June 1st is an important date for the health and environment of the EU. REACH is on!

REACH stands for registration, evaluation, and authorization of chemicals. It's a revolutionary piece of legislation that fiercely effects the chemical industry and boy are they pissed.

 

Flip through our info on what's going on and why you should care. I mean do you know what that new car smell actually is? Gross. Super gross in fact. That's the smell of toxic chemicals leaching out of the steering wheel, fabric, and the rest of the plastic inside. Yeah, I told you it was nasty.

 and then  . . . 

Read this article:

  From the US Trade Press…
REACH Enters Into Force on June 1; Too Early to Celebrate, Advocates Say
BNA Daily Environment Report, Wednesday, May 30, 2007           Page A-6

The European Union's registration, evaluation, and authorization of chemicals (REACH) legislation is set to enter into force June 1, but a coalition of eight advocacy organizations said May 25 it is "too early to celebrate REACH."

"Embedded in the REACH legislation are numerous reviews, beginning in 2007 and continuing for the next 12 years," the coalition said. "These reviews will give the European Commission and EU member states the opportunity to tighten the legislation in line with last year's demands by civil society and some of the main political parties.

"However, the reviews could also be used by the chemical industry to further weaken current safety requirements," according to the statement from BEUC, an EU consumers organization; the European Environmental Bureau; Health and Environment Alliance; Euro Coop, an association of EU consumer cooperatives; Friends of the Earth Europe; Greenpeace; Women in Europe for a Common Future; and World Wildlife Fund.

At an EU Chemicals Regulation 2007 conference held May 1-2 in Washington, D.C., a consultant to the European Commission's Environment Directorate-General (DG) described numerous reviews that the legislation directs the Commission to undertake (84 DEN A-7, 5/2/07  ).

Reviews Within Two Years

By June 1, 2008, the Commission is supposed to review Annex I, which contains rules for chemical safety reports; Annex IV, which describes when substances are exempted from registration because, for example, sufficient information is known about the chemical and the risk is minimal; and Annex V, which addresses substances exempted from registration under the current legislation, according to Mark Blainey, independent consultant to the Environment DG.

If the Commission deems changes to be needed, it can propose those and the European Parliament can review the recommendations, Blainey said. The European Parliament has three months to review those changes, he said. If a majority objects to the changes, the Parliament can block them, he added, referring to a new procedure approved in June 2006.

By June 1, 2008, the Commission must issue a regulation describing the fees chemical manufacturers or manufacturers of products that release chemicals above a specified threshold will have to pay to register their chemicals, he said.

The fees are supposed to pay for 80 percent of the budget of the new European Chemicals Agency established by REACH, he noted.

The agency's Board of Appeals is to be set up as close as possible to June 1, 2008, Blainey said, adding that "appeals could arrive shortly thereafter."

By Dec. 1, 2008, the Commission is supposed to review Annex XIII, which provides the criteria to be used to identify persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals (PBTs) or very persistent and very bioaccumulative substances (vPvBs), he said.

The European Parliament included this review because some member states are concerned that the criteria REACH contains are not protective enough and that a substance of high concern might be missed, Blainey said.

Also by Dec. 1, 2008, the Commission is to review Annex XI.3, which allows companies to reduce the amount of test data they include in their registration package if they can show exposures to a substance they are registering would be sufficiently low, he said.

The Commission must decide what constitutes adequate justification for exposure controls to allow a company not to submit data that otherwise would be required by REACH, Blainey said.

Once again the Commission could propose changes, and the European Parliament has three months to review those changes, he said.

Scope of Law, Additional Requirements

By June 1, 2012, the Commission is supposed to review: the scope of REACH to determine whether it overlaps with other relevant EU provisions; how well the European Chemicals Agency is working; and whether certain substances have been affected too much by REACH, Blainey said.

By June 1, 2013, the Commission will review whether uses of substances that have endocrine-disrupting properties should still be authorized if a suitable safer alternative exists, he said.

The reason, Blainey said, is that the Parliament had wanted more stringent authorization language in REACH for substances, such as endocrine disruptors, that it considers high-concern chemicals, but it agreed to less-stringent language as part of a compromise that allowed the legislation to be adopted.

By June 1, 2019, the Commission is to determine whether registrants of chemicals made in or imported into the European Union in volumes of less than 10 metric tons should have to prepare chemical safety reports, Blainey said. Currently, chemical safety reports are not required for substances made in or imported into the European Union in volumes below 10 metric tons.

By that date the Commission also is to decide whether to extend REACH's obligation to inform consumers about substances, released by articles, that are not of very high concern but which could still be dangerous or unpleasant, such as causing allergies, according to information from the Commission's website.

By June 1, 2019, the Commission also will decide if reproductive toxicity test data should be required for chemicals that are made in or imported into the European Union in volumes between 10 metric tons and 100 metric tons per year, Blainey said.

'Green Agenda Certain to Resurface.'

As all these reviews are conducted, "the unfulfilled 'Green Agenda' is certain to resurface," according to David Bowe, a member of the European Parliament from 1989 to 2004 and now a consultant.

"Building upon what they have already achieved, [advocacy groups] will seek ways to ensure that the Commission and the European Chemicals Agency apply the most stringent interpretation to the yet undecided elements of the implementation package," he told the May 1-2 conference, adding that advocacy groups are likely to focus on the Parliament to encourage members to block changes the Commission may propose.

Industry also should be lobbying to achieve its goals, Bowe said, but he stressed that those efforts should be focused on making REACH work.

Summaries of REACH from the Commission's Environment and Enterprise Directorate-Generals are available, respectively, at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/reach/qa.htm and http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/reach/docs/reach/TechnicalQA_Feb2007.pdf.

By Pat Phibbs-Rizzuto
--------------------------

 

Well, I'm back from CA. Sunny, humid, and busy Washington DC for me again. Don't worry if the electronics industry doesn't continue to move towards greener designed products I'll be back at it following people asking, why the hell not kids?  

Take care. Renee.  

In 1907 a Belgian-American chemist named Leo Baekeland created a little ditty  phenol-formaldehyde polymer resin. CNN just posted an interesting article. Who knew that in only 100 years the consumption level of just one type called PVC would reach 16,000 million pounds in the US and Canada alone. In fact who knew that consumption of PVC in the US and Canada would increase 6,000 million pounds in 13 years (from 1994 to 2007).

In a report called "Economics of Phasing out PVC" by the Global Development and Environmental institute, writes "Polyvinyl chloride has grown from a little known material in the mid-twentieth century (used by the Navy for waterproofing in World War II, for example) to become one of the most widely used plastics today. Thanks to low prices and aggressive marketing, polyvinyl chloride, also known as PVC or "vinyl", has become ubiquitous in our homes and communities. We encounter PVC on a daily basis in products ranging from children's toys, packaging, and lawn furniture to water and sewer pipes, medical equipment, and building materials."

The report is pretty lengthy but an interesting read that touches on a broad introduction to vinyl and discusses alternatives in various materials. It ends with steps toward phasing out PVC.

I'd like to go into exactly what this stuff is, but its a warm day in San Fran and I'm headed back east.

See you on the flip side. (I dont think that works in this situation. We use to say it at this 24 hour diner at the start of the graveyard shift - oh well)

Take care. Renee.  

 

ps: So something that has been interesting to me as a social and environmental justice activist is understanding how useful inventions become dangerous to our well being. I'm sure since you are reading this blog (and found this blog in the first place) also know that Greenpeace had a pretty amazing Defending Our Oceans tour last year that started and ended confronting Japanese whalers in the Southern Ocean.

One piece of that tour involved studying trash vortex's in the Pacific Ocean. You mean plastics end up killing not only those that live around manufacturing plants and poisoning us by leaching out of our water bottles, but it kills, strangles and otherwise is destroying our oceans?  Yeah . . . read this and check out just what our team found during the tour.

 

 

This week's MetroActive posted this small article about Greenpeace's Apple campaign. Scroll all the way to the bottom.

Renee.  

 

 

I mentioned PBDEs yesterday. Do you remember what those letters stand for? Polybrominated diphenylethers. Great, you remembered!!

So this chemical is toxic and exists in a lot of the things we use on a daily basis, electronics, furniture, and textiles. Many organizations are battling it out with governments and the chemical industry in an effort to save our seas, land, and children.

This is what the EPA is saying about this stuff.  

Here is an interesting article detailing what PBDEs are and what it is doing to our environment.  

In regards to why this matters in the whole e-waste issue, you should check out Greenpeace's report released Feb 8, 2007. If you would rather just have a snapshot of what that report says, read this.

Hope I haven't bored you, but this stuff is gross and dirty and has no place in the deeps of the ocean or in mother's breast milk. This little planet of ours deserves a little bit more respect, don't you think?

Take care. Renee.  

 

Oh wait . . . one more thing. Minnesota is awesome! 

So Apple has agreed to eliminate BFRs and PVC from their products by 2008, a whole year ahead of HP and Dell. I'm sure now that your excitement over the fact that your next mac is going to be less toxic has subsided, you might be asking yourself  . . .what does that mean? What are BFRs and PVC? Why does Greenpeace care about this? And lastly, really, aren't there bigger things to care and read about than ridiculously spelled words I can't pronounce?

I'm going to try to explain all this stuff in a way that not only makes sense but doesn't make your eyes glaze over like when I took chemistry in high school. God, I hated that class. I always got those stupid rings around my eyes from the goggles. Now that I only get those tiny little moon shaped rings where my eyeglasses fit oddly around my nose, I kind of find this stuff interesting. I also love Lyle Lovett. I'm just saying.

BFRs- Brominated Flame Retardants explained in its most simple form: are applied to prevent electronics, clothes, and furniture from catching fire. Intention is good but the practice is dirty and bad for your health. They are considered persistant organic pollutants (POPs) and are known to bioaccumulate.

POPs- Persistant Organic Pollutants are known to be a controversial discussion in itself, but for our purposes here, are known to travel vast distances from their original source. Polar Bears anyone? Yes, seriously, I'm not kidding you, there have been traces of this nasty stuff in those giant-soon-to-be-if-we-don't-do-something-about-it-extinct animals.

Now you're asking why. POPs bioaccumulate (you know, consistently build up) in fatty tissue and then there is the whole food chain thing. Big animal eats smaller animal. Even being exposed to really small amounts of BFRs over and over again is really bad. It just sit there in your fatty tissue bioaccummulating.

So that sucks. But really what does that mean to us? I have one more ridiculously long chemical name for you -- polybrominated diphenylethers (PBDEs). Yup, just one of the most used BFRs there is and just happens to be one of the most toxic.   

PBDEs- A type of BFR, Brominated Flame Retardant, are known to impair attention, learning, memory, behavior, and disrupt hormone and reproductive systems (breast milk). In short, these toxins are not only about our bodies and our best friend's bodies, they are about our children's bodies, our nieces and nephews bodies, and our best friend's children's bodies.

These things are so bad that several states have recommended phase out plans to force the elimination of them from products. The European Union announced a complete prohibition of PBDEs from all electronics products. 

I'm not interested in boring anyone here and there sure is enough bad news out there, so I'm going to stop right now. All this stuff just lightly touches on why cleaning up our electronics industry is important, even in the big ol' scheme of things (global warming). 

If you are interested in reading more about BFRs, check these out.

Health Care Without Harm 

Clean Production Action  

Natural Resources Defense Council  

 Greenpeace International

Renee.

Yesterday Rick, Iza, Martin, Sam and I attended Apple's AGM.

It had its moments of gasps and laughter and beefy security guys. Bill Campbell sat in the front row the entire meeting. If that name rings a bell you can thank Lauren at Columbia for it. Steve sat in the front row for the official meeting part and then, along with three others (including Apple's General Counsel), sat on uncomfortable looking shiny metal stools on a stage. The room looked very much like a freshman year college lecture classroom, but then again they call Apple's headquarters a campus.

Iza, the head honcho woman in charge of putting the scorecard together, and Rick, our DC based toxics campaigner, talked about how much Apple has moved in terms of being more transparent and eliminating PVC and BFR's by the end of 2008.  That step is huge and Steve's deadline is a full year before anyone else's, including Dell. Awesome. I knew I loved my mac for a reason and I'll love my much greener mac a whole lot more.

 Rick even dropped off 250 (a small percentage of what we received) pictures of students from around the country saying "Hey Steve score a 10". One of his beefy assistants held on to it for us. We all want to give everyone that participated in the student week of action a really big hug and kiss. Steve saw first hand that you really care about greener electronics.

 Ted Smith, founder of Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, and Barbara Kyle, Campaign Coordinator for Computer Take Back Campaign, spoke about the noticeable absence of a good global take back program from Job's green manifesto last week. Jobs responded that the company is taking back in the areas with the largest markets and increasing their iPod recycling goals. . . . Ok. . . . Don't forget Steve, people notice when they are not being treated equally. I'm sure Apple users in Argentina would really love to know that Apple cares about their access to recycle their electronics in a green manner. Because . . . who else but the companies who are making these products know best how to safely recycle them?

Steve acknowledged our questions and took full responsibility for creating a more transparent process that he hopes to continue being part of the Apple culture. We do too!  

So, I guess that is basically what happened at the meeting. 

Not as exciting as the Guadelupe Gardens Spring Festival where the giant skull got stuck in mulch and it took us two hours of inching the 1,200 pound sculpture back on the truck after spending 5 hours in the sun and heat, but hey it was pretty exciting as far as AGM's go.

Still in Cali,

Renee  

 

 

Activist Vocab Test:

(1) What does SRI mean?

(2) What does AGM mean?

 

Any ideas?

 
These two questions tackle an important part of most consumer campaigns . . . hitting companies where it hurts . . .  their shareholder demands.

 

SRI mean Socially Responsible Investing. Wikipedia details the history and such here.  But basically it means that people who want to invest in corporations that are more environmentally or socially responsible use a socially responsible investing firm to play the stock market. They do all the research and activism to encourage good behavior, practices, and policies and the investors make the money. (It is also a good way for companies to understand that if those that play the stock market can make money with a company that is good for the planet they will.)

When you are a stockholder in a company you get to participate in guiding the company to do good and part of that guiding is voting at the AGM (Annual General Meeting). You know those boring meetings companies have to have once a year to listen to what their stockholders have to say. They even have to listen to it if they disagree.

A lot of times, activists use these meetings to get the attention of the board members and stockholders about the issues they care passionately about.  Sometimes they do funky things like stand up and take off the boring collared shirts to show awesome t-shirts with their campaign messages, hand out buttons, or sit quietly until the Q&A sessions where they get to ask hard questions and whoever is representing the company needs to answer.

 
Do you see where this is going now?

 
Apple's AGM is on Thursday. Even though they made this big announcement last week, there are places where Apple can do better (global take back -- I'm turning into a broken record these days) and as shareholders we want to help them go green to the core (have you checked out that great animation on the front of www.greenmyapple.org? awesome!) 

 

Two SRI's that have been working on helping Apple score a 10 is As You Sow and Trillium. Both groups do amazing work and have for years.

This is what As You Sow has to say about Apple. 

This is what Trillium has to say about Apple.  

 

If you want to learn more about why social and environmental justice organizations think attending AGM's are good, you should totally read Rules for Radicals. It tells a good story.

 

Hasta.

It is Sunday night and I've been watching Miami Ink for most of the afternoon. I love that show!! And it's not just because I grew up in South Florida or that I think the owner of Miami Ink is super hot, I just  .  . ..  am a little bored, been in this strange town for two weeks, and don't feel like doing the dishes.

 

I was doing some art history research for my next tattoo, but even while I'm trying to decide on what type of frame I want for my back piece (I'm not sure I even believe that one), I couldn't help but look through the greenmyapple flickr site. There are some great new pictures up.

 

Check out this one -- very creative. I like this one too. And you can't beat the love from USC -- who made that thing? I found this too. Ok, it has nothing to do with a greener apple, but whatever it's Sunday night and I'm bored.  Back to the green.

 

The Week Ahead: I know I promised that the skull was underwraps these days, but it is making a two day appearance around Stanford and De Anza College on Monday and Tuesday of this week. Don't forget to check back later in the week to read the recap.

 While out here in Silicon Valley, I've been able to meet some really amazing colleagues. Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition is a great group out of San Jose that has been working on e-waste issues before I had my first computer. The staff there has achieved an incredible amount in this year including helping students create toxic free UC campus'. Wow, a far reaching environmental sustainability policy on every UC campus? That's amazing. And totally possible on every campus. If you are a student an interested in getting more info on how to start something similar on your campus, you should definately join our student network. There are trainings available and access to Greenpeace campaigners to help your campus group make a real green difference.

 

One more thing --- If you haven't already seen this, take a look now.  

 

I'm done now. 

 

Green dreams and Holla from Cali -- Renee

Yesterday was pretty exciting. You know that whole A Greener Apple thing and all.

 So what's a girl to do when her whole purpose in being in sunny Northern California when her boss tells her to put away the skull and get ready for a board meeting?

 

She reads the newspaper. And blogs. And anything else she can get her hands on to see what everyone else is saying about this Greener Apple (by 2008 anyway).

 

I read this this morning.  

 

And for a girl spending all her time in Silicon Valley I make sure to check out Valleywag every day (ok sometimes a couple times a day). But they said this yesterday right after the announcment.

 

Mercury News . . .   Greenpeace  . . . Business Week . . . BBC  . . . Houston Chronical . .   . Wired Magazine (blog) . . .  Not too shabby. Not too shabby.

 

Holla from Cali ---  

 

 

 

I arrived in Silicon Valley on April 16 ready to rock and roll on the Toxic Tech Tour. I was really excited to help the campaign in such a unique way. "You mean, you want me to drive around Cupertino and San Jose with a 7ft high skull made out of e-waste and talk about how much cooler it would be inf Apple eliminate toxins from its computers and implemented a global take back program?" I couldn't believe what my team was asking me to do, but I was happy to do it.

During the past two weeks and after speaking to Apple employees, neighbors of Apple's headquarters and even former schoolmates of Steve Jobs, I learned that not many people knew just how far behind Apple was in eliminating toxic chemicals than the rest of the industry. It was great for me, a die hard Apple user, to be part of a movement encouraging Apple to be better, to be more innovative, and to change a dirty industry into a clean, green one.

It has been a great two weeks. We showed up at San Jose Giants baseball games, San Jose State University's Sustainability Week, and the Spring Festival at Guadelupe River and Park, not to mention about a half dozen other places. I even got to meet my favorite author, Tobias Wolff (awesome!), and talk about the campaign on a local radio show. How hot is that?

But what is even more hot than meeting my favorite author is what Steve Jobs said today in a post titled: A Greener Apple.

The introduction reads like this:
'It is generally not Apple’s policy to trumpet our plans for the future; we tend to talk about the things we have just accomplished. Unfortunately this policy has left our customers, shareholders, employees and the industry in the dark about Apple’s desires and plans to become greener. Our stakeholders deserve and expect more from us, and they’re right to do so. They want us to be a leader in this area, just as we are in the other areas of our business. So today we’re changing our policy.'

The rest of the post goes into all the ways Apple is going green and greener than some other companies. Since August of 2006 they have been ranked as 2.7 out of a possible 10 on our Guide to Greener Electronics and now with all this they will be ranked a 5. And I feel a little better about listening to my iPod and using my ibook.

Apple still isn't the greenest, which is kind of disappointing to someone who has grown up learning about computers on all those pretty Apple products. It would be really cool if Steve announced that they will be taking back their products in every country they sell them.

Of course it isn't Greenpeace's style to not follow through . . . so I will continue to work with Apple users in encouraging Apple to go green . . to the core.

Take care.
Renee.