E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Coal tar sealant is applied at a study site at the University of Texas in Austin.
When you think of pollution, you might picture an industrial center like Camden, N.J., or Jersey City. But new research shows that when it comes to a potent class of cancer-causing toxic chemicals, many American parking lots are a lot worse.
New studies paint an increasingly alarming picture – particularly for young children – about how these chemicals are being spread across big swaths of American cities and suburbs by what may seem an unlikely source – a type of asphalt sealer. These sealants are derived from an industrial waste, coal tar.
Four new studies (links are at the end of this article) announced this week further implicate coal tar-based asphalt sealants as likely health risks. The creosote-like material typically is sprayed onto parking lots and driveways in an effort to preserve the asphalt. It also gives the pavement a dark black coloring that many people find attractive.
Coal tar is a byproduct of the steelmaking industry. In 1992, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency declared that it would not be classified as a hazardous waste, even though it met the characteristics of one, because it could be recycled for uses that include coating asphalt. That meant steel mills didn’t have to pay for costly landfilling or incineration of the waste.
Only in recent years have scientists discovered the ill effects of this practice.
Coal tar sealants are used most heavily in the eastern United States, but were applied in all 50 states until Washington state banned the products last year. More than a dozen local governments, including Washington, D.C., and Austin, Texas, also have banned the coal tar sealants in favor of the other major type of sealant, which is asphalt-based.
Asphalt-based sealants contain about 1/1000th the concentration of the cancer-causing chemicals that coal tar-based products do. Home Depot and Lowe’s stores have dropped the coal tar sealants from their product lines, but still some 85 million gallons of the coal tar-based sealants are applied annually in the United States.
The new research, published in peer-reviewed science journals, focuses on a class of chemicals found in coal tar and known as “polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons,” or PAHs. Previously, researchers believed that people’s exposure to PAHs came primarily through food, which contains trace amounts produced primarily from smoking food or cooking it at high temperatures in practices such as grilling, roasting, and frying. PAHS are produced when any organic matter burns.
The new research shows:
- It appears that children – especially those from 3 to 5 years old – living by coal tar-sealed parking lots and driveways are getting a bigger dose of PAHs from house dust than from their food. The kids who put their hands in their mouth most often are likely receiving 9 ½ times more exposure through house dust than through food, according to research led by E. Spencer Williams, a Baylor University human health risk assessment expert. That’s just from the house dust. When the kids are outside in the yard or playing on coal tar-sealed pavement, they likely are picking up much larger doses.
- While researchers previously theorized that airborne PAHs come mostly from power plants, factories and cars’ and trucks’ tailpipe emissions, U.S. Geological Survey researchers measured large amounts vaporizing into the air off coal tar-sealed parking lots. The concentrations coming off parking lots in suburban Austin, where the researchers are based, were higher than in centers of heavy industry, including Jersey City and Camden, N.J.; Chicago; London and Manchester, England; and Guangzhou, China. The Austin parking lots tested were three to eight years old. Much more off-gassing occurs in the first few years after the sealants are applied, researchers said.
- Concentrations measured four feet above the coal tar-sealed lots in some cases exceeded health-protection guidelines recommended by a European Union science panel to protect against cancer. The United States has no similar guidelines.
- Extrapolating from the 85 million gallons of coal tar sealants laid down annually and the out-gassing rates measured in Austin, Geological Survey researchers calculated that nationwide, more PAHs are getting into the air from coal tar-sealed parking lots, driveways and playgrounds than from all the auto and truck exhaust.
“That’s a lot,” said Barbara Mahler, a USGS scientist involved in the research.
Researchers previously had shown that coal tar-sealed parking lots were shedding tiny bits of the material, which was washed by rain into nearby waterways – killing, sickening and maiming aquatic creatures such as salamanders, minnows and, importantly, bugs at the base of the food chain. The chemicals kill tadpoles, cause tumors on fish, stunt growth of aquatic creatures and reduce the number of species able to live in a waterway.
As a result of being washed into waterways by stormwater, these chemicals’ concentrations have been rising over the last two decades, even as levels of most contaminants are headed down, Geological Survey researchers showed.
The chemicals are getting into the house dust, researchers think, when small bits are eroded off pavement and tracked into nearby homes.
Scientists also had previously demonstrated that toxic constituents of coal tar were showing up in the dust of homes adjacent to parking lots and driveways, raising questions about health effects on children in those homes, especially toddlers who frequently put their hands in their mouths. Coal tar is known to cause cancer in humans, as well as genetic mutations in lab animals.
One of the new studies helps quantify that risk. Kids who are average in terms of how often they put their hands into their mouths are getting 2 ½ times as many PAHs from house dust as from food, while those in the 95th percentile of hand-to-mouth behavior – they do it more than 94 percent of other kids – get 9 ½ times as much from the dust.
Researchers still would like to know how much of a toxic dose those same kids are getting when they play outside in yards next to coal tar-sealed asphalt, or on the asphalt itself. The level of cancer-causing chemicals in the dust on the asphalt itself has been measured at about 37 times the levels found in house dust.
“Those concentrations are a good bit higher and this study doesn’t include that at all,” said Williams, the Baylor researcher. “That may be important because just one little fingerful could be a relevant dose,” meaning one that worries health experts.
While researchers have known about contamination of water and dust, the findings about air pollution are new. Significant amounts of PAHs continue to vaporize off coal tar-sealed lots even years after the sealant is put down.
“When we look at a seal-coated parking lots, in any direction we look we see these really strongly elevated concentrations,” said Peter Van Metre, a U.S. Geological Survey scientist based in Austin. Of the dust on the coal tar-sealed pavement, he said: “It would just take a tiny amount of that to be a large enough dose for it to be significant.”
Companies that sell and use the coal tar sealants have previously disputed the growing body of evidence of the coal tar sealants’ danger being amassed by scientists from the Geological Survey, the University of New Hampshire, Baylor and other institutions.
Repeated attempts this week to reach an industry representative, Anne LeHuray, executive director of the Pavement Coatings Technology Council, for comment on the new studies were unsuccessful. In an email on Thursday, LeHuray said she was tied up at a meeting of the pavement council in Memphis.
Generally, the pavement council has attacked previous coal tar research on technical grounds.
Read previous articles on coal tar sealants:
Study sees parking lot dust as a cancer risk
State bans coal tar sealants in big win for foes
The pavement council has fought bans – sometimes successfully – when they have been proposed by local and state governments. In addition to the local governments that have forbidden use of the coal tar sealants, some governments have placed restrictions on their use, including the state of Minnesota and the California Department of Transportation. Restrictions also are in effect in more than 40 Illinois municipalities.
U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, a Democratic congressman from the Austin area, has previously filed legislation calling for a nationwide ban on coal tar sealants. He plans to refile the legislation, a Doggett spokeswoman said, but is currently embroiled in a redistricting fight.
Tom Ennis, an Austin city official who helped get coal tar sealants banned there, has now launched a campaign to support a nationwide ban.
“You’re looking at a big urban air quality” problem, Ennis said. “It’s completely unacceptable and something needs to be done.”
The studies announced this week appeared in the science journals Environmental Science and Technology, Chemosphere, Atmospheric Environment, and Environmental Pollution.
InvestigateWest is a non-profit journalism center based in Seattle. If you value this kind of in-depth, independent news reporting, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to support further work of this kind.
Leave a Comment:
Dang, we just had our road sealed in front of our house.. I hope I don't die from it because I have an eye appointment Monday
I think just about everything causes cancer or will kill you these days... I know that's not true but it sure seems like that's all that's ever in the news.
I thought we were leaning towards lighter colored surfaces for "heat island" issues anyway. That "dark black" isnt so great either.
Like nobody knew this when they put out the product.
wellcome to the United States of A**holes
oh they knew but all that money that was getting kicked back to the gov from the compaines and funneld to the politions they cant miss out on that even if it kills all the tax payers here in the us of as*h*les
@alanB,
Just don't lick your driveway or eat off of it !! You will be okay.
Fresh asphalt is just about the same .... just less liquidity .... so would you stop paving roads .... ??
We have such an abundance of manure in this country. Looks like researchers could find a more utilitarian use for it. I can produce 2 to 3 bushels a day myself, without even trying, and I,m not a politician.
bigbenalaska -
Coal tar is highly toxic because it's a byproduct of steel production.
Also, I found it disturbing that the guy spraying coal tar for a test in the picture isn't wearing any type of breathing protection. But, then again, he is from Texas.....
Coal tar and other products like creosote, betchumastic, etc. have long been known to be hazzardous to your health...Any person who rubbed up against warf pilings while swimming near a creosoted pier will tell you how bad it is for your skin...Any person who has applied (creosote or bitcumastic) as a coating on wood while the sun is bright in the summer will also tell you how it can hurt your eyes and make your skin peel...So this really is not a new problem...
About 20+ years ago coal tar was largely replaced as a wood preservative by CCA which is an arsenic based product...Remember all the picnic tables and playground equipment they used it on...Yes we ingested it and our kids played on it too...
This is what happens when you let businesses control themselves (so called FREE MARKET BS)...This is why we need more governmental control to protect our environment and our lives...We need to progress forward, not backwards to the pre-EPA days...Anything else is just stupidity and good old fashion GREED...
dano I live in Arizona how am I going to fry my eggs in the summer?
WoooooHooooo yet another way for fossil fuels to kill us or cause us harm. Coal- We can heat your home, cook your food, spill into your neighborhoods and, now, pollute MORE of the air your breathe.
Ok, anti-green energy people attack. Ready set go....
dano-3878024 "Just don't lick your driveway or eat off of it !! You will be okay."
Right Dano, because we couldn't possibly be inhaling pollutants now could we?
I am so tired of "scientists." Or at least the irresponsible greedy ones. Bird flu engineering to airborne, all those who helped make the bomb, chemicals that sicken us and our environment. What about responsible science?
The business a-holes that pay these "scientists" are guilty as well but they can't "make these chemicals." I personally see no difference between Adolf Hitler and Dow, Monsanto, and scientists who create chemicals that slowly kill and cripple humans, animals, and the environment. It may take longer to die, but they surely slaughter more than Hitler ever did. Why aren't we prosecuting these criminals?
http://www.ewg.org/
Alan, if your appointment is this Monday, you should be fine. But there are no guarantees about Thursday.
Sharktopussie:
Keep in mind the fact that it is scientists who have identified and are reporting the danger of coal tar sealants.
@ rick
"This is what happens when you let businesses control themselves (so called FREE MARKET BS)...This is why we need more governmental control to protect our environment and our lives...We need to progress forward, not backwards to the pre-EPA days...Anything else is just stupidity and good old fashion GREED"
You must have missed the part where the EPA is allowing the industry to use this stuff even though studies have proven it to be cancer causing since 1992. That's 20 years of ignorance by "governmental control", but i'm sure some at the EPA have their reasons and it probably starts and ends with GREED. I can't believe there are people that think government control is a good thing.
This is just one example of why I never worry about Social Security running out of money. Big business with the help of the GOP will ensure that life expectancy declines in this country. Add in the millions who will die prematurely from obesity-related diseases and we're looking at a surplus again. Now Medicare/Medicaid is a different story. The answer is to vote GOP! They will eliminate both programs and replace them with private insurance who will refuse to cover anybody who is sick, hence a quick death. Problem solved.
wh-ow after 5 years still giving fumes off 4 feet high. nice ,that crap is all over florida. I told neighbors they were stupid to paint driveway black with that crap, It would just make it and everything around it hotter. I didn't even know it was toxic, although I did think it was, because it really smells. Now they are hoppin down it yelling o0 0oo 0o00o 00o ahh to go to beach in the summer. @!$%#tards,I like them , but they are so freakin superficial. they have three small superficial kids also . Hope they read this. They won't believe it anyway. maybe they will spraypaint there dead grass they just installed and let die, with some other chemical by product. next
Here's one for the peanut gallery!
Here in the northeast we get what is called snow and ice.
Our parking lots and roofs benefit from dark colors by absorbing what little sunlight there is and thus melting the ice and snow. In other places the reverse is true but there is no one size that fits all and no one approach is universal.
What pretty amazing is that the PAH load of 1 acre of Applied Refined Tar Sealcoat = 2oz of Denorex Shampoo or BBQ'ing a 6 oz Pork Chop.
Any chance - in between going around the country Scaring people about their Kids & Cancer –
USGS Could Actually Re-Tested Austin's Hotspots that Started this!
(PS - The PAH loads in most areas INCREASED After the Ban was Implemented-If their Science & Math is so Credible - Why Don't they re-test.)
Really - "Cancer Time Bomb" -
So much for Responsible Science!!
NATURALLY OCCURRING MUTAGENS & CARCINOGENS FOUND in FOODS & BEVERAGES
Acetaldehyde (apples, bread, coffee, tomatoes)—mutagen & potent rodent carcinogen
Acrylamide (bread, rolls)—rodent & human neurotoxin; rodent carcinogen
Aflatoxin (nuts)—mutagen & potent rodent carcinogen; also a human carcinogen
Allyl isothiocyanate (arugula, broccoli, mustard)—mutagen & rodent carcinogen
Aniline (carrots)—rodent carcinogen
Benzaldehyde (apples, coffee, tomatoes)—rodent carcinogen
Benzene (butter, coffee, roast beef)—rodent carcinogen
Benzo(a)pyrene (bread, coffee, pumpkin pie, rolls, tea)—mutagen & rodent carcinogen
Benzofuran (coffee)—rodent carcinogen
Benzyl acetate (jasmine tea)—rodent carcinogen
Caffeic acid (apples, carrots, celery, cherry tomatoes, cof-fee, grapes, lettuce, mangos, pears, potatoes)—rodent carcinogen
Catechol (coffee)—rodent carcinogen
Coumarin (cinnamon in pies)—rodent carcinogen
1,2,5,6-dibenz(a)anthracene (coffee)—rodent carcinogen
Estragole (apples, basil)—rodent carcinogen
Ethyl alcohol (bread, red wine, rolls)—rodent & human carcinogen
Ethyl acrylate (pineapple)—rodent carcinogen
Ethyl carbamate (bread, rolls, red wine)—mutagen & rodent carcinogen
Furan and furan derivatives (bread, onions, celery, mushrooms, sweet potatoes, rolls, cranberry sauce, coffee)—many are mutagens
Furfural (bread, coffee, nuts, rolls, sweet potatoes)—furan derivative & rodent carcinogen
Heterocyclic amines (roast beef, turkey)—mutagens & rodent carcinogens
Hydrazines (mushrooms)—mutagens & rodent carcinogens
Hydrogen peroxide (coffee, tomatoes)—mutagen & rodent carcinogen
Hydroquinone (coffee)—rodent carcinogen
d-limonene (black pepper, mangos)—rodent carcinogen
4-methylcatechol (coffee)—rodent carcinogen
Methyl eugenol (basil, cinnamon & nutmeg in apple &pumpkin pies)—rodent carcinogen
Psoralens (celery, parsley)—mutagens; rodent & human carcinogens
Quercetin glycosides (apples, onions, tea, tomatoes)—mutagens & rodent carcinogens
Safrole (nutmeg in apple and pumpkin pies, black pepper)—rodent carcinogen
Right wingers will see this as government intrusion on business even though it is a MAJOR health issue.
No, they will see this as another example of how the EPA and environmental crazed left continue to cower to the Union Corporations.
So if it's such a hazard, how have we survived all these years?
Didn't take long for someone to politicize the article. You liberal eco weenies crack me up. You lamblast far right extemism, yet have no clue as to how extreme your views are.
"Family sized Bubbles for sale".
@ Fed Up -I would say....neither.
Having worked in the environmental consulting industry for 11 years now, one of the most important things I've learned is just how much you can skew data, for either side.
The "9 1/2 times" this, and "49 times" that has to be put in perspective. For instance, some of the regulatory exposure standards that are set for these chemicals are extremely low. In New Jersey, only one part per billion of benzene (1 ppb) in groundwater is considered an exceedence. So if you have 10 parts per billion in a water sample, I could author an article that says "...groundwater levels are 10 TIMES HIGHER than safe limits..." etc, etc,.
In terms of the inhalation risks, of course, if you're taking readings right above fresh asphalt that is baking in the sun, you are going to pick up some PAHs. That's like painting your shutters with oil based paint and taking a reading in the breathing space and going "MILLIONS OF AMERICANS ARE USING TOXIC PAINT TO PAINT THEIR HOMES".
You have to look at weighted, or long term exposure levels. Down-gradient wind levels. Vapor levels in the homes that people live in next to these lots. In terms of the PAH laden dust, there are many much more serious chemicals that children and people are exposed to on a daily basis. Flame retardents (used in everything from carpets to couches) are KNOWN to inhibit mental development and cause an exotic array of illnesses. Plasticizers do the same thing, yet people cook their food in Teflon pans and heat their kids' food up in plastic containers in the microwave.
I will, however, concur with the points made in terms of runoff into our streams, and subsequently, our ecosystems. PAHs take a while to naturally degrade, and continual "shocking" of our waterways with PAH residual compounds is a problem. Aquatic life are much, much more susceptible to contaminants than their land counterparts.
Hey D Man, I've got 1 year on you in the biz. In CT mostly, but some in NJ. Good perspective about the "10 TIMES SAFE LIMIT"....and you know that even the term "safe limit" carries a bias. The safe limit is generally the limit beyond which 1 in a million people will get cancer. PAHs don't degrade much at all, especially the heavier asphaltines and resins. Sure we eat some when we grill, but that's a tradeoff I choose to make. I will take issue with your comment about taking readings right above fresh asphalt - I believe the article said the parking lots tested has sealant laid down 3-8 years ago. That's some time to still be off-gassing. PAHs (and even PCBs) are now thought of as more volatile - CT actually proposed a vapor standand for PCBs during their last regs revision, which got shelved for the time being. I'm dealing with PAHs now at sites with normal parking lot runoff (not even coal-tar based sealants), and its complex from the eco perspective. Still sad that a SLERA or eco-checklist has to focus on normal paving and parking lot maintenance.....Cheers!
What an asinine comment. What makes you think that conservatives care less about their kids being poisoned by this crap that a liberal like you. This is not a political issue. Please grow up and stop trying to insert your on political biases into every single discussion.
This stuff is not only used commercially. It is sold by many home supply stores as a driveway sealant for homeowners to use on residential driveways as well. In addition, a similar material called coal tar epoxy is sold in the marine world for use to seal the hulls of fiberglass boats that have blistered from being left in the water too long without adequate bottom paint protection. The stuff smells nasty and is a real pain to apply. I do question the effects of this since I applied this coal tar epoxy to a boat hull and also sealed the driveway at my old house with coal tar sealant years ago and suffered no ill effects. They are talking about relative exposure levels in the article, but there is apparently no information about what constitutes a dangerous level of exposure - or at least none was mentioned in this article. It would be interesting to learn what constitutes a dangerous exposure level for this chemical before getting people worried about it.
I dont see the point in using a cheaper more toxic substance, when a product is available that may not be AS CHEAP (but is still cost effective) and is less toxic.
stupid is as stupid does...
but i think ultimately, this is another example of how BUSINESS (union or otherwise) has corrupted our elected officials into letting a proven toxic waste be recyled into a "product", that is harmful...all so the company doesnt have the handling of the waste become a cost to their bottom line.
fracking comes to mind (and it's not unionized)
im convinced that if we the people didnt pay attention at all, we'd be sold cardboard as food...just like they do in china and our govt would swear up and down it's safe to eat and healthy for you too!
"but it has electrolytes!" comes to mind
Because it is conservatives that want to kill regulations and the EPA. Conservatives have been favoring industry over health safety for decades. If you don't see this, you are in denial.
JS in SD " I do question the effects of this since I applied this coal tar epoxy to a boat hull and also sealed the driveway at my old house with coal tar sealant years ago and suffered no ill effects."
does smoking cause lung cancer?
do all smokers get lung cancer?
I wouldnt exactly be patting yourself on the back because you dont have cancer YET.
best of luck to you, you might be one of those people - like some smokers - who have just the right combo of genetics to keep the cancer at bay.
not everyone is or will be, as lucky as you.
Doug - spot on!
I had a conversation with a conservative the other day about this very topic.
He, unlike JS - was proud to admit that conservatives dont give a crap about health in regards to pollution. He said (and im paraphrasing):
We have to take the good with the bad, and the good is jobs...productivity...and profit, and if that causes some deaths...so be it. The thing is, years ago we'd be elated if someone lived to 50 years old...now we are crying a river when someone dies of cancer in their 60's. we need to shut up and let business do what it wants to do...we are living longer, we need to stop worrying about who isnt.
for the record - this conversation took place at the luncheon following the funeral of a dear friend, Marcia, who died of cancer in her early 60's.
appropriate, not so much...but at least he was honest about what his party stands for and cares about, and doesnt really want to care about the collateral damage.
JS - im sorry you cant see your party as everyone else does (including everyone else in your own party).
perhaps...you arent as republican as you think.
@ Larry
Hello, long distant coworker!
I somewhat agree on the PAH air data, but Id still have to see the levels they collected, I'm willing to bet they are comparing the regulatory limit to the benzo family, which is ridiculously low .
And PCB inhalation risk? Have fun with that one! I thought NJDEP was bad...
Coal tar is also an ingredient in several dandruff shampoos even though it is a known carcinogen.
Js, how can you not see, the conservatives are attacking our environment at every crossing, every issue, wishing America's children to breathe filthy air and drink water loaded with carcinogens to help their rich pig buddies get richer! They're after the EPA to lower clean air standards to help industries to pollute for the financial economy. Since 1949, man has released 500,000 new toxins into the atmosphere for our children to breathe. If our children die from asthma attacks, who would care about much else?
Conservatives are totally illiterate as to the eco-nomy of our ecosystem-dependent Earth, light years beyond the most critical issues facing Earth and mankind.
Ecological ignorance and man's avarice are killing the Earth, man's only home. If you don't agree with this assessment, you don't understand the ecology of the Earth.
JS,
Are you sure it didn't affect your brain?
just askin'
So in other words, 5% of kids are getting 9.5x the normal dose if you will. How much of those 5% of kids live near giant parking lots? Probaly 0.1% or so. Think about it, where do you find houses DIRECTLY next to giant parking lots? No where I've ever seen. What effect do these sealers have on people? No where in the article did it say this significantly affected anybody. For all we know, this article could be saying "These kids are getting a 9.5x higher dose of a relatively harmless chemical." What is the FDA/EPA's safe limit for exposure to these chemicals?
I mean, did people think asphault was HEALTHY?
The stupidity in these studies baffles me. This, along with the rediculous arsenic thing are just scare tactics to get people to make a big fuss about it and try to get lesislation passed. Show me a study that people who lived near giant parking lots had a significantly lower life expectancy and I'd be more apt to believe it.
Republican, huh? Doesn't take a genius to figure out that dumping tons of toxins into our ecology will eventually make us sick or kill us eventually. Big Duh! Reality check-
Maybe you'd be interested in some low lying beach property...lol
"Doesn't take a genius to figure out that dumping tons of toxins into our ecology will eventually make us sick or kill us eventually"
You have no idea what you are talking about. You have no evidence whatsoever for your statement. It just "seems" right to you -- as it would to any stupid person who doesn't bother to think.
What makes you think this is limited to giant parking lots? Why are you trying to misinform people? The coal tar can be used on regular roads, like those in front of a house. And even if that weren't a factor, the study says a significant amount can be found in the air YEARS after it was put down.
Again, I ask why you are trying to spin the conversation?
Tom - Actually the statement sounds very logical to me. There are TONS of studies showing that some of the constituents (i.e., certain PAHs) in coal tar directly cause cancer. And we know the routes of exposure - ingestion and inhalation. And we can measure concentrations in soil, sediment, air, groundwater, and surface water. And in doing science, we make assumptions, hypotheses, and we test them by collecting actual data, and then comparing the results to what we already know about their toxicity to humans. You see, we in the env risk assessment industry ARE doing the thinking you so boldly proclaim. Pray tell Tommy boy - what do YOU think is the end result of "dumping toxins into our ecology"? Prettier flowers and shrubs???
Between the coming $4 a gallon gas...and now this....I guess we'll just all have to stay in our homes and NOT venture outside. The sky is falling...the sky is falling......just as is planned....
You must understand that children have no right to breathe clean air until they grow up to be corporations. Just ask the GOP/TP/SCOTUS.
Its a constant battle because we learn more about these chemicals over time, and unscrupulous companies push the proverbial envelope in their own product testing. And, more importantly, they can afford to hire well paid shills to lobby on their behalf. Fortunately there are smart people on the other side.....that need our support, not our ridicule and condemnation.
Rado, have you ever BEEN to an American city? There are kids who live near giant parking lots all over the country.
Most giant parking lots are in commerical areas, aka not near housing. I'm thinking lowes/home depot/wal-mart parking lots not little store parking lots. I think the whole point of this study was that the giant ones release a lot of this chemical.
But like I said before, show me this increase in the chemical has a significant effect on the kids health then I'll care. And the main method of exposure (from the article) is putting hands in mouths. Like I said before, only the top 5% of hand suckers get a 9.5x dose, however, how much of that 5% live near a giant parking lot? What is the dosage increase for a "normal" hand sucker? Take time to think before you reply.
Rado- Ever been to an apartment complex??? Full of kids, pets ...A lot of these lots & roads are near creeks, rivers, lakes- Rains wash it off into the food & water supply....
When I was a kid in the 60's & 70's, hardly anyone had allergies, especially not the kind that kill you, autism, unheard of, genetic problems are on the rise ....do you ever wonder why???
I have
I guess rado has never been to a school and seen an asphalt parking lot or playground.
I find that strange, because I've never seen a school without one.
Rado,
Why are you ignoring the content of this article?
“Scientists also had previously demonstrated that toxic constituents of coal tar were showing up in the dust of homes adjacent to parking lots and driveways [my italics], raising questions about health effects on children in those homes…The chemicals are getting into the house dust, researchers think, when small bits are eroded off pavement and tracked into nearby homes.”
want to create jobs? Sounds like there's a lot of work to do to clean up and replace these 'toxic' roads.
anything that smells that bad just can't be good for you.
That's what I've been saying about my next door neighbor...
Gumps that is THE best laugh I have had today. Better watch out the vine police hate a sense of humor. LOL.
remember the commercial that said "people are smart" ?did it make you laugh or cry, or laugh and cry?
This is hardly the only example of taking a toxic chemical and exempting it from safety requirements. It fits into that "the solution to pollution is dilution" category. Come on folks, toxic is toxic. Allowing this poison into our environment is precisely what happens when those evil regulations are dropped.
If you think this is isolated, check out the damage of MTBE. If your health is important - or the health of those children and grandchildren the right wing is always harping about - take the time to look up Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether.
Health? Check out where that wondrous fluoride comes from that's in your water supply. I'm a Rachel Maddow fan, but she is dead wrong on this. Of course, if a cavity-free lawn is important, then maybe toxic fluoride compounds are the answer. If you think fluoride is important, then get it from your dentist. You may be surprised to find you need a prescription. But dumping this toxin in your water supply - well, that's OK.
If your health is more important than corporate profits, cut the military budget, close tax loopholes, and put more money into consumer protection and toxic hazard remediation. It makes sense, it makes jobs, and it makes a healthier America.
No, Toxic is not Toxic. Everything is concentration/dose dependent.
There is an (LD50) toxicity level for water.
For example there are toxicity fears about certain materials, like your fluoride example, but when it was in the ground, at low concentrations, they were not a problem.
"Reno", you're making too much sense for the yahoos on this board.
Shot a man in Reno:
You contradict yourself. Toxic is toxic and your utterly ridiculous LD50 allusion to water is the height of disingenuousness.
There is an army of Tom's out there who don't have brains enough to check out what LD means. You are playing semantics. This is not a game.
So if toxic is toxic, then we shouldn't take medicine because if you take too much you'll die, aka it's toxic.
Seems like you are the one contradicting yourself.
David,
Thanks for bringing up fluoride...it is a by-product of a chemical weapon made during WWII that they did not want to "waste" either. I had been thinking about fluoride as I was reading some of the comments. They first put fluoride in the water in Grand Rapids, Michigan. At the same time, they did a comparison study with the water of Muskegon, Michigan. The results of the harm the fluoride was doing was so apparent that the study was quickly stopped. Fluoride used to be delivered to water treatment plants in barrels with a skull and crossbones on them. Maybe it still is. Why do you think they tell you to only put a pea size amount of fluoride toothpaste on children's toothbrushes? It is poison, folks. Of course, we have ended up with fluoride in the water of most cities. Money talked back in the 50's, too. I have a RO water system in my house and only use toothpaste without fluoride. I take my drinking water with me also to avoid fluoride as much as possible. Cannot avoid it completely but I do my best.
Reno, Rado,
You can die from concentrated car exhaust, should we ban cars? Nope, bad example, we SHOULD ban cars. But my point is that toxic IS toxic. You can die from doing too much of ANYTHING. Antibiotics also kill the good bugs in your stomach that help you digest. I went through chemotherapy. Chemotherapy is basically taking deadly poisons and hoping that they kill the cancer before they kill you. But there is an obvious benefit to antibiotics and chemo, they counter an immediate threat to your life. Are you really trying to say that there is an acceptable human health risk involved in providing a cheap way to seal a driveway? I took chemo because the alternative was dying of cancer. I don't think I'd do it so my driveway would look nice. Your comparison makes so little sense as to be intentionally deceptive.
Rado,
Are you really saying we should never try to keep ourselves healthier when we're not sick?
Since this material is used to "preserve" the asphalt, I wonder how it's concentration of questionable chemicals compares to the health effect of laying down new pavement.
Or they could just have gravel, but then there is the dust hazard...
If it preserve asphalt maybe Kim K could us it as a butt preserver a new beauty line for her!
I have sealed my own driveway with this goop dozens of times and each time I applied it I thought to myself as my Korean friend said, Sum Ting Wong here. I had a feeling this stuff was somewhat toxic. But hey after Operation Ranch hand in Vietnam with Dioxin made right here by Dialmond Shamrock chemicals in NJ I said to myself if you are on thin ice ya might as well dance.
Suck it up people, with over a thousand suspected carcinogens there is no place to hide from these toxic chemicals. Do something about them or live with the increased chance of cancer and other disease.
Let's face it Paul, Life is terminal.
How do we LIVE? According to California, we're going to die from EVERYTHING. It's a wonder we're living so long now-a-day.
Rado.
If you look around at ailments that didn't exist even a few years ago and cancer rates (particularly in CA) going through the roof, "everything" is taking a pretty good shot at us. So your objection is because it hasn't killed you yet?
I'll resist the obvious shot there.
To this day they can't prove how smoking causes cancer, only that statistically the numbers can't be ignored. After smoking for 25 years and losing a lung, I'm not so hot for documentation.
Is your suggestion that we let tens, hundreds, thousands of people die so that you can get a number that satisfies your personal statistical analysis? All so you can save money making your driveway look good? Um, did you really mean to say that?
ok who has ever driven a car on a concrete road? How about a gravel road that has been slagged, a by-product of concrete, that is dangerous to your lungs? How about an asphalt road? Of the types of road material that does not have any cancerous by-products or waste only a pure gravel road is safe, until calcium chloride brine is sprayed on it for dust control. Created and worked on these types of roads for 30 yrs. Not all products used are safe for humans or the environment. Asphalt has additives/fillers added as a way to purge the chemical and manufacturing industry of its toxic wastes. Who's being paid to turn a blind eye?
People wonder why cancer is such an epidemic. It just might be because you are driving and walking on this stuff, and when it rains, it washes into our streams, absorbed by anything that lives there, and goes into our oceans.
Does anyone ever stop to think of the many wonders of modern science, the marvels of modern medicine that are emerging every single day? Could this be the reason there seems to be such an emergence of increased cancer detections around the world?
This is not a new story. They have known about this for years. And when it rains it goes into your water. Think about it.
Don't lick the asphalt. There. That's it.
TO ALL THE SCARE MONGERS here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrights_Coal_Tar_Soap
Coal tar soap is still being used today. I use it as well. Have been doing so for decades.
So have I, even though I knew the active ingredient is Benzene, a know carcinogen. I was willing to take the risk to myself, not thinking of where the coal tar goes after it leaves my shower drain. Upon further consideration it's probably time to for me to change products.
The amount of benzene in coal tar is extremely small. Every time you gas up your car you are breathing in lots of benzene, and that does not stop anyone, or make them get cancer. The carcinogens the article is talking about are poly-aromatic hydrocarbons, like benzo-a-pyrene, which are indeed quite high in coal tar. Still, somehow these chemicals when present in coal tar soap are very beneficial - they do not stick to your skin, just act on it's surface, killing bacteria, fungi, and other micro-organisms.
Max,
Last line of the Wiki article states coal tar is no longer in the soap:
cctv - that is only true for coal tar soap sold in Europe. Most American brands still use either coal tar oil or pine tarp oil (like my personal favorite: Grandpa's Pine Tar Soap).
What a story to wake up to...I'm going back to bed.
A profitable way to get rid of toxic waste - spread it around.
The solution is simple; use concrete instead.
Studies, studies, studies and more studies! Dream up a problem, apply for grant money to "study" it and make the facts fit the problem. Why, I'll bet you could "prove" that looking at 16 pound bowling balls more than twice a week is 10 times more likely to cause in-grown toenails than looking at, say, 12 pound bowling balls.
Grand Puba,
What study did you get your information from? You see, I bowl and have his honkin' ingrown toenail.
(Hey, I know a grant writer...)
four of my neighbors had thier driveways coated last summer and let me tell you it stank for about a week.When the rains came you could see the sheen in the waters along side the roads.There is no way this crap is healthy for anyone.You don't need a degree to know that ,all you need is common sense.
If you "could see the sheen in the waters", they weren't using a coal tar based sealer.
If you "could see the sheen in the waters", they weren't using a coal tar based sealer.
Odd, but coal tar is an ingredient in many types of shampoo and soap. I'm much more likely to be exposed to it that way than from a parking lot. And I don't see any great rush to ban it from those products.
Not likely - there are only trace concentrations in soap/shampoo, you don't eat it, and they stay dissolved, so you don't inhale it either.
1. Some shampoo brands advertise as much as 5 percent coal tar in their products, which is hardly a "trace amount".
http://www.amazon.com/Psoriatrax-Coal-Tar-Shampoo-Equivalent/dp/B003IW4AS0
2. I don't eat macadam or driveway sealer either. (I don't know about the inhaling part, particularly if they outgas during a hot summer's day).
What is not giving us cancer, nowadays? nothing! it is a miracle that the human race still exist. I think those study guys should relax a bit.
What a great idea!!
Let's all just lay down and literally die in the face of corporate profits. Right at the time they seem to be winning is the best time to give up. After all, as Jim Morrison said, "Nobody gets out of here alive."
So are you saying if someone attacked you with a knife you would just stand there because "there's nothing you can do?"
At least the corporations are getting paid to keep us complacent, you're doing it for free.
New song. They Paved Paradise and Put on Coal Tar Sealant. Gives off gases 8 years later? The gases last longer than the sealant
Where do these people get their money? They create a story, sometimes, or someone hints at a problem, and it gets spread, via different media routes, until a lot of people are talking about it. They convince money people of the "public good" done by investing in such research, and away they go. But, to keep that money coming in, they have to keep the interest up, and that means convincing some media group to spread more "news" about the possible harmful aspects.
Sometimes, this leads to sound research, other times, it is just fear mongering. Keep an open mind.
The area up to Four Feet off the ground is loaded with fumes .........
Well, that area also contains our pets !!!!!!
Easy enough, common sense test: if walking by something when it's being applied makes you gasp and hold your breath, it's probably not good for you. And dirty little secret: as with fracking, industries have gotten the EPA (especially under Bush) to re-classify what are otherwise toxic waste products, as not if they are used for another purpose. So it's not toxic waste if we use it to pave our roads or pump it in the ground to force out oil or gas.
Agreed. We the people, its our responsiblity to do our OWN homework, research, if we rely on agencies like the EPA ,FDA, blah, blah, we will all end up sick or in a hospital somewhere b/c its' always, ALWAYS about the money and the cheapest way (meaning more toxic to humans, animals, environment) to do things.
Problem is these companies that are in bed ith the EPA and the FDA have toxic waste reclassified so now it is ok to spray it all over everything around you so now what do you do, hide in your closet or try and take your country back from a bunch of criminal politicians and corporations ?