Coal tar sealant controversy
Smoldering its way across the U.S., the question of whether municipalities and retailers should act on a ban of coal tar-based pavement sealants won’t quite go out – but hasn’t fully engulfed, either.
For 60 years the midwest, southern and eastern United States have applied a diluted formula of the toxic by-product of Iron coke smelting across bare land like Turtle Wax on a Mustang. Ninety percent of Chicago’s driveways are coal-tar sealed, and Hydrologist Peter Van Metre of the United States Geological Society estimates 30 to 40 percent of the vehicle spaces in four recently-tested watersheds in the South, West and Midwest are covered with the compound.
Coal tar sealant’s superior impermeability compared to asphalt sealants makes it makes it an effective protector of surfaces likely to come in contact with fuel. The product is infrequently used in road construction, though, due to contamination concerns and because it breaks down more quickly than asphalt, or oil-based, sealcoats.
USGS findings
Since 2006 a list of municipalities that have banned the product’s sale and use has developed in response to persistent, if not overwhelming, contamination concerns.
That year, the USGS began testing sites for the carcinogenic, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons present in coal tar. It quickly identified the PAHs in coal tar as a “major source” of contamination in urban areas where the product is heavily preferred over asphalt sealcoat.
PAHs are established animal carcinogens, and have been confirmed as human carcinogens by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, although detractors maintain that human studies of PAH exposure are hampered by the mix of compounds that humans ingest.
Among the USGS’s key findings were that half of all PAHs found in 40 urban lakes can be attributed to coal tar-based sealcoat; that residences next to coal tar-sealed parking lots have PAH concentrations 25 times higher than those found in the house dust of residences next to parking lots not sealed with coal tar pitch; and that dust collected directly from pavement with coal-tar-based sealcoat had PAH concentrations hundreds to thousands of times higher than dust from pavement with no sealcoat or with asphalt based sealcoat. Coal tar sealants and the dust generated when they break down have been found to contain higher levels of PAH than other PAH sources like soot, vehicle emissions and even used motor oil.
Coal tar-sealed parking lots contained 530 times more PAHs than dust from parking lots with other surface types. Rainwater washes sealant particles and dust down storm drains and into local streams and rivers. The USGS has documented upward trends in the amount of PAHs in urban lakes concentrations allegedly causing mutations in marine life. But the most direct human contact with PAHs comes from inhaling coal-tar-containing household dust.
Moves to ban
USGS policy is to refrain from making legislative recommendations based on their work. But the EPA has preliminarily corroborated the USGS’ findings and concerns regarding PAH levels in water runoff and its negative effects on aquatic life.
Austin, Texas, which first rang the coal tar sealant warning bell in 2005, didn’t wait
for consensus. It banned the sale or use of Refined Tar-Based Pavement Sealers
in 2006 as a “precautionary” measure. Dane County, Wis., did the same in 2007,
followed by the District of Columbia in 2009, several suburbs of Minneapolis, Minn., and numerous other municipalities. McHenry County, Ill., Administrator Peter Austin and Water Resources Director Cassandra McKinney have collected “tons” of material condemning coal tar sealant since McKinney became aware of the potential hazard four years ago. Two, four-inch thick binders of scholarly, peerreviewed and non-bias studies document her cause for concern.
“We really researched this, and haven’t found anything yet that tells us it’s not bad,” McKinney said.
As a non-home rule community, McHenry County lacks the authority to ban coal tar sealants on its own. But McKinney and Austin feel strongly enough about the product’s dangers that they’ve taken the step of requesting permission from the state of Illinois to ban coal tar on the 2012 Illinois legislative agenda.
Pushback
Industry representatives insist that the USGS’ findings are flawed due to incorrect methodology and that intervention is an overreaction, According to a report prepared by Robert DeMott of Environ corporation, even Denorex dandruff shampoo contains a higher percentage of PAHs than coal tar sealant. In a presentation prepared for the Pavement Coatings Technology Council, DeMott alleged that the levels of PAH contamination that alarmed Austin were no higher than levels found in more than a dozen other bodies of water in Minnesota, New York, New Jersey, Texas, Virginia and Washington.
PCTC Executive Director Anne LeHuray points out that, first of all, the sealant’s components can’t pollute the water if they’re water insoluable. Rather, PAHs accumulate in sediment. At PCTC’s initiative, environmental forensic analyses were done after the USGS’s initial studies. Not only were coal tar PAHs acting not acting alone in the environment, but could not be determined to be the cause of pollution, she said.
She added that if coal tar sealant was a significant danger, it’s unlikely that it would have failed to show up before now.
“This is a product that has been used extensively for four decades. Many of the people who apply it are in multigenerational, family-owned businesses. If there was a health concern, wouldn’t it have shown up in those families?”
In recent years, sealcoat manufacturers have been successful refining the performance of asphalt emulsion sealers through the use of specialty chemicals and pigments. But asphalt emulsion’s resistance to petrochemicals and solvents — while improved — has yet to be perfected. Federal Aviation Administration Specifications accept only refined coal tar-based sealcoatings for use on airport projects, because asphalt tends to soften with fuel.
In spite of its deficiencies, some sealcoaters recognize advantages of asphalt emulsion over refined coal tar sealers that include their user friendliness, lack of odor and irritation to lungs and sensitive skin.
COAL TAR SEALANT BANS
Austin, Texas • Bee Cave, Texas • Buffalo, Minn. • Centerville, Minn. • Circle Pines, Minn. • Dane County, Wis. • Edina, Minn. • Golden Valley, Minn. • Inver Grove Heights, Minn. • Home Depot Stores Throughout US • Little Canada, Minn. • Lowes Stores Throughout US • Maplewood, Minn. • New Hope, Minn. • Prior Lake, Minn. • Roseville, Minn. • Suffolk County, N.Y. • Vadnais Heights, Minn. • Washington, D.C. • State of Washington • White Bear Lake, Minn.
RESTRICTED USE JURISDICTIONS
Boone, N.C. • Commonwealth of Massachusetts • Sudbury, Mass.
GOVERNMENT USE RESTRICTIONS
Lake in the Hills, Ill. • McHenry County, Ill. • State of Minnesota
Spring Grove, Ill. • Springfield, Mon.
Source: coaltarfreeamerica.blogspot.com/p/cts-bansResources:
www.truthaboutcoaltar.com/
www.usgs.gov
www.pavementcouncil.org
www.epa.gov
www.pavementpro.org
By Jodi Magallanes
The Municipal
Ban Would Increase Dependency on Foreign Oil !!
PAH’s = 2 oz of Dandruff Shampoo same as 1 acre of Asphalt Sealcoat!!
This is the Pollution Scare that You want to Ban an American Mfg Product Over???
USGS Texas Hydrologist=Salary – 2009
Van Meter, Peter – $114,016
Mahler, Barbara -$91,123
Wilson, Jennifer -$65,810
Total Annual Salaries – $270,949.00 + (Salaries are from 2009, Benefits not listed) to advocate & ban an American Mfg Product in lieu of a Product that keeps us Dependent on Foreign Oil, that doesn‘t work as well, & corresponds to the Equivalent of 2 oz of Dandruff Shampoo.
But of Course, Texas’s main income is Oil Refining – not surprising to see a Geological Agency promote Oil/Asphalt based products to justify $270,949.00 Every Year on Hydrologists, Knowingly violating it’s own Quality Guidelines
(3) Impartiality and Non-advocacy. http://www.usgs.gov/usgs-manual/500/502-4.html
PS – BTW-The Ban didn’t Work in Austin!
The Math was Bad from the Very 1st Equation.
Bad Math always equals Very Bad Science!!!!!
Dear “RU4 democracy”:
(Yes, I am 4 democracy!) You toss out a lot of figures but don’t give any sources for your claims. Can you provide a link to some verifiable source for the claim that 1 acre of sealant has only the PAH content of 2 oz. of tar-based shampoo? (If so, does this prove the shampoo is harmless, or could both bear some risk?)
What I see is a lot of scientists confirming that PAHs are carcinogens, and we are exposing children to a lot of PAHs from dust tracked in from coal-tar sealed pavement. That’s what the science shows. This link sums up the evidence and links to four recent peer-reviewed studies:
http://on.msnbc.com/w5R4rm
What a bunch of crappola! Typical liberal lies of BS! The environazis will NEVER stop people until every traditional American product, value, and way of life is ended using the biggest lies of pollution, safety and health. This is a push to control the populace and steal your money by forcing you to pay more for other products. The leftists and EPA get kickbacks to destroy one sector or company and pump a new one. Take back America! Punch a liberal in the face by voting for Conservatives in every local, State, and Federal election!
Independent – (adj) – Bing Dictionary
1.not controlled by another: in politics, free from the authority, control, or domination of somebody or something else, especially not controlled by another state or organization and able to self-govern
2.able to function by self: able to operate alone because not dependent on somebody or something else
3.self-supporting: not forced to rely on another for money or support
The following is “Independent” –
Valle, S., Panero, M., Shor, L., Pollution Prevention And Management Strategies For Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons In The New York/New Jersey Harbor. New York Academy of Science, September 2007.
“Today, a general consensus of literature reports two major national and global sources of PAHs in the environment: 1) incomplete combustion of organic matter, especially common, nonpoint activities that utilize modern emissions controls (e.g., cars) or less common activities with no emissions control (e.g., tire fires); and
2) releases of petroleum, including oil spills and illegal dumping. Major sources include forest fires, motor vehicle emissions, open burning, domestic fireplaces, and spills and dumping of petroleum products. (page 47)
“Our estimates indicate that transportation-related activity (i.e., on-road and off-road engine exhaust, tire wear, and motor oil disposal and leakage) is the source category contributing most greatly to total loadings of PAHs”. (page 27)
Study determined that refined tar based sealer to be a minor source of PAHs to the NY/NJ harbor watershed (less than 1% total contribution). (pages 21 & 26)
NYAS reconsidered and dropped PAH loading estimate recommended by COA.
NYAS rejected COA photographic sealer wear-off estimation.
NYAS saw flawed conceptual study design and flawed statistical analysis (errors in calculations) in the COA studies.
Funny how all these so-called dangerous products caused no harm to anyone of the WWII generation. They live today into their 90’s and 100’s. They used mercury, lead, freon, tar, etc. This scheme of environazis and the EPA is all for bogus purposes. It is all BS to give lawyers work and government control. Fight the EPA, demand TORT reform and vote Conservative in every local, State, and Federal election onward!
Think about it! If they really were concerned with the environment, safety, and health? They would secure the borders, stop all illegal drugs immediately, and teach children to go to church. Simple as that!
DUDE, 2 oz of shampoo = 1 acre of coal tar sealer. You can’t really believe that. I mean that is really ridiculous, and is absolutely false. No intelligent person could possibly believe some figure you pulled out of your…uhh.. hat.