
For over three decades, CEHN has been a leading advocate for evidence-based child-protective policy, preventive research, and education on children’s environmental health, collaborating with diverse stakeholders to promote a healthier future for children.
This podcast conversation explores the intersection of climate change and chemical pollution.
Highlighting opportunities to address both crises simultaneously while improving public health, equity, and economic vitality, featuring experts Dr. Elizabeth Sawin and Beverley Thorpe.
A new report reveals that low-income countries, despite using less plastic, face lifetime plastic costs that are ten times higher than those of wealthier nations.
This disparity highlights the structural inequities within the plastics value chain, where the burdens of plastic pollution fall disproportionately on those least equipped to address them, exacerbating the crisis. WWF urges all governments to adopt a treaty with harmonized, binding global rules to eliminate these inequities in our current take, make, and waste plastics system. Such a treaty is essential to ensure a fair and effective global response to plastic pollution.
In this article, journalists investigate the American Chemistry Council’s promotion of chemical recycling, contrasting it with environmentalists’ concerns and highlighting issues found at Braven Environmental’s facility, suggesting that chemical recycling may not be as environmentally friendly or commercially viable as claimed.
This report explores the association between racially discriminatory housing practices from the 1930s and exposure to oil and gas wells, highlighting the impact of structural racism on environmental exposure disparities in urban areas.
Also referred to as social determinants of health , these conditions range from access to and quality of education, transport, and health care services to housing conditions and the toxics and pollutants we are exposed to in the neighborhoods we live in.
While definitions may vary around what these conditions are and which should be prioritized, there is general consensus that:
In alignment with efforts tackling the root causes of health inequities, Healthy Building Network (HBN) entered into a partnership with United Renters for Justice (IX), a nonprofit working to transform the Minneapolis housing system, to reduce tenant exposures to toxic chemicals used in building products. Funded through an Environmental Assistance grant by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), this collaborative project prioritized toxic exposure reduction in areas designated to be of environmental justice (EJ) concern by the MPCA. EJ concern areas include tribal land and census tracts with higher concentrations of low-income residents and people of color – communities that are disproportionately impacted by toxic chemical exposures and other forms of pollution.
This collaboration provided the unique opportunity to embrace the perspective of tenants in the co-creation of resources to help them make informed decisions about the products used in their housing units and common areas. Specifically, this meant designing resources that would leverage IX’s organization and mobilization skills as well as the structure of a recently established tenant cooperative, “A Sky Without Limits.” Also, it meant increasing information accessibility, for example, through the use of non-technical language and making the resources available in both English and Spanish.
Tenant organizations and other stakeholders can access HBN’s healthier building product guidance at informed.habitablefuture.org and by watching this 10-minute seminar video:
Watch the Seminar (English)
Ver el Seminario (Español)
This high-level, 10-minute recording can be used to educate the general public (e.g., tenant meetings) about the importance of avoiding toxic products. It begins by breaking down myths and misconceptions around the perceived hazards and safety of natural and synthetic chemicals and discusses how toxic products impact individuals and families, especially children, along the lifecycle of products.
By empowering the people most affected by toxic chemical exposures to advocate for and create change in their living conditions, this project creates avenues for creating a safer environment for all. Anyone who influences product purchasing decisions – including manufacturers, building owners, managers, developers, architects, investors, policy makers, and consumers – has the power and responsibility to reduce health inequities for those using or exposed to those products every day. This includes residents, workers, installers, and the communities that surround the facilities where these materials are processed and disposed of. By making material health a priority in your decision-making processes, you’ll be joining efforts to tackle the root causes of health inequities in communities around the world. Visit informed.habitablefuture.org to learn how our building product guidance can help you make better material choices.
In this case study, Healthy Building Network and Energy Efficiency for All teamed up to apply a framework for considering life cycle chemical and environmental justice impacts to the primary component of fiberglass insulation: glass fibers.
The case study explores the chemical hazards associated with the manufacture of glass fibers and the localized impacts that facilities have on communities and workers. It includes an example of chemical movements within the supply chain and highlights end of life scenarios for fiberglass insulation. Overall findings are coupled with specific recommendations for policymakers and for manufacturers throughout the supply chain.
Supporting Documents:
In this case study, Healthy Building Network and Energy Efficiency for All teamed up to apply a framework for considering life cycle chemical and environmental justice impacts to the primary component of spray polyurethane foam insulation: isocyanates.
The case study explores the chemical hazards associated with the manufacture of isocyanates and the localized impacts that facilities have on communities and workers. It includes an example of chemical movements within the supply chain and highlights end of life scenarios for SPF. Overall findings are coupled with specific recommendations for policymakers and for manufacturers throughout the supply chain.
Supporting Documents:
Insulation selection has generally focused on prioritizing a product’s ability to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from building operation, though increasingly considerations include GHG emissions from a material’s life cycle, from manufacture through disposal (known as embodied carbon).
However, this singular focus on GHGs fails to account for other harmful emissions associated with the life cycle of these materials, including toxic pollution that disproportionately burdens Black, Indigenous, people of color (BIPOC), and/or low-income communities. As billions of pounds of new insulation is being installed in buildings each year, failure to address these toxic impacts will mean that building decarbonization efforts will further entrench environmental injustice.
Healthy Building Network (HBN) joined NRDC and Energy Efficiency for All in an analysis of the life cycle chemical and environmental justice impacts of two popular building insulation materials—fiberglass and spray polyurethane foam (SPF).
The analysis found that both SPF and fiberglass release pollution into BIPOC communities over their life cycles, but SPF carries a much heavier pollution burden. The combined population surrounding the facilities that manufacture the key ingredient of SPF has almost double the percentage of Latino people compared to the U.S. overall. These facilities reported releasing an average of about 560,000 pounds of related hazardous chemicals every year and have a history of noncompliance with EPA regulations. Our previous research also found that spray foam has significant hazardous chemical concerns during installation and use in buildings.
Regarding embodied carbon, while the specifics vary, studies (such as here, here, and here) consistently show that closed cell SPF has significantly higher embodied carbon per R-value than fiberglass insulation. Further, SPF is made from almost entirely fossil fuel-derived inputs, with no recovery, reuse, or recycling of the material—necessitating continued extraction and refining of fossil fuels to produce this insulation product. Overall, comparing material health, environmental justice, and embodied carbon impacts between SPF and fiberglass, fiberglass is preferable on all accounts.
However, fiberglass manufacturing still releases hazardous pollution into communities who are disproportionately BIPOC and/or low income, and many fiberglass facilities have exhibited regular noncompliance with EPA regulations. Fiberglass manufacturers can reduce and eliminate such pollution by using less hazardous chemistries. For example, all four U.S. manufacturers reported reduced releases of formaldehyde by changing to safer binder formulations for many of their products between 2002 and 2015.
Why It Matters
As laid out in the Equitable and Just National Climate Platform:
“To achieve our [climate] goals, we will need to overcome past failures that have led us to the crisis conditions we face today. Past failures include the perpetuation of systemic inequalities that have left communities of color, tribal communities, and low-income communities exposed to the highest levels of toxic pollution and the most burdened and affected by climate change. The defining environmental crisis of our time now demands an urgency to act. Yet this urgency must not displace or abandon the fundamental principles of democracy and justice…Unless justice and equity are central components of our climate agenda, the inequality of the carbon-based economy will be replicated in the new economy.”
To truly be part of a just and equitable transition to a clean economy, climate solutions like building insulation must advance the well-being of BIPOC and low-income communities. We recommend that embodied chemical and environmental justice impacts drive material decision-making on par with consideration of GHG emissions.
Your Action Today = Healthier, More Just Future
In general, there are significant opportunities to improve the life cycle of building insulation materials through avoiding hazardous chemicals, implementing circularity, and taking other actions stemming from the principles of green chemistry and environmental justice.
Manufacturers and policymakers should advance transparency about what is in a product, how and where it is made, and the hazardous releases that occur throughout its life cycle. In the meantime, those who choose building materials can start by avoiding hazardous chemicals in a product’s content to help protect not only building occupants and installers, but also others impacted by those hazardous chemicals throughout the supply chain. Our InformedTM product guidance can help you choose safer materials.
All stakeholders–including manufacturers, policymakers, and those who choose building materials–should support the leadership of frontline communities and make changes to their own practice so that all families have healthy places to live, learn, work, and play.
This chapter in ILFI’s book The Regenerative Materials Economy explores the often overlooked life cycle chemical and environmental justice impacts of building materials, focusing on insulation materials like fiberglass and spray polyurethane foam (SPF).
Through a framework rooted in green chemistry and environmental justice principles, authors Rebecca Stamm of HBN and Veena Singla of NRDC analyze manufacturing realities, environmental justice concerns, and environmental health impacts, providing recommendations to improve the industry’s sustainability and reduce the negative effects on marginalized communities.