Posted by Rebecca McDaniel on Mon, Dec 14, 2009 @ 06:31 AM
By Jason Atwood, Field Service Manager
In
recent months, public scrutiny surrounding the presence of PCB's in
materials commonly used in public school building construction prior to
1978 has been mounting. Media coverage and an onslaught of resulting
attention have forced this issue to the forefront of public health and
safety concerns pertaining to our environment. Typically - this focus
has been aimed at the presence of the contaminated caulking itself: in
window glazing/caulking, interior and exterior joint compounds, in
Univent construction, paints, etc.
While building inspections
and intensive sampling plans will certainly illustrate the cause of
concern (I.E. The presence of PCB contaminated material is the crux of
the issue), the true effect may not become evident without a stringent
air monitoring / sampling plan. PCBs do not become an immediate hazard
until they are ingested into the human body, be it through consumption,
absorption or inhalation.
The latter may be the issue of
greatest concern in the context of classroom hazards. PCBs have the
ability to volatilize - that is tiny particles of the material can
vaporize from the solid state and become airborne, a process that is
expedited with the presence of heat. Window caulking and glazing
subject to extended exposure to the sun, PCB ballast material that may
leak inside of fluorescent lighting and PCB containing material within
or immediately around HVAC systems all pose a significant risk for
volatilization. Once airborne, PCB particles mix with other sources of
airborne dust and can be directly inhaled, or can deposit on horizontal
surfaces and then be ingested or absorbed.
To ensure your
school department engages in a robust and encompassing risk assessment
plan, it is imperative that they focus not only on potentially impacted
materials, but also on the byproducts of those materials in the form of
airborne PCB concentrations and associated surface dusts. The EPA has
established guidelines for acceptable PCB concentrations for both of
these medias, taking into account all potential sources of human
ingestions of PCBs and how those risks align with the risks outlined
herein. These guidelines can be found here.
As
with all environmental concerns, effective assessment is essential in
the development of a risk management plan. PCBs in building materials,
air, dusts, and soil are all manageable risks that can mitigated
through effective remediation efforts. As public scrutiny surrounding
this issue has intensified, so also has our ability in the
environmental services industry to protect families from future
exposure and the resulting detrimental health effects.
Posted by Rebecca McDaniel on Thu, Dec 10, 2009 @ 11:09 AM
By Kristina Florentino, Environmental Compliance Specialist
An emerging environmental health issue is information published
by the Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) that caulk containing
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) was used in many nonresidential
buildings, including schools, throughout the 1950s through the 1970s.
PCBs are man-made toxic chemicals that persist in the environment and
bioaccumulate in animals and humans. Exposure to PCBs can affect the
immune system, reproductive system, nervous system, and endocrine
system and is potentially cancer-causing. Caulk is used in construction
to seal gaps to make windows, door frames, masonry and joints in
buildings watertight or airtight. Before the prohibition of PCBs in all
U.S.-manufactured products in 1977, caulk was prepared with PCBs due to
the flexibility and other valuable properties of the compound such as
persistence and low reactivity. Buildings that were constructed or
renovated during this period could contain caulking with elevated
levels of these hazardous compounds.
Until recently, testing was seldom conducted for PCB levels and
there have been few studies to determine the environmental exposures to
building occupants, remediation or construction workers, or related
environmental contamination. The material will evidently deteriorate
and leach PCBs into nearby soil, concrete pads, bricks, mortar, storm
drains and potentially volatilize. Studies have shown a correlation
between PCBs in caulking and elevated levels of PCBs in indoor air and
dust, in addition to ambient soil surrounding the buildings. The
deteriorating caulk has the highest potential for creating dust
exposing occupants via inhalation. In addition to inhalation from PCBs
in the air or dust, dermal exposure may occur when a person comes in
contact with the caulk, surrounding porous materials, or
PCB-contaminated soil adjacent to buildings.
The US EPA recommends indoor air monitoring to determine if PCB
levels exceed the suggested public health levels. If testing reveals
PCB levels above these levels, the potential sources of PCBs need to be
identified. Typically testing of samples of caulk, dust, and soil is
performed. If elevated air levels of PCBs are found, it is also
recommended that the ventilation system be evaluated to determine if it
is contaminated with PCBs, since it may have been contaminated before
other sources of PCBs were removed from the building and may be
contributing to elevated air levels. Contaminated ventilation systems
need to be decontaminated along with removal of any sources of PCBs
that are found to avoid recontamination of the system.
EPA is currently researching PCB exposure related to
contaminated caulk and looking into methods for mitigating exposure and
potential risks associated with PCBs in caulk. In addition to the risk
posed by PCBs caulk can also contain as much as 20 percent asbestos,
requiring additional management during sampling and disposal.
Resources:
MA DEP PCB Q&A,
US EPA, Target Indoor Air Levels published by the EPA
Herrick,
R. F., Lefkowitz, D. J., & Weymouth, G. A. (2007). Soil
Contamination from PCB-Containing Buildings. Environmental Health
Perspectives , 115 (2), 173-175.
Look for future consulting blogs
about environmental health and safety, and industrial hygiene topics
including mercury, lead and heavy metals. Please contact Triumvirate’s
consulting group for more information. We have Environmental Engineers
and Consultants ready to answer your questions.
Posted by Rebecca McDaniel on Wed, Dec 02, 2009 @ 10:30 AM
By Mike Farrell, Disposal Coordinator
Black Friday…Cyber Monday..We’re being inundated with news and flyers advertising the best deals that are worth stampeding a WalMart for. Also out there are all the black market rip off products available from overseas, everything from DVD’s to household cleaners. Make sure you’re getting what you pay for.
If you’re a manufacturer make sure you’re doing your part to keep returned or damaged goods and off-spec products off the shelves and damaging your brand name. Triumvirate helps clients destroy, and when possible, responsibly recycle all kinds of consumer products and trade secret raw materials. We can manage a wide range of materials through various technologies such as shredding, waste to energy incineration and even ethanol recovery of that awful fragrance Grandma sent you from last Christmas.
Happy Holidays!
Posted by Rebecca McDaniel on Tue, Nov 03, 2009 @ 01:41 PM
By Kate Carpenter, Technical Services Representative
In time of intense hurricanes and killer earthquakes, we are searching for the answers as to why these supposedly natural disasters are occurring. Human impact on the environment is hotly debated to be directly responsible for the destruction.
It has been proven in several cases that physical changes to the landscape have been responsible for creating earthquakes. Coal mining can create stress and change the tectonic force creating quakes such as the one in Newcastle in New South Wales on December 28, 1989. Also, the building of dams creating what is known as “hydrofracturing” where the change in the weight of the water stresses the unstable faults and fractures of the ground underneath. The deadly earthquake in China’s Sichuan Province in 2009 is attributed to Zipingpu Reservoir, a four-year-old reservoir built close to the earthquake’s geological fault line.
Changing the landscape near rivers, taking away the vegetation and natural occurring structures that absorb the land and replacing them with building and flat roads can lead to flooding. In addition to this, we often build large communities in the flood plains which can lead to large human loss of life and material.
There was a recent study that suggested global warming caused by human influences is directly responsible for the warming of the oceans (over 1 degree over the past century) which in turns fuels the intensity of hurricanes. This could be linked back to the deforestation and greenhouse gases. While it is not as widely accepted as the previous theories, all of these so called natural disasters should be a wakeup call to us to care for the world we live in and be more conscientious about our effect. We need to respect the power nature holds and not tempt fate by building dams on fault lines or constructing cities in flood plains. Furthermore, following the green movement such as biking or carpooling when possible, using reusable grocery bags, printing double sided and taking tossing cans in the recycle bin instead of the trash may appear insignificant but can slowly add up to counter effect the negative impact our lives have thus caused. What else can you do to help?
Posted by Rebecca McDaniel on Mon, Sep 14, 2009 @ 01:35 PM
By Kevin Poulin, Account Manager
A potentially significant environmental health and safety concern was brought to the public’s attention this past week in the Boston Sunday Globe. The article written by Beth Daley confirms what many environmental officials have suspected for years, that high levels of PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) are present in many older New England schools. The high levels of PCBs used in the caulking applied to various parts of these buildings are now in a deteriorating condition. Tests have shown PCBs are finding their way into the soils around these buildings in concentrations above the regulatory limit through the weathering process and actual physical pieces falling off of these structures. Some tests are now being conducted to verify if this material is potentially becoming an airborne hazard inside these structures.
PCBs were used primarily in office buildings and schools during the 1960s and 1970s, but were banned in the late 1970s when extensive researched exposed that they may cause cancer. Unfortunately, there are no regulations in place that require schools to test for PCBs. If a school does test for PCBs and the results come back above the regulatory limit of 50 parts per million, the school is required to address the problem. Although the schools can choose not to test for PCBs, they may be jeopardizing the health and safety of their students and faculty.
EPA has mandated remediation projects at several New England Universities. At least two others have done abatement projects on their own. However, the majority of schools are waiting until further guidance or regulations are put in place.
Many of these institutions are struggling with the decision to address this issue from an ethical, and health/safety point of view. If a school decides to test for PCBs in building components and results demonstrate their presence, the costs associated with the solution can be overwhelming. The only EPA-approved abatement methods include the removal of the infrastructure that has come in contact with the PCB-laden material. This has caused abatement projects in individual buildings to cost millions.
These institutions are one of New England’s most valuable resources, which directly and indirectly make up a huge part of our local economy. Many schools are already struggling in this down economy. On the other side of the equation is the already enormous cost for students and their families who are attending these institutions. We cannot afford to place any more stress on these resources that help define the New England area in so many ways. On the other hand, the colleges and universities along with EPA, need to find a practical solution to look beyond the money and realize that their first priority should be the people who work, live, and attend school there. Perhaps they should look to the lessons learned from the last evil spirit called asbestos.
Triumvirate Environmental has been actively engaged on this issue for the past 5 years with policy/strategy development, testing programs, project/remediation management, as well as developing innovative, cost-saving remedial approaches. Contact us today for information or assistance on this issue.
Posted by Rebecca McDaniel on Mon, Sep 14, 2009 @ 07:11 AM
By Meghan Sunyar, Technical Services Representative
Nearly all companies use paper. In the past few years, many companies have made the switch to reduce their environmental impact by recycling paper. Like most consumer products the environmental impacts of using paper occurs across the paper life-cycle, starting from forests, to paper mills, to point of use, to landfills and recycling centers. Collecting paper for recycling and buying recycled paper will ultimately lessen the overall demand for wood, energy and at the mill recycled paper takes less chemicals to product new postconsumer paper.
Not all paper can be 100% recycled due to fact that if you can only recycle - recycled paper for so long before the pump fibers degrade beyond use. Therefore, there will be virgin fiber in recycled paper but recycling will reduced the amount of trees to be harvested. Recycling one ton of paper saves about 17 trees from being cut down. It is cleaner to produce recycled paper then virgin because the chlorine-containing chemicals used to bleach virgin pulp often release chlorinated organic by-products in the form of dioxins and furans into our environment. The EPA has found that recycling causes 35% less water pollution and 74% less air pollution than making virgin paper. To add to the benefits the amount of energy to produce recycled paper is about 40% less then producing virgin paper. Mills will burn pulp that is no longer usable for recycle as fuel to operate their facilities. Although burning wood products and fossil fuels release greenhouse gases, the pulp already has invested fossil fuels from its virgin manufacturing. Therefore, the amount of greenhouse gases is essentially recycled.
The environmental impacts of papermaking are complex, but the basic conclusion is that recycled paper is better for the environment then virgin paper. Simple tips to reducing paper use are keep documents electrically based, print only when needed and buy recycled paper!
Posted by Rebecca McDaniel on Fri, Sep 11, 2009 @ 01:27 PM
By Rider Foley, Operations Manager
Earlier this week, during the dark of night, a company set about to illegally dump drums of hazardous waste in a small town of Connecticut. Alert residents noticed the activity and called authorities. Quickly, the news surfaced that over 8 locations had been used as illegal dumping sites.
The moral: Please do your homework and check out the transporter, end disposal facilities, and ensure that all parties involved are going to follow the regulations and keep hazardous waste out of our water and soil.
Don’t assume everyone is going to do what they say – it is your responsibility to properly dispose of hazardous waste.
Go to this link to learn more: http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/hartford_cty/news_wtnh_bristol_illegal_dumping_sites_investigated_200908170517
Posted by Rebecca McDaniel on Thu, Sep 10, 2009 @ 02:27 PM
By Kristina Florentino, Chemist III
A popular topic in today’s media is sustainability. Many companies want to minimize their ecological footprint by becoming environmentally sustainable. Businesses strive for financial sustainability to provide job security to their employees. A human resources department wants to maintain a sustainable workforce by providing a great working environment, thus ensuring employee longevity. As you can see, sustainability has different meanings to different people. What some people don’t realize is how close these three ideas of sustainability are related.
In order to understand the correlation between these topics, you must first understand the triple bottom line approach to sustainability. Briefly put, the triple bottom line argues that instead of one bottom line (financial), there are in fact three bottom lines for true sustainability: financial, environmental, and social. If a product, or idea, meets these three criteria, then you have true sustainability.
In order to become sustainable, you have to do more than just use “green” products. You have to make sure these products improve all three bottom lines. What good is a “green” product if it costs too much to buy, or use? If a product improves the environment, but doesn’t make financial sense, it might not be a wise decision for a company to invest in, as it may cause a decrease in financial assets, and potentially lead to dreaded layoffs. Not very sustainable!
As this may all seem confusing and overwhelming, let’s take a look at a common issue faced by businesses. Most company’s wants to improve their environmental footprint, and one way to do that is use more sustainable paper sources. What exactly is meant by more sustainable paper sources? This could mean recycled paper, developing electronic paper, using sustainable ink supplies, etc. For the purpose of answering this question, let’s focus on switching from the use of petroleum-based inks to soybean oil.
Is soybean oil based ink a sustainable product? How do we know? We would have to check to make sure this product improves the company’s triple bottom line. First, let’s look at the environmental bottom line.
Petroleum based inks contain a significant amount of volatile organic compounds (VOC). The Clean Air Act Amendments regulate overall VOC emissions from printers, so the extent to which inks contribute to VOCs is important. The VOCs contained in ink are benzene, xylene, toluene, and ethylbenzene.
If we replace petroleum based inks with soybean oil, how does this affect the environmental bottom line? There is a reason the Clean Air Act regulates these chemicals. The Clean Air Act is the law that defines EPA's responsibilities for protecting and improving the nation's air quality and the stratospheric ozone layer. Chemicals are regulated by the Clean Air Act because they cause harm to human health and/or the environment. Removing these chemicals from the ink, improves overall air quality, effectively contributing to the company’s environmental bottom line.
The company’s social bottom line can also be advanced by switching to soybean oil based inks. As mentioned before, petroleum-based inks contain benzene. Research has shown benzene to be a carcinogen. Long-term exposure to benzene may affect bone marrow and blood production. Short-term exposure to high levels of benzene can cause drowsiness, dizziness, unconsciousness, and death. As you can imagine, benzene is a hazardous chemical that is not socially acceptable.
Financially, soy ink often costs more than conventional inks, but the cost is expected to decrease. In addition to the cost of soy ink decreasing, the costs of petroleum based products are expected to increase as the effect of global peak oil intensifies. The combination of decreasing soybean oil cost and increasing petroleum based products will ultimately lead to cost savings. Moreover, there are unseen costs associated with petroleum-based inks. For example, not using these chemicals will bypass regulations set forth by the Clean Air Act, and potential monetary violations will be avoided, further improving the financial bottom line.
Posted by Rebecca McDaniel on Wed, Sep 09, 2009 @ 09:16 AM
By Kate Carpenter, Technical Services Representative
As many of us are firing up our grills for the cookout season, we may also be increasing our chance of colorectal, pancreatic, and breast cancers. There has been increasing amount of reports warning us of dire consequences if we consume a charbroiled hotdog, but is it enough of a threat to give up the grill?
When cooking at high temperatures, two things may happen. The high heat may break down the creatine in meats and form heterocyclic amines (HCAs) which are present in the blackened crust. In January of 2005, the federal government officially added HCA’s to its known carcinogen list. Additionally, the fat from meat can drip down into the flames of the grill and produce a smoke that contains polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). These PAHs can coat the food when rising in smoke form and are thought to be carcinogenic as well.
The impact of these studies showing the carcinogenic effects of grilled meat depends on your personal preferences. Marinating meat has been shown to significantly decrease HCA formation. Also selecting leaner cuts that will drip less fat, and cooking them just to the desire doneness and not charring them will help. If you cannot stand the thought of pink meat, wrapping your steak or burger in foil will help it cook thoroughly while minimizing char. You can also omit meat all together as grilling vegetables or fruits does not show the same link to cancer. Lastly, ensuring that your grill is clean and there is no residue will prevent flare ups and eliminate extra char. Grilling can still be a healthy option if you observe a few tricks, and, like everything, practice moderation.
Posted by Rebecca McDaniel on Wed, Sep 09, 2009 @ 09:04 AM
By Kate Carpenter, Technical Services Representative
Now with the assistance of the United States Government, you can trade in your gas guzzling clunker for a brand new fuel efficient model. Officially, this program is called the Car Allowance Rebate System or CARS but is also known by its media given name, “Cash for Clunkers”.
CARS provides a credit to purchase new fuel efficient cars after trading in your old model. There are a few requirements to this new law. Your vehicle must be less than 25 years old and must get less than 18 or less miles per gallon (although there are some exceptions, so check your local dealership), and you must purchase a new car that is a certain percentage better in MPG than your current ride. If you qualify, you can make out big on this deal. My brother just traded his 95 rusted out Ford truck, which has miraculously lasted this long in his hands, for $4500 credit towards a new Toyota Tacoma. Seeing how his car, although registered and insured for the past year, would not pass its coming inspection, this was his best possible option. Additionally, it also benefits the car dealerships. As we all know, the economic times have been especially difficult for the automotive industry. This deal allows for the selling of surplus stock on the car lot, and a local salesman recently said that he did not remember ever doing as much business this month before.
But this does not only help out those economically challenged, the environment benefits as well. For example, the average MPG of the 1995 F150 is 13. Talk about greenhouse gases! The average MPG of the 2009 Tacoma will be 23. That’s ten miles a gallon’s worth of fossil fuels that will not be discharged to the environment! With the mass buying of more fuel efficient cars, our fuel emissions will decrease. It is a great way to reduce gas emissions and help the flailing car economy at the same time, not to mention look stylish in your new whip as well.