It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

EPA is now allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

page: 1
27
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+10 more 
posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 11:45 AM
link   
So America's Environmental 'Protection' Agency is doing their jobs yet again.

archpaper.com...


One of the most dangerous construction-related carcinogens is now legally allowed back into U.S. manufacturing under a new rule by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). On June 1, the EPA authorized a “SNUR” (Significant New Use Rule) which allows new products containing asbestos to be created on a case-by-case basis.

In May, the EPA released a report detailing its new framework for evaluating the risk of its top prioritized substances. The report states that the agency will no longer consider the effect or presence of substances in the air, ground, or water in its risk assessments.

The SNUR greenlights companies to use toxic chemicals like asbestos without thinking about how it will endanger people who are indirectly in contact with it.

New data revealed that asbestos-related deaths now total nearly 40,000 annually, with lung cancer and mesothelioma being the most common illnesses in association with the toxin. That number could rise if new asbestos-containing products make their way into brand new buildings.

Though the EPA is easing its regulations against using harmful toxins like asbestos, it will largely be the responsibility of local and state governments, as well as companies and informed consumers to counter these federal moves.


Well banning asbestos is one of those few good things the EPA actually did. Uh good luck I suppose.

Asbestos is nasty horrible stuff. Much of the rest of the world has banned it for a reason. guess it's all part of making America great again....

Here's the Material Safety Data Sheet for Asbestos in case you wanna read how many ways and how terribly it can kill you.



(post by Gandalf77 removed for political trolling and baiting)

posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: dug88




it will largely be the responsibility of local and state governments, as well as companies and informed consumers to counter these federal moves. 


They're giving the responsibility back to the states where it should be.

I'd be willing to bet most cities and states already have regulations against asbestos, making the Federal EPAs involvement redundant and an unnecessary burden on taxpayers.

I'm fine with that.


+9 more 
posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: dug88

My mother died of mesothelioma, and this decision proves to me just how far the greedy scum will go in order to make more $$$. When we have a society that values cash more than human life, well I shouldn't need to tell you



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 11:54 AM
link   
The best part is that the report states that the agency will no longer consider the effect or presence of substances in the air, ground, or water in its risk assessments. Effectively, its super bad for you, i'ts now going to be legal to use, oh, and the EPA wont monitor it anymore to find out just how bad its hurting people.

What many of you are failing to understand is letting big businesses and business owners use this stuff goes a long way for them making more money. Sure it'll kill some folks, but as long as the profit > liability lawsuits then we're golden. MAGA!



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 12:01 PM
link   
This will take the air out of the attorneys that advertise lawsuits for asbestos and mesothelioma on tv and everywhere.

Proving, once again, big business rules; individuals don't. How did this happen? Is this the price for expanding economy?
edit on 7-8-2018 by Justso because: (no reason given)


+7 more 
posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Killed my dad. Got asbestosis while building a hospital in the 70's, took till the late 90's for him to get ill and die. Devastated my mom.

I am not fond of this in the least.


+9 more 
posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Oh boy howdy this gets even more delightfully interesting:

"There’s only one major producer of asbestos left in the entire world. It happens to be based in Russia and the owner of it happens to be close buddies with Putin. Remember that story months ago about the Russian plant stamping it’s pallets of product with “45” and an image of Trump’s face? Yeah same asbestos plant I just mentioned. Weird how they seemed able to know what Trump’s EPA stance on asbestos was going to be before the report was even commissioned!" (SA-D&D-T 3686)



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 12:23 PM
link   
The stuff is still used today.
Gaskets
Caulking
Shingles

It's not called asbestos anymore.
Canadian fiber or chrysotile



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Killed my dad. Got asbestosis while building a hospital in the 70's, took till the late 90's for him to get ill and die. Devastated my mom.

I am not fond of this in the least.


Just an FYI. I think there is more to the story.

It appears the EPA is trying to establish control over something they currently don't?



www.asbestosnation.org...




Many Americans mistakenly believe that asbestos was banned decades ago. Tragically, that is not the case. Although asbestos is no longer mined in the U.S. and its use has declined significantly, American industry still legally imports, uses and sells both raw asbestos and products made with it.

The asbestos industry and the government of Canada – at the time the source of 95 percent of the asbestos reaching the U.S. – rightly feared that EPA regulation under could lead to an outright ban. They pressured the Reagan White House to halt EPA’s efforts. Top EPA officials wavered, but prodded by career employees’ public dissent, moved forward. In 1989, after a 10-year, $10 million study that generated 100,000 pages of evidence, EPA announced it would order a phaseout and ban of more than 90 percent of products containing asbestos.

The industry went to court to overturn the ban, claiming that it was too costly and that the alternatives were neither safer nor more effective than asbestos. Though it acknowledged that asbestos in any amount caused cancer, in 1991 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit threw out most parts of the EPA’s rule, saying the agency failed to prove that a ban was the “least burdensome alternative” for controlling the public’s exposure.

This disastrous decision not only overturned EPA’s ban but also established a precedent that has made it almost impossible for the agency to ban any dangerous chemical. The administration of President George H.W. Bush chose not to appeal the Fifth Circuit’s decision. Even though new evidence of asbestos’ hazards continues to crop up, EPA’s hands have largely remained tied. Today, asbestos is banned only in less than a dozen types of products and for “new use” in products that did not historically contain asbestos.

More than 50 nations have banned asbestos, but the U.S. still permits its citizens to be exposed to a substance known to cause illness and death in any amount. As multiple scientific and regulatory bodies assert, there is no safe level of asbestos.

Meanwhile, the use of asbestos in China, India, Russia, Brazil and many other developing countries is expanding, increasing the likelihood that millions more people worldwide will die from asbestos-related diseases in coming decades.


EPA Releases New Rules for TSCA Asbestos Review
www.asbestos.com...

As part of the latest updates to the reformed Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) last week proposed new rules for the risk evaluation of asbestos.

The EPA released a significant new use rule (SNUR) proposal which would allow the agency to prevent new uses of asbestos, the naturally occurring mineral linked to deadly cancers such as mesothelioma.

It is the first time the EPA has issued such an action. The SNUR would require the agency’s approval before asbestos-containing goods can be manufactured, imported or processed. It would grant the EPA power to evaluate the intended use of asbestos and take action, when necessary, to prohibit or limit its use.

“These actions provide the American people with transparency and an opportunity to comment on how EPA plans to evaluate the ten chemicals undergoing risk evaluation, select studies, and use the best available science to ensure chemicals in the marketplace are safe,” EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said in an agency press release. “At the same time, we are moving forward to take important, unprecedented action on asbestos.”

However, environmental groups and anti-asbestos advocates are skeptical of the SNUR proposal and what it may mean for a future ban of asbestos in the U.S. They say the new rules undermine the spirit of the reformed TSCA and ignore the health concerns of asbestos disposal and past uses of asbestos.

“Every day, Americans are exposed to deadly substances like asbestos that are strongly linked to cancer and other devastating diseases without seeing a sufficient response from the government,” Sen. Edward Markey, D-Mass., a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, said in a statement. “By moving to ignore the health concerns of disposal and past uses of asbestos and other dangerous chemicals, the EPA is flagrantly disregarding the fact that it is statutorily required to look at the full lifecycle of these chemicals, from manufacture to disposal.”


edit on 7-8-2018 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

The stuff is pretty safe if handled properly.
When I was in high school they did a remodel and removed a bunch of asbestos from the original construction in 1964.
I would get to school and I could write my name in the dust on my desk... wonder how good those traps worked...



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: infolurker

The stuff is pretty safe if handled properly.
When I was in high school they did a remodel and removed a bunch of asbestos from the original construction in 1964.
I would get to school and I could write my name in the dust on my desk... wonder how good those traps worked...


I don't want to be anywhere near it. I fully support a full ban.

God knows how much of that crap I inhaled back in 70's-80's.

I am just not sure if this new EPA action is good or bad. hard to tell anymore with the political spin.


edit on 7-8-2018 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 12:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: infolurker

The stuff is pretty safe if handled properly.
When I was in high school they did a remodel and removed a bunch of asbestos from the original construction in 1964.
I would get to school and I could write my name in the dust on my desk... wonder how good those traps worked...


Stirring it up in removal schemes was about the dumbest thing to do. Encapsulation in paint/polymer is much safer.



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 01:20 PM
link   
Cool, now we just need Thalidomide and segregation and this MAGA experience will feel complete.

Who said time travel was impossible?



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: dug88




it will largely be the responsibility of local and state governments, as well as companies and informed consumers to counter these federal moves. 


They're giving the responsibility back to the states where it should be.

I'd be willing to bet most cities and states already have regulations against asbestos, making the Federal EPAs involvement redundant and an unnecessary burden on taxpayers.

I'm fine with that.

Yup. That's what I read too. OP making a doom and gloom post and the fools lap it up like kittens at a bowl of milk. I mean, it's right there, IN THE OP!



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Asbestos was widely used in building insulation up until it was banned in most countries in the 1970s. The U.S. is one of the only nations in the world that has placed significant restrictions on the substance without banning it completely.


If it never was banned why the effing political trolling in the above comments?



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: dug88




it will largely be the responsibility of local and state governments, as well as companies and informed consumers to counter these federal moves. 


They're giving the responsibility back to the states where it should be.

I'd be willing to bet most cities and states already have regulations against asbestos, making the Federal EPAs involvement redundant and an unnecessary burden on taxpayers.

I'm fine with that.


lol

I do not think freedom for asbestos is what all the states rights activist have been up in arms about.



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Tired of winning yet?



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
Tired of winning yet?


You know when a 6 mile tall firenado is headed your way and you decide the best remedy is to do a controlled burn?

Trump is that controlled burn and we are just doing our best to control it. If left unchecked he would burn this motha down...



posted on Aug, 7 2018 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
Tired of winning yet?


That depends... as stated above are the changes really good or bad since the details are politically slanted.

asbestos is already in manufacturing both domestic and imports. Is this a good or bad thing. I don't know.

www.asbestos.com...


The EPA released a significant new use rule (SNUR) proposal which would allow the agency to prevent new uses of asbestos, the naturally occurring mineral linked to deadly cancers such as mesothelioma.

It is the first time the EPA has issued such an action. The SNUR would require the agency’s approval before asbestos-containing goods can be manufactured, imported or processed. It would grant the EPA power to evaluate the intended use of asbestos and take action, when necessary, to prohibit or limit its use.

“These actions provide the American people with transparency and an opportunity to comment on how EPA plans to evaluate the ten chemicals undergoing risk evaluation, select studies, and use the best available science to ensure chemicals in the marketplace are safe,” EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said in an agency press release. “At the same time, we are moving forward to take important, unprecedented action on asbestos.”




top topics



 
27
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join