Recently Tænk’s study of paints was published
In the study’s paint samples, a number of harmful substances were found, including PFAS, and some of them off-gas into the indoor climate, are discharged into the environment and are taken up in food chains.
One of the many conclusions from the report is
“If you’re using paint, consider how you can minimize the amount of paint used. Mineral based paints achieve a higher level of coverage with fewer layers, which is in part why their global warming potential impacts are less than paints with plastic binders.” – Martha Lewis, Head of Materials/ Henning Larsen Architects
IF you have to paint at all. The same logic is very relevant to all the other surfaces that we and our society have become accustomed to. So: If you need surface treatment at all – at least to the extent that is the case and to which we have become accustomed.
The comfort we enjoy today, which means that most people can come home after a day at school or work, sit down on the sofa and scroll on their phones, is a level of comfort we have bought into in many ways.
Where, just a few decades ago, our parents and grandparents had to manually spend a disproportionately large part of their time and painstakingly maintaining the house, garden and their other possessions, today we are exempt from most of it. While free hands in human history have only been reserved for the richest, we live in a society where it is common. Thanks to surfaces.
There are many products in households and other private consumption that have properties that are the prerequisites for our level of comfort. These are surfaces that are dirt-resistant, weather-resistant, water-resistant, color-resistant, have a shine, corrosion protection, reduce wear and strengthen the durability of the product, reduce dust sticking to it, reduce the effect of heat, fire retardant, etc.
We have gotten used to being able to leave garden cushions out in the rain and to easily remove stains from the sofa. To have washable surfaces, to be able to choose gloss on products and walls. Surfaces that reduce bacterial growth or are so-called self-cleaning. That the colors of textiles do not fade from the sun, and rainwear that is waterproof.
Both privately and on the job market, that comfort has meant less strain on the body, and has increased the part of our welfare that deals with wear and tear. In the healthcare field, improving both medical equipment and processes is related to – yes, surfaces. In fact, our high level of comfort is related to surface treatment in most manufacturing trades and industries, including energy and water.
Under the surface
But few people think about how we have suddenly become so lucky. Because what on the surface seems like a helping hand from the manufacturers has a seriously toxic backside.
The properties of the surfaces come from a number of particularly harmful ingredients. Emissions from both their production and use lead to significant overshooting of the planetary boundaries . The Novel Entities area is actually more exceeded than the Climate Change area, which is a sad first place.
It is to such an extent that it threatens the entire bottom of the needs pyramid – the one that deals with shelter, food and water. In other words, the very basics that are necessary to be able to sustain life.
PFAS are found to a surprisingly large extent for many in all the products we surround ourselves with on a daily basis – for example in bathtubs, contact lenses, condoms, guitar strings and climbing ropes. PFAS are difficult to break down, spread easily in the environment and accumulate in living organisms and thus people, with many researchers linking PFAS to cancer, birth defects, liver disease, thyroid disease, reduced immunity, hormonal disorders and a number of other serious health problems.
In a study ( Janousek et all. 2019), of the PFAS content of 51 textiles and building materials, it is in surface treatments that you find the most different types of PFAS, and it is also in surface treatments that the highest concentrations of the subgroup PFAA are found. In one of these surface treatments you find the highest content of FTOH, which is a polyfluoroalkyl substance.
Comprehensive knowledge base
Scientists from all over the world have for more than 30 years investigated the extent and effects of harmful chemicals and have shared their knowledge. Since 1947, the consumer council TÆNK has tested and informed widely in society. At regular intervals, in various media and in the daily press, you can read about how we as citizens are exposed to the harmful effects of drugs. In Denmark, the purpose of the Working Environment Act is to protect workers’ health at workplaces. From the political side, a Science Task Force for PFAS has been set up consisting of the most talented researchers in Denmark in the field.
As citizens, we should be fairly enlightened – at least not completely in the dark.
Nevertheless, the production of fluoropolymers (the basic substance in the harmful surface treatments) is increasing. In fact, there is an expectation in the market of a significant growth in the production of fluoropolymers both towards 2025 and 2050.
The growth reflects a demand from the manufacturing industry for, among other things, surface treatments.
Nice-to-have everyday versus need-to-have future
The challenge is that the scale is so large – that pretty much everything we surround ourselves with has a surface treatment.
But is it necessary? Should everything we surround ourselves with be treated?
When there is now knowledge that shows that the health of both ours and all ecosystems is degraded by the chemistry behind the products. Now that planetary boundaries have been exceeded and the bottom of the needs pyramid is threatened – will we continue to insist on the right to a blank surface?
What are we prepared to give up in our daily lives, in order to have a future without harmful chemicals in drinking water, the marine environment, backyards, air – and not least our homes?
In many cases, the need may not be there at all, but we have become accustomed to the comfort of the surfaces’ properties.
Surfaces with harmful chemical content are an example of one of sustainability’s many dilemmas, here focusing on social sustainability. Where the health aspect has both been strengthened in terms of reducing wear and tear and new medical products, the chemical content is so harmful that it affects the entire prerequisite for maintaining holistic health.
The question is, will we give up the newfound luxury and trade it back for more manual labor? We will get more in the deal. For example, surfaces that patina beautifully and are not destructive.
