The positions of NGOs on

Nanotechnology

Some examples of Trade Unions activities to assure

transparency in the debate on the use of

nanomaterials

From Public Engagement to participatory Governance of Nanotechnology: which role for civil society organisations

24-25 February 2011 University of Augsburg

Pieter van BroekhuizenManager Nanotechnologies & Chemical Risks,

IVAM UvA, Amsterdam

OverviewOverview

• General background

– NanoCap activities

• Role of NGOs and Trade Unions in the

nanodebate and positioning

• Examples of role in REACH RIP-oN, ISO and

Trade Union Action Plan

• Conclusions

NanoCapNanoCapNanotechnology Capacity Building for NGO’s Nanotechnology Capacity Building for NGO’s

and Trade Unionsand Trade Unions

Working conferences, positioning discussions, workplac e visits� Technical issues� Environmental issues� Occupational health and safety issues� Ethical issues � Critical assessment of benefits

Contribution to public nanodialogue� Discussion with members, authorities and the public� Workplace visits and discussions with industry

September 2006 – September 2009

FP6 Project , Science & Society programme

NLNL

CoordinatorIVAM

Trade unionsEnvironmental groups Universities

NLNLSNM

ITITLA

LULUBEF

EUEUEEB

GRGRMIO

NLNLFNV

IRIRAMIC

EUEUETUI

DEDEKOOP

ATATPPM

DKDKUAAR

DEDETUD

BEBEKUL

UKUKUES

NLNLECDO

NanoCap consortiumNanoCap consortium

www.nanocap.eu

NGOs and Trade Unions in the nano-debateNGOs and Trade Unions in the nano-debate

General mission� Mobilising and representation of individual and collective interests and

promotion of its members’ ambitions � Environmental NGOs: citizens, consumers, the general environment

� Trade unions: workers, members in companies and civil services

Role?

� Political actions and lobbying � Parliamentarians and governmental authorities

� Industries and employers

� General public

Instruments?� Capacity building, awareness campaigns

� Participation in consultative/deliberative bodies

� Public and focussed actions

� Bargaining, deliberations

� Etc.

Nano, uncertainties and frame for mind settingNano, uncertainties and frame for mind setting

1. Accept that there are (scientific) uncertainties

2. Make uncertainties part of the used risk management system

� Take precautionary measures based on uncertainties

1. Be aware that precaution is not equivalent to prevention

� Precautionary measures might have to “go further” than preventive measures

� Accept the principle of No Data ���� No Market (REACH)

1. Be aware that this means a shift in responsibilities:

Not: Innocent unless proven guilty

� (User / government have task to proof the harm or the risk)

But: Guilty unless proven innocent

� (Manufacturer / supplier have task to proof the product is safe or can be used safely)

1. Communicate along the chain

� Demand upstream transparency (to supplier)

� Supply downstream information

1. Critical assessment of actual performance of products

� Assessment of claims for beneficial performance and deliberation on substantiation

of claims related to sustainability and precaution

Results NanoCapResults NanoCap

� Positioning statements of Environmental NGOs (2009)

� ETUC Resolution (2008) on nanotechnologies and

nanomaterials

� Update ETUC resolution 2010

� Active role of CSOs in many national and European nano-

activities, debates, developments etc.

Summary of CSOs’ nano demandsSummary of CSOs’ nano demandsBuilding blocks for a precautionary approach Building blocks for a precautionary approach

Precautionary

approach

Precautionary

approach

Risk Assessment

Emission control

Risk Assessment

Emission control

Pro-active

registration

Pro-active

registration

Transparent

communication

Transparent

communication

Pre-market

approval

Pre-market

approval

No data � no exposure

No data � no emission

OELs / DNELs / NRVs

No data � no exposure

No data � no emission

OELs / DNELs / NRVs

Registration exposed workers

Early warning system

Registration exposed workers

Early warning system

Reporting of nano in products

Known and unknown risks

Info on MSDS

Reporting of nano in products

Known and unknown risks

Info on MSDS

Test need & acceptability of

nanoproducts

Test need & acceptability of

nanoproducts

Example REACH RIP oN 1, 2 and 3Example REACH RIP oN 1, 2 and 3Role of Trade UnionsRole of Trade Unions

EC evaluations:

Nano-risks in principle covered by existing regulations , but some

adaptations may be necessary �

REACH Implementation Plan (RIP) on Nano 1, 2 and 3 (on adaptation of

REACH to the nanoscale)

•RIP oN1: Substance Identification on MNM

(Manufactured Nano Materials)

•RIP-oN2: Information requirement on MNM

•RIP-oN3: Hazard and Exposure Assessment and

hazard/risk characterisation of MNM

REACH RIP oN 1, 2 and 3REACH RIP oN 1, 2 and 3Role of CSOsRole of CSOs

Project leader Members Observers

RIP-oN1(Substance identification)

JRC Ispra MSs (e.g. SW, GE, NL, IR)

EEB, ETUC,

CEFIC , Industry

ECHA

RIP-oN2(Information requirement)

IOM (SafeNano) NIA

CEFIC

SIN (ICT)

MSs

EEB

ETUC

RIP-oN3(Hazard and Exposure

Assessment )

IOM (SafeNano) NIA

CEFIC

SIN (ICT)

MSs

EEB

ETUC

Overall Management: JRC Ispra

Period: May 2009 – June 2011

RIP-oN1 RIP-oN1 (Substance identification)(Substance identification)

Topic: - When is a NM a new substance?

- Nanoform versus the non-nanoform

Problem: - REACH does not know the word “material”, so how to make the step from material to substance

- If fate (env. / health) of NM differs from bulk � other substance

- If NM has other physical properties, then other risk profile?

- Finding the right parameters for identification

Conflicts

Industry strongly opposes Governments – NGO / TU

RIP-oN1 RIP-oN1 (Substance identification)(Substance identification)

Industry:

- states there is no difference between nano and bulk form

Rationale: - only one registration dossier (one registration � less costs, less tests)

- NM and bulk can be combined in one Chemical Safety Assessment

TU/NGO/Gov:

- state there are differences between nano and bulk � separate registration

Example: - When phase changes, properties change (e.g.Solubility, ZnO in cosmetics)

- Quantum confinement (catalytics, ROS, e.g. Au)

- e.g. CNT versus graphite

- TU/NGO: “Taliban of the RIP oN1”

Result:- CNT considered as new substances

- Expected: many NMs will be considered as new substances

RIP-oN2 RIP-oN2 (Information requirement)(Information requirement)

Topic: - Specification of toxicity tests for Chemical Safety Assessment

Problem: - Existing tests not fit for use:

- Tests based on dissolving of substances, but NM are non-

soluble substances

Paradigm change:

- “classical toxicology versus particle toxicology”

Details: - experimental conditions are problematic

- uncertainty about the right endpoints (e.g. oxidative stress)

- reporting metrics: mass or amount of particles?

(effect determined by particles, not the mass)

RIP-oN2 RIP-oN2 (Information requirement)(Information requirement)

“Problems”: Mass versus particle approach

- in practice size distribution, agglomeration, aggregation etc.

- adaptation of many test methods

- mass detection limits >> than particle detection limits

Industry position:

- Prefer mass approach (comprehensible, fits “traditional” way of thinking: all substance policies based on mass (except fibres))

- Consider monodisperse systems (all particles one diameter)

EC / MS position:

- Prefer mass approach for time being because of risk of delaying regulation of risks. (Social pressure)

TU / NGO position:

- Use particle approach, because this is the right toxicological parameter

- For transparency and a precautionary approach

- Obligation to make a CSA also for lower tonnages at the market

RIP-oN3 RIP-oN3 (Risk assessment & management)(Risk assessment & management)

General tendency:

- Proposed measures reasonably effective

Discussion:

- Timing of the measures

- Assuming effectiveness of local exhaust ventilation

ISO TC229ISO TC229Working group on NanotechnologyWorking group on Nanotechnology

• Four Working Groups:

1. Definitions & concepts

2. Measurement methods

3. Health and Safety & Environment

4. Characterisation of NM

• Participation TU relevant for WG3

Problems: - ISO Guidelines are commercial items (costs purchasing guideline)

- ISO can be seen interests organisation

- ISO is “closed” circuit; industry + member states

- Participation as member national delegation

- Participation = costs + time (much time)

- HSE may cover political items

• Participation ETUI in “Liaison group” (right for advice, no voting rights)

Nano Reference ValuesNano Reference ValuesDefinitionDefinition

� A Nano Reference Value (NRV) is a provisional substitute for OELs or

DNELs, as long as they are not available

� A Nano Reference Value (NRV) is:

� a warning level for the concentration of nanoparticles in the workplace atmosphere

� expressed as amount of nanoparticles / cm3

� established as an 8hour-TWA (Time Weighted Average) exposure level.

� corrected for the background particle concentration.

� intended to be a warning level to urge exposure assessment of nanoparticles at the

workplace.

� When exceeding this level the exposure should be reduced to the minimum:

thorough source identification and exposure mitigation.

� The NRV is not health-based, but there is some correlation with possible health

effects. Inherent to the established level of NRVs is the knowledge that the

amount of nanoparticles, and the total surface area of the particles are

determinants for possible health effects.

Nano Reference ValuesNano Reference Valuesschemescheme

Description DensityNRV

(8-hr TWA)Type NP

1CNT with a high aspect ratio (>3:1),

>5µm, insoluble

0,01

fibres/cm3

• Asbestos-like SWCNT or MWCNT

without specific declaration of the

manufacturer

2Biopersistent granular nanomaterial

in the range of 1 and 100 nm> 6.000 kg/m³

20.000

particles/cm³

• Ag, Au, CeO2, CoO, Fe, FexOy, La, Pb,

Sb2O5, SnO2,

3Biopersistent granular nanomaterial

in the range of 1 and 100 nm< 6.000 kg/m³

40.000

particles/cm³

• Al2O3, SiO2, TiN, TiO2, ZnO, nanoclay

• Carbon Black, C60, dendrimers,

polystyrene

• CNT with excluded asbestos-like

effects

4 Ultrafine liquid and soluble particles Applicable OEL• e.g.fats, hydrocarbons, siloxanes,

NaCl

Reference: IFA Germany. http://www.dguv.de/ifa/en/fac/nanopartikel/beurteilungsmassstaebe/index.jsp

Nano Reference ValuesNano Reference Valuesshort term exposure levelsshort term exposure levels

Short term NRVs 15min / peak

NRV 15min-TWA exposureNRV 15min-TWA exposure NRV15min-TWA = 2 x NRV8hr-TWA

• 40.000 Np/cm3

• 80.000 Np/cm3

NRV peak exposure NRV peak exposure

(several seconds)NRVpeak = 10 x NRV8hr-TWA

• 200.000Np/cm3

• 400.000Np/cm3

Dutch Trade Unions Dutch Trade Unions (2010-2012)(2010-2012)

Workers oriented awarness raising programmeWorkers oriented awarness raising programme

NanoVakbondsActieplan

• Focussed actions amongst members in:- Building Industries

- Car manufacturing & repair

- Hospitals

• Inventory of products and risks awareness members

• Development of workplace specific, workers-friendly risk assessment materials

• Workers initiative nano risk assessment

ConclusionsConclusions

• Participation of CSOs in public dialogue and deliberative circuits is essential

• CSOs input rather needed on technology policy and development than specifically on NanoNanotechnology

• Mobilisation of facilities for capacity building of CSOs is essential

• Independent input in nanodialogue essential

• Stakeholders interests may be hidden even in the smallest details

Thank you for your attentionThank you for your attention

Pieter van BroekhuizenPieter van Broekhuizen

IVAM UvAPlantage Muidergracht 14

P.O. Box 18180

1001 ZB Amsterdam

The Netherlands

00 31 20 525 5080

pvbroekhuizen@ivam.uva.nl

www.ivam.uva.nl

RESEARCH AND CONSULTANCY ON SUSTAINABILITY