By Surbhi JainMar 21 2022Reviewed by Susha Cheriyedath, M.Sc.

In an editorial recently published in the open-access journal Materials, researchers discussed the impact of materials on the environment.

Study: Measurement of the Environmental Impact of Materials. Image Credit: kira-TeamDNA/Shutterstock.com

Background

In the 20th century, global material use climbed by a factor of eight, reaching more than 10 tons per capita per year. Negative environmental effects can occur at any point in a material’s life cycle, from its creation from natural resources to its usage and disposal. It’s difficult to quantify a material’s environmental impact quantitatively.

The so-called IPAT formula developed by Holdren and Ehrlich in 1971, where environmental impact (I) is defined as the product of affluence (A), population (P), and a technological term (T), defined as the reciprocal of material productivity or efficiency (T = 1/e), is used to identify this driving force.

The population continues to grow, and economic growth is frequently accompanied by an increment in material productivity. Man-made materials can be manufactured from natural resources or recycled garbage. Laboratory tests that address important use scenarios under accelerated conditions can be used to mimic the environmental impact of materials and products during their use phase.

When these studies are paired with exposure trials utilizing artificial weathering that mimics field circumstances, a greater knowledge of the material’s underlying mechanisms can be acquired. To enable regulators to set limit values and producers to adjust their goods in order to minimize the release of dangerous compounds, it is critical to research the complicated and dynamic leaching processes of substances from various materials.

About the Study

In this study, the authors discussed the impact of materials on the environmental compartments of water, soil, and air. The leaching and emission processes, as well as the mechanisms that underpin them, were presented. The mobility of extremely small particles, such as colloids or nanoparticles, was considered.

The team illustrated the release of chemicals from materials owing to interaction with water and presented their quantification by using eluates from a variety of materials, including polymer-based materials and primary and secondary construction materials.

The researchers discussed various exposure testing and mass transfer techniques for polymer materials. They used accelerated simulations at a laboratory scale to investigate the leaching characteristics of irrigated building structures built of carbon-reinforced concrete. Evaluation techniques were explored to permit the development of threshold values. The observation of worm reproduction under the impact of leachates from building items was used as an example of a test that required just moderate time and effort.

The authors investigated the emissions from natural building materials to indoor air using large emission chambers. The scenario of emissions of formaldehyde from wooden toys was also examined. The use of zeolitic minerals as soil conditioners and slow-release fertilizers was studied. A life cycle analysis (LCA) was used to examine the environmental impact of adding CaO to improve performance. Column leaching tests were used to determine environmental compatibility, and they were shown to be beneficial for both characterization and quality control. The fundamental mass transfer concepts of column leaching tests were discussed.

Observations

Leaching emissions into the environment had an impact on surface waterways, groundwater, and soils. Some studies demonstrated that referring to the solid matter content of hazardous chemicals was insufficient and that the processes that lead to their release must also be considered. Another component of environmental simulations involving materials used in construction products was the requirement for accurate data on pollutant emissions, notably in the case of volatile organic compounds (VOC) in indoor air.

More from AZoM: A Quantification Method for The Elemental Analysis of Water

Geosynthetic materials were used to make coastal protection products. This had advantages such as long service life and low weight, but it also posed the risk of adding another source of microplastic particles into the environment. The key element impacting the aging of geotextiles was found, and their simulations yielded a half-life of 330 years for the 50% loss of the strain. Furthermore, leachates did not have any negative ecotoxicological impacts.

When waste materials were used instead of fresh resources, the environmental impact of extracting raw materials from natural deposits can be reduced. It was demonstrated that adsorption parameters could be calculated in batch leaching tests with different liquid-solid ratios. The release of hazardous compounds during manufacture, usage, or end-of-life could be used to assess the direct environmental impact of materials. The indirect environmental impact of materials was attributed to the associated energy consumption, production emissions, and natural resources depletion.

Conclusions

In conclusion, this study elucidated that nature’s sink function, as well as the ecosystem for all negative influences, is limited. The authors emphasized that when recycled waste products are appropriately described in terms of their environmental compatibility, they may be useful in this regard. They also believe that global material use will continue to rise in the future and, as a result, authorities, producers, and users must identify ecologically friendly materials.

Source

Simon, F.G., Kalbe, U., Measurement of the Environmental Impact of Materials. Materials 15(6) 2208 (2022). https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/15/6/2208/htm

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are those of the author expressed in their private capacity and do not necessarily represent the views of AZoM.com Limited T/A AZoNetwork the owner and operator of this website. This disclaimer forms part of the Terms and conditions of use of this website.

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

The federal Environmental Protection Agency has finalized its decision to designate Greenpoint’s Meeker Avenue Plume a Superfund site, setting the stage for a federally-supervised scrub of the site, possibly funded by the companies responsible for polluting the neighborhood.

Bounded roughly by Norman Avenue to the north, Kingsland Avenue to the west, the Newtown Creek to the east and Withers Street to the south, the roughly 50-block Plume is comprised of soil and groundwater contaminated with dangerous chlorinated volatile organic compounds, or CVOCs, left behind by now-shuttered businesses including metalsmiths and dry cleaners. 

Two of the compounds in particular — tetrachloroethylene and trichloroethylene — are known carcinogens and can cause short-and-long term health issues with continued exposure.

Of particular concern to the EPA, the state Department of Environmental Conservation, and community members, investigations have found contaminated air inside homes and businesses atop the Plume as a result of what’s known as “soil vapor intrusion.”

EPA officials proposed adding the Plume to the National Priorities List last September, after New York State referred the site to the agency “because groundwater and indoor air contaminated with CVOCs require cleanup to protect human health and the environment,” according to the site listing narrative.

“I strongly urged that the Meeker Avenue Plume be included as a Superfund cleanup site over a decade ago when I was working with the community to designate Newtown Creek,” said US Rep. Nydia Velázquez, in a release. “Working families have a right to live in a place that supports good public health, and I am thankful that EPA has put the Meeker Avenue Plume on the Superfund National Priorities List.”

The former site of Spic and Span Cleaners, one of the sites identified by the state as contributing to the toxic Meeker Avenue Plume. File photo by Tom Callan.

While DEC has been investigating the Plume and installing mitigation systems to keep contaminated air out of affected homes and businesses since 2007, additional resources are needed to make the area safe. Additional state and federal cleanup options were considered, according to the listing narrative, but were not viable.

“Hundreds of residents and workers are exposed to the indoor air contamination that results from vapor intrusion into the structures,” the document states. “Contaminated groundwater in the underlying aquifer flows east northeast and possibly discharges to Newtown Creek, an arm of the New York-New Jersey Harbor Estuary.”

Now that the site’s place on the list has been finalized, the EPA will begin a remedial investigation and feasibility study to identify the full extent of the contamination, assess potential threats to human health and the surrounding environment, and begin planning the eventual cleanup.

“Working collaboratively with DEC, our federal partners will deploy the best available science and resources to protect the Greenpoint and East Williamsburg communities by addressing the soil, soil vapor, and groundwater plume in the vicinity of Meeker Avenue, and continue the critical work of preventing potential exposure to the public,” said DEC Commissioner Basil Seggos, in a release.

The Superfund program was founded in part to allow the federal government to identify the parties — often, large companies — responsible for the pollution and charge them for the cleanup, rather than paying for it themselves. Past investigations have named a number of businesses who contributed to the contamination, though it’s not clear whether any of them will be designated PRPs by the federal agency as they begin their own investigation. 

“Our neighbors in Greenpoint and Williamsburg have been dealing with hazardous vapor intrusion for decades due to dumping and industrial manufacturing,” said local Councilmember Lincoln Restler. “Now, the EPA Superfund designation will ensure our health is finally prioritized with the overdue cleanup of our community.”

If PRPs are not named, or if the companies in question no longer exist, the site is considered an “orphan site,” and cleanup is fully paid for by the federal government. The federal infrastructure bill passed last year allocated $3.5 billion to cleaning up those sites. 

In a visit to Newtown Creek, Greenpoint’s other Superfund site, earlier this month, Senator Chuck Schumer said he hoped the additional funding would be a boon toward the non-orphan sites as well, since it would increase the EPA’s strained resources.

The Plume is Brooklyn’s fourth Superfund site. The Wolff-Alport Chemical Company, which straddles the border of Bushwick and Ridgewood, Queens, is an “orphan” site, which has seen very little work since it was named to the NAPL in 2014. Newtown Creek, which directly abuts the Plume, has also been quiet — the EPA most recently said they expected to announce their cleanup plan for the body of water in 2024. The Gowanus Canal, a few miles south of the Plume, is probably the borough’s most well-known Superfund, and the one with the most activity — dredging and other cleanup activities have been ongoing since 2020.

The discovery

The state Department of Health and DEC first started their investigation of the Meeker Avenue Plume in 2007, after ongoing cleanup of the 1950 Greenpoint Oil Spill found CVOCs commonly used in dry cleaning and metalworking in the soil.

Two years later, DEC added the former site of Spic and Span Cleaners and Dryers on Kingsland Avenue to the Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Site Program as part of the State Superfund program after identifying the lot as a source of the dangerous chemicals. Greenpoint is also home to a second, unrelated state Superfund, the former NuHart Plastics plant, which is being cleansed for redevelopment less than a mile north of the Plume.

The old NuHart Plastics factory is in the midst of an in-depth cleanup under both state Superfund and Brownfield cleanup programs.File photo by Stefano Giovannini

Neighbors and local groups, like the Newtown Creek Alliance, have been pushing for faster remediation for years, worried about the still-unclear ramifications of living and working in such a heavily-contaminated area. Last fall, they joined forces with North Brooklyn Neighbors to push for the EPA to include the site after the initial proposal, encouraging neighbors to submit comments in support of the addition to the EPA. 

“We celebrate the designation as a critical step towards cleaning up the Plumes,” the Alliance said in a tweet. “The designation is a major step towards a thorough cleanup of this longstanding hazard and protecting the health of everyone who lives and works on top of these toxic Plumes.”

The investigation and planning processes are likely to take years — the Gowanus Canal sat mostly untouched for a decade before dredging started, and Newtown Creek is still waiting for a plan. In any case, the densely-populated nature of the neighborhood likely means the process will look quite different from the mostly in-water activity at the canal.

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

Driver runs over spectator while doing donuts in …

14 hours ago

One of 5 co-defendants pleads guilty in trial for …

13 mins ago

Inflation and what to do about it, Greenville financial …

6 hours ago

2 Killed in Motel Shooting

13 hours ago

KIA Georgia Semiconductor Shortage

5 hours ago

OCAAT:Lara-Allan Lasseter

3 days ago

032122 PM WEBCAST

12 hours ago

FHP Trooper Punched During Traffic Stop

3 days ago

Bodycam: Lowell officer moves opossums out of road

3 days ago

Four Marines from NC die in NATO drill when Osprey …

1 day ago

The city of Carbon on road to recovery while Eastern …

16 hours ago

Panama City couple saves man from powerful storm

2 days ago

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

Mar 21, 2022, 2:41pmUpdated 52m ago

By: News 12 Staff

Spring is here, and with it is the sneezing, runny or stuffy nose, watery and itchy eyes, associated with seasonal allergies.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says the best way to protect yourself against allergies is to reduce your exposure to pollen.

Here are some more tips to help you cope with seasonal allergies during high pollen days:

1. Limit time outdoors

Limit your time outdoors and seek indoor spaces with clean air.

2. Clean air space

Create a cleaner air space at home to protect yourself from outdoor air irritants during the COVID-19 pandemic. Use a portable air cleaner in one or more rooms. Portable air cleaners work best when run continuously with doors and windows closed.

3. Comfortable temperature

Keep your cleaner air space at a comfortable temperature by using air conditioners, heat pumps, fans, and window shades.

4. Filters

If you have a forced air system in your home, consult a qualified heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) professional about different filters (HEPA or MERV-13 or higher) and settings (“Recirculate” and “On” rather than “Auto”) that can be used to reduce indoor air irritants.

5. Avoid some activities

If outdoors, avoid activities that stir up pollen, such as mowing lawns or raking leaves.

6. Wash up!

When you return indoors, take a shower and change your clothes. And wash your hands often with soap and water.

7. Wear a face covering

Masks also offer some protection against seasonal allergies because they can prevent some larger particles from being inhaled. However, if you have seasonal allergies, masks should not be your only protection against pollen exposure because smaller particles can still get through the covering and be inhaled.

Wash your masks after each use, particularly if you suffer from seasonal allergies, because the covering may carry particles such as pollen. 

8. Protect your eyes

Wear sunglasses and a wide-brimmed hat to reduce pollen getting into your eyes.

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

By Tom Gilbert

It may seem like a tall order: Make changes to your home to lower your energy bills, remove harmful pollutants from the air you breathe, and help in the global fight against climate change.

But it is not as hard as it might sound. According to a new report commissioned by the New Jersey Conservation Foundation, it is possible for New Jerseyans to achieve all three.

The report, “The Future Is Electric,” finds that consumers could see more than a 50% reduction in their energy bills by installing highly efficient electric heating and cooling systems and weatherizing their houses. That amounts to substantial savings in a household budget.

What’s more, transitioning away from burning fossil fuels inside homes would mean cleaner and healthier indoor air, and fewer outdoor emissions contributing to global warming and more than 250 premature deaths annually in New Jersey.

Prepared by the Acadia Center, a New England-based climate research and advocacy nonprofit organization, the report also highlights the need for New Jersey and its utilities to provide more incentives for consumers to invest in efficient electric heating – similar to the popular rebates offered to consumers who buy electric vehicles.

Coincidentally, “The Future Is Electric” was released one day after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a dire warning that our rapidly warming climate is wreaking havoc across the planet and that time is running out to stabilize it.

Unless greenhouse gas emissions are quickly and drastically reduced, the IPCC report said, climate change impacts – including floods, storms, droughts and other extreme weather events – will overwhelm the ability of nature and humanity to adapt.

New Jersey is making progress on reducing the state’s reliance on fossil fuels to generate electricity. This state we’re in requires that by 2030, 50% of the electricity we consume will come from in-state and regional solar and wind.

New Jersey is also working to reduce the state’s largest source of greenhouse gas emissions – vehicles and transportation – with generous rebates to buyers of electric vehicles.

One piece of the clean energy puzzle that has gotten considerably less attention is the building sector. Many New Jerseyans do not realize that houses and buildings are the state’s second largest source of greenhouse gas emissions.

When you think about it, it makes sense: Our state has hundreds of thousands of homes and buildings. Each building heated with natural gas, heating oil or propane has its own on-site combustion system, which produces indoor and outdoor emissions. Polluted air can cause or exacerbate many health conditions, including asthma.

What is the alternative to fossil fuel systems? Many consumers are turning to a newer technology known as air source heat pumps.

“Heat pumps are essentially a super-efficient air conditioner that can work backward,” explained Amy Boyd, policy director at the Acadia Center.

The heat pumps work by moving heat from outdoor air indoors and are effective even in cold climates.

Air source heat pumps are far more energy efficient than fossil fuel combustion. By combining heat pump technology with weatherizing “leaky” houses, Boyd said, consumers could see their energy bills cut in half.

Heat pumps create no emissions, either indoors or outdoors, so families can breathe cleaner, healthier air. This is especially important in New Jersey’s urban areas, which have the state’s highest levels of air pollution.

So what is stopping New Jersey consumers from reaping these benefits? Mostly money.

Heat pump systems have higher up-front costs and New Jersey is behind other northeastern states in offering financial incentives to motivate homeowners to make the switch.

“One thing states like Massachusetts are doing is putting their money where their climate policy is,” said Boyd.

In states that offer substantial rebates, she noted, heat pump systems can be comparable in cost or even cheaper than fossil fuel combustion systems.

It is time for New Jersey to get with the program and support a switch to clean, electrically heated buildings.

The Murphy administration has already committed to producing more electricity with clean, renewable technology – and getting more drivers in electric vehicles. The next logical step is to make it affordable for residents to upgrade their homes to safe, efficient, non-polluting heating systems.

One advocate for stronger incentives is state Sen. Andrew Zwicker (D-Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Somerset), who spoke at a briefing on the release of “The Future Is Electric” report.

“New Jersey has to be a leader here,” Zwicker said. “If we can provide financial incentives, consumers can have choices” for better health, lower energy bills and fighting climate change.

“This is a key moment, not just in New Jersey’s history or U.S. history, but globally. The IPCC report that just came out makes it clear global warming is outpacing our ability to cope.

“The oceans are rising, the forests are burning and carbon dioxide levels continue their upward march. It’s now a question of are we willing to take this moment and move forward?” Zwicker said.

New Jersey’s answer needs to be yes.

To read “The Future Is Electric,” go to https://acadiacenter.org/resource/the-future-is-electric/

Tom Gilbert is a co-executive director of the New Jersey Conservation Foundation, Far Hills. He may be reached at [email protected]

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here