Climate change solutions
We deliver game-changing environmental solutions that have a real impact for people around the globe.
Tom Neltner, J.D. is the Chemicals Policy Director.
In October 2019, we reported finding canned foods had a surprising number of samples with lead based on the Food and Drug Administration’s testing results. Almost half of the 242 samples had detectable lead, including a staggering 98% of 70 canned fruit samples.
We suspect that the high lead detection rates are a result of lead in the tin – either added to make an alloy or as a contaminant – used to coat the steel or join steel pieces together in the cans. This lead can then leach from the coating or solder into the food. Light-colored fruits and fruit juices would be more likely to have lead contamination based on a report indicating they are commonly packaged in tin-coated steel cans without a synthetic coating on the inside isolating the food from the tin. The lead detections in the other canned products in FDA’s study could have resulted from flawed synthetic coatings.
In December 2020, EDF and ten health, consumer, and environmental groups[1] petitioned FDA to ban the use of lead in food contact materials such as tin. We also included that FDA should presume that lead was intentionally used when levels in food contact materials are at or above 100 parts per million (ppm) and provided an option for the agency to specifically authorize the use only if:
Our petition demonstrates that, because lead is a carcinogen that is unsafe at any level in the blood, its use in tin coatings and solder for food cans should be expressly prohibited. The agency posted the petition for public comment and must make a decision how to proceed by June 2021. There is no deadline for comments, but it is best to submit them by April 1 so they can influence the agency’s decision.
Tom Neltner, J.D., is Chemicals Policy Director.
In January 2017, the outgoing Obama Administration undertook a criminal investigation of Home Depot for alleged violations of the Lead-Safe Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule. Last month, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed a proposed civil consent decree with Home Depot committing the company to establishing a comprehensive set of detailed procedures designed to ensure compliance with the rules and protect customers from lead poisoning. The company also paid a fine of more than $20 million in civil penalties – more than any other under the Toxic Substances Control Act.
A federal court will consider accepting the proposed consent decree after reviewing public comments received by January 20, 2021.
The proposed consent decree is important because it:
The settlement also alerts us of troublesome implications of a new federal policy that limits violators’ ability to direct some of the fines to affected communities for activities such as lead poisoning prevention projects.
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist.
Yesterday EDF submitted comments on a supplement to EPA’s 1,4-dioxane risk evaluation under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which the agency issued a scant three weeks ago.
This solvent is a likely human carcinogen that contaminates drinking water nationwide and is present in millions of consumer products.[pullquote]What EPA left out of its analysis swallows what it included.[/pullquote]
The supplement expands the scope of EPA’s ongoing risk evaluation of 1,4-dioxane. It now includes certain water exposures and certain exposures of consumers to products in which the chemical is present as a contaminant (more technically, a “byproduct”).
EPA rushed the public comment period, providing only 20 days and refusing requests from at least 14 organizations for an extension. The agency also cut out another vital step in the process – peer review –in violation of its own rules for how risk evaluations are to be conducted.
But that wasn’t the only thing EPA rushed. The Supplement itself was an 11th-hour affair, done mainly to appease a hypocritical demand from the formulated chemical products industry.
The haste with which it was assembled badly shows. The additional exposures EPA examined are so narrowly constructed as to omit major, and potentially the largest, sources of exposure and risk people face from the presence of 1,4-dioxane in water and products.
And what EPA left out of its analysis swallows what it included. (more…)
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist.
In recent weeks EPA has issued for public comment significant modifications to its draft risk evaluations under the Toxic Substances Control Act for two chemicals: Pigment Violet 29 (PV29) and 1,4-dioxane. Because EPA initially provided relatively brief comment periods on the modifications, both were subject to requests for extensions of the comment period.
The table below tells the story of how these two requests fared under the Trump EPA. (more…)
Sam Lovell, Project Manager.
Any successful initiative to replace lead service lines (LSLs) – the lead pipes connecting the water main under the street to homes – must be built on clear and consistent communications to residents. This will not only accelerate LSL replacement progress and equip people with information that impacts their health – it will also help build trust.
Many residents likely don’t even know what an LSL is, let alone that they need to take proactive steps if they want it fully replaced. In most communities, ownership of the water service line is split between the drinking water utility and the resident. Fully replacing an LSL entails removing the portions of lead pipe both on public and on private property. A partial replacement (when only one of the sides of an LSL is removed – see image below) is an issue because it can spike lead levels in the short-term and does not have the long-term benefit of reduced lead exposure seen with a full LSL replacement.
When describing LSLs and the replacement process, water systems must explain whether they are referring to the full LSL or only one of the sides, and the implications of this for the resident.
Sarah Vogel, Ph.D., is Vice President for Health.
This post originally appeared on the Global Clean Air blog.
When we’re outside, either walking or driving, we’re instinctively looking out for traffic. “Look both ways when you cross the street,” is advice drummed into most children.
But even so, we all have blind spots, and we’re not aware of the present danger polluting cars and trucks bring into our daily lives.
Our new video shows that although air pollution from vehicle exhaust is invisible, its damage to our health is visible and deadly.
EDF’s Global Clean Air Initiative has spent years researching air pollution in cities around the world. Our pioneering work with Google Earth Outreach, academic, community and government partners in Oakland, Houston and London shows that levels of air pollution vary much more widely than was previously known. In Oakland, we now know that levels of air pollution can vary by up to eight times within one city block. We’ve been working to visualize local pollution and its impacts in order to support targeted policies for cleaner air especially in those communities hardest hit by pollution. But we also recognized the need to make the experience of pollution more visible and more personal to each one of us as we walk down a city street.
