{"id":2809,"date":"2022-12-27T16:14:31","date_gmt":"2022-12-27T14:14:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.gruppolegno.it\/?p=2809"},"modified":"2022-12-27T16:20:24","modified_gmt":"2022-12-27T14:20:24","slug":"pvc-ecological-or-harmful-building-material","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.gruppolegno.it\/en\/il-pvc-materiale-da-costruzione-ecologico-o-dannoso\/","title":{"rendered":"PVC: ecological or harmful building material?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

PVC (Polyvinyl Chloride) is a material of synthetic origin (polymer), versatile, durable, resistant to fire and corrosion, recyclable and represents the third most widespread plastic product in the world<\/b>, after polyethylene and polypropylene. Recent independent research commissioned by ecvm <\/b>(European council of vinyl manufacturers), a division of Plastics Europe, the European association of plastics producers, which represents the 100% of plastic producers in Europe, has brought out a truly astonishing result: PVC, compared to other natural materials such as wood and metal, it would look like the best product in terms of<\/b> costs\u2013benefits. <\/b>The study shows that in three major construction sectors such as windows, floors and pipes,<\/b> PVC is not only the most "effective" solution in terms of installation costs, but it is also the best choice for life cycle<\/a> compared to other materials.<\/p>

In fact, it emerges from the study that PVC proves to be a very ecological material in terms of environmental impact<\/b> over its entire life cycle, demonstrated in terms of Ger (energy demand) and Gwp (Global warming potential \u2013 greenhouse gas emissions). It therefore presents advantages in terms of total energy consumption and CO2 emissions.<\/p>

It is a pity, however, that the study was commissioned by the producers themselves, with easily understandable purposes, and not by third-party and impartial institutes for the protection of citizens.<\/b><\/p>

It is a material present in many domestic and working environments in various forms and functions. But an ever-increasing number of people and researchers are highlighting the damage that PVC causes, its real danger and the risk to human health associated with the use of the material, which is often also used in construction.<\/p>

POSITIONS AGAINST PVC<\/h2>

According to a study by "The center for Health, Environment and Justice", an American consumer protection company, PVC is not to be considered an ecological material at all. In fact, it would be responsible for many tumors and fetal malformations. The fact that many companies over the years have evaluated the opportunity or chosen to remove the use of polyvinyl chloride from their production processes would represent irrefutable proof of this (for example - IKEA, Microsoft, Apple, Carnegie Fabrics Finishes etc. - see the list<\/a> Source CHEJ).<\/p>

According to the CHEJ \u201c PVC is harmful to human health<\/b> and to the entire ecosystem throughout its life cycle, from the factory, to use, up to disposal. Our bodies are contaminated by additive, poisonous chemical particles such as mercury and phthalates (toxic softeners that make it flexible and whose use in children's games was banned by the European Community in 2005 due to the health risk, but which continues to be used in the USA thanks to an agreement between the Department of Commerce and US toy manufacturers) which can cause our lives to be shorter and irreversible. When produced or burned, PVC releases dioxins, a group of the most potent chemicals ever tested, which can cause cancer as well as attack the immune system and reproductive system.<\/i>''<\/p>

And again regarding its recycling, the CHEJ claims: ''The PVC it cannot actually be recycled due to the additives used in the manufacturing process<\/b> to make it durable and flexible as these contaminate the entire process. Many consumers do not know that the 3 symbol on plastic means PVC, and therefore recycling these products makes little sense as it would result in unusable containers. Indeed a single bottle of PVC manages to contaminate a recycling process of 100,000 PET bottles<\/b>.\u201d <\/i><\/p>

Therefore what clearly emerges is that PVC would be technically simple to recycle like other plastic but what produces the greatest health problems are the additives used in processing to make it more malleable and workable, putting the entire process at risk. of recycling.<\/p>

Another element of reflection is represented by the choice of places for the production of polyvinyl chloride. In fact, PVC production plants are located near concentrations of low-income and black communities, and from scientific tests in these areas there would appear to be a clear correlation between health and pollution from PVC additives<\/b>. The CHEJ claims, among other things: \u201c\u2026.In 1999, the federal government measured the amount of dioxins in the blood of 28 individuals living near one of these facilities in Louisiana. The test revealed that their blood contained three times the level of the average US citizen.<\/i> Workers in these factories risk health damage from exposure to polyvinyl chloride and other additives used in the manufacturing process. Such health risks include liver angiosarcoma, lung cancer, brain cancer, lymphoma, leukemia, and liver cirrhosis.\u201d<\/i><\/p>

\"Photo<\/p>

Photo 2, Baerlocher explosion, PVC additives factory.<\/span><\/p>

IN FAVOR OF PVC<\/h2>

The positions in favor of polyvinyl state that many of the reasons given against its use are unfounded and have a political origin<\/b>. The reasons in favor are mostly of an economic nature and in particular refer to the ease of cleaning which makes it a key material - for example - in the health sector. In this field of application it is used in various ways \u2013 from the walls of operating rooms to blood bags, up to surgeons' gloves. Indeed, if PVC were truly a plastic harmful to human health, we would all be in serious danger.<\/p>

According to Dr. Patrick Moore<\/b>,one of the founders of Greenpeace ''the evidence of danger to human health has been rejected by the European Commission, by in-depth studies on polyvinyl and also by the United States Green Building Council, a group of activists in various fields, who have refuted the criticisms made of polyvinyl.<\/i>''This statement, however, seems to be in clear contrast with a Community directive which prohibits the use of additives commonly present in the material in the production, for now, of children's toys.<\/p>

\"Photo<\/p>

Photo 3: Storage<\/span><\/p>

Furthermore, Moore claims that PVC is only made up of 50% fossil fuels, while the other types of plastic are made up of 100% fossil fuels with a strong reduction in global warming. And since it can be recycled, he continues: \u201c\u2026Activists who claim that polyvinyl cannot be recycled are wrong approximately 100% of its processing waste is reused<\/b><\/i>\u201d. Therefore, polyvinyl can be produced and recycled, reducing energy requirements and consequently causing less damage to the environment; but this is true compared to alternative plastics and not to natural materials.<\/p>

One of the accusations leveled against the PVC industry is the impossibility or difficulty of recycling. Moore points out that PVC, having a basically infinite life cycle, is the least recycled. Therefore he states: ''Not much consumer-grade polyvinyl is recycled. Ask yourself why? Because they still use it. And therefore it makes very little sense to make these accusations against the polyvinyl industries regarding recycling, when, thanks to its durability it is still in homes, in water pipes, as an insulating material. It does not need to be recycled because it is still used thanks to its resistance over time<\/b>.<\/i>''<\/p>

It is not recycled because there is no need for it! Hm\u2026.<\/p>

The position, albeit biased, of the is interesting PVC Forum Italy<\/a>, PVC Information Center according to which; in short we must forget about the old PVC (therefore it is a form of admission of real problems) and look to the future, in terms of social and environmental eco-sustainability. The conclusions of a conference are quite eloquent:<\/p>