March 26, 2009
EPA Changing the Way it Tests Chemical Toxicity
In a move that could affect how companies approach new product development and risk management, the Environmental Protection Agency has new scientific methods to assess the toxicity of chemicals. The advanced methods also could reduce companies’ testing costs.
On March 25, the EPA released the “U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Strategic Plan for Evaluating the Toxicity of Chemicals.”
Using recent advances in molecular biology, genomics, and computational sciences, the new toxicity testing methods will allow the EPA to screen thousands of environmental chemicals quickly for potentially harmful effects.
Additionally, EPA will examine children’s reaction versus that of adults, leading to improved health protection for children, according to a press release.
With the new technologies, EPA is moving away from animal-based tests.
EPA found itself needing to test of tens of thousands of chemicals for a wide range of applications, and it was unable to fully explore testing using traditional animal-based methods, according to EPA’s new strategic document.
Using newer, quicker testing methods, the agency says it will be able to direct its efforts to chemicals with the greatest potential for risk. EPA expects the equipment for employing the new methods to add great costs to its budget during the adoption stage.
The transition in toxicity testing and related changes to risk assessment will not come overnight, EPA says, noting that it might take 10-20 years to reach its goal.
Advertisers
Enhance Sustainability. Improve Profitability.
Learn how at the SAP Sustainability Resource Center. >>
EFFECTIVELY MANAGE WATER COMPLIANCE
Understand how increased enforcement may affect your company. Find out more >>
EPA mandatory emissions reporting starts Jan 1st
CSA Standards can help your organization get ready for compliance. Find out how. >>
Join the Discussion
Recent Daily News [ see all ]
- 11/06/2009
- 11/05/2009
- 11/04/2009
- Emissions Intensity Falling Globally
- JohnsonDiversey Ups GHG Reduction Target to 25%
- Sainsbury’s Offers Free London Electric Car Charging
- Carbon Trading Could Trigger a ‘Sub-prime Style’ Economic Crash
- Peabody, Exxon Accused of Undermining Climate Talks
- BMW, Toyota, Ford Tout Eco-cars
- In ‘Apathy Gap,’ Energy Efficiency at Home Ranks Low
- China Pushes for CO2 Storage, Not Emissions Reductions
- Clean Tech VC Funding On Rebound, Up 50% Since 2nd Quarter
- IECC Building Code Recommendations Add Up to 30% in Energy Efficiency Gains
- Disney Buys $7M in Reforestation Offsets, a Corporate Record
- McKesson to Save $300K Via Fuel-Efficient Vehicles
- Sprint to Save $2.1M With Eco-Friendly Packaging
- U.S. Export-Import Bank Adopts Carbon Policy to Support Renewable Energy
- Greening the Automotive Supply Chain
- Yokohama Rubber Cuts GHG Emissions 13.4% in 2008
- Electronics Industry Lawsuit Called ‘Attack on States’ Rights’
- Wal-Mart Adding LEDs to 650 Stores
- One Committee Down for Senate Climate Bill, Five More to Go
- EU Poised to Give Heavy Industry Free Carbon Permits
- ResponsibleTravel.com Scuttles Carbon Offsetting Option
- U.S. Cap-and-Trade Creates Winners and Losers among Largest Emitters
- DOE Awards $155M to Make Industrial Sector More Energy Efficient
- System Upgrades Power Up Energy Savings for Hotels
- Xerox Cuts GHG Emissions by 20% from 2002
- Waste Management Landfill Gas Project Complete
- Intel, Pepsi, Kohl’s Stay Atop Green Power Partnership list
- Wal-Mart Thinks Big With Smaller Stores
- Despite Critics, Gore ‘Proud’ to Invest in Green Firms
- Metal Recyclers Spar Over Ship Recycling Site
Industry Voices [ see all ]
A Roadmap for a Renewable Energy Partnership
Brad Cashaw
Vice President
Quaker Foods and Snacks Supply Chain and Sustainability
Forest Carbon Core to Climate Change Deal
Chris Elliott
Forest Carbon Initiative Lead
World Wildlife Fund
VCS and CarbonFix Tops in Review of Forestry Carbon Standards
Paulo Lopes
Carbon Management Consultant
Carbon Clear







Reader Comments
Well done article. I think a key point was missed. The existing strategy is to require industry to submit animal test data done at industry expense. Unless this new approach uses public dommain models and data that can be given to both industry and NGO’s, validation can not be performed by third parties. More importantly, taxpayers will have to meet all the expenses of this instead of industry! Talk about tipping a cocked hat.
John Laumer | March 27th, 2009