As the 2019 Basel-Rotterdam-Stockholm Conventions Conferences of the Parties (BRS COPs) approaches, IPEN has dedicated the first of its 2019 bi-annual global newsletters to cover persistent organic pollutants (POPs).
In the newsletter, entitled "IPEN Working To Eliminate POPs On The Ground," IPEN Science Advisor Dr. Sara Brosché states, "Strong measures under the Stockholm, Basel and Rotterdam Conventions are crucial to stop the production and release of POPs and should be effectively implemented nationally. Hazardous waste limits should be protective and regrettable substitutions with related toxic chemicals prohibited.However, this is far from enough. Only 28 out of thousands of potential POPs are listed under the Stockholm Convention today and efforts need to be scaled up dramatically.”
This newsletter covers some work of IPEN Participating Organizations around the globe who have researched and/or monitored POPs in their countries. Topics include POPs Country Situation Reports, POPs in Community Food Chains, Toxic Recycling, Non-combustion Technologies for POPs Waste Destruction, Dicofol and PFOA, Sulfluramid, and POPs in Our Oceans.
In the run-up to the Stockholm Convention's 9th Conference of the Parties, IPEN has released its "Views of Stockholm Convention COP9." This document is a summary statement of IPEN views on issues that COP9 will be called upon to address, including POPs wastes, technical assistance and regional centres, rules of procedure, compliance, listing of dicofol and PFOA, illegal traffic, rules of procedure, evaluation of PFOS, and more.
The Views document can be read here and on IPEN's page for COP9, which has additional information about IPEN activities and publications related to the conference.
"Was the Stockholm Convention established to prevent industry from additional costs or is “the objective of this Convention to protect human health and the environment from persistent organic pollutants”?"
For consideration at the upcoming Stockholm Convention's 9th Conference of the Parties (COP9), the Treaty’s expert committee, the POPs Review Committee (POPRC), has recommended two substances for listing: dicofol and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), its salts, and PFOA-related compounds. The POPRC has also recommended strengthening the listing of PFOS in the treaty. Finally, one Party has proposed changing the process for evaluating candidate substances.
In this new Guide, IPEN provides recommendations about listing dicofol and PFOA, and perspectives on the suggestion for amending the evaluation process and the PFOS evaluation. The Guide also provides information about the serious hazards related to the use of dicofol, PFOA and related substances, and PFOS.
In 2015, the EU nominated PFOA for listing in the Stockholm Convention and agreed to lead the evaluation drafting process. However, instead of carrying out the work in-house, the EU hired an industry consultancy (BiPRO). This resulted in proposals for a sweeping set of loopholes that undermine a global ban. BiPRO’s client list includes companies that make and/or use fluorinated chemicals, including PFOA.