Sound Chemicals Management: An Overview Of This Issue

• Author: Lynn Goldman
• Position: Pediatrician and an epidemiologist
• Pages: 02

Page 2

The world in which we live has changed tremendously from that of previous generations. Synthetic chemicals are ubiquitous in our environment worldwide, and traces of these compounds are found in all humans and animals. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Human Exposure Report has amply demonstrated that such chemicals are often pervasive, appearing in the vast majority of blood and urine samples taken at random from the general population in the United States. Many chemicals are readily passed across the placenta to the fetus or to the infant via breast milk.

Worldwide, around 15,000 new chemicals are introduced every year. In the United States, at least 75,000 industrial chemicals are currently produced or imported.¹ Public concern has risen due to various studies linking hazardous chemicals to increased occurrences of cancer, respiratory diseases, reproductive disease, impairment in the physical and emotion development of children, neurological disease, and more. New substances are continuously introduced into domestic and global markets, and the impacts of many of these substances are unknown. For example, there is a growing number of nanomaterials that are entering the market with little regulation or data; many of these are likely to have hazardous properties.

Children and their health should be the focus of our domestic and worldwide chemicals policies: children are our future and we need to assign a high value to preserving their potential health and productivity. Pound for pound, children eat more food, drink more water, and breathe more air than adults. Thus, they are likely to be more exposed to substances in their environment than are adults.

In the United States, environmental chemicals are regulated in numerous ways. Pollutants, pesticides, consumer products, and industrial chemicals are each under different statutory and Page 3 set of guidelines for chemicals testing, an agreement on good laboratory practices, and an agreement on mutual acceptance of data that allows all nations to adopt these agreements.

This issue of Sustainable Development Law & Policy examines efforts to promote sound chemicals management at the domestic and global scale. Contributors to this issue discuss the next steps for chemicals regulation within the United States. Articles encourage assessing and tackling the new risk posed by nanotechnology. The establishment and implications of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management is analyzed, and the status of the Basel Convention is explored. Chemical regulation in the European Union is examined, along with a proposal for an independent entity to manage global chemicals agreements and protocols.

As a whole, these articles address the broad range of issues and possible solutions in chemicals management. The concerns, ideas, and possible solutions identified in this issue highlight the obstacles that many individuals in the global community feel are of the utmost importance to protect environmental public health. In the end, it is important to remember that chemicals policies should be action-oriented and employ approaches that are sufficiently protective to provide assurances that we are acting cautiously to protect our children, future generations, and the environment.

-------------------------------

[1] U.S. EPA Web site, http://www.epa.gov/region5/defs/html/tsca.htm.

The uncertain future of mtbe production: effects of the u.s. Energy policy act of 2005

Cari Shiffman

JD and MA candidate (International Affairs), 2007, at American University, Washington College of Law and School of International Service

Page 3

Fuel industry analysts project that the production of methyl tertiary butyl ether ("MTBE"),¹ an oxygenated fuel additive used to help reduce air pollution from automobiles,²will decrease in the United States over the next two years, due in part to the government's support of ethanol over MTBE in last year's U.S. Energy Policy Act ("Energy Act") and domestic concerns over groundwater contamination.³ In recent years, controversy has surrounded MTBE due to assertions that the additive contaminates groundwater when leaked from underground storage tanks.⁴ The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the World Health Organization labeled it as a possible carcinogen when consumed in high doses.⁵ Additionally, 26 states banned MTBE usage because of water contamination concerns.⁶

The future of MTBE production in the United States is even more uncertain due to the exclusion of limited liability protection for MTBE producers in last year's Energy Act.⁷ The House of Representatives ("House") proposed to give limited liability protection to MTBE manufacturers in product defect suits filed after September 5, 2003, in exchange for MTBE producers' contributions toward a trust fund for cleaning sites contaminated by MTBE.⁸ Domestic cleanup costs range from $2 billion to $25 billion.⁹ Following debates between the House and the Senate over limited liability protection for MTBE producers in the Energy Act, Congress redacted the limited liability provision from the Act.¹⁰ Additionally, Congress substituted the Clean Air Act's oxygenated gasoline requirement with a renewable fuels plan that supports the gasoline additive ethanol over MTBE.¹¹

Valero, the second largest U.S. producer of MTBE, announced that it will stop MTBE production due to the elimination of limited liability protection in the Energy Act.¹² If other producers follow suit, then the U.S. gas supply may face supply disruptions, resulting in a rise in gas prices.¹³ Domestic MTBE production is expected to further decline as ethanol is increasingly substituted for MTBE.¹⁴

---------------------------------

ENDNOTES

[1] MTBE, CHEMICAL WK., Nov. 9, 2005, at 59.

[2] Chris Woodyard, Refiner's Change Could Raise Gas Prices, USA TODAY, Aug. 5, 2005, at B1.

[3] MTBE, supra note 1. 4 Darren Goode, Barton Announces Deal on MTBE Liability, Trust Fund..., CONG. DAILY, July 22, 2005, at 1 [hereinafter Barton Deal].

[5] Environmental Protection Agency, Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether, Drinking Water, http://www.epa.gov/mtbe/water.htm (last visited Mar. 12, 2006). The World Health Organization released a document reporting that MTBE is a potential carcinogen in rats, but cautioned against over applying these results to humans. See WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, BACKGROUND DOCUMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF WHO GUIDELINES FOR DRINKING-WATER QUALITY: METHYL TERTIARY-BUTYL ETHER (MTBE) IN DRINKING-WATER (2005), available at http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/chemicals/MTBE200605.pdf (last visited Mar. 12, 2006).

[6] MTBE, supra note 1.

[7] Kara Sissell, MTBE Liability Relief Dropped from Energy Bill, CHEMICAL WK., Aug. 3, 2005, at 11.

[8] Darren Goode, Energy Bill Flash Points, 37(30) NAT'L J. 2380, 2381 (2005) [hereinafter Energy Bill]; Barton Deal, supra note 4; Sissell, supra note 7.

[9] ENSR International, a group supported by MTBE lobbyists, estimate cleanup costs to be only $2 billion, while the American Water Works Associations estimates cleanup costs to be closer to USD twenty-five billion. See Energy Bill, supra note 8, at 2381.

[10] Sissell, supra note 7.

[11] MTBE, supra note 1; Peck Hwee Sim, Valero to Quit MTBE Production, CHEMICAL WK., Aug. 10, 2005, at 12.

[12] Sim, supra note 11.

[13] Woodyard, supra note 2.

[14] MTBE, supra note 1.