Using Chemical Release Surveillance Data to Evaluate the Public Health Impacts of Chlorine and Its Alternatives

DOI: 10.4236/jep.2012.312177   PDF   HTML     3,585 Downloads   5,564 Views   Citations


Background: More than 80 million Americans may be at risk of a chemical exposure because they live near one of the 101 most hazardous chemical facilities or near routes used to transport hazardous chemicals. One approach to hazard reduction is to use less toxic alternatives. Chlorine, one of the chemicals posing the greatest public health danger, has several alternatives depending on the application. Methods: We analyzed data collected during 1993-2008 by 17 state health departments participating in the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry’s (ATSDR) active chemical incident surveillance program. We conducted descriptive analyses to evaluate whether five chlorine alternatives (calcium hypochlorite, hydrogen peroxide, sodium chlorate, sodium hydrosulfite, and sodium hypochlorite) resulted in less severe incidents. We used chi square and z-score analyses to test significance, where appropriate. Results: During 1993-2008, 2040 incidents involved chlorine, and 1246 incidents involved chlorine alternatives. Nearly 30% of chlorine releases resulted in injured persons, as compared to 13% of chlorine alternatives that resulted in injury. Although similar proportions of persons injured in chlorine or chlorine alternative releases were treated on scene (18% and 14%, respectively) and at a hospital (58% and 60%, respectively), there was a greater proportion of hospital admissions following chlorine releases than there was following releases of chlorine alternatives (10 % vs. 4%) (p < 0.01). There were significantly fewer victims per release for hydrogen peroxide (0.2) than there were for chlorine (1.3) in paper manufacturing (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Exposures to these five potential chlorine alternatives resulted in a lower proportion of exposed persons requiring hospital admission. To reduce acute public health injuries associated with chemical exposures, users should consider a chlorine alternative when such a substitution is reasonable.

Share and Cite:

P. Ruckart, A. Anderson and W. Welles, "Using Chemical Release Surveillance Data to Evaluate the Public Health Impacts of Chlorine and Its Alternatives," Journal of Environmental Protection, Vol. 3 No. 12, 2012, pp. 1607-1614. doi: 10.4236/jep.2012.312177.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] P. Orum, Center for American Progress, “Chemical Security 101,” 2008.
[2] B. Thorpe, “How the Toxics Use Reduction Act Continues to Promote Clean Production Internationally,” Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 19, No. 5, 2011, pp. 552-558. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.07.016
[3] American Chemistry Council, “Responsible Care Fact Sheet,” 2011.
[4] P. Eliason and G. Morose, “Safer Alternatives Assessment: The Massachusetts Process as a Model for State Governments”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 19, No. 5, 2011, pp. 517-526. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.05.011
[5] F. Granek, “Business Value of Toxics Reduction and Pollution Prevention Planning,” Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 19, No. 5, 2011, pp. 559-560. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.09.012
[6] E. T. Lavoie, L. G. Heine, H. Holder, M. S. Rossi, R. E. Lee, E. A. Connor, M. A. Vrabel, D. M. DiFiore and C. L. Davies, “Chemical Alternatives Assessment: Enabling Substitution to Safer Chemicals,” Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 44, No. 24, 2010, pp. 9244-9249. doi:10.1021/es1015789
[7] G. Morose, S. Shina and R. Farrell, “Supply chain Collaboration to Achieve Toxic Use Reduction,” Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 19, No. 5, 2011, pp. 397-407. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.04.004
[8] J. Onasch, P. Shoemaker, H. M. Nguyen and C. Roelofs, “Helping Small Businesses Implement Toxics Use Reduction Techniques: Dry Cleaners, Auto Shops, and Floor Finishers Assisted in Creating Safer and Healthier Workplaces,” Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 19, No. 5, 2011, pp. 408-413.
[9] Homeland Security Council and Department of Homeland Security, “National Planning Scenario 8: Chemical Attack—Chlorine Tank Explosion,” 2005.
[10] C. Winder, “The Toxicology of Chlorine,” Environmental Research, Vol. 85, No. 2, 2001, pp. 105-114. doi:10.1006/enrs.2000.4110
[11] Toxic Use Reduction Institute (TURI), “Massachusetts Chemical Fact Sheet Chlorine”. chusetts_Chemical_Fact_Sheets/Chlorine_Fact_Sheet/Print able_Chlorine_Fact_Sheet
[12] The Comprehensive Microbial Resource, “Chemical Profile: Chlorine,” Chemical Market Reporter, 2006.
[13] L. Ainsworth and J. Hampton, “A safe option for Disinfection: On-Site Sodium Hypochlorite Generation,” Water Engineering & Management, Vol. 144, No. 12, 1997, pp. 25-27.
[14] D. J. Applegate, “Creating Safer Work and Community Environments: Gaseous chlorine to Liquid Bleach Conversions,” Water Engineering & Management, Vol. 145, No. 2, 1998, pp. 33-35.
[15] A. Garibi and L. A. Kazanowski, “On-Site Hypochlorite Generation,” Pollution Engineering, Vol. 38, No. 6, 2006, pp. 32-35.
[16] P. Orum, Preventing Center for American Progress, “Chemical Toxic Terrorism,” 2006.
[17] Center for Health, Environment & Justice (CHEJ), “PVC Factsheet. CHEJ’s Guide to PVC-Free School Office Supplies and Building Materials”.
[18] T. J. McDonough, “Bleaching Agents—Pulp and Paper Industry,” The 4th Edition of the Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, The Institute of Paper Science and Technology, 1991.
[19] B. Sudha, H. Veeramani, et al., “Bleaching of Bagasse Pulp with Enzyme Pre-Treatment,” Water Science and Technology, Vol. 47, No. 10, 2003, pp. 163-168.
[20] Black & Veatch, “White’s Handbook of Chlorination and Alternative Disinfectants,” John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, 2010.
[21] Testimony of George S. Hawkins, 2011.
[22] Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Report on Gaseous Chlorine Reduction Initiative in Michigan, 2008.
[23] Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), “HSEES Biennial Report 2007-2008,” 2009.
[24] Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, Pub. L. No. 95510 (Dec. 11, 1980), as Amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99499 (Oct. 17, 1986), 42 U.S.C. 9604(i).
[25] M. A. Duncan and M. F. Orr, “Evolving with the Times, the New National Toxic Substance Incidents Program,” Journal of Medical Toxicology, Vol. 6, No. 4, 2010, pp. 461-463. doi:10.1007/s13181-010-0114-6
[26] United States Census Bureau, “North American industry Classification System,” 2004.
[27] SAS Institute Inc., “SAS? 9.2 Enhanced Logging Facilities,” Cary, 2008.
[28] R. Rushing and P. Orum, Center for American Progress, “Leading Water Utilities Secure Their Chemicals,” 2010.
[29] National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA), “Chlorine Gas Decision Tool for Water and Wastewater Utilities,” 2006
[30] A. Fidis, “Pulp Fiction—Chemical Hazard Reduction at Pulp and Paper Mills,” US PIRG Education Fund, 2007.
[31] T. K. Das, “Evaluating the Life Cycle Environmental Performance of Chlorine Disinfection and Ultraviolet Technologies,” Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2002, pp. 32-43. doi:10.1007/s10098-002-0139-x
[32] Greenpeace, “Building a PVC Free Future”.
[33] Healthy Building Network, “PVC Free Materials List”.

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.