Climate change solutions
We deliver game-changing environmental solutions that have a real impact for people around the globe.
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
[Links to posts in this series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5]
Let’s now turn to dissecting just how limited EPA’s authorities are both to collect information that companies already possess on their nanomaterials, and to require companies to generate and submit new information. (more…)
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
[Links to posts in this series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5]
This was going to be the last post in my series on the fate of nanomaterials under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), where I turn to what will likely be – at least in the near term – the most common regulatory scenario that will apply: the extent to which EPA has authority to regulate nanomaterials as “existing” chemicals under TSCA. But there’s so much to cover that I’ve decided to split this last topic into three separate posts. (more…)
John Balbus, M.D., M.P.H., is Chief Health Scientist.
A new paper by Shaw et al., published in May in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, “suggests a generalizable and scalable method for the systematic characterization and comparison of novel nanomaterials” using high throughput in vitro tests. Does this mean that the National Academy of Sciences’ vision for toxicity testing in the 21st century – proposed for conventional chemicals – is already here for nanomaterials? Not quite. (more…)
Cal Baier-Anderson, Ph.D., is a Health Scientist.
The proliferation of nanoscale materials in consumer products is impressive: nano titanium dioxide and zinc oxide in sunscreen, buckyballs in face creams, and nanosilver in socks are but a few examples of what is currently available for purchase. But they make me wonder: what happens when the nanomaterials in or released from these products are washed down the drain? (more…)
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
Yesterday the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed the National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of 2008 (H.R. 5940), by a vote of 407-6. Among other changes, the bill calls for a number of much-needed improvements in how the NNI addresses health and environmental concerns associated with nanotechnology. See EDF’s news release issued today.
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Senior Scientist.
[Links to posts in this series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5]
In my last post, I decried EPA’s shortsighted decision to declare nano forms of chemicals listed on the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Inventory to be “existing” rather than “new” chemicals. But I noted that EPA did not rule that all nanomaterials are existing chemicals. EPA says it will consider buckyballs, carbon nanotubes, or anything else that has no counterpart – a substance with the same chemical structure – already on the TSCA Inventory to be “new.” So can we rest assured that, at least for these nanomaterials, EPA has sufficient authority under TSCA to effectively identify and address their potential risks? Would it were so. (more…)
