|
Table of Contents
POPS Treaty Signed - Next Step: Senate Ratification In May 2001, EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman joined officials from 90 other countries in signing the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). This historic event is the result of nearly three years of negotiations, and has as its goal the eventual elimination of POPs worldwide, starting with a list that includes PCBs, DDT, and dioxins. The new treaty, one of many important initiatives growing out of the 1992 Earth Summit, represents the most ambitious effort by the global community to date to rein in and ultimately halt the proliferation of toxic chemicals. In December 2000 the POPs treaty was finalized by consensus of 122 governments, with the support of both chemical industry trade associations and environmental/public health groups including the more than 300 nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) participating in the International POPs Elimination Network. The treaty is based on:
Unlike other chemical treaties that rely on notification requirements or "end-of-pipe" pollution controls, the new convention calls for outright banning and destruction. The treaty is designed to eliminate or severely restrict production and use of some very dangerous pesticides and industrial chemicals; ensure environmentally sound management and chemical transformation or destruction of POPs waste and stockpiles; and prevent the emergence of new chemicals with POPs-like characteristics. The treaty commits the developed world to provide developing countries with significant financial and technical support so that they can successfully implement treaty provisions. The "Dirty Dozen" of POPs POPs chemicals were targeted because they exhibit a combination of particularly dangerous properties: they are toxic; they are persistent in the environment, resisting normal processes that break down contaminants; they accumulate in the body fat of people, marine mammals and other animals and are passed from mother to fetus; and they can travel great distances, typically from temperate and tropical regions to the poles, on wind and water currents. Because of this last trait, even though most of these named POPs have been banned or severely restricted in many countries, the only way to provide adequate protection is assuring global elimination. In addition, because they are widely recognized as being impossible to keep from escaping to the environment and causing harm once they are manufactured, the only way to prevent their effects is to not create them in the first place and eliminate those already there. Even very small quantities of POPs can be harmful, causing cancer and developmental disorders, as well as damage to the reproductive, nervous and immune systems. POP - Date of Definition and Primary Use Aldrin - 1949 - Insecticide used against soil pests (primarily termites) on corn, cotton and potatoes. Chlordane - 1945 - Insecticide now used primarily for termite control. DDT - 1942 - Insecticide now used mainly against mosquitoes for malaria control. Dieldrin - 1948 - Insecticide used on fruit, soil and seed crops, including corn, cotton and potatoes. Endrin - 1951 - Rodenticide and insecticide used on cotton, rice and corn. Heptachlor - 1948 - Insecticide used against soil insects, especially termites. Also used against fire ants and mosquitoes. Hexachlorobenzene - 1945 - Fungicide. Also a by-product of pesticide manufacturing and a contaminant of other pesticide products. Mirex - 1959 - Insecticide used on ants and termites. One of the most stable and persistent pesticides. Also a fire retardant. Toxaphene - 1948 - Insecticide used especially against ticks and mites. A mixture of up to 670 chemicals. PCBs - 1929 - Used primarily in capacitors and transformers, and in hydraulic and heat transfer systems. Also used in weatherproofing, carbonless copy paper, paint, adhesives and plasticizers in synthetic resins. Dioxins - 1920s - By-products of combustion (especially of plastics) and of chlorine product manufacturing and chlorine bleaching of paper. Furans - 1920s - By-products, especially of PCB manufacturing, often with dioxins (Source: Anne Platt McGinn, Why Poison Ourselves? A Precautionary Approach to Synthetic Chemicals, Worldwatch Paper 153, November 2000.) More information on the POPs treaty and citizen actions needed are available at: http://www.ipen.org - International POPs Elimination Networkhttp://www.unep.org/ - United Nations Environmental Program http://www.wwfus.org/toxics - World Wildlife Fund U. S. http://www.panna.org - Pesticide Action Network North America http://www.greenpeace.org - Greenpeace http://www.iisd.ca/chemical/pops5/ - Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) for an International Legally Binding Instrument on POPs Key Elements of the Stockholm POPs Convention Precaution and Public Participation as Guiding Principles Precaution and public participation are operationalized throughout the treaty, with explicit references in the preamble, objective, provisions for adding POPs and determination of best available technologies. The objective states: "Mindful of the precautionary approach as set forth in Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the objective of this Convention is to protect human health and the environment from persistent organic pollutants." Funding commitments enable all countries to participate Developed country parties commit to providing new and additional financial resources to developing country parties and parties with economies in transition. Adequacy, predictability and timely flow of funds are essential. The treaty calls for regular review by the Conference of Parties of both the level of funding and the effectiveness of performance of the institutions entrusted with the treaty's financial operations. On an interim basis, the Global Environment Facility (GEF) will serve as the treaty's principal financial mechanism. Eliminating intentionally produced POPs Of 12 targeted POPs, eight are pesticides, most of which are slated for immediate bans once the treaty takes effect. A longer phase-out is planned for certain PCB uses. DDT provisions include the goal of ultimate elimination, limiting use to disease vector (i.e. malaria) control in accordance with World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. The treaty calls for research, development and implementation of safe, effective and affordable alternatives to DDT. Parties that have regulatory and assessment schemes for new chemicals are called on to "take measures to regulate with the aim of preventing" the production and use of any new POPs. Ultimately eliminating by-product POPs For dioxins, furans and hexachlorobenzene, parties are called on to reduce total releases "with the goal of their continuing minimization and, where feasible, ultimate elimination." Rather than rely on end-of-pipe pollution control technologies, the treaty urges the use of substitute or modified materials, products and processes to prevent the formation and release of by-product POPs. Environmentally sound management and disposal of POPs wastes (including stockpiles, products, articles in use and materials contaminated with POPs) The POP content in waste is to be destroyed, irreversibly transformed, or, in very limited situations, otherwise disposed of in an environmentally sound manner (i. e., by methods that do not themselves create POPs) in coordination with Basel Convention requirements. Transparency The treaty requires open exchange of information among governments and widespread dissemination of public information concerning the properties and status of existing POPS and progress toward their elimination, and specifies that "information on health and safety of humans and the environment shall not be regarded as confidential." Strict limitations and bans on trade. Trade in POPs is allowed only for the purpose of environmentally sound disposal or in other very limited circumstances where the importing State provides certification of its environmental and human health commitments and its compliance with the POPs treaty s waste provisions. Delegates rejected a proposed World Trade Organization "supremacy clause" that could have encouraged States to challenge the treaty's trade-related measures. What are the Next Challenges Regarding POPs? Implement and Expand Treaty Elements at the Local, State, and National Level Actions have already begun in the U. S. at several levels to implement and go beyond the provisions of the Stockholm Convention. Sierra Club members in every Chapter are encouraged to work with their state lobbyists to introduce POPs elimination legislation and programs based on those that have already been introduced in some states. Although the U.S. has already phased out the use and production of most of the POPs covered by the treaty, our country remains a significant source of global dioxin pollution, so it is appropriate that our domestic efforts focus on dioxin elimination. Waste incinerators, paper mills, chemical and plastics factories, and open trash burning produce dioxins as unintended by-products. Just one week before the treaty signing in Stockholm, a federal advisory panel approved EPA's long-awaited dioxin reassessment, which classifies the most potent form of dioxin as a human carcinogen. New Hampshire is adopting a first-in-the-nation strategy to substantially reduce harmful dioxin emissions in New Hampshire, with a goal of cutting dioxin emissions in half in the next two years (http://www.des.state.nh.us/ard/dioxin/press_dioxinstrategy.htm) The strategy identifies five major sources of dioxin emissions in New Hampshire: medical waste incinerators, wood-fired utilities, backyard trash burning, residential wood burning, and vehicles. It includes more than 50 specific recommendations to reduce those emissions from over 20 sources. Washington state has a program for the elimination of dioxins and other persistent, bioaccumulative toxics (PBTs). All sections of the agency must incorporate PBT elimination strategies into their regulations. In 2003, the Washington State Legislature cut the funding for the implementation of this important program. The Washington Toxics Coalition is the lead NGO in tracking this program: http://www.watoxics.orgLegislation to phase out dioxin-generating processes was introduced in Oregon's 2001 legislature, HB 3828. It would require the Environmental Quality Commission to develop a priority list of the most hazardous substances; dioxin would be required to be on the list. It called for testing, monitoring and reporting of "priority list" substances. "Priority list" substances would be banned after four years. Sales of consumer products containing such substances would be banned after five years (Oregon Legislature web link). In California, local government has taken the lead in dioxin elimination. In September 1999 the Executive Board of the Association of Bay Area Governments passed a "Resolution Supporting Efforts to Understand, Manage and Reduce Dioxin Compounds in San Francisco Bay Area Waters and Environment". It urged regional, state, and federal regulatory agencies to increase their efforts to understand and prevent dioxins in the Bay Area; and authorized its Executive Director to work with the cities of Oakland, San Francisco, Berkeley, and Alameda County and other local governments to convene and assemble the appropriate regulatory agencies. Adding New Chemicals Additional chemicals are being suggested for early inclusion in the treaty. No decisions on adding chemicals can be made until after the treaty is ratified, but a POPs Review Committee will screen additional POPs candidates for listing. Possible additions to the POPs treaty include the insecticide chlordecone (kepone); the pesticide hexachlorocyclohexane (which includes lindane); polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) released in the burning of oil, coal, and other organic materials; and hexabromobiphenyl, a fire retardant additive. These chemicals were listed in the regionally-focused United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution's (LRTAP) Protocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants. Other chemicals or groups of substances which warrant immediate scrutiny for possible future inclusion in the POPs Treaty include pentabrominated diphenyl ether, a flame retardant; polychlorinated napthalenes used in capacitors, electrical insulators, and as engine oil additives; substances which break down into perfluoro octanyl sulfonate; ochtachlorostyrene, an unwanted by-product; and endosulfan, an insecticide. Additional Information Basel Convention Secretariat Technical Guidelines on Wastes Comprising or Containing PCBs, PCTs, and PBBs. Basel Convention Series/SBC No. 97/009. (1997) http://www.ban.org Center for Health, Environment and Justice (CHEJ) "Behind Closed Doors, 2001", Stop Dioxin Exposure Campaign. Provides evidence of the chemical industry's efforts to keep the dangers of dioxin (cancer risk, birth defects and other health impacts) hidden from the public. Includes sections on how the chemical industry worked to discredit and stall the release of the Environmental Protection Agency's Dioxin Reassessment, attempted to block local anti-dioxin initiatives, and exercised influence in United Nations' POPs treaty negotiations. Also reveals the link between the chemical industry and electoral politics, with an appendix on campaign contributions. A timeline highlights major dates in anti- and pro-dioxin campaigning in the Unites States. Available free at http://www.chej.org/BehindClosedDoors.html. Contact CHEJ, P.O. Box 6806, Falls Church, VA 22040; phone (703) 237-2249; email mrohde@chej.org; Web site http://www.chej.org. Greenpeace International (Darryl Luscombe and Pat Costner), Zero Toxics: Sources of By-product POPs and their Elimination (May 2001) http://www.greenpeace.org Pesticide Action Network (PAN)-Germany "Beyond POPs: Evaluation of the UNEP Chemical Substitutes of the POPs Pesticides Regarding Their Human and Environmental Toxicities, 2001". Critiques the United Nations Environment Programme POPs Database on Alternatives that proposes potentially toxic chemical substitutes for nine POPs pesticides. Reveals that 60 proposed chemical substitutes are dangerous to human health and the environment, and do not constitute sustainable alternatives. Considers that the use of chemical substitutes would take place under conditions of poverty. Argues that the database dedicated too little attention to non-chemical alternatives and suggests how to prioritize research on non-chemical alternatives to pesticides. Available free at http://www.pan-germany.org (click "Downloads" on sidebar). Contact Pestizid Aktions-Netzwerk e.V. (PAN Germany), Nernstweg 32, D - 22765 Hamburg, Germany; phone 49(0)4039-9191-00. fax 49(0)4039-075-20; email pan-germany@t-online.de; Web site http://www.pan-germany.org. Basel Action Network Briefing Paper No. 5. The Next POPs Challenge: Appropriate POPs Destruction. (May 2001); Briefing Paper No. 6. Package Deal to Fight Pollution: Ratifying the 4 Toxics Treaties. (May 2001) http://www.ban.org. European Working Group of International POPs Elimination Network (IPEN). "POPs: Poison in the Heart of Europe II, 2001" Compiles available information on production, use and legislation of POPs throughout Central and Eastern Europe. It presents case studies from Czech Republic, France, Romania, Russia and Slovakia. Also brief descriptions of the POPs situation in Belarus, Bulgaria, Poland and Ukraine. Includes sections about impacts on the environment and human health, as well as recommendations for legislation and further action. Contact Deti Zeme (Children of the Earth), Chlumova 17, 130 00 Praha 3, Czech Republic; phone/fax (4202) 227-800-52; email jindrich.petrlik@ecn.cz; Web site http://www.detizeme.cz. EU Dioxin Emission Inventory Stage II Available on: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/dioxin/download.htm at the bottom of the page. "Evaluation of the occurrence of dioxins and POPs in wastes and their potential to enter the food chain" Can be found at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/dioxin/ Greenpeace International "Toxic-Free Future: Time to Act. A Guide to Some of the World's Most Poisonous Chemicals", (May 2001) http://www.greenpeace.org. IPEN (International POPs Elimination Network, Stockholm Declaration (May 2001). www.ipen.org [statement of the "new" post-Stockholm IPEN, already signed by over 100 NGOs, and other IPEN news] National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) Web site on Contaminants in Breastmilk http://www.nrdc.org/breastmilk. Educational tool helps parents and others make informed decisions about breastfeeding and babies' health. Focuses on the adverse effects of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) as well as some metals and solvents in breast milk. UNDP - United Nations Development Programme Global Environment Facility Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) Resource Kit. (May 2001) http://www.undp.org/gef [contains full text of Stockholm Convention, small grant opportunities, etc.] UNEP United Nations Environment Programme Text of the Stockholm Convention (March 2001). http://irptc.unep.ch/pops. UNEP United Nations Environment Programme IOMC (Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals, Survey of Currently Available Non-Incineration PCB Destruction Technologies; First Issue (August 2000). http://irptc.unep.ch/pops UNITAR United Nations Institute for Training and Research IOMC (Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals, Preparing a National Profile to Assess the National Infrastructure for Management of Chemicals: A Guidance Document. http://www.unitar.org [also useful for CEC regional action plans on DDT, Chlordane, dioxin, etc.] For additional background material on the POPs Treaty as well as publications and resources, please go to the World Wildlife Fund website. Up to Top HOME | Email Signup | About Us | Contact Us | Terms of Use | © 2008 Sierra Club |
