to produce electrical equipment
as well. German Environmental Protection Agency asks for phase out of decabromo diphenylether in electrical and electronic equipment In a press release of 26 March 2007, the German Environmental Protection Agency (UBA) demands again the phasing out the flame retardant decabromo diphenylether (DecaBDE) in electrical and electronic equipment like computers and TV-sets. The European Union initially wanted to phase out all polybrominated biphenyls (PBB) and polybrominated diphenylethers (PBDE) -including DecaBDE - as of July 2006 according to the Directive 2002/95/EC "Restriction of certain Hazardous Substances in Electric and Electronic Equipment (RoHS)". In the frame of the European Existing Chemicals Directive, in 2004, the Risk Assessment for DecaBDE which took 10 years was completed and no risk reduction measures were proposed. This was the reason why in autumn 2005, against the will of the European Parliament, the European Commission exempted DecaBDE from this restriction before it had come into force. The European Commission may allow exemptions to these restrictions, provided the use of substitutes is technically or scientifically not possible or if the substitutes are more harmful than the initially foreseen substance. According to UBA, both is not the case for DecaBDE, because it is persistent and accumulates in the environment and living organisms. In addition, there are hints that in the environment DecaBDE may partly degrade to the lower brominated and more toxic chemicals penta- and octabromodiphenylether. Denmark and the EU-Parliament are of the same opinion and question the legal basis for the exemption of DecaBDE from the restrictions by the European Commission, and have therefore launched a legal challenge to this Commission Decision in January 2006. The UBA points
out that for many years a number of innovative companies phased
out the use of DecaBDE, and some of them plan to replace all brominated
flame retardants. Instead, they use e.g. certain halogenfree organic
phosphorous compounds, magnesium and aluminium hydroxides, red phosphorous,
metal phosphinates, nitrogen-containing flame retardants, or modified
equipment design. In Germany, since 1986, members of the Plastics
Producers Industry (VKE, now PlasticsEurope) voluntarily abandoned
using DecaBDE. http://www.umweltbundesamt.de
Sustainability conquers the USA: New American "halogen-free" projects In the USA, the word "sustainability" may still evoke fuzzy stereotypes of do-gooders putting ideals ahead of reality. However, the growing influence of watchdog groups making clever use of the internet, new environmental regulations with additional, stringent restrictions coming from Europe and spreading over to Asia, create a new perception of sustainability, health and the environment in American companies, associations, authorities, and last but not least, the public opinion. This also concerns the use of flame retardants. The development
of "halogen-free" systems for office and consumer electronics
started in Europe and has now reached the USA: Projects from electronics
manufacturers and suppliers, as well as from the US Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) focus on printed wiring boards (PWBs). The Design for
the Environment (DfE) Program of the EPA works in partnership with
a broad range of stakeholders to reduce the risk to people and the
environment by preventing pollution. Under the title "Safer
Flame Retardants", one DfE project Printed Circuit Board Flame
Retardancy Partnership was started in order to improve our knowledge
of the environmental, health and safety aspects of commercially
available flame retardants that can be used to meet fire safety
requirements for the majority of printed circuit boards. Tetrabromobisphenol
A (TBBPA) is the largest-volume brominated flame retardant with
an annual production of approximately 150 000 tonnes, and is the
primary flame retardant for printed circuit boards. Alternative
flame retardant materials are becoming available for use in PWBs. New initiatives for halogen-free printed wiring board materials in the USA In the USA,
there is an increasing interest in alternatives to the currently
used brominated flame retardant systems in electronics, and particularly
in printed wiring boards (PWBs). Besides the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), which has started a Design for Environment project
to look at environmental and health properties of alternatives to
TBBPA, a major industry association, the International Electronics
Manufacturing Initiative (iNEMI) has started a halogen-free initiative
beginning of this year. iNEMI is an industry-led consortium of approximately
70 electronics manufacturers, suppliers and related organizations
with its headquarters in Herndon, Virginia, USA. The objective of the feasibility study is to promote standards development by establishing materials, manufacturing, assembly, and test guidelines for halogen-free PWBs based on market segment requirements and technical, commercial, and functional viability. The study consists of three phases:
Details, see
EPA and iNEM
In recent years, the question arose to what extent emissions of flame retardants from building and consumer products take place and whether they pose a health risk. Many studies and research projects were conducted, and they have helped to better understand this phenomenon. All results have shown that emissions of flame retardants are extremely low, and therefore do not pose a health risk. Emissions are usually measured in indoor air and dust in buildings and automotive interiors. The flame retardants studied are mainly phosphate esters and halogenated phosphate esters, as well as brominated flame retardants, including the polybrominated diphenylethers. In 2002, the Swiss Federal Health Agency (Bundesamt für Gesundheit = BAG) made a study on "phosphorus-based flame retardants in indoor air" in order to find out the relevance of these compounds. The conclusions were that for 10 widely-used phosphorus-based flame retardants, there is no indication of any health risk related to their use. In 2003, a study conducted by the German Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing BAM (Bundesanstalt für Materialprüfung) on the emission of flame retardants from building products and consumer goods (insulating foams, computer equipment, printed circuit boards, upholstered furniture and mattresses), showed that brominated flame retardants and phosphate esters were not detected or only found in extremely low amounts far below a precautionary guiding value of 0.005 mg/m³. For the flame retardant with the highest emissions, trischloroisopropyl phosphate (TCPP), more environmentally friendly alternatives do exist. A third study on flame retardants and plasticizers emissions in car interiors was carried out by TÜV Nord and the Fraunhofer Wilhelm Kauditz Institute on behalf of the German automotive industry in 2003. Again, the result was that no relevant emissions of flame retardants were found and that no health risks were identified. There are no compulsory limit values for emissions of flame retardants in Germany and elsewhere in the world at the moment, and no activities planned to introduce emission requirements for flame retardants in the future. References: Kemmlein S, Hahn O, Jann O. (2003): Emissions of organophosphate and brominated flame retardants from selected consumer products and building materials. Texte des Umweltbundesamtes, Berlin, Nr. 55/03, 188 pp. Sagunski H, Roßkamp E (2002): Richtwerte für die Innenraumluft: Tris (2-chlorethyl)phosphat. Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Vol. 45. pp. 300-306 Salthammer T, Wensing M (2002): Flame retardants in the indoor environment Part IV, Classification of experimental data from house dust, indoor air and chamber tests. Indoor Air 2002 Conference, Monterey, California, Vol. 2. pp. 213-218 StapletonH, Dodder N, Offenberg J, Schantz M, Wise S (2005): Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in House Dust and Clothes Dryer Lint. Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 39, No. 4. pp. 925-931 Wensing
M, Pardemann J, Schwampe W (2003): Flame retardants in the indoor
environment. Part V: Measurement and exposure evaluation of organophosphate
esters from automobile interiors. Proceedings Healthy Building 2003,
Singapore. The European "Flower" Ecolabel and the use of flame retardants The European
"Flower" Ecolabel is a voluntary scheme designed to encourage
businesses to market products that are kinder to the environment
and for European consumers - including public and private purchasers
- to easily identify them. Criteria are established for individual
product groups, such as paper products, textiles, detergents, paints
and appliances such as refrigerators or dishwashers.
Criteria for ecolabels have been published in Official Journal of the European Union for the appliances, TVs and computers listed here. The criteria for flame retardants say that plastic parts which are heavier than 25 grams must not contain decabromobiphenyl and polybrominated diphenylethers, as well as chloroparaffins. In addition, no flame retardants or substances dangerous to health according to various risk phrases (e.g. causing cancer, toxic to aquatic organisms) may be used. For furniture
no EU ecolabel exists at the moment. A feasibility study for an
EU furniture ecolabel had been prepared by the German Environmental
Agency UBA, and the Dutch Stichting Milieukeur entrusted with establishing
the criteria. A report was completed in August 2004. The criteria
proposed were eventually rejected by the EU Member States, because
the proposed limit values would have precluded the use of PVC and
some flame retardants (<600 mg/kg Cl). Nonetheless, the EU Ecolabel
Board has now decided to re-start discussions (meeting of 8th December
2004) and many EU Member States are favourable to reviving the project.
Further information
on the EU ecolabels may be found here.
Flame Retardants
in the European Electrical & Electronic Waste Directives The purpose of the WEEE directive is the prevention, reuse, recycling and recovery of waste. The Directive prescribes the separation of electrical and electronic waste containing plastics with brominated flame retardants prior to recycling, energy recovery or disposal. The purpose of the RoHS directive is to contribute to the protection of human health and the environmentally sound recovery and disposal of WEEE. Member States shall ensure that from 1 July 2006 new E&E equipment put on the market does not contain certain heavy metals, flame retardants like polybrominated biphenyls (PBB) and the polybrominated diphenylethers penta-, octa-, and decabromo (deca-BDE) diphenylether. While penta- and octa-BDE have been banned in the meantime, in the light of the positive risk assessment results for deca-BDE, the European Union has supported moves to exempt this flame retardant from the RoHS Directive and thus allow its continued use. On 22 April 2005, a majority of EU member states voted to exempt deca-BDE from the restrictions in the Directive. However, the proposal did not reach the necessary majority (72.3% of the votes) to be adopted immediately. Therefore, the proposal was sent to the EU Council of Ministers that will have a maximum of three months to adopt a decision. To reject the Commission proposal, the Council would have to oppose it by more than 70% of the vote. In June 2005,
six environment ministers have reiterated their opposition to exempt
deca-BDE from the ban on hazardous substances in the RoHS Directive.
In a letter sent to environment commissioner Stavros Dimas, ministers
from Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Portugal and Sweden say
uncertainty still surrounds deca-BDE, and complain that existing
alternatives have not been considered in the Commission's proposal
to exempt the chemical. Swedish officials say the letter is aimed
at persuading the Commission to reconsider its position if the council
fails to reach a qualified majority for or against exemption. The
Commission must adopt its proposal unilaterally if the council fails
to act. Deca-BDE's opponents still hope to withdraw this chemical
from the E&E market.back to top>>>
Flameretarded furniture positive for the environment A life cycle
assessment (LCA) including the effects of fire on upholstered furniture
has been performed by SP, the Fire Testing and Research Institute
in Boras, Sweden.
Other "Fire-LCAs" have already been applied to TV-sets
and cables. The number of
fire deaths and injuries has dramatically decreased since. In other
European countries, only voluntary requirements apply and most furniture
sold meets the cigarette test, which basically does not require
the use of flame retardants. If here too, more demanding fire tests
where used, the number of fatalities and injuries from upholstered
furniture fires could substantially be reduced. The new EU Chemicals Policy and its Impact on Flame Retardants The European Commission adopted its White Paper, "Strategy for a future Chemicals Policy", in February 2001, setting out the strategy for future community regulations for chemicals. The main objective
of the new chemical strategy is to ensure a high level of protection
for human health and the environment while ensuring the efficient
functioning of the internal market and stimulating innovation and
competitiveness in the chemical industry. For new substances,
however, it has been necessary to submit extensive data sets since
1981. The notification procedure involves a great deal of effort
and has been largely responsible for only about 2,800 new substances
being brought onto the market in Europe in the last 22 years. The REACH concept forms the basis of the proposed legislation as a single system for produced or imported existing and new substances: REACH = The question is whether it is possible to create a system which is workable and where costs and benefits in terms of human health and the environment are well balanced. Otherwise we build up a huge bureaucracy, generate a lot of paperwork, sacrifice many animals for toxicity tests and spend a lot of money on other tests without really improving the environment or our health. In our global economy it also vital to take into account the effects on international competitors - will it become more favourable to produce chemicals or even finished articles outside the EU and import them instead of producing here? Will big chemical
companies shift their production outside of Europe? BAM-Study "Emission of Flame Retardants from Consumer Products and Building Materials" On behalf of the German Federal Environmental Agency UBA, the Federal Establishment for Materials Research and Testing BAM has studied the emission behaviour of flame retardants in building products and consumer goods. The product
groups tested were insulation and assembly foams, upholstered furniture
and mattresses as well as IT devices and circuit boards. The project
focussed on brominated flame retardants like hexabromocylododecane
(HBCD) and Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBA), halogenated tris(2-chloroisopropyl)
phosphate (TCPP) and halogenfree phosphoric acid esters like triphenylphosphate
(TPP), bisphenol A-bis(diphenyl)phosphate (BDP) and Resorcinol-bis(diphenyl)phosphate
(RDP) as well as chloroparaffins. The
testing of the single products took place in test chambers of varying
sizes under standard conditions. For a German Class B2 to DIN 4102 polyurethane assembly foam with TCPP, a concentration of 3 g m-3 TCPP was found in the air of the emission chamber. For other assembly foams, the concentrations amounted to 10 and 15 g m-3 TCPP. Due to their low volatility, the other flame retardants could not be detected or only as surface specific emissions in the (by a factor of one thousand lower) nanogram range. According to the results of this research project, no increased risk for health and the environment could be identified for flame retardant emissions from consumer goods and building products in room interiors. The 248 pages study "Emission of Flame Retardants from Consumer Products and Building Materials" was published inthe series TEXTE of the German Federal Agency UBA as No. 55/03. <<< back It is available
from Werbung und Vertrieb It is also available
as a download in English under www.umweltbundesamt.de.
|