California to Unveil New Flammability Standard to Avoid Chemicals in Furniture

The new rules would cut down on the use of flame retardants that have been linked to human health effects















Share on Tumblr

The changes will “address upholstery-covered fabric and the interaction between materials in a couch the way it would occur in a real-world fire," said Russ Heimerich, spokesman for California's department of Consumer Affairs, which houses the Bureau of Electronic and Appliance Repair, Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation that will release the new draft.

He said it "fulfills Gov. Brown's vision with continuing to improve fire safety while reducing the use of flame retardant chemicals. We think this does as good or better as previous standards to ensure furniture won't burn readily."

About 85 percent of furniture on the market today already meets an upholstery smolder standard, according to a report from the Consumer Product Safety Commission that proposed a similar smolder standard in 2008 [PDF].

"These types of upholstery are not typically treated with flame retardants," said Heather Stapleton, who researches flame retardants at Duke University. "It should reduce our everyday exposure to flame retardant chemicals if it passes."

Arlene Blum, an environmental chemist with the University of California, Berkeley, has campaigned for years against flame retardants. She said she was "cautiously optimistic" about the new proposal.

The legacy of the old standard, however, will be felt for years since many people keep couches and other furniture for decades.

"Even with new regulations in place we still have the ongoing impact of these bio-pervasive and bioaccumulating chemicals, which will be with us for decades," Leno said. "This is only step one. It will hopefully stop the bleeding."

Because flame retardants are mixed into consumer products, rather than chemically bound, they can leach out and stick to dust particles that people can inhale.

A recent study found them in nearly all couches tested. In couches purchased before 2005, three out of every four contained flame retardants. For newer couches, 94 percent contained them, nearly all next-generation compounds with little known about their potential health effects.

Before 2005, a brominated flame retardant known as penta was used in most U.S. furniture. When it was banned because it was accumulating in people and wildlife around the world, newer chemicals came onto the market to help furniture meet TB 117. Scientists have struggled to keep pace with studying their health risks.

Children and pregnant women are particularly vulnerable, especially in California. California children have some of the world's highest-measured levels of flame retardants in their bodies. An ongoing study of California children has found that exposure during pregnancy or early childhood may lead to children with poorer attention, motor skills and IQ scores.

This article originally ran at Environmental Health News, a news source published by Environmental Health Sciences, a nonprofit media company.



1 Comments

Add Comment
View
  1. 1. greenhome123 07:18 PM 2/11/13

    It's about time.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American Editors

More »

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

Solve Innovation Challenges

Powered By: Innocentive

  SA Digital
  SA Digital

Science Jobs of the Week

Email this Article

California to Unveil New Flammability Standard to Avoid Chemicals in Furniture

X
Scientific American Magazine

Subscribe Today

Save 66% off the cover price and get a free gift!

Learn More >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X