Health Impacts of Chemical Fires Extend Beyond Air Quality Concerns
By Rob Spahr
Rollins School of Public Health researchers say it will be crucial to look beyond the chemical-infused smoke and subsequent respiratory symptoms stemming from this week’s chemical plant fire in Conyers, Georgia to gauge and mitigate the potential long-term health impacts.
Dana Barr, PhD, and Stephanie Eick, PhD, both faculty in the Department of Environmental Health at Emory University’s Rollins School of Public Health, explain the importance of future analysis in the section below.
When there is an incident at a chemical plant like this, what happens next in terms of identifying potential health impacts?
“We may not fully understand the impact of this situation for some time, but there are important steps that should be taken now. It's crucial to collect and analyze environmental samples, such as air, soil, and water, to identify all the chemicals that were released, including chlorine. This will help in future studies. It's likely that many harmful chemicals, like Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), were released along with toxic by-products from the fire or explosion. Additionally, it would be a good idea to create a registry of people who were near the plume. Tracking their location in relation to the plume and following up with health questions over the next few years could help us monitor any long-term health effects,” Barr says.
“We really need to be monitoring the soil and water, this will give us a better sense of how long these chemicals are staying in the environment and therefore posing a potential risk for health. This will also allow us to figure out if levels of these chemical are being detected at levels above the EPA threshold, in which case we might be able to draw more conclusions about potential health effects,” Eick says.
How long could persistent chemicals like these impact soil, air, water, etc.?
“At the moment, we don't have a clear understanding of all the chemicals that were present in the plume. Some of these chemicals may last for a long time in the environment, while others may disappear more quickly. The concern with persistent chemicals is that they can remain in the air, soil, or water for many years and may eventually make their way into the food chain, where they can build up over time. However, most chemicals will likely break down gradually through exposure to sunlight and rain, which will help reduce their impact over time,” Barr says.
“How long it stays in the air depends on things like the wind speed, but it can remain in the air for up to several hours depending on the amount of chlorine released. The chlorine would be able to stay in the water for at least a few days, though it might be longer here since this is something that’s causing really high levels of exposure. Chlorine is reactive and it breaks down to become chloride, which can stay in the soil for at least 40 days,” Eick says.
How broad is the impact geographically?
“Those living closest to the plume, especially in the direction of the prevailing wind, are likely to have experienced the highest exposure. Their soil, air, and water may also have the highest levels of contamination. It is important to quickly collect and analyze samples from these areas to determine if chemical concentrations decrease as you move farther from the plant. This will help us understand the potential risks and guide any necessary actions to protect health and the environment,” Barr says.
“It is difficult to know without real data on this, but it’s likely impacting metro Atlanta beyond Rockdale County,” Eick says.
What could “cleanup” involve?
“Cleaning up contaminated environments can be a lengthy and expensive process. Once chemical levels are measured, any areas where contamination exceeds safety thresholds set by risk assessments should be addressed. This could prompt an investigation and cleanup efforts by agencies like the EPA or ATSDR, potentially involving Superfund resources. Remediation efforts might include removing contaminated topsoil or applying a thin layer of capping to affected surface waters, depending on the severity and type of contamination,” Barr says.
“Soil, water, and air should all be monitored to identify if this will be an ongoing problem,” Eick says.
What types of analysis will be needed?
“The first actions taken should include an environmental monitoring strategy where samples are collected longitudinally to identify chemicals present, determine if they are present above risk-based thresholds, and to surveille the levels over time. Samples should be taken at various radii from the site where the fire occurred and will likely include more frequent sampling over the course of the next few months. The timeline for sampling will have to be developed after knowledge of which chemicals are present in these matrices. The sampling most likely will span buffer areas of about 5-10 miles from the site with more sampling in the direction of the prevailing wind. Furthermore, samples should be taken from areas that were not in close contact with the plume for comparison,” Barr says.
“Since we do not yet have a great sense of everywhere that has been impacted, we can’t be certain yet about how big the scope of this will need to be. But I would say we should probably monitor the water and soil for the next couple of months,” Eick says.
What is the long-term concern?
“Understandably, many people are primarily concerned about the long-term effects this incident may have on their health. Once the chemicals present in the plume are identified, each will be assessed based on established risk-based thresholds for specific health outcomes, including both cancer and non-cancer risks. Long-term health evaluations should not only focus on cancer risks but also consider the potential for respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, as these are often associated with exposure to airborne toxicants. Continuous monitoring and health assessments will be critical to ensure that any potential risks are identified and addressed as early as possible, providing reassurance and guidance for those affected,” Barr said.
“This chemical is considered to be extremely toxic to aquatic life according to the EPA, so the long-term consequences of that would have to be monitored here. Most of what we know shows that acute exposure to chlorine might not be that toxic to humans and could just cause some mild irritation. However, this is something that could really be more of a chronic exposure event depending on how long the chemical is able to stay in the environment (water, soil, etc). In that case, we really need to be monitoring the levels over time to see how widespread the problem is,” Eick says.
