Today, the European Parliament voted on the matter in plenary, and a great majority voted in favour of a resolution – in other words, against granting an authorisation.
Circular economy is the new buzzword in the world of sustainability. It has truly become a hot topic – not only among legislators in the European Union, but also among companies that strive to have a progressive sustainability profile. And most importantly, the concept has gained a lot of traction in public opinion. But. Not all recycling, and not all recycled materials, are good.
Recently, the European Parliament Environment Committee voted in favour of a resolution against the draft decision from the EU Commission to grant an authorisation for using sodium dichromate, which is classified as cancerogenic, mutagenic and toxic for reproduction.
In order for circular economy to become cost-efficient and economically feasible, the whole value chain will need to invest in smooth collaboration. The key to its success? Trust, transparency and traceability.
I’d like to argue that a database that can help us understand some of the toxic chemicals we surround ourselves with is pretty solid idea. And imagine the possibilities: What if it wasn’t limited to Candidate List substances, but could also include SIN List chemicals, or better yet, full material declarations? This would seriously incentivize the use of recycled materials as well as increase the value of the industry.
Sportswear that do not smell bad after exercising in them is a great business idea, and such clothing items have actually been available to customers for quite a while. Although it may sound good, the truth is that these clothes are very problematic for the environment.
European chemicals legislation allows several hazardous chemicals, that are identified as Substances of Very High Concern (SVHCs) by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and restricted under the REACH regulation, to be used in food contact material. How can this be?
Two years have passed since hazardous chemicals were given much-needed attention and closer scrutiny in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI). Qhat has happened since then? Has the “new” DJSI had any actual effect?
US organisation Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (BCPP) released a report that examines fragrance chemicals in beauty, personal care and cleaning products sold in the United States. BCPP tested 140 products using semi- and non-targeted chemical analysis methods, and the results were quite concerning. More than one in four of the total 338 fragrance chemicals detected in the products were linked to serious chronic health effects, such as cancer, hormone disruption and reproductive harm.