 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Green Building Discussion
Topic: Choosing Water Pipes
Discussion Participants:
- Buzz Burrell presents the issues
- Hal Levin with some clarification
- Norbert Senf has some experience
- Norbert Senf brings up environmental estrogens
- John Bunzick on PVC for drinking water
- Alex Wilson brings up "Our Stolen Future"
- Bion Howard with some references on hormones
- Buzz Burrell with a comprehensive post on pipes
- Matt Kitterman on pressure tanks
- Michael Totten on some web sites
All postings are the opinion of the writer, and BuildingGreen can take no responsibility for their accuracy or appropriateness.
Buzz Burrell presents the issues
From: Buzz Burrell
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 1996 9:02 AM
Investigation is still very incomplete (and is likely to remain so), but here is the update for those of you who are wondering about water pipes. (There is much in the "green" literature about IAQ, but very little about water quality).
The issue is that the materials used in ordinary PVC pipes, and to a much lesser degree PE pipes, are obviously toxic, and yet we drink water that was contained in these products. Are they safe?
So far, it appears probably yes. The big problem with plastics is that they don't biodegrade. In this application, that trait is the key to success; once those long polymers are made, the plastic becomes an inert material that leaches or degrades almost no residue into the water. Thus, since it is preferable that they do NOT biodegrade, water pipe might be one of the few good uses for plastic.
It is still quite unclear if truely nothing leaches into the water, or if the amount that does go in simply falls below the threshold deemed dangerous to public health. The following synopsis is based on numerous conversations --
All pipe is tested and certified either by Underwriters Laboratory or the National Science Foundation using ANSI proceedures. It must pass "Standard 61"; in the NSF test, distilled water is sealed in the product for 17 days under end-use conditions, then analyzed for residue. The engineer at the NSF told me there are very few things to test for, since these plastics are simple in composition. In the past 5 years he's never had a product exceed the "action levels" in the "chemical extractive" part of the test, or even come close.
I'm not sure what "action levels" they have established. Furthermore, those levels are based on other tests that other agencies of the government have done, and might not be the same level of safety that others of us may aspire to. Also, when asked why water stored in PE (like canteens) often tastes terrible (it tastes like "plastic"), he thought that was a good question, and didn't know the answer. According to their tests, there is no residue and therefore no way to impart a taste. It might be the chemical treatment or natural minerals in the water.
When asked why PVC has such a reputation, he replied that it is partially deserved. The product is relatively new, and standards weren't really established until 1975. PVC has a bad history of using lead stabilizers, which have now been replaced by tin; the modern products are now considered very safe. One note of caution: the stamp should say "NSF - PW" (Potable Water). Plastic pipe designed for drinking water is formulated quite differently.
You can buy a copy of NSF 61 from them, either by phone or a direct download (see below). However, to get the actual results of any test, which would show what does go into the water, one must ask the particular manufacturer who paid to have the test done. I haven't tried this yet and they are under no obligation to tell anything, except to show the NSF certification.
In summary, the industry has spent maybe a million dollars testing and promoting plastic products. Although suspicians are quite justified, so far critics have only about a million rumors to offer to the contrary.
I personally would still like to learn a lot more, both about plastic pipe and the alternatives, which aren't so rosy themselves (except maybe for stainless steel, but that's a bit out of reach). I'd also like to know more about cisterns regarding the same concerns, comparing the use of polyethelene, versus concrete, or steel sealed with epoxy paint.
Resources: National Science Foundation www.nsf.org 800 NSF-MARK American Water Works Assoc www.awwa.org 303 794-7711 Nat Technical Info Service www.ntis.gov 800 553-6847 (I have more if you're really into it).
Buzz Burrell Geneva Development Corporation Boulder, CO
Top of fileHal Levin with some clarification
From: Hal Levin
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 1996 11:09 AM
Nothing is so stable as not to degrade at all - including granite. The radon problem is evidence of that. I believe the question becomes the relationship between the degradation rate and its impact on two things: 1) the release of constituents, especially potentially harmful ones, into the water, and 2) the durability of the pipe which determines whether the rate of transfer of materials from the lithosphere to the ecosphere and the concomittant contamination of the ecosphere are greater than the natural rates or the rates at which the "natural" system can absorb the contamination without untoward side-effects. (See Azar et al, 1996, "Socio-ecological indicators of sustainability," _Ecological Economics_, 18: 89-112.) The second criterion, put another way is, if it lasts a very long time but not forever, then how long is long enough to justify the depletion of non-renewable resources and the contamination of the ecosphere? It will have to be disposed of at some point. And plastic pipes are subject to damage leading to their premature disposal. A further issue with plastic pipe, perhaps not so important for water tanks outdoors, is that when they burn they release very toxic gases. This is not a trivial issue since there are tens of thousands of house fires every year in the United States alone. Bottom line: nothing is simple.
>All pipe is tested and certified either by Underwriters Laboratory or the >National Science Foundation using ANSI proceedures.
Clarification: it is not the National Science Foundation, it is NSF International, a private organization that does standards and testing for such things. It is an ANSI approved standard.
It must pass
>Also, when asked why water stored in PE >(like canteens) often tastes terrible (it tastes like "plastic"), he >thought that was a good question, and didn't know the answer. According >to their tests, there is no residue and therefore no way to impart a >taste. It might be the chemical treatment or natural minerals in the >water. > I have no evidence, but I doubt that there is absolutely no interaction between beverages and the containers. My taste buds don't make these experiences up out of some sort of xenophobia. Some transformation takes place. Perhaps we cannot measure it with a gas chromatograph, but we can detect it with our senses. Perhaps there is some catalytic function. I would like to know.
Hal Levin email: hlevin@cruzio.com 2548 Empire Grade, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Tel. 408 425 3946 Fax 408 426 6522
Norbert Senf has some experience
From: Norbert Senf
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 1996 12:08 PM
This may not be much help, but for what it's worth, we've been getting our water from a spring by gravity through 3000 ft. of 1" poly pipe for about 15 years. The water tastes great, but that's about all I know. The pipe was cheap, easy to install, and is still in perfect shape.
Norbert Senf email: mheat@mha-net.org Masonry Stove Builders mheat@hookup.net RR 5, Shawville website: http://mha-net.org/msb Quebec J0X 2Y0 fax: 819.647.6082 voice: 819.647.5092
Norbert Senf brings up environmental estrogens
From: Norbert Senf
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 1996 1:31 PM
One disturbing effect that that I've heard discussed is the fact that degredation products from things like microwaveable plastic food containers are related chemically to hormones such as estrogen. This implies that extremely minute amounts could have biological effects. Does anyone have information on this? ----- Norbert Senf email: mheat@mha-net.org Masonry Stove Builders mheat@hookup.net
John Bunzick on PVC for drinking water
From: JBunzick
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 1996 12:06 PM
Regarding Buzz Bururll's comments on plastic piping:
The NSF that certifies water piping is actually the National Sanitation Foundation, not the National Science Foundation.
Some of the bad reputation regarding PVC may come from an incident a number of years ago, the details of which I'm somewhat fuzzy on now. Apparently some manufacturer's of potable water piping had made batches where the vinyl chloride monomer was not fully polymerized, and the un-polymerized components did leach into the water (or at least had the potental to.) Several municipalities sued (I think) to have the material replaced. In a good turn of events out of this, I think that the manufacturers strengthened their quality controls significantly after this. If anyone recollects this, perhaps they can correct the record.
There may be local health department, water department, or building department requirements as to what type of pipe is legal as well, even if it's a totally private distribution system. Be sure to check that out.
John Bunzick, CCS jbunzick@dprarchitects.com
Alex Wilson brings up "Our Stolen Future"
From: Alex Wilson
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 1996 12:08 PM
Regarding environmental hormones: You should read the book "Our Stolen Future" by Theo Colborn, Dianne Dumanoski, and John Peterson Meyers (Dutton 1996). We reviewed this in the last issue of EBN (Nov-Dec 96). There is considerable discussion of evidence of leaching a chemicals from plastics that mimic natural hormones, such as estrogen. Bisphenol-A, a common ingredient of polycarbonate, and nonylphenols, used in polystyrenes and PVC, are identified as such chemicals. It's a pretty sobering book. Some call it as significant at Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring." I've also been following this issue through the journal "Environmental Health Perspectives."
Alex Wilson Environmental Building News
Note: there is a separate discussion thread on environmental estrogens and "Our Stolen Future".
Bion Howard with some references on hormones
From: Bion Howard
Sent: Thursday, November 28, 1996 11:55 AM
Hormone Mimicking Chemicals ??? Terrestrial UFO's
Check work done at Florida Universities on penile atrophy in alligators, discovered in the Everglades, being linked to hormone mimicking organic chemicals. This is of course a charming prospect related to our continual low level exposures to organic's. Just take a look at sperm counts and birth defect stats since the late 1940's and even a 6th grader could see a disturbing trend.
What to do? This one may be another "tragedy of the commons," since such low levels and lack of peer-reviewed proven cause and effect means little likelihood of tighter regulation. BUT, if we could get access to secret research and development files of major chemical and petro giants, much like the tobacco whistle- blowers, then new facts about what industry knows about the effects of such substances could come out.
Might want to check out some of the chemical sensitivity work of William J. Rea, MD who is about to publish a new book on diagnosing sensitivities. Its to include reports based on data from 20,000 !!! patients. _Chemical Sensitivity_ Vol. 4 "Tools for Diagnosis and Treatment" Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL 1-800-272-7737 ETA -- Mid December 1996
Mr. Bion D. Howard, Principal Building Environmental Science & Technology P. O. Box 1007 Upper Marlboro, Maryland 20773 USA V:(301)627-2780 FAX:(301)627-4735
Buzz Burrell with a comprehensive post on pipes
From: Buzz Burrell
Sent: Monday, December 02, 1996 1:14 PM
As part of the ongoing research into types of water supply and storage materials, specifically plastic pipe, I just recieved the following article a friend of mine wrote regarding PVC pipe. The background is that he writes a weekly "Home Repairs" sort of column, and after mentioning PVC, got some flak from the plastic industry. Here is the entire article, written by Zolten Cohen ---
In a column a few months ago that dealt with a homeowner's question about repairing a leaking galvanized pipe with CPVC plastic pipe, I wrote the following: "You also might be interested in calling your public health authority about CPVC pipe. There have been a couple of published reports pertaining to the possibility of CPVC pipe leaching chemicals into the water it carries." I got the information about this issue primarily from a brief reference in Peter Hemp's excellent book on plumbing, "Plumbing a House", published by the Taunton Press, and from other reading in trade journals and the mainstream press. A few weeks after the column appeared, I was contacted by a public relations company that represents a large manufacturer of plastic plumbing pipes. They requested I become "better informed about CPVC" pipe and its benefits, and that I present a "more even-handed article" about it. Their query prompted me to look further into this question. And the more I looked, the more I realized that, like a lot of issues today, there are differing viewpoints surrounding what would appear to be a black and white issue. But I guess that's not surprising - there were vested interests on both sides pushing their own points of view. So, briefly, here is a synopsis of some of the literature I've been able to dig up on the history of the controversy surrounding plastic plumbing pipe.
In the early 1980's, the California Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) filed a suit to block building code approval of plastic pipe for carrying drinking water until an environmental impact statement could be prepared. The California Pipe Trades Council (CPTC) joined the suit after publishing a study claiming some of its members suffered health problems that were associated with installing plastic pipe. CPTC also said they were concerned about industry involvement in testing procedures that determined the safety of such products. Preliminary studies presented at a hearing connected with the lawsuit indicated water running through two types of commonly used plastic pipe contained tetrachlorethane, tetrachloride, and triahalomethanes - all suspected carcinogens - in amounts many times over the standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, the testing claimed glues used to join the pipes were mislabeled, and contained more harmful chemicals than those indicated on the labels. The plastic pipe industry, represented by the Society of Plastics Industries, said the concern over possible health hazards associated with plastic pipe were unfounded, and that the tests used to conduct the studies cited by the CPTC used the wrong standards. In 1982, the lawsuit, which attempted to block approval of the 1982 Uniform Plumbing Code unless it carried warnings about plastic pipe, was not approved by the Los Angles Superior Court. The Court said the suit failed to show conclusively that plastic pipe leaches chemicals into drinking water. In October 1995, the California Assembly passed legislation that approved CPVC pipe for use throughout the state. There are also safety concerns about permeation and leaching of chemicals in plastic pipe that is buried in the ground. To address this, the Battelle Memorial Institute (according to literature from the Plastic Pipe and Fittings Association) conducted a series of tests in 1983 on various piping systems to determine whether they were susceptible to permeation from contamination in the ground outside the pipe. They found "ungasketed PVC piping was...highly resistant to permeation." In addition, they noted that "the great majority of soil in the U.S. has either no contamination or contamination at extremely low levels." Another study, by Thomas M. Holsen, assistant professor in the Environmental Engineering Department, Illinois Institute of Technology, and others, conducted between 1986 and 1987, and published in the August 1991 issue of the Journal of the American Water Works Association, reported that polybutylene (PB), polyethylene (PE), acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS), and polyvinylchloride (PVC) plastic pipes used as service connectors (pipes used to connect municipal water pipes buried under the street to a house) are susceptible to permeation of organic chemicals found in the soil outside the pipe to the water inside the pipe. The primary cause of the seven documented incidents addressed in the study was a gross chemical spill of gasoline or another contaminant that saturated the soil surrounding the pipe. All of the spills seem to have occurred after the installation was complete. Over time, certain chemicals appear to be able to penetrate the walls of the pipe and enter the water supply. Homeowners whose service connector pipes were thus contaminated complained of gasoline or kerosene smells coming from their water, and their service connectors were subsequently replaced with metal pipes. In an executive summary of the 1989 Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) On Plastic Plumbing Pipe prepared by the California Department Of Housing and Community Development, the conclusion in the "Public Health" section reads (in part), "Recent studies have found that a few chemicals leach from plastic pipe and solvent cements into drinking water. However,...cement solvents are the only leachates consistently found in measurable levels in CPVC pipe systems. None of the leachates was detected at levels that would pose a significant health risk to residents." In the "Conclusion" part of the executive summary, the findings were, "Wider use of plastic plumbing pipe would not increase public health risk significantly. ...Overall, no significant environmental impacts are associated with more widespread use of plastic plumbing pipe. ...Furthermore, the various environmental implications of the two types of plumbing systems, although differing, indicate no clear environmental preferences for plastic or for metal pipe." The National Sanitation Foundation, an independent testing laboratory that determines the safety and effects on health of various products, has certified some PVC and CPVC plastic pipes as passing certain criteria for carrying potable water. Pipes that are so designated carry labels that state the NSF ANSI 61 standard under which they are approved.
Matt Kitterman on pressure tanks
From: Matt Kitterman
Sent: Monday, December 02, 1996 10:49 AM
Another possible vinyl/water contact point is the pressure tank on many domestic wells. I think the internal bag of these tanks is vinyl.
matt 46.722438 N -117.005599 W
Michael Totten on some web sites
From: Michael Totten
Sent: Monday, December 02, 1996 6:35 PM
I'm just about through Our Stolen Future, and it is definitely well worth the time to read. Quite compelling information that sent me off looking for more information on the topic of endocrine disruptors.
There's also a great web site that Alton Jones Foundation is funding about the topic, called Environmental Concepts Made Easy: Environmental Concepts Made Easy is maintained by the Center for Bioenvironmental Research (CBR) of Tulane and Xavier Universities, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, with assistance from the Office of Medical Informatics of the Tulane University School of Medicine. The site is partially supported by grants from the W. Alton Jones Foundation and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS).
http://www.tmc.tulane.edu/ecme/
Michael Totten
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|