=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL’S HAZARDOUS WASTE NEWS #74
—April 25, 1988—
News and resources for environmental justice.
——
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@igc.apc.org
==========
The Back issues and Index are available
here.
The official RACHEL archive is here.
It’s updated constantly.
To subscribe, send E-mail to rachel-weekly-
request@world.std.com
with the single word SUBSCRIBE in the message. It’s free.
===Previous issue==========================================Next issue===
NEW AIR POLLUTION FROM LANDFILLS: ASBESTOS AND FIBERGLASS HAZARDS.
A new danger from municipal landfills is emerging from scientific
studies: cancer causing air pollution from asbestos, fiberglass
and other synthetic mineral fibers. The problem has two parts:
the health danger from the fibers, and the release of fibers from
landfills.
Everyone agrees that asbestos causes cancer in humans. An
estimated 9,000 Americans now die prematurely each year from
asbestos exposure and the number increases yearly. The federal
government and many states now sponsor programs to remove
asbestos from schools and public buildings. But where does the
asbestos go after removal? It goes either into a hazardous waste
landfill, or it goes into a municipal landfill, the town dump.
In both cases, the effect is the same: the asbestos goes into the
ground, not far below the surface.
As the dangers from asbestos have been recognized, it has been
phased out in favor of fiberglass and so-called “mineral wool”
(though fiberglass is much more popular than mineral wool). Such
synthetic fibers are now used in more than 50,000 different
consumer products–building materials and insulation, cars,
furniture, packaging, draperies, and many other products.
Industry spokespeople insist that these fibers are 100% safe, but
studies have been appearing in the scientific literature for at
least 19 years indicating that some synthetic fibers cause cancer
and other diseases in laboratory animals. While searching for
the mechanism by which asbestos causes cancer, scientists in the
late 1960s discovered that the size of the fiber (and not its
chemical composition) is the key to the carcinogenicity of
fibers. In a series of papers published from 1969 to 1977, Dr.
Mearl F. Stanton of the National Cancer Institute (Bethesda, MD)
reported that glass fibers less then 3 microns in diameter and
greater than 20 microns in length are “potent carcinogens” in
rats; and, he said in 1974, “it is unlikely that different
mechanisms are operative in man.” A micron is a millionth of a
meter (and a meter is about three feet). Since that time,
studies have been appearing in the literature, showing that
fibers of this size not only cause cancer in laboratory animals,
but also cause changes in the activity and chemical composition
of cells, leading to changes in the genetic structure and in the
cellular immune system. Although these cell changes may be more
common (and possibly more important) than cancer, it is the
cancer-causing aspects of synthetic fibers that have received
most attention.
The cancer alert hit the front page of the NEW YORK TIMES March
15, 1987: “Emerging evidence that fiberglass and other
manufactured mineral fibers may cause lung cancer and other
diseases is creating a sensitive, potentially farreaching public
health issue.” The TIMES went on to discuss several recent
scientific studies showing that excessive lung cancer can be
observed among workers exposed to mineral fibers on the job. At
a meeting of the World Health Organization in Copenhagen in
October, 1986, three studies of worker health reported
significant increases in lung cancer among workers exposed to
mineral fibers. Dr. Philip Enterline, professor of biostatistics
at Pittsburgh University’s School of Public Health, told the NEW
YORK TIMES that the data he presented at Copenhagen were
“surprising,” given the low levels of exposure among the workers
he studied. “It may yet turn out that these fibers have to be
controlled the way asbestos is controlled,” he said.
The federal EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) seems
dimly aware that this problem is a sleeping giant. Dr. David L.
Dull, acting director of the chemical control division of the EPA
told the TIMES, “Some evidence suggests we ought to treat it as a
serious problem and regulate it like asbestos.” Dr. Dull also
told the TIMES, “If I had a choice of being exposed to asbestos
at current exposure levels and to respirable manmade fibers, I
would breathe asbestos every time because the exposure limits are
so much more stringent.”
The U.S. now consumes more than a billion pounds of synthetic
mineral fibers each year–approximately the same as our
consumption of asbestos was during peak years of use (the ’70s).
The vast majority of synthetic fibers are not small enough to
fall within the dangerous size-range–only a small fraction of
the total mass of fiberglass, for example, consists of fibers
thinner than 3 microns and longer than 20 microns. Nevertheless,
a small fraction of a billion pounds represents a tremendous
quantity of tiny, dangerous fibers dumped into the environment
year after year. And consumption increases each year as these
fibers replace asbestos. Furthermore, industry is constantly
striving to make glass fibers smaller and smaller because the
smallest fibers are most useful (they have the best insulating
properties, for example). Three scientific researchers in 1970
summed up the outlook for fiberglass: “Recent advances in
reducing the diameter of the fibers and the development of new
coating materials will aid in the development of countless new
products. The fibrous glass manufacturers believe that most
homes will be constructed out of or decorated with some material
made of fiberglass.” Today, eighteen years later, this prediction
has come true. Synthetic fibers are a $3 billion-a-year industry.
So far as we know, regulatory officials have never asked where
asbestos and fiberglass go after they are dumped into a landfill.
However, back in the early ’70s, the National Insulation
Manufacturers Association hired three scientists to evaluate
contamination of the general environment by fiberglass. Their
papers were never published, but were made available to us by one
of the researchers himself.
The three researchers began by finding glass fibers in the air
inside public buildings and they wanted to find the source. They
discovered it was outdoor air that contains the fibers. They
then began looking at outdoor pollution. They found that they
could measure glass fibers in the air on a remote, rural mountain
top in California. Where was it coming from?
“A point source of airborne glass and other fibers was found to
be a disposal site (landfill of San Francisco Bay) where
industrial waste containing fibrous materials had been disposed
of for many years. A sample of the dust cloud generated by a
moving passenger car driven in a circle approximately 100 yards
in diameter over the compacted surface of this site gave a
concentration of approximately 500 glass fibers [per] liter….
A sample taken about 100 yards downwind from several earthmoving
and compacting machines at work on the site… showed
concentrations of 300 glass fibers [per] liter…..”
Our landfills are enormous repositories of asbestos and synthetic
fibers. It is clear that, as time passes, natural erosion
releases some of this material back into the atmosphere. In less
than two generations, we have contaminated the entire atmosphere
of the United States with glass fibers, even the most remote
areas. Encasing fibers in epoxy-like blocks before disposal
should reduce the problem substantially. An even better solution
would be to stop using synthetic fibers. For the majority of
uses, alternative materials already exist. What seems lacking is
the will to switch.
(For citations to the unpublished work, see “Fiber Glass,”
ENVIRONMENT MAGAZINE, Sept., 1974, pgs. 6-9.)
–Peter Montague, Ph.D.
Descriptor terms: landfilling; asbestos; fiberglass;
particulates; cancer; air pollution; carcinogens; mearl stanton;
nci; studies; findings; lung cancer; occupational safety and
health; who; philip enterline; epa; david dull; mineral fibers;
synthetic mineral fibers; ca;