Upcoming challenges flame retardants Stamatis Sivitos 30 10

Upcoming challenges: flame retardants Stamatis Sivitos, 30. 10. 2013 UK SNS annual event

Outline Potential use of flame retardants Context NGO work and results Health and environmental impacts

Background 2008: New requirement proposed in an international standard (IEC 62368) on the safety of Audio/Video and ICT technology Supported by the Alliance for Consumer Fire Safety in Europe (ACFSE), front group for the bromine industry, now Fire Safety Platform. . . Initiated by the U. S. National Association of State Fire Marshals

IEC 62368/ 60065 and EN 60065 Amendment 11 “A television set shall be so designed that the likelihood of ignition and the spread of fire caused by a flame is reduced” and tested according to TS 62441 CLC/TS 62441: “the combustible materials used in candle flame accessible areas do not exhibit flaming for more than 3 min”

Aims of this meeting 1. Background and update on current developments 2. Call for your support 3. Share information/ brainstorm 4. Need for coordinated approach – counteraction

Products affected

Is there a need for this clause?

“How eight TV fires spread across the world” Source: Chicago Tribune reporting

Source: Chicago Tribune reporting

Source: Chicago Tribune reporting

Source: Chicago Tribune reporting

Use of statistics Source: Green Science Policy Institute, Berkeley, USA

Why is this important?

Flame retardants The most cost effective and commonly used chemicals to meet this requirement are flame retardants (BFRs and CFRs). Dechlorane Plus (DP) 1, 2 -Bis(2, 4, 6 tribromophenoxy) ethane (BTBPE) Decabromodipheny lethane (DBDPE) Deca. BDE (used in the past). Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA)

Environmental pathways Found in increasing levels in dust, human fat, body fluids, and breast milk worldwide. California has the highest levels of fire retardants in consumer products in the US Much higher levels of BFRs in dust, food, and breast milk. US levels are 10 times than those in Europe.

Health and env. impacts Serious adverse health effects in experimental animals and accumulation in humans - documented in many hundreds of peer reviewed articles (Blum et al , 2008 – The Case against Candle Resistant Electronics)

Other env impacts Ø Plastic products containing FR are hard to recycle Ø Flame retarded plastic is either being incinerated, landfilled, or exported to developing countries

What about the legal framework?

EU legislation • Ro. HS Directive & REACH Regulation: banned or restricted only a small fraction of the chemicals of concern • Complicated and long process via REACH • Applicable only in the EU => Regulatory framework not sufficient

Views of US organisations • • Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) “potential risk was too low to justify the implementation of a candle flame ignition requirement”

The coalition (Blum et al , 2008 – The Case against Candle Resistant Electronics)

ECOS work • Alerted the relevant standardisation bodies (CENELEC & IEC) • Contacted the national members of IEC and CENELEC, providing the relevant scientific input • Raised awareness among env NGOs in the EU

Outcomes Majority of IEC TC 108 members voted against IEC 62368 Vote in CLC not in parallel with the IEC : => the CENELEC EN 60065 Am 11 on TVs was approved in late 2008 –into force since July 2010

State of play Relevant IEC and CLC draft standards have been repeatedly voted down (May 2012, March 2013) Final standards should not contain the external ignition clause!

Conclusions Increased attention to energy and environmental issues but room for improvement Standards should be set on a robust evidence base Vigilance essential at all levels Important role of Env NGOs

Support the UK SNS!

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION! Mundo-B Rue d’Edimbourg 26, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium Direct line: + 32 2 894 46 56 stamatis. sivitos@ecostandard. org http: //www. ecostandard. org