Green chemistry: science or politics?

FILE - In this Monday Dec. 1, 2014 file photo, the California State Assembly meets for an organizational session where lawmakers took the oath of office at the Capitol in Sacramento, Calif. In the upcoming year Democrats will push for increased spending on education and social programs while Republicans will strive for relevancy after a strong showing in legislative races last month. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, File)

SACRAMENTO Legislators already are touting myriad new bill ideas as they head back to Sacramento next week. Meanwhile, their efforts from last year 900-plus new laws will go into effect New Year's Day. Its back to business as usual, with all the usual hype by legislators promising their latest ideas will fix some pressing problem.

The states ban on free lightweight plastic grocery bags is arguably the best-known of the new laws. I bought Christmas groceries in a city in Washington State where a similar ban has been in effect. I paid for bulkier bags, which I promptly threw away. I always kept and reused the light, easily stored ones to scoop cat litter and dog poo.

Well see if the law cuts back on trash or just causes people to react as I did. Then again, we might never know the answer. Opponents say they have collected enough signatures to qualify a referendum for the ballot that would overturn the law (and puts the ban starting in July on hold until after the November vote). Even if voters keep the law, little time is spent at the Capitol analyzing how past measures have worked out.

But a new controversy surrounding an old package of environmental laws is a reminder that well-intentioned environmental measures even ones that gain widespread bipartisan support often have questionable consequences. The issue involves the states efforts to promote the use of green chemistry in consumer products.

It sounds unobjectionable. The goals of this program are to reduce toxic chemicals in consumer products, create new business opportunities in the emerging safer consumer products economy, and reduce the burden on consumers and businesses struggling to identify whats in the products they buy , according to the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, which administers the program.

The first-in-the-nation Safer Consumer Products Program was started in 2008 by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, with implementation planned five years later. Backed by members of both parties, it promised to create a science-based model for state regulators to identify toxic chemicals and propose safer alternatives.

In March, the agency released its draft list of products that would be analyzed to find potential alternative chemicals. The top-three targets are spray-foam insulation, childrens play pads and some paint strippers. In September, it released seven broad categories of products that demand further analysis. One category involves lead fishing gear.

Of course, the manufacturers of the targeted products are frantic. Getting branded as a problem product isnt good for business and they argue the departments listing process is arbitrary and based more on the influence of activist groups than sound science. For instance, the spray-foam insulation groups say the agency did not seek much input from affected industries, and as a result has disseminated inaccurate information that taints their product before enough research is done.

The agency has acknowledged it is not employing a numerical weighting or ranking system, but instead is taking a subjective approach, using professional judgment and policy objectives to select which chemicals should be phased out of the consumer market, wrote former Sen. Sam Blakeslee, in a Sacramento Bee column this month. The San Luis Obispo Republican co-authored the green-chemistry legislation.

See the rest here:
Green chemistry: science or politics?