Category Archives: Nanotechnology

Regulating nano-silver as a pesticide

By | Bio | Published: February 12, 2009

John BalbusCal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D., is a Health Scientist.

In May 2008, the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA) submitted a petition to EPA requesting that it regulate nano-silver used in products as a pesticide under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).  The petition calls on EPA to take the following specific actions:

  1. Classify nano-silver as a pesticide.
  2. Determine that nano-silver is a new pesticide and require its registration as such.
  3. Analyze the potential risks of nano-silver to human health and the environment.
  4. Take enforcement actions against nano-silver-containing products being sold illegally without EPA approval under FIFRA. Read More »

Also posted in Health Policy | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

Nano reporting goes mandatory

By | Bio | Published: February 10, 2009

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.

It had to happen sooner or later. After several years spent by the UK and US governments conceptualizing, vetting, proposing, again vetting, developing, yet again vetting, and finally launching and reporting on their voluntary reporting programs for engineered nanoscale materials – only to have them largely spurned by the intended targets – other governments observing all this have decided that mandatory approaches are needed. Read More »

Also posted in Health Policy | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

Nano Confessions: EPA all but concedes mandatory reporting and testing are needed

By | Bio | Published: January 12, 2009

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.

It's been nearly a year since EPA launched its voluntary Nanoscale Materials Stewardship Program (NMSP) – and over three years since EPA was urged, by a diverse group of stakeholders, to do so only in conjunction with the development of mandatory reporting rules as a backstop and to limit the duration of the basic part of the program to at most six months.

EPA ignored that advice, and proceeded with an open-ended voluntary program and no development of backstop rules.  Now EPA has issued its first evaluation of the NMSP.  So what did EPA find? Read More »

Also posted in Health Policy, TSCA | Tagged , | Comments closed

Clump Change: Challenging conventional wisdom about nanoparticle aggregation

By | Bio | Published: December 5, 2008

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.

In some nanotechnology circles, it is almost a mantra that, once released to the environment, nanoparticles will inevitably aggregate or agglomerate into larger masses and thereby lose their nanoscale-related properties and, by implication at least, any associated risks.

But can we count on nanoparticles released to the environment to self-regulate their own risk so conveniently? Read More »

Posted in Nanotechnology | Tagged , , | Comments closed

Shanghai diary

By | Bio | Published: November 26, 2008

John BalbusJohn Balbus, M.D., M.P.H., is Chief Health Scientist.

Some 216 delegates representing 26 countries converged on the largest city in China last week for the 7th meeting of the International Standards Organization (ISO) Technical Committee (TC 229) on Nanotechnologies.

In China, the turtle symbolizes cosmic order, strength, endurance and wisdom.  In the US, the turtle has come to symbolize slow progress and not keeping up with the times.  Which representation better captures what's going on in ISO's TC 229?   Maybe a little of both. Read More »

Also posted in Health Policy | Tagged | Comments closed

Down the Drain, then Down the Hatch

By | Bio | Published: November 18, 2008

John BalbusCal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D., is a Health Scientist.

Can nanoparticles get into our drinking water and if so, what's the harm?

Nanoparticles are being used in cosmetics and other personal care products with increasing frequency.  Carbon fullerenes, also known as buckyballs, have recently been touted as imparting age-defying antioxidant benefits when added to skin cream.  And there are some studies that seem to support these claims.  But even if such claimed benefits turn out to be true, this is by no means the end of the story.  Read More »

Posted in Nanotechnology | Tagged , | Comments closed

Yes, Virginia, inhaled carbon nanotubes do cause lung granulomas

By | Bio | Published: October 31, 2008

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.

My last post identified two Section 8(e) "substantial risk" notices pertaining to carbon nanotubes, one submitted by BASF, the other by Arkema.  I have in my files one additional Section 8(e) notice for a single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT), submitted by DuPont.  With three Section 8(e) notices submitted for different rat pulmonary toxicity studies on carbon nanotubes, it's interesting to compare their results. Read More »

Also posted in Health Science | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

A. Length, B. Metals, C. Oxygen, D. Surface, or E. All of the Above?

By | Bio | Published: October 29, 2008

John BalbusCal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D., is a Health Scientist.

The manufacture of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) is a very complicated business.  Different production processes leave behind different kinds of metal catalysts, which yield differences in physical and chemical – as well as toxicological – properties of the CNTs.  Read More »

Also posted in Health Science | Tagged , | Comments closed

EPA's Nano Consent Order, Part II: What About the Lifecycle?

By | Bio | Published: October 13, 2008

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.

Since my first post concerning EPA's Consent Order, I've been reflecting further on the management conditions it imposes – or, more accurately, on what conditions it doesn't impose.  The Order's only such conditions address potential worker exposure.  What about the rest of the nanomaterial's lifecycle? Read More »

Also posted in Health Policy, TSCA | Tagged , , | Comments closed

EPA's Nano Consent Order, Part I: "Sanitized" Transparency is Still Very Revealing

By | Bio | Published: October 9, 2008

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.

[Part II of this post is available here.]

Word hit the street today that EPA intends to make public a "sanitized" version of a Consent Order it has negotiated with a producer of multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs).  [A link will be provided once available.]  We obtained a copy of the Order, which has redacted all information claimed confidential by the company involved.  What can we learn from this well-scrubbed Order? Read More »

Also posted in Health Policy, TSCA | Tagged , , | Comments closed

  • About this blog

    Science, health, and business experts at Environmental Defense Fund comment on chemical and nanotechnology issues of the day.

    Effective April, 2009, we have expanded the scope of our blog to encompass our work and perspectives on both chemicals and nanomaterials.

    Our work: Chemicals

  • Get blog posts by email

    Subscribe via RSS

  • Categories

  • Filter posts by tags


    • aggregate exposure (9)
    • American Chemistry Council (ACC) (49)
    • arsenic (3)
    • asthma (3)
    • Australia (1)
    • biomonitoring (9)
    • bipartisan (6)
    • bisphenol A (14)
    • BP Oil Disaster (18)
    • Canada (7)
    • carbon nanotubes (24)
    • carcinogen (19)
    • Carcinogenic Mutagenic or Toxic for Reproduction (CMR) (11)
    • CDC (6)
    • Chemical Assessment and Management Program (ChAMP) (13)
    • chemical identity (30)
    • chemical testing (1)
    • Chicago Tribune (6)
    • children's safety (18)
    • China (10)
    • computational toxicology (9)
    • Confidential Business Information (CBI) (40)
    • conflict of interest (1)
    • consumer products (43)
    • Consumer Specialty Products Association (CSPA) (4)
    • contamination (4)
    • cumulative exposure (4)
    • data requirements (41)
    • diabetes (4)
    • DNA methylation (4)
    • DuPont (11)
    • endocrine disruption (23)
    • epigenetics (3)
    • exposure and hazard (38)
    • FDA (8)
    • flame retardants (17)
    • formaldehyde (13)
    • front group (13)
    • Globally Harmonized System (GHS) (5)
    • Government Accountability Office (5)
    • hazard (5)
    • High Production Volume (HPV) (22)
    • in vitro (13)
    • in vivo (10)
    • industry tactics (38)
    • inhalation (18)
    • IUR/CDR (25)
    • Japan (3)
    • lead (6)
    • mercury (4)
    • methylmercury (2)
    • microbiome (3)
    • nanosilver (6)
    • National Academy of Sciences (NAS) (16)
    • National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (7)
    • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) (5)
    • National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) (6)
    • obesity (6)
    • Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (3)
    • Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) (3)
    • Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (12)
    • Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) (3)
    • oil dispersant (18)
    • PBDEs (14)
    • Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBT) (20)
    • pesticides (7)
    • phthalates (14)
    • polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) (5)
    • prenatal (6)
    • prioritization (31)
    • risk assessment (60)
    • Safe Chemicals Act (24)
    • Safer Chemicals Healthy Families (33)
    • Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) (15)
    • Small business (1)
    • South Korea (3)
    • styrene (5)
    • Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC) (12)
    • test rule (13)
    • tributyltin (3)
    • trichloroethylene (TCE) (3)
    • Turkey (3)
    • U.S. states (12)
    • vulnerable populations (1)
    • worker safety (21)

  • Archives