ES&T EDITORIAL
Pros and Cons of a Full-Scale Chlorine Study
T
here is currently an disposal, including incineraFailure to review the initiative, led primation and use of landfills. health effects of the rily by Greenpeace, to The ACS position argues ban the production and use of entire class of chlorthat a full-scale reexaminac h l o r i n e and c h l o r i n a t e d tion of the use of chlorine in inated compounds, compounds in our society. our industrial society is overThe contention is that chlorialthough scientifically kill: "While there may well be nated compounds, as a class, some chlorinated compounds defensible, may be are hazardous to human and about which EPA should be viewed as a whitewash ecological health. This view concerned, a comprehensive has grown in a c c e p t a n c e chlorine study would waste by the general public. among environmental activscarce resources by shifting ists, and there is even some research dollars to focus on interest on the part of the this vast category." It argues Clinton administration in requiring EPA to confor a rational risk characterization and manageduct a comprehensive study of chlorinated comment program focusing on the compounds that are pounds. most toxic and bioaccumulate most readily. The opponents of such a study, including the This seems like a sound approach, but it may American Chemical Society, correctly point out be viewed by the general public as a whitewash. that chlorinated compounds have widely different Opposition to a study may indicate to some envitoxicities and that putting them into one undifferronmentalists and politicians that the chemical entiated category is scientifically indefensible. industry has something to fear from a compreStudy opponents point to the substantial benefits hensive investigation of the environmental imof chlorinated compounds, which in many cases pacts of chlorine in our society. A thorough balance well against the risks. Benefits range from study might, in fact, be preferable because it improved public health resulting from the use of would almost certainly show that Greenpeace's hypochlorous acid as a water disinfectant to the broad-brush position is unsound scientifically many commercial and lifestyle benefits of the synand unwise economically. It would also provide thetic chlorinated compounds such as the precurEPA with an opportunity to combine risk assesssors to high-purity silicon, pharmaceutical interment and economic analysis in a comprehensive mediates, and others. Study opponents also point study of an important part of American comout that chlorinated compounds are natural prodmerce. The cost of such a study cannot be very ucts and are abundant in the natural environment. significant compared to the total EPA budget, and if in the process we find ways in which the Most of the leading proponents of the chlorine overall risk of chlorinated compounds can be reban know these things but still contend that the duced, so much the better. benefits of synthetic chlorinated compounds are outweighed by the long- and short-term hazards associated with their use and disposal. They point out that many such compounds are highly toxic, bioaccumulate in natural species, and have significant environmental impacts (e.g., on the ozone layer). Ban proponents also point out that the use and production of large amounts of chlorinated compounds and their poorly documented byproducts cause problems associated with transport and 352 A Environ. Sci. Technol. Vol. 28, No. 8, 1994
0013-936X/94/0927-352A$04.50/0 © 1994 American Chemical Society
