about us | newsletter | donate | contact us | privacy | home

•  Overview  •  Health Care  •  Pharos Project  •  Healthy Homes  •  U.S. Green Building Council  •  Overview  •  PVC Plastic  ·  PVC Facts  ·  PVC-Free Alternatives  ·  PVC Terms  ·  Resources  ·  News  ·  Emerging Science  ·  Corporate Policies  ·  Links  •  Pressure Treated Wood  •  Plastic Lumber  •  Formaldehyde  •  Biopolymers  •  Overview  •  Environmental Justice Sign up to receive our biweekly email with insights and analysis on building materials and environmental health. Current Newsletter: Trends in Transparency (July 14, 2010)  •  Newsletter Archive	Make Your Voice Heard At The USGBC The public has until February 15, 2005 to comment on the US Green Building Council's draft report on PVC Plastic entitled Assessment of Technical Basis for a PVC-Related Materials Credit in LEED. The Healthy Building Network believes that protecting and enhancing the health of people is a critical part of protecting the environment through green building. A wide range of public policy makers, green building professionals, and product manufacturers have determined that the protection of public and environmental health requires putting a priority on working towards the elimination of certain particularly toxic chemicals that are uniquely associated with PVC plastic. Unfortunately, this draft report not only fails to address that key priority, it threatens to undermine the progress these governments, professionals and manufacturers have made in realizing those goals. Please take the time to contact the USGBC at leedinfo@usgbc.org. And copy your comments to HBN at info@healthybuilding.net. Three things must be done to improve the report: Public Policies That Target Particularly Harmful Toxic Chemicals and Their Serious Environmental Health Impacts Must Be Respected. The record contains analysis and conclusions by many health authorities that PVC production, use and disposal pose unique health risks to workers at vinyl chloride monomer and PVC production facilities, to residents near those facilities, to first-responders at fires involving PVC, to consumers living and working in buildings with PVC components, and globally, to people whose food supply is contaminated by long lived, highly toxic byproducts of the PVC lifecycle. The draft report fails to incorporate these findings. As a result, the draft report contradicts policies put in place by authorities such as the United Nations Environment Programme, and the State of New York. Rating Systems Which Integrate These Public Policies Represent The Best Practice In Building Design. They Must Be Respected. The record contains several examples of materials evaluation systems by industry leaders such as McDonough/Braungart, Skanska, Kaiser Permanente and the Green Guidelines For Health Care. Each of these successfully integrates public policy mechanisms, such as elimination of priority toxic chemicals like dioxin goals, into the materials analysis. The draft report fails to discuss or incorporate these models. As a result, the draft report contradicts the best practices in materials evaluation by green building leaders today. Manufacturers That Have Incorporated These Best Practices Into Product Design Should Be Rewarded, Not Penalized, By LEED. An ever increasing number of product manufacturers reject PVC based upon their own materials evaluation systems. Some examples include Firestone Building Products (membrane roofing) and Herman Miller, Inc. from the building industry, as well as global brands such as Nike and IKEA. The draft report fails to discuss or incorporate these models. As a result, the draft report threatens this positive market trend. For more information:  •  Off Track - An Analysis of the USGBC PVC Report (PDF)  •  HBN's Memo to Design and Construction Professionals about the USGBC PVC Report (PDF)
© Copyright 2008, Healthy Building Network. All Rights Reserved.