The regulations specify that these products must meet the criteria of British Standard 5852 (BS. 5852). In brief, most upholstery and filling materials, when tested ...
BRITISH FURNITURE FIRE SAFETY REGULATIONS: DO THE BENEFITS JUSTIFY THE HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS? Dedeo M1*, Singla V1, Stapleton H2, Babrauskas, V,3, Blum A1,4 1 Green Science Policy Institute, Berkeley, CA, USA; 2Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA, 3Fire Science and Technology Inc., Issaquah, WA, USA; 4Department of Chemistry, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA
Introduction Flame retardant chemicals have been found to migrate from consumer products to house dust to people, and have been associated with a range of health problems.1–4 In the United Kingdom (UK), a major driver for the incorporation of flame retardant (FR) chemicals in consumer products such as residential and juvenile furniture, mattresses, and pillows is the Furniture and Furnishings (Fire) (Safety) Regulations 1988 (amended in 1989, 1993, and 2010). The regulations specify that these products must meet the criteria of British Standard 5852 (BS 5852). In brief, most upholstery and filling materials, when tested together must pass a smolder test using a lit cigarette and an open flame test using a gas burner. Historically, the smolder standard has often been met by a fabric back-coated with latex containing antimony trioxide and decabromodiphenyl ether (deca-BDE), with addition of a plasticizer such as a medium chain chlorinated paraffin. To pass the open flame test, foam is typically formulated with melamine and tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP) or tris (1-chloro-2propyl) phosphate (TCPP). Due to concerns over health effects and persistence in the environment, deca-BDE and TDCPP are being or have been phased out for most applications, and the identities of their potential replacements are unknown. To address this data gap, we are conducting a pilot study of flame retardants in UK furniture. These findings will be compared with results from a recent study of US furniture, which measured patterns of flame retardant usage before and after the phase out of the pentaBDE in 2005 5. Due to their significant impact upon a variety of consumer products used in the UK, the efficacy of the British furniture regulations in increasing fire safety has been the subject of several detailed analyses.6–11 To further evaluate the potential benefit and harm of these regulations, we are reviewing these reports and additional statistics. We will make a preliminary evaluation of the benefit of the regulations to society in terms of lives saved and fires avoided as well as the potential for exposure and human and environmental health harm from the flame retardant chemicals and materials used to meet the regulations. Materials and methods Foam Sample Collection Polyurethane foam samples were solicited from volunteers during 2012–2013 using e-mail list-serves and requests at lectures and meetings that reached individuals from all over the UK. To qualify for this study, the participant had to own a couch, mattress, pillow, or other product containing foam that had a label indicating it met the 1988 BS 5852 flammability standard. The foam sample donor was instructed to cut or tear a 1/4 cubic inch foam sample from the couch, wrap the sample in aluminum foil, and seal it in an inner Ziploc bag which was placed into an outer Ziploc bag. The donor filled out a questionnaire including where and when the product was purchased, the filling material as specified on the label, and what flammability label was found on the product. The questionnaire was placed in the outer Ziploc bag. The donor and sample information was logged into a database, unique ID numbers were given to each sample, and they were then shipped to Duke University for blind analysis of flame retardants. Sample Analysis by Mass Spectrometry All foam samples were screened for flame retardant additives. Briefly, small pieces of foam (approximately 0.05 g) were sonicated with 1 mL of dichloromethane (DCM) in a test tube for 15 min. The DCM extract was syringe-filtered to remove particles and then transferred to an autosampler vial for analysis by GC/MS. All extracts were analyzed in full scan mode (collecting data on all mass spectra generated) using both electron ionization (GC/EI-MS) and electron capture negative chemical ionization (GC/ECNI-MS). Pressurized
temperature vaporization injection was employed in the GC. Peaks observed in the total ion chromatograms were compared to a mass spectral database (NIST, 2005) and to authentic standards when available. Results and discussion Collection and testing of pilot foam samples are in progress; results will be available before the BFR2013 meeting. A number of reports have been published which attempt to assess the effects of the UK furniture standards. Given the multitude of factors affecting the frequency and severity of residential fires, it is perhaps not surprising that reports produced by various groups (with different interests and agendas) have come to different conclusions. Two of the reports are widely cited as providing evidence for significant savings in both life and property due to the UK furniture standards. A re-analysis suggests that alternate explanations such as a significant change in smoking habits could have a larger impact than considered in these reports. In the 2005 report by researchers at the University of Surrey for the European Flame Retardants Association, the central conclusion was that the decrease in serious fires since the 190s should be attributed equally to smoke alarms and the furniture regulations.8 The 2005 University of Surrey study did not consider any of the following factors as contributing to the decrease in fires and fire deaths: changes in smoking habits such as less smoking overall and more smoking outside buildings reduction in the use of space heaters with an increase in central heating, electric heating and enclosed flame gas fires public education campaigns the introduction of fire safe candles and fire safe cigarettes less severe winters building sprinkler sysems The justification presented for ignoring smoking in the Surrey analysis is that from 1988 to 1998, the prevalence of smoking dropped from 33% to 30%, which was deemed insignificant. This corresponds to a roughly 10% drop in the number of smokers, which should have a significant effect on domestic fires given that smokers’ materials (i.e. cigarettes, cigars or pipe tobacco) are often the most frequent source of ignition causing accidental dwelling fire deaths (34% of total deaths).12 As shown in Figure 1, from 1980 to 2009 there is a decrease in the annual number of cigarettes cleared for sale in the UK which correlates with a decrease in fatalities in residential fires. This further suggests that the reduction in smoking could be of importance in the reduction in fire deaths in the UK during this time frame.
Figure 1. Cigarettes cleared for sale (bars) and domestic fire deaths (line), UK, 1980-2008.
In a 2009 report by Greenstreet Berman for the UK’s Department for Business, Innovation, and Skills, a central argument for a benefit from the standards is that furniture fires decline more than other fires (food, electrical insulation, paper/cardboard, textiles/clothing, bedding, liquids, and gasses) comparing the period of 1981-1985 and 2002-2007. This comparison was made to try to control for the myriad other factors that could affect residential fires such as smoking and smoke alarms, but it is noted that smoking could affect the two classes of fires quite differently. Given that the combined risk factors of smoking and human factors leading to incapacitation (like alcohol or drug use) emphasized in the case studies could be expected to occur much more frequently near furniture than many of the other fires areas, it should not come as a surprise that a significant drop in the smoking rate (Fig. 1) could have a more pronounced effect on furniture fires. Conclusion A pilot study identifying some of the flame retardants used in UK furniture, pillows, and other products will provide preliminary information on possible health and environmental harm from the use of these chemicals to meet the British Fire Safety Regulations. Also a re-evaluation of the conclusions that these regulations were responsible for a large improvement in fire safety (54 lives saved per year, 780 fewer casualties per year, and 1065 fewer fires per year10) may be warranted based the contribution of reduced smoking and other factors to this reduction in fire deaths and fires. Acknowledgements This work was supported in part by funding from the Wallace Genetics Foundation, the New York Community Trust, and the Fred Gellert Family Foundation. References: 1. Zhang X, Diamond ML, Ibarra C, Harrad S. Multimedia modeling of polybrominated diphenyl ether emissions and fate indoors. Environmental science & technology. 2009 Apr 15;43(8):2845–50.
2.
3. 4.
5.
6. 7.
8. 9. 10. 11. 12.
Harrad S, Goosey E, Desborough J, Abdallah MA-E, Roosens L, Covaci A. Dust from U.K. primary school classrooms and daycare centers: the significance of dust as a pathway of exposure of young U.K. children to brominated flame retardants and polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental science & technology. 2010 Jun 1;44(11):4198–202. Stapleton HM, Dodder NG, Offenberg JH, Schantz MM, Wise SA. Polybrominated diphenyl ethers in house dust and clothes dryer lint. Environmental science & technology. 2005 Feb 15;39(4):925–31. Eskenazi B, Chevrier J, Rauch SA, Kogut K, Harley KG, Johnson C, et al. In Utero and Childhood Polybrominated Diphenyl Ether (PBDE) Exposures and Neurodevelopment in the CHAMACOS Study. Environmental health perspectives. 2012;(November). Stapleton HM, Sharma S, Getzinger G, Ferguson PL, Gabriel M, Webster TF, et al. Novel and High Volume Use Flame Retardants in US Couches Reflective of the 2005 PentaBDE Phase Out. Environmental science & technology. 2012 Nov 28; University of Surrey. Effectiveness of the Furniture and Furnishings (Fire) (Safety) Regulations 1988. 2000; UK Department of Trade and Industry, London Viscusi K. Assessing the Need for a Federal Small Open Flame/Cigarette Ignition Upholstered Furniture Flammability Standard. 2001; National Economic Research Associates for the Upholstered Furniture Action Council Emsley A, Lim L, Stevens G, Williams P. International Fire Statistics and the Potential Benefits of Fire Counter-Measures. 2005;(May). University of Surrey for the European Flame Retardant Association Chivas C, Guillaume E, Sainrat A, Barbosa V. Assessment of risks and benefits in the use of flame retardants in upholstered furniture in continental Europe. Fire Safety Journal. 2009 Jul;44(5):801–7. Greenstreet Berman. A statistical report to investigate the effectiveness of the Furniture and Furnishings ( Fire ) ( Safety ) Regulations 1988. 2009; UK Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, London ARCADIS Belgium. Identification and evaluation of data on flame retardants in consumer products. 2011;(17). European Comission DG Health and Consumers, Brussels DCLG UK. Fire Statistics, United Kingdom, 2008. 2010; Department for Communities and Local Government, London
