Volvo's "Nose Team" evaluates each component that might be used in a Volvo interior.
Health officials are alarmed to report an epidemic of glue-sniffing by drivers nationwide. They have been sighted at intersections, on interstates and in their own driveways inhaling a cocktail of chemicals suspected of causing cancer, birth defects, liver damage, and learning disorders.
If you trust the findings of a new report, this is dangerously close to the truth. The Ecology Center, a non-profit research group in Ann Arbor, Michigan, has dissected what we laypeople know as “new car smell,” and found it to be a chemical soup with some scary possibilities.
Strange Brew
The source of a new car’s enchanting perfume is its materials — plastics, leathers, fabrics — that release their molecules into the cabin environment. New cars release more of these chemicals, but interior components can continue to off-gas for years, long after we’ve grown used to the musk.
Nowhere on a car (in its user’s manual or online) do carmakers list the substances circulating inside the cabin. There are also few government standards controlling their airborne concentrations, even though a number have been linked to health risks ranging from allergies to cancer.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Web sites offer information on “sick building syndrome” and how to avoid it (acknowledging that “most indoor air pollution comes from sources inside the building”). But the EPA offers nothing on the possibility of “sick car syndrome,” even though concentrations of these chemicals can be many times higher in a car than what’s deemed healthy for a home or office.
Considering the increasing hours Americans spend in their autos, cabin air quality may quickly become a big concern. According to the Ecology Center’s study (and its companion website HealthyCar.org), some new cars are much better than others. The Chevy Cobalt scored high, for instance, while the VW Beetle fared poorly. There are also simple things anyone can do to lower their own risks, no matter what they drive.
Chemical Soup
Automakers work from a seemingly endless rainbow of substances to build our cars. Bromines and antimony are used as flame retardants; mercury is used in polymers; fabrics are treated with arsenic; leather is tanned with chromium; chlorine and lead are used to make PVC plastic; and phthalates are used to soften it. The list, in fact, seems to go on forever.
Of particular concern to the Ecology Center are bromines, which are found in thousands of everyday products. The list of “suspected health concerns” include “thyroid hormone disruption, permanent learning and memory impairment, behavioral changes, hearing deficits, delayed puberty onset, decreased sperm count, fetal malformations and possibly cancer.” In addition to cars, the Ecology Center is finding alarming levels of bromated flame retardants in children’s car seats and toys.
But it gets more complicated. Heat and ultraviolet light can cause bromines and other chemicals to break down into new compounds. Jeff Gearhart, the Ecology Center’s Auto Project Campaign Director, likens this process to “a chemistry experiment in vehicles.” One common bromated flame retardant, deca-brominated diphenyl ether (decaBDE), can break down into pentaBDE and octaBDE, two chemicals potentially more threatening than the sum of their parts.
Discuss: Is your car making you sick?
Winners and Losers
Using an X-ray fluorescence (XRF) scanner, the Ecology Center tested 11 separate components in dozens of 2008 and 2009 cars, trucks, and SUVs. Interestingly, the line that separates cars of high, medium, and low concern is a snaky one, and many automakers were both winners and losers.
Toyota’s Tacoma was a winner in the truck category, while the 2008 Avalon was one of the worst offenders in the large sedan group. The Prius was a clear winner — with a concern score of 0.8 on a scale of 0 to 5 — while the Scion xB (Toyota owns Scion) was one of the worst scorers.
