This year´s theme of the conference was a poison-free environment, which is one of the 16 environmental quality goals, established by Sweden´s Parliament, to be achieved by 2020. The overarching issue for the two-day conference was how that goal will be achieved. The focus of the first day of the conference was on the knowledge we currently have about hazardous materials from environmental and health perspectives, and what additional knowledge is needed. As an introduction, a range of government agencies presented their views of the tools they have for adopting measures, and the types of knowledge they feel they are lacking.Recovery
According to Rolf Annerberg, Formas´ General Director and investigator of the environmental quality goals, the poison-free environment target won´t be reached in time.
“One of the reasons is that it takes a long time for nature to recover. This environmental area is transboundary in character — that is to say, chemicals are spread to Sweden by water and air, from sources that we don´t control," he says.
Ethel Forsberg, the General Director for the Swedish Chemicals Agency, feels that the EU-wide law Reach is a good first step in the right direction, but that we are far from achieving the goal of a poison-free environment. She pointed to lack of knowledge as the single largest reason why the work to phase out materials that are hazardous to the environment and health is going so slowly. “Lack of knowledge regarding which chemicals are dangerous is one barrier, another is that it takes a long time for existing knowledge to lead to the adoption of measures that make a difference," she said.
Goal-oriented robots and cocktails
Lack of knowledge and the demand for more research was a theme that the researchers also focused on. “We know a lot about some poisonous materials´ immediate health effects. But we have little to no knowledge about the long-term effects. There are studies, for example, that point to a connection between diabetes and PCB exposure, but more knowledge is needed before we can be sure of the connection," said Kristina Jakobsson from the Division of Occupational and Environmental Medicine at Lund University Hospital.
Ingvar Brandt, Professor of Environmental Toxicology at UppsalaUniversity, regarded whether researchers succeed in identifying the most dangerous chemicals to be one of the most important questions. “New chemicals are being produced that we still have no knowledge about, as well as mixtures — or cocktails — comprised of several chemicals that are harmless on their own but together pose environmental risks. Some agents change and attain new characteristics along the way, while other chemicals work like goal-oriented robots and can attack specific cells in an organism. Such chemicals are hard to capture, and our knowledge about them is insufficient, which in and of itself can lead to incomplete evaluations of risk," he said. He sees a need for faster screening and testing methods.
The work toward a poison-free environment
A seminar was held during the second day of the conference, with examples of how the private sector is working toward a poison-free environment. Seven workshops were held, with themes ranging from how local and regional agencies work toward a poison-free environment to the presence of chemicals in products and buildings. Several companies, but also government agency representatives and researchers, provided examples at the seminar of how companies can contribute to achieving a poison-free environment.
Many participants felt, for example, that laws and other requirements are important drivers for companies´ efforts to phase out materials that are hazardous to the environment and health from their production processes. Martin Carlsson from Nynas felt that dialogue with public agencies is also important for developmental work. “It is necessary, both so that we know what the rules are and to be able to influence future requirements, because we have such long lead times for changing production," he said.
Knowledge transfer
Several new research areas, better environmental monitoring and knowledge transfer between the different actors were the general conclusions regarding what is needed that were drawn at the conference, but also the importance of responding based on the knowledge that does exist.
