Impact_assessment_for_Norwegian_PoHS4-6
would arise in consequence of such emissions is extremely complicated. We do not have valuation estimates for these damages for most of these substances. There have been limited opportunities to acquire new and supplementary background documentation. We have primarily based the assessments on what is available in existing reports regarding application areas, the quantities being used and the consequences.
As far as the regulations in the EEA Agreement and the WTO regulations are concerned, this measure is regarded as appropriate and justified given the chemical substances’ specific properties that are hazardous to health and the environment when they occur in consumer products. Nor in our opinion are there any specific legal regulations/total harmonisation requirements in the EEA chemicals regulations that hinder the proposed regulations. We have assessed the regulations in the EEA Agreement for each individual substance and proposed exemptions from the prohibition in those cases where we believe the individual substance’s area of use is regulated via the totally harmonised EEA regulations.
Estimated costs
The assessments of the consequences associated with the proposed prohibition are extremely overarching and primarily a description of application areas and characteristics concerning human health and the environment, as well as possible alternatives. As regards the costs for the industries associated with a possible prohibition, we do know that for most of the application areas there are alternative products on the market without hazardous substances. We are not familiar with the details of all of these alternatives and are not in possession of cost estimates for such. In the cases where we know that commercially available alternatives do exist, we have as an very rough estimate presumed that a prohibition would not involve costs of any significance.
We endeavour to point out that the proposed prohibition is based upon limiting values. This means that it is allowable for the products to contain small quantities of the substances concerned. The magnitude of the quantity allowed varies from substance to substance. This modification has been made in order to simplify the implementation and thus reduce the costs to industry. For many application areas we have proposed that exceptions should be made to the prohibition. This is primarily due to strict regulation of some applications pursuant to the EEA-treaty, the lack of real alternatives, a diminished effect on human health and the environment of including the application area or a prohibition in the application area being expected to involve significant costs. In the formulation of the prohibition, an emphasis has thus been placed on reducing the costs as much as possible without great impact on the environmental efficiency of the proposal to too large of an extent. We are thus of the perception that the benefits of the measure can be expected to be greater than its costs.
The importance of taking a precautionary approach
There is a large degree of uncertainty associated with a number of aspects of the proposed prohibition. We are however of the perception that the measure, on the basis of the precautionary principle, ought to be implemented even though we do not have fully adequate information regarding the substances concerned and the costs that the prohibition would involve for the players. In the Norwegian Government Agency for Financial Management's guide for the treatment of uncertainty in economic analyses, four criteria are established for when the precautionary principle can be used. These are:
- Large and non-quantifiable uncertainty associated with future consequences 2. The damages can be dramatic
- The damages will be irreversible
- There is no time to wait and see how things develop and to acquire more information
5
For all the substances, the uncertainty is large and it is impossible to quantify, among other things, the harmful effects to human health and the environment with the present state of our knowledge. Experience indicates that extremely unfavourable effects often gradually come to light with these types of substances. Hence there are good reasons to believe that such will also be the case with these substances. As is brought to light in the foregoing, the effects of these substances are quite serious in that they are not very degradable and are bioaccumulating. These are conditions that in practice must necessarily be regarded as being irreversible. To acquire sufficiently certain knowledge of the long-term effects of these substances would take an extremely long time. When viewed against the background of the dramatic consequences these have, we do not deem that to be a relevant solution. The substances concerned thus in our perception fulfil all these criteria and the prohibition hence ought to be implemented in our perception as soon as possible on the basis of the existing information.
Further work – acquisition of further information
We are of the opinion that we are familiar with the majority and the most important of the application areas for all the substances. Among other things, we have extensive contacts with the industrial sector and have arranged two open meetings for the sector during the course of the work in order to check out our proposal with them. We cannot, regardless, completely ignore the possibility that there could be special application areas that we have no knowledge of. This could also be due to the importers not knowing that their products contain the substances concerned. We expect that industry will, in connection with this request for comments, go through the application areas for the individual substances even more thoroughly. If there then, or even in some other context, should be information presented concerning new application areas or other important information, we will carry out a new assessment in conjunction with the relevant industrial sector.
6
Assessment of impact associated with the regulation of hazardous
substances in consumer products. Arsenic
1) Substance or group of substances
Arsenic and arsenic compounds
2) Known application areas
Metallic arsenic:
• Brass
Chemical arsenic compounds:
• Glass goods (window glass, crystal, lead glass)
• Glass beads for road markings (not a consumer product)
• Plastic/PVC products (including garden articles, travel/leisure time articles,
construction materials and wallpapers)
• Lead accumulators
• Grout
• Textiles
• Earlier in pesticides, wood preservatives included
• Ship-bottom paint
• Cosmetics
• Mineral fertiliser
Arsenic was previously used in lead shot, pesticides and wood preservatives. The use of lead
shot is now banned in Norway. Arsenic can occur in imported products, especially products
based on recycled materials such as glass and plastic. It also appears as impurities in other
products, particularly those containing lead.
The list does also contain application areas and products that are only for occupational use
and they will not be covered by the prohibition on certain hazardous substances in consumer
products.
3) Description of human health and environmental risks
Arsenic and arsenic compounds: Persistent and toxic for many organisms even in small
concentrations. Very toxic for aquatic organisms, may cause long-term effects in the aquatic
environment. Some compounds are carcinogenic. This substance fulfil all the criteria for use
of the precautionary principle mentioned in the introduction.
The emissions of arsenic have been reduced by approx. 8 % from 1995 up through the
present. They are expected to diminish further, in part due to the ban already imposed on
CCA-impregnated woodwork and lead shot. Long-range transport of arsenic has decreased
significantly. Arsenic has been found in the air, reindeer, sediments and soil. Emissions from
products are responsible for fully 91 % of the total emissions, which comprised approx. 28
tons in 2004. Of the product emissions, emissions from the CCA-impregnated woodwork
currently in use comprised fully 23.6 t, and emissions from lead shot approx. 2.6 t. The
arsenic in the CCA-impregnated woodwork currently in use is substantial, and will contribute
to emissions for a long time into the future. These emissions will not be affected by a
prohibition on the use of arsenic in products.