Dear Editor:
Recently, letters in this newspaper from Ron Hine and his associates are again playing to public fears regarding asbestos. As a member of the Stevens community with expertise in environmental issues, I am distressed at the resumption of this dissemination of misinformation. (I founded Stevens’ Center for Environmental Engineering, and have published widely on environmental issues. My background is available at:
http://www.soe.stevens-tech.edu/ceoe/People/korfiatis.html.) There is a profound and little-understood difference between naturally occurring asbestos and manufactured asbestos products. The latter have been the subject of numerous lawsuits (and understandable public concern), but the former has not. A cursory Internet search by Stevens found NO litigation on behalf of workers excavating asbestos-bearing (serpentine) rock, or on behalf of people living near such excavations.
Here’s why. Asbestos in natural rock formations is low in concentration and consists of long, “non-friable” (i.e., not easily broken) fibers.
Manufacturing asbestos products from the fibrous minerals found in serpentine formations requires that the rock be completely pulverized to extract these fibers (which are otherwise inseparable from the rock). This separation process is what breaks asbestos into the small fibers which have been identified as the cause of respiratory ailments suffered by people with long-term exposure to asbestos PRODUCTS (mainly asbestos-industry workers, manufacturers, and installers).
Naturally occurring asbestos fibers are difficult to break and adhere strongly to the rock in which they’re found. They cannot be released in measurable amounts by the kind of blasting that loosens rock for excavation.
Stevens’ excavation blasts created ordinary dust – NOT airborne asbestos. More asbestos fibers are released from an automobile’s brakes than were released from any of Stevens’ excavation blasts. (Brake pads are typically asbestos products, and braking tears off fibers.)
The only indication that asbestos was even in the excavation area occurred when air measuring devices were inadvertently stored alongside digging equipment. This excavation equipment came into repeated, violent and direct contact with buried asbestos fibers, which caused some fibers to lodge in the equipment. Hine cited this uptick in asbestos readings as proof that asbestos had been “strewn everywhere”. Properly performed atmospheric measurements, however, revealed only normal background amounts of asbestos-related minerals.
Hine’s accusations were partly based on a preliminary report on the excavated rock by NJ consultant H2M Associates. H2M was hired by the Meadowlands Commission, which oversees a Carlstadt, NJ landfill where the rock was taken. (That H2M’s report was never intended as the final word is evidenced by the fact that the renowned Columbia University geologist Garry Karner was subsequently hired by these authorities.) The Meadowlands officials had been alarmed by claims sent to them by Hine, in an attempt to block their acceptance of the excavated material. From Dr. Karner’s report last June, the Commission concluded that the Stevens rock posed no hazard, and it was accepted as ordinary landfill material.
Dr. Karner’s report addresses the inaccurate and/or incomplete remarks from H2M’s snapshot assessment, and specifically addressed the remarks made to the Meadowlands officials by Hine. Karner’s exhaustive examination repeatedly emphasizes that NO asbestos was made airborne by Stevens’ excavation. Some people have asked why Stevens waited this long to comment. Actually, Stevens has released previous statements, but these were overshadowed by Hine’s breathless assertions of public menace, which probably made for better newspaper copy. Stevens quietly reassured public officials that no danger existed (as confirmed by Dr. Karner’s report).
With the excavation finished, Stevens felt that to further debate the issue with one individual would only generate more controversy and concern, and felt it best to drop the matter. However, as Ron Hine has demonstrated his intent to continue making his long-disproven claims, we offer this accounting of the history of this issue.
The Stevens excavation was conducted in accordance to standard engineering practices and in strict compliance with regulatory and monitoring requirements. After all, that is why regulatory agencies have developed and enforce standards; to protect the public from both harmful contaminants and people that sound false alarms.
Dr. George Korfiatis
Dean, Charles V. Schaefer, Jr.
School of Engineering
Stevens