Our study found, among other things, that the Gulf Coast region (which includes Mossville) is home to nine facilities that use outmoded asbestos technology, and home also to some of the industry’s worst polluters: Five of the six largest emitters of dioxins––a long lasting, extremely toxic family of hazardous waste that causes cancer and many other health impacts, are located there. The Bennets reminded the EPA that according to studies by a division of the Centers for Disease Control, Mossville residents have three times higher levels of dioxin in their blood than average Americans, and the dioxin levels found in their yards and attic dust exceed regulatory standards typically used for toxic waste remediations of industrial sites. Even the vegetables in their gardens tested positive for dioxin.

When I think about why we fight so hard to exclude PVC from any palette of green, healthy, or sustainable building materials, I think first of people like Delma and Christine. I then think about the many non-profits, government agencies, and private enterprises dedicated to recycling. Way back in the 1990’s, the industry Association of Plastic Recyclers declared PVC a contaminant to the recycling stream. A generation later, a 2016 study by the Circular Economy evangelist Ellen MacArthur Foundation called out PVC packaging for global phase-out, citing low recycling rates and chemical hazard concerns. Much of the concern about PVC packaging is driven by worries about ocean pollution.  HBN’s study found that at least one U.S. PVC manufacturer is routinely dumping tons of PVC pellets into local waterways and refusing to stop even after being ordered to do so by the state of Texas.

The list goes on. Our report documents the types of industrial pollution in addition to dioxin that could be reduced or avoided by a switch to more recyclable plastics that are not made with the chlorine that is an essential ingredient of PVC, including ozone depleting and potent global warming gasses. HBN’s earlier studies have documented the hazards posed by legacy pollutants that are returning to our consumer products in recycled PVC content––heavy metals such as lead, and endocrine-disrupting plasticizers known as phthalates.

In a report released by StopWaste and the Healthy Building Network, we take an in-depth look at the health implications, supply chain considerations, and potential to scale up recycling of the world’s most common plastic: polyethylene (aka PE). [1] This report, Post-Consumer Polyethylene in Building Products, is the latest installment in our Optimizing Recycling series.

Polyethylene is a material widely used in product packaging, beverage containers, and myriad consumer products. High Density Polyethylene (HDPE), Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE), and Linear Low Density Polyethylene (LLDPE) are all readily recyclable in California. Polyethylene plastic scrap bottles and plastic bags usually have minimal contents of concern and are easily processed into feedstock for new products, including building materials. Despite the great potential for recovery of PE, sizeable barriers stand in the way of a lot more recycling.

The explosive growth in virgin ethylene production on the U.S. Gulf Coast, driven by cheap energy, has meant that most post-consumer scrap PE is either landfilled, incinerated, or sent overseas for processing. [2]

A half-century ago, the federal government started regulating solid wastes and preventing rampant dumping in the woods, ocean, and unlined dumps. Then the so-called Not-In-My-Backyard (NIMBY) movement of the 1970s and 1980s prevented scores of landfills and incinerators from being permitted across the country, just as existing disposal sites were reaching capacity. There were also spectacular failures at waste sites that made headlines. Coal ash ponds failed, releasing contaminated waste into rivers and drinking water. Giant piles of tires caught on fire, and came to symbolize the crisis of growing piles of waste. 

In response, environmental agencies partnered with waste generators like the coal power and tire industries to find ways to reduce the amount of their wastes going to landfills. The US Environmental Protection Agency developed an option called “beneficial use,” in which these wastes could be diverted to build roads, fill old mines, and turn wastelands into golf courses. Some of these “beneficial uses” hit literally close to home; coal waste has been diverted into wallboard and carpet backing, tires into flooring, and contaminated soils into our own backyards, without any regulation.

Many factors contribute to the development and aggravation of asthma. However, I am wondering whether the installation of PVC flooring in my bathroom and kitchen contributed to the worsening of my breathing.

The floor was laid three years ago. A slow leak under my sink went unnoticed until the downstairs’ neighbor’s ceiling fell. About this time, my life-long respiratory ailments worsened.

Scientists are investigating the relationship between moisture, PVC flooring, and asthma.

In Sweden, a study of 10,851 children found the presence of both floor moisture and PVC significantly increased the risk of asthma.[1] The incidences were higher in multiple family dwellings where a higher percentage of PVC flooring was found.

Many workers in an office building in Finland, over a short period of time, were diagnosed with adult-onset asthma at a rate of about 16 times higher than expected.[2] An investigation uncovered in the office air space high levels of volatile chemicals, such as 2-ethyl-l-hexanol, l-butanol, which are degradation by-products of vinyl. The problem was traced back to damp concrete surfaces below the PVC flooring.

The PVC flooring was removed and surface of the concrete slab warmed up enough to remove the volatiles that had been diffused within. In rooms cleaned up in this manner and floors replaced with ceramic tile, the emissions of the three main volatiles (2-ethyl-l-hexanol, l-butanol, and 3-heptanone) decreased, as did employees’ symptoms and many asthma patients’ needs for medication.

To make it less brittle, PVC is coated with plasticizers called phthalates. These chemicals evaporate and enter the air space where they adhere to dust particles.[3] New research shows that dust from homes containing PVC floors has higher levels of phthalates – particularly di(2-ethylhexyl) (DEHP) – than dust from homes without vinyl floors. One recent case-control study found an association between dust concentrations of phthalates inside homes and asthma, rhinitis and eczema.[4] The presence of PVC flooring in the child’s bedroom was the strongest predictor of respiratory ailments.

Other studies reach similar conclusions,[5] with one recommending “avoidance of PVC flooring in homes with small children” as a simple first step.[6]

Avoiding PVC flooring isn’t difficult, but it’s often disregarded as a cost-cutting measure.

Meanwhile, the costs associated with the increase in rates of asthma keep adding up. According to officials in my home state of Massachusetts, asthma is the number one preventable cost to hospitals.[7]

Prescription costs, doctors’ fees, lost wages due to time off from work for parents of asthmatic children, and the un-quantifiable cost of school absenteeism add up to a hefty burden for families and society.

Alternatives to PVC that are easier on the lungs exist today.

By switching to safer products we could be offering a child the priceless gift of easy breathing.
Guest columnist Niaz Dorry is a veteran activist and writer living in Gloucester, Massachusetts. She works with small-scale, traditional, and indigenous fishing communities in the U.S. and from around the globe to advance the rights and ecological benefits of the small-scale fishing communities as a means of protecting global protect marine biodiversity. In 1998, Time Magazine named Niaz as a Hero For The Planet for this work. Her fisheries articles appear regularly in a range of publications.

Chlorine gas kills and maims in a manner so heinous that it was banned as a chemical weapon after the battlefield experiences of World War I. Today, according to the Washington Post, anti-terrorist experts say there is “little doubt that plants storing large amounts of chlorine and other toxic chemicals are potential terrorist targets.” These chemicals are even more vulnerable while in transit, as the Wall Street Journal proved by following graffiti artists as they “tagged” chlorine tank cars within site of the US Capitol building, long after 9-11.

One morning ten years ago, I was at work on a book about environmental health when the phone rang. It was my Uncle Roy. He wanted me to know that a developer had come to town peddling a plan to construct a giant waste incinerator in the cornfield next to his own. What the man was planning to burn in it, he said, was old auto interiors, including a lot of PVC plastic. If the people of the township went along, the company would build the school a new library.

Now how did they know we needed a library, my uncle wondered. And what did I know about a chemical called dioxin? Funny he should ask. I was just drafting that chapter.

So I took leave of the Harvard Medical School Library and went back home to library-less central Illinois to throw my hat in the ring with my mother’s brother and a group of other farmers who had vowed to fight the incinerator.

And we won. Not only did Forrest, Illinois vote down the incinerator plan, it was defeated in six other small, impoverished farming communities where the same developer had dangled it. People looked out at their turkeys, hogs, and fields of corn and imagined what could happen if one semi-truck full of dioxin-laden incinerator ash overturned on a windy day. It just wasn’t worth the risk, they decided.

A decade later, central Illinoisians are confronted with a similar choice. This time it involves the manufacture of PVC rather than its destruction.