Cadmium in Crisis!
There is a possibility that Cadmium Pigments will be banned by the EU.
Read the update here: Cadmium Ban News
Read all the articles on our blog about the cadmium crisis.
The authorities concerned, however, are currently assessing the situation and taking on comments from the public.
We know that a ban would affect many of our customers so we are writing to you in the hope that you can help us raise awareness of this issue and we are asking as many artists as possible to visit the ECHA (European Chemical Agency) website to give their opinions on the use, unique characteristics and handling of these special paints.
Below is an article written by our friend Michael Craine, from Spectrum Paints, who expains all the issues. We invite you to read his article before passing comment on the ECHA website.
Michael Craine of Spectrum Paints
What’s the issue?
It might initially appear rather dry and uninteresting, but the European Union’s Chemical Agency(ECHA) is considering severely restricting or even banning the use of all Cadmium pigments. It could be a significant reduction to the artists’ palette – arguably an even bigger change than the restrictions applied to the use of lead in artists’ colours. Whereas the risks associated with lead were undeniable and obvious, the premise on which the cadmium proposal is based appears both unconvincing and entirely unnecessary to many.
Why all the fuss now?
Pressure from one particular EU member state means that Cadmium pigments could be stripped of the protection they currently enjoy when used in the limited application of artists’ colours, and the changes could be introduced within a couple of years.
What is the objection?
Our understanding is that the objection to the continued use of heavy metal Cadmium pigments is based not on concern for the paint maker or artistic user, but to prevent such materials entering the water course, Essentially, one EU member maintains that by rinsing brushes in the sink, cadmium may enter the waste water treatment plants and end up in the sludge. When the sludge is spread on agricultural land, growing crops absorbs the cadmium and consequently this will lead to an increased exposure to humans via food.
How dangerous is Cadmium?
Animal studies have shown that cadmium pigments are potentially toxic and carcinogenic when inhaled or eaten. Over the years, paint makers have consequently used cadmium pigments of progressively lower solubility in efforts to increase safety. However we must be realistic and say that there is still reason to treat paints made with cadmium pigments with extra care. As has been said, there are no safe chemicals; just safe ways of using them!
The greater risks associated with cadmium are in the industrial setting of the paint manufacturer, where inhalation of dry pigment could be possible if appropriate measures were not taken. As a consequence CEPE members set stringent workplace exposure limits and hygiene requirements. We take this seriously and workers exposed to cadmium pigments are required to have periodic testing to determine their blood levels of the element.
What is the CEPE organisation that you refer to?
The European artists’ colours association (CEPE) is the member organisation that represents paint, ink and artists’ colours manufacturers in Europe. Here in the UK the cadmium debate is of particular concern and interest to CEPE members. It is CEPE who quietly get on ‘behind the scenes’ ensuring that Europe remains the sustainable home of fine art materials.
Is Cadmium a new addition to an artist’s palette?
Definitely not! Cadmium pigments were discovered around 1820 and first used commercially for artists’ use by the mid 1840’s. The cost and scarcity of the metal kept their use relatively limited in mainstream artists’ materials until the 1920’s. Their introduction provided unequalled hues in the yellow to deep red range, in terms of brightness, strength, beauty and light-fastness.
Are artists amongst the world’s big polluters?
The artist fraternity has probably been caught with a punch intended for a much bigger boxer! There are a number of initiatives regarding the long term environmental impact of cadmium in landfills and water courses. The landfill issue is largely the result of the use of soluble cadmium compounds in battery manufacture and the sheer numbers of spent batteries in the waste stream. However, for the purposes of reducing the potential for cadmium compounds leaching out of landfills, cadmium from all sources is of concern to the agencies regulating waste disposal. Any cadmium-containing waste that releases the metal is considered hazardous waste. Perhaps it is these other issues that have brought cadmium to the fore now and the art world are simply an innocent bystander?
What is to stop the EU cadmium ban going ahead?
CEPE has an excellent relationship with regulators including the European Chemical Agency ECHA who genuinely will listen to informed and constructive contributions. If artists and manufacturers present evidence that artists can be relied upon to dispose of the small quantities of cadmium waste from paint in a responsible manner and not down the sink, it is not impossible that a dispensation could be made for Artists’ paints.
Who is leading the campaign?
Whilst not leading an identifiable campaign, members of the European artists’ colours association met in Brussels last month to consider how they might respond to the European Union’s changing attitude towards Cadmium pigments. We will not be standing outside any foreign embassies with placards, but we do feel a strong responsibility to at least consult with artists. Hence this conversation.
Why is Cadmium so important?
Cadmium hues range from pale to golden deep yellows; light fiery to deep oranges through to light bright scarlet to deep reds and maroons. These brilliant pigments are loved for their strength, purity and light fast properties. Some artists prefer more descriptive and perhaps more illustrative adjectives such as zingy, joyous and singing colours!
Cadmium Yellow artists colour
Are there alternatives?
Yes but they are limited and generally poor relations. Although the properties of alternative organic pigments are in many ways similar to cadmium colours, they are not identical in every respect. Variations include how the colours mix to create new colours, strength, opacity and purity.
Couldn’t I just make my own?
The same restrictions will ultimately apply to us all wanting to make cadmium colours; whether in the factory or in the private studio. If a ban is applied to us professional paint makers, you will probably find it impossible to get hold of cadmium pigments. The sustainability of cadmium on artist’s palette will depend upon continuing demand for the pigment in other industries too. Only a small percentage of cadmium pigments are used in the production of artists’ colours. The overwhelming majority is used in the plastics and packaging industry, where the pigment offers great stability when subjected to the high heat. That’s why it is used in the coloured glaze for certain cooking dishes! I feel certain other industries too will also be putting their best foot forward!
Why is CEPE so concerned about the ban?
We fear that if this somewhat underwhelming case is accepted, it makes no recognition of the generally high standards demanded by artists and paint makers and leads the way to further bans of even safer pigments in the future. CEPE members also fear that should European manufacturers lose the right to use Cadmium pigments, inferior products (without the generally high environmental standards expected within Europe) will be imported and remain in circulation.
What happens next?
The dossier handed to the European Chemical Agency (ECHA) has been accepted at this preliminary stage as being worthy of merit for consideration. ECHA has started a public consultation exercise lasting six months until 19th September of this year.
What are the possible outcomes?
The worst-case scenario is that Cadmiums could be banned within a couple of years, which in the view of many of us in the industry is both distressing and entirely unnecessary. If it did come into effect, the tap would be turned off the supply of pigment and we would see the remaining stock pass through the supply chain until it is gone.
Is there a petition to sign?
We are not organising a petition as mass numbers don’t help or inform ECHA greatly. What is helpful is an understanding on how artists handle residual paint from brushes and tubes and indeed how much paint is wasted. In addition anecdotal stories on the power and beauty of cadmium colours and the influence on the selling price of a painting would also be relevant.
How can individual artists have their say?
ECHA would like to hear from artists who use Cadmium pigments in acrylic, oil or water colour to gauge what level of risk this represents. They would like to build up a view of the experiences of users so they can constructively contribute to the debate in a genuinely informed way. For example they would like to discover how much Cadmium paint is left when old tubes and tins are discarded and how much paint is wasted when brushes and palettes are cleaned? A recent study in the USA estimated that less than 5% of all cadmium paints fails to reach the canvas. Do artists feel that is a fair estimate? ECHA are also likely to be interested to hear if Cadmium paints add value to paintings by their strength, vibrancy and longevity.
How can I have my say?
If you would like to comment on this proposed change, please visit www.echa.europa.eu/restrictions-under-consideration
What is the deadline for contributions and opinions?
No time like the present! Submissions in the next few weeks would be most effective.
When will we find out if cadmium has survived?
The consultation ends in September after which the ECHA will retire for several months’ discussion during which time the committee members cannot be lobbied or contacted.
Cadmium Red artists colour
I feel this is a positive development. The pollution cadmium causes is of particular concern to me, it’s important that everyone in society contributes to a cleaner environment and removing cadmium from the artist palette is one way to help.
As far as alternative, there are excellent alternatives in modern pigments.
Entirely disagree with Nali, these are some of the best paints in the artists colour range with a long tradition. A sense proportion in relation to any real or perceived risk is required. Cadmium colours are not the cheapest paints and I don’t know about anyone else but I waste as little of these or any artist paints as possible. Artists paints, in terms of amount produced, or for that matter wasted, and the potential to enter the water course is negligible compared to other sources of pollution. EU legislators should focus their efforts on restricting or controlling sources of significant environmental hazard and apply a bit of common sense in their thinking.
I agree with David and a comment someone else has just made, about silly bureaucrats, and getting out of the EU…. and bringing production of Winsor newton paints back to the UK. When Jackson sent the email informing us 0f the possible ban on cadmium paints, my heart sank, then I took action, immediate action.. I buy paints from kremer, in Germany so being bit if a bullish person ordered two kilos of three yellows, plus some red and orange cadmium paints. although it cost a lot of money my attitude was EU be damned!!!!, if I can get round these stupid restrictions I will do!! Typically, I found out the other day these idiots and nutcases working in Brussels are trying to ban vaccuum cleaners over 900 watts power as some sop to the environment!! they are so utterly beyond stupid, so, again, I ordered one from John lewis, a Dyson, of 1200 watts power!!…damn these idiots is my attitude. often there is a way around these restrictions if we act in time
Nali states that there are Plenty of alternative…but not what
Yes what would be as good to replace it. I am very careful with my paints use as little as I can and use every inch in the tube to the point of squeezing the residue out with pliers also cut the end as there is a lot stored there…. Then wrap up un cling film then a bag to seal it for next time. Don’t know artists who waste paint far too expensive
The Azo / Bismuth / Naphthol / Pyrolle / Quinacridone family has hundreds of pigments available that can easily replace cadmiums.
The article that the choice is limited is severly innacture.
I have to disagree with Nali as the colors mentioned do not replace the yellow cadmium though one could argue that pyrol orange is a wonderful transparent alternative to cad orange for instance.
The debate here should be about proportion: do cadmium artist paints represent such a threat that we must ban them? Perhaps we should encourage the European Commission to undertake a short study and look at the quantities of paint produced as well as the number of artists who use them. my guess is that the quantity is small but the artist community quite large.
After reading about the proposed ban I had a bit of a panic thinking that I might have been poisoning myself and the environment for years!
However after a hasty check of my paint tubes I discovered that all my ” cadmium” colours , ( some rather elderly) were in fact substitutions requiring no health labeling, and as some of these are twenty years old there must be some even better substitutes availabel now.
I can honestly say I have never noticed a problem with these regarding colour intensity, and although I do waste a bit of paint, I do try and dispose of everything care fully.
We really should be doing all we can to protect the enviroment, so I agree with Nali.
I have to agree with David Carter.
As a portrait painter of many years, the prospect of loosing a quarter of my pallet is daunting to say the least. Any painting artist will tell you the same thing. “The materials you use for a prolonged period of your life, become a part of your artistic language and thus become invaluable to you”.
Any painter using these pigments know the hazard connected with cadmium. So in our studios as well as how we dispose of waste containing these chemicals, we all are very careful how it is done.
It is mentioned somewhere in the material which I read on this subject that a survey states that only 5% of the cadmium colours do not reach the canvas. This figure is probably even putting it high, since cadmium colours are very costly, and thus handled with respect by most artists. It is clear however, that a slight procentage does go to waste (either left in the tube, or at the bottom of the rinsing well that most of us have.)
In Denmark the system of disposing of chemical waste of any kind is well organized and there are stations all over the country and in all communities, which deal with these substansies in the appropriate manor. We are all tought in the academies, that we have to take care not only of our selves, but also the environment when it come to this. And I know that this discussion are often touched in the forums of any artist communty.
Furthermore the quantities of colour containing cadmium are minimal when it comes to artistic industry. This as opposed the many other wase they are being used (in plastic and cook ware and so on).
There are absolutely no valid alternatives to these colors, neither in quality, punch, stenght, opagueness, lightfastness or handling, that can compete. Extensive studies of the lifespan of cadmium colours are many, and well documented, and are therefore the best reason why the ban of them should not be taken lightly, and without carefuly distinguishing between in what manor and quantity they are being used.
It will doubtless have many other consequenses than just the artistic ones. One thing is to be told that “now you are not allowed to use a hammer, but only your two middle fingers to drive in that nail in….”, but if our clients know (and they will) that maybe all the red and yellow passages in our works might fade away with time, how do you think that will influence the often very limited price on the paintings that are sold?
I can only say that there must be made seperate rules or legislation for the artist market which otherwise will suffer greatly.
Yours sincerely,
Lord Melbye
“There are absolutely no valid alternatives to these colors, neither in quality, punch, stenght, opagueness”
This statement is untrue.
Azo, Pyrolle and Quinacridone pigments have are cleaner and more saturated than cadmiums.
Bismuth and Pyrrole pigments have comparable opaqueness to cadmiums.
Cadmiums have flaws of their own, they suffer greatly from humidity.
EFFECTS OF AZO-DYE POISONING
There are a number of effects that the poisons will have on the body.
• If vapors are inhaled from the dyeing solution the body can be sufficiently poisoned
and will experience headaches and dizziness.
• If the dye has direct contact with the skin it can cause rashes.
• If the poison is consumed it can paralyze limbs, damage inner organs and cause cancer.
• Babies, children and unborn fetuses are at a higher risk than adults as they are
smaller and a smaller amount of poison will have a greater effect on them. A small
amount of the poison makes children sleepy, gives them headaches and makes it
difficult for them to concentrate. A larger amount will reduce the appetite and
weaken limbs, it can even kill a child.
• Unborn babies can be affected in the womb as they grow and can be born crippled,
blind or even dead. If poisons get into the mother’s body they will get into the
mothers milk and so the baby will continue to be poisoned after it is born.Poisoning of different precious metals on carbon catalysts (Pd/C, Ru/C and Rh/C) was observed in the hydrogenation of some pyrrole derivatives, under mild reaction conditions, in non-acidic medium. In all reductions, the catalysts were poisoned by the hydrogenated products (pyrrolidines) more strongly than by the reactants (pyrroles). A comparison concerning poison sensitivity of the catalytic metals was also made.Organic red pigments include Benzimidazolone Maroon (PR 175), Thioindigoid Red (PR 88 MRS, PR 181), and Quinacridone Reds (PR 122, PR 192, PR 207, PV 19)). They are listed as “nontoxic”, but they have NEVER ACTUALLY BEEN TESTED for teratogenic or embryotoxic properties. Avoid them.Bismuth toxicity like that of other heavy metals is attributable to its predilection to combine with sulhydril groups. Because sulhydril groups are components of many vital enzymes, the effect of bismuth is to denature and destroy the function of these enzymes. Bismuth is toxic to all living organisms who depend on these enzymes. There is little selective toxicity for a particular cell type and the degree of injury depends upon the concentration that develops in a particular organ. Renal toxicity in acute poisoning is evident early because bismuth is excreted mainly by this route, only 10 percent appearing in the feces after an oral dose. In chronic poisoning, all organs are affected. In the skin a lichen planus-like rash, in the mouth stomatitis with a blue black gum line. Inflammation and inclusion bodies in the liver, kidney, and bone are characteristic. In the brain, the lesions will cause encephalitis.
the answer is NO , absolutely NO pigments should be baned leave it to the integrity if the artist, By all means suck a brush with cadmium on it, eat flake white to your hearts content if that is your wish. Most are too sensible not to do this. Leave free will alone, let the individual choose, not some petty group of bureaucrats in some stuffy offices in Brussels……
Having retired from the plastics industry 7 years ago I was surprised to find that CADMIUM had not already been banned. The Polyester resin and gelcoat industry experienced a ban several years before my retirement. I believe a lot of time was then spent to establish viable alternatives.
With this in mind I would think it unlikely that a total ban can be avoided.
What are your opaque alternatives
What about all the ‘Cadmium Hue’ colours?
Many thanks
Lisa
Have made my comment on ECHA website as suggested. What an awful shame this would be.
If the level of use of cadmium by artists is so small, could there not be an argument for the ban to be partial? Could not artists and pigment/paint manufacturers be exempted? It is the careless discarding of cad batteries that poses the biggest risk, not tiny amounts of brush washing, or palette scraping.
AS a botanical artist, I find that the cadmiums offer the most brilliant hues for the work I do. I make many mixes of colours to achieve the perfect one whenever I have flowers to paint, so if Cadmiums are in that mix, I can sure of the highest vibrancy and colour-fastness. This is very important for botanical work, in order to make the closest match to nature’s own colour schemes. But I don’t use very much, and I certainly don’t wash anything more than my brushes; so no cadmium gets into our water system.
Blimey, I only started painting in 2011, and straight away they banned lead whites, and now the cads are getting the chop. I guess I’ll have to panic buy them now just in case, pity they’re so expensive. I bet they’ll ban brushes next.
As a complete newcomer to painting, I have to admit that I hadn’t thought about the environmental consequences of washing brushes in the sink. What is the best way to safely dispose of brush-cleanings and used cadmium paint tubes?
Hi Rosemary. You might find this post I wrote a few years ago helpful:
Less toxic brush cleaning method.
Most safety manuals are much more concerned with the toxicity of solvent fumes (in the studio) and solvents down the drain (for the environment) than the paint left in a used tube. I think most artists squeeze them out as fully as they can and then include them in the rubbish.
Thanks Julie, that’s helpful.
Also thanks Julie
Although do try and do all that already
Thanks Julie!
I do use disposable palettes that you can let the paint dry onto, then dispose of, but still worry that it will end up in a Landfill site, as for the brushes, the cloths that the paint is removed with could end up the same way! But it is a step in the right direction, so Thanks! Cute frogs by the way!
We need to paint in fluffy transparent colours
Thanks for an excellently clear explanation of the issues.
I highly value a range of cadmium based colours and would hate to lose them.
I’ve yet to encounter the artist who readily chucks paint away, cadmium based or not, but it is clear that we need to think carefully about disposal of the minuscule amounts that don’t stick to the canvas. Old containers and tubes are no great problem but I’m a bit puzzled about what to do with the water used to rinse brushes.
The minimal amount of exposure to the use of cadmium based paints should not lead to their being removed from use within the artist paint production process. It is an absolutely essential part of the power of the pigment to enable us as professional artists to produce truly dynamic works of Art and has been since 1820. By all means give stronger warning indications, or even increase the individual costs associated with buying those colours so as to reduce casual use, but please do not dictate removal of them.
Science and nature are intrinsically involved in the world of the artist, particularly a need to preserve a happy and healthy way of life, but our ability to carry on producing life-giving works of Art far outweighs any possible leaching of the minute amounts of chemical into any part of the food-chain. The psychology of the art world, particularly pictorial depiction has been proven to be life-enhancing, and Art therapy is direct proof of this. To reduce the impact of artworks through this exclusion would have a considerable effect. My argument is that I believe it is possible to quantify the health benefit of good, professional painting enhanced through the power of colour containing Cadmium, and it can scientifically be contrasted by the infinitesimal amount of the compound which potentially can leach into the food chain through farming practice.
Indeed there are far more significant compounds within water, specifically Hydrofluorosilicic acid, to name but one of those chemicals allowed in water which have a detrimental effect on the health of our population. I am sure that most artists will consume a far greater amount of Cadmium through sucking at paintbrushes or similar actions directly involving their intake of the item, I know of not a single case whereby an artist has been hospitalized or identified as ill due to the same.
Please consider this with great care and allow us to continue with our profession in a professional manner.
My first thought is why don’t we leave the EU? Yes, I have known about the use of Cadmium in artist pigments, not to mention the use of cobalt, white lead, not to mention other poisonous substances, used in ceramics.
As artists, I feel we all have a particular invested interest in the welfare of our environment, and so I would welcome any suggestions on how to clean brushes, and palettes etc safely without polluting the water table etc. the same could also be said about the use of solvents used in oil painting, we have to use them, as there is no alternative, Banning these substances is a drastic move, surely more education is what is needed.
Hi Anne. You might find this post I wrote a few years ago helpful:
Less toxic brush cleaning method
I disagree with the removal of cadmium. There is too much frenzy and obsession over the environment “religion” that we have all been battered with during the past few years. Most artists are careful and considerate over how they use their paints and, considering the cost of paint today, are hardly wasteful.
Cadmium today, then tomorrow it will be something else, and then it will be some other ingredient. Soon artists will be painting with fruit juice.
Paranoia rules, it seems. I’ve certainly sent in my thoughts to ECHA.
Why do not we take away the Euro, which is the true disaster in Europe?
What interests are under theses maneuvers?
These are my questions to ECHA with the request that European politicians should better spend our money and persecute the true big polluters. But these are powerful and rich, and then they pay under the table the politicians to find some false problems.
My five cents! (sorry, I didn’t have much time to do research, just for a quick note):
“I want clean air and water as much as everyone else, but I don’t believe that the fine arts community is responsible for the environmental contamination with cadmium.
The loss of proprieties in paints in a wide range of colours after the banning of cadmium in artists paints will hurt the fine arts community with negligible benefit to the environment.
Paints are expensive, and I assure you artists don’t like to see precious paints run down the pipes. Most artists use their tubes to the last drop.
I believe cadmium could be banned in colours destined for children and student grade paints though.”
Totally agree with what you say Monica!
In English i wrote an essay based on the coastal waters
contamination from Cadmium, Fish being a major source
of protein left those eating it vulnerable. It was shortened
to ”it hurts, it hurts” since it severely invaded he ske;tal
structure and caused immense pain. Cancer didn’t feature
then but reflecting back on those contaminated may
change one’s opinion.
Hi Philip
That’s very interesting. I think it is important to research further into the biggest sources of Cadmium contaminating coastal waters. I also think it is up to each individual to consider how we might be able to live more environmentally friendly lives in these very sobering times.
Many thanks
Lisa
This is how I see it,
Whilst I wholeheartedly appreciate the concerns for the level of pollutants impacting the global environment I am deeply concerned that the control of the use of Cadmium in artists paints could result in a loss of control in its production in non-member states and therefore result in a far greater impact. Carefully controlled and regulated production in a more open and democratic society seems a more sensible course. The introduction of methods and practices in the manufacture of colours using cadmium and of their disposal will ensure Cadmium pollution is properly controlled. The additional benefit is that these products will also be available to non-member states and in so doing also lower pollution in those countries. Water does not understand borders so this has got to be good for EU countries that neighbour uncontrolled states.
To comment on my own use of Cadmium pigments, any unused oil paint is kept back and mixed with other paints for use as a ground on canvas and boards ready for new works at a later date. Nothing is wasted. Any paint remaining is scraped from the pallet and wiped on a disposable cloth and then binned. Clearly a very small amount of cadmium paint must get into the water course by virtue of cleaning the brushes. If this can be done such that it can be isolated – i.e. Suggest best practice just as we do for domestic engine oil and other liquid pollutants then I am sure the vast majority would adopt those practices enthusiastically.
Cadmium is dangerous, but so are the chemicals in batteries which far exceed the cd in artist paints. However, a compromise to keep these essential (to me) pigments is to contain the problem in our studios and then return/recycle the spent tubes – much like batteries are recycled.
I would suggest that artists are generally a very environmentally aware grouping and that we would be prepared to help contain cd from “escaping” into the environment.
I’ve added these comments to the ECHA site.
I have sent a comment to the EU about this and asked for statistics on how or if they have proof artists are seriously affecting the environment.Surely the amount must be infinitesimal ? So much knee jerk banning on tiny things. We have become so much under the thumb of the EU it’s disturbing. I’m not convinced about banning this at all thanks for sending me the article if you hadn’t would have been unaware…makes you wonder what else they are wanting to ban without discussing it in the UK to the public.
The possible banning of the use of cadmium in Artists paints, could create more harm than good, If people start to panic buy and stockpile paints containing these pigments, and consequently don’t use them,( yes, paint can go off with time! ) they end up being thrown away, and end up in landfill, we could end up with more problems than when we started.
I use paints containing cadmium, because I’m not convinced that other pigments have the same ‘kick’. Compare a cadmium yellow to an Azo yellow and you’ll see the difference.
Cadmium is actually found in the Earth’s crust, unfortunately the problem arises when it’s processed, perhaps one day this can be looked at and made safer?
In the meantime, we should put things into perspective, lots of things we use in everyday life can be toxic in one form or another, if we are careful with our usesage of them, and dispose of waste with care, there really should not be a problem.
I think I have the solution………..
Lets all paint in miniature!
I am no artist but am married to one, however I am Environmental Auditor.
I must strongly disagree with Nali. The alternative is to remove sludge from the food chain process and find alternative uses for it. There are lager causes of cadmium pollution and great environmental consequences than that of the artists. After all Nali would change views on a cleaner environment if they knew the other side effects of sewage sludge spreading causes Green House gas emissions in the form of methane which is in fact more dangerous to the environment than CO2.
I am concerned that every website that I have read concerning this discussion has missed the point entirely and have taken to heart that artists are being blamed for the cadmium contamination. This is not to say that there are a lot of uneducated MEP’s that are getting paid far too much to make a decision on how they will affect the populations they represent. After all sewage treatment plants receive all types of hazardous waste from hospitals, nursing homes, industry and households even funeral directors discharge waste body fluids down the sewer after embalming the deceased .
It is true that Cadmium is harmful to the environment and the control of such substances is needed but at what level would such controls be enforced. But on the other hand cadmium is a naturally occurring substance, it is even found in the air we breathe. Studies in the US have shown that cadmium in car exhaust fumes are causing unacceptably high concentrations found in soil near roads.
It is all too easy for MEP to ban a substance with a swipe of a pen and not look at who or what is affected or will be lost because of a substance that can be harmful to the environment is within the spectrum of a small groups usage. But it must be looked at to see how much is used on average per artist and how often. Compared for example to the 700 million batteries (20,000 tonnes) sold in the UK that the average house hold use within a year. Of which 2% are recycled the rest go to land fill. Or even the 290 million cars within the EU. Or have we not learned anything from the Minamata Incident in Japan.
So call this an assumption out of the UK’s population of 64 million approximately 30,000 are artists in one form or another. I can only guess that approximately 50% would use Cadmium based paints as not all artists use paint. Discharging diluted solutions into the sewer system would after all be miniscule in comparison to phosphate fertilizers which have a concentration of up to 200 ppm cadmium which are spread on fields with no control.
Cadmium in soils is derived from both natural and anthropogenic sources. Anthropogenic input of cadmium to soils occurs by aerial deposition and sewage sludge, manure and phosphate fertiliser application. Cadmium The use of cadmium-containing fertilisers and sewage sludge is most often quoted as the primary reason for the increase in the cadmium content of soils over the last 20 to 30 years in Europe.
Cadmium is here to stay. SO it is about time the MEP’s who get paid a heck of a lot for really not a lot had better start doing their homework and earning their salaries. Look at the biggest pollutant culprits for cadmium usage such as the fertilizer and petroleum industries. Instead of using sewage sludge to fertilise fields, alternative options can be used with a little thought and investment.
Options include using anaerobic digestion of the sludge to produce biogas and biofuel, this means anaerobically digested bio-solids have a far lower, and a more controlled level of methane released to the atmosphere than that of an uncontrolled release of methane from untreated or land applied sludge. If methane is captured rather than allowed to outgas, it can be used for fuel, closing the carbon cycle. After the bio sludge is spent and dried it can then go to land fill.
So after all it doesn’t take the brains of an MEP to work out that if sewage sludge is banned from fields and put to an alternative use such as biogas production; we can slow down the global warming process, eradicate the anthropogenic addition of cadmium in to food crops, ease the global energy burden and allow minority groups such as artists to continue to produce great works, after all its subjects like art and music that separate us from the APES.
I would rather see my tax money spent on this type of project than wasted on an MEP’s expenses budget.
Thank you for adding your voice to the discussion. It is a helpful viewpoint!
I love the brilliance of the cadmium colors and would miss them. I also am very careful about wasting paints and don’t think the little left on a brush when we rinse it off should be a problem.
I clean my oil brushes by wiping excess off on tissue squeezing out as much paint as possible (as I’m sure most artists do any way) then I clean them in oil on the pallet using cheap sun flower or rape seed oil – to dilute and clean the pigment out the brush and mopping it up and squeezing the oil out the brush after which I then clean in solvents – which becomes less dirty. I pour out the solvent into another jar when it becomes too cloudy and wipe out the sludge from bottom of the jar. Just how to dispose of this can be a problem but at least it is not going down the sink. But it could be spread onto an old primed board or canvas and left to dry which could eventually turn into an interesting absract painting after a year. But if all the paint rags, tissue and paper are buried well this should not be an issue. If the government could agree on a disposal service where all this waste paint could be disposed of – say under house foundations prior to concreting over or a special place other than land fill sites then the chance of it polluting water ways or the environment could be minimised.
I believe that Acrylics and Water soluble oils pollute more than oils do and if artist’s washed their brushes out on a plate after dipping the brush gently into water then mopped up the excess pigments with rag or tissue, then this would minimise the proposal by the EU to ban these pigments.
I became aware of the need to minimise the washing of pigments down the sink a few years ago and have been washing it in to tissue rather than down the sink ever since.
I also don’t think it always neccesary to use cadmium colours in acrylics as I have paintings over 20 years old that have used alternatives and are still bright – because the binder is a highly protective coat of plastic which does a good job and like egg tempera if several coats are applied should last longer than a thin film of oil. But water colour paintings need a reliable light fast permanent colour and cadmiums are vital.
Perhaps if we can prove to the EU beaurocrats that cadmiums can be used responsibly and disposed of safely then they might decide to reconsider this.
Douglas Young
I used Flake White and Chrome Yellows for years without any ill effects. I always obeyed the painters rule never to eat, drink or smoke and used gloves when painting. The loss of lead whites was a blow to me, though I still have some stock and some dry pigment. My painting improved when I gave up Titanium White. It has a character that no other white can compare to. I always considered Cadmiums as a little more toxic pigments but really when ground in oil they are absolutely safe. The cases of poisoning are rare except where there is carelessness. Van Gogh had a taste for Chrome Yellow possibly contibuting to his mental illness. Artists are exposed to toxins every day and come to no real harm if they will follow safety rules. Allergy is another thing. I knew an artist who was in hospital for 9 months , a mystery to the doctors, and very ill. At last when discharged she went home to her studio. She opened a bottle of genuine turpentine and knew the source of her mystery illness. One answer to our problems could lie in this direction. All spent batteries by Law have to be deposited in boxes for disposal at shops who sell batteries. Why not the same system at art shops with spent tubes and safe disposal at council tips with the same and paint rags etc. There would be a small charge for more toxic materials, I am sure, such as dry pigments etc. Art clubs could organise some of this or resell some materials to members and replenish their funds and thus fulfil any safety Laws. With watercolour, which could be a problem which the EEC exagerate, we could clean our brushes in disposable plastic cups from say “Poundland” and leave them to dry and put the paper towels we clean our brushes and palettes with in the cups and safely dispose them in like manner. We must try and show the authorities that we mean to keep our best permanent colours like the cadmiums etc. and keep them safe from harming the enviroment. The future conservation of our paintings depend on this. I hope this is helpful to the discussion.
A G Randalls – I’m with you all the way. The ridiculous English Heritage hoops we are asked to jump through in order to buy/use lead white.
well said, in a few words it can all be put down to maturity and plain common sense. why are lead acid batteries not banned when they contain sulphuric acid? or bleach that will poison us far faster than cadmium paints?? i could go on.
I have not read all the entries above but is there anyone who, like myself, loathes cadmiums? Problem is, a good vermilion is impossible to buy, now. A brilliant genuine, wet-process vermilion will out perform any cadmium. Chrome yellows are available only in dry pigment, now but are wonderful and well worth the fuss. There are excellent, bright, genuine Naples yellow-light oils for sale from several makers; none of that nasty acid-green undercolour that makes cadmium yellows unusable for me. I don’t see anyone lobbying for derestriction of these colours with served Turner so well.
I love cadmiums. Recently Winsor & Newton stopped putting cadmiums in their Griffin Alkyd line of paint. The colors are not the same, and not as rich. They claim pressure from the restrictions as their reason.
Rather then ban cadmiums, why not just have more careful rules of use. Most painters buy tubes of paint at stores and online. Would it make sense if everyone who sold the paint was required to accept the rags, turp, paper towels, and empty tubes with cadmium waste on them, and then it was properly treated? A slight treatment fee per tube could cover the cost. If you didn’t want to pay the fee, you would have the choice of using another color.
I know most painters clean as much of the paint off of the brush as they can before using soap and water. The the only cadmium in the water supply would be the tiny bit left in the brush, which if done right, would hardly amount to anything at all.
There are a great many undesirable chemicals in the modern environment – not least estrogen in the water supply in particular.
Heavy metals are clearly harmful to health, and should be controlled. However, lead is still permitted in paints used on traditional buildings and is exempt from the general ban in paint products. Likewise, cadmium is a traditional component in artists colours, and in view of the very small amounts used, and the even smaller amounts that may be cleaned from brushes, there should therefore be an exemption for cadmium used in artists’ colours.
my solution as soon as Jacksons sent the warning a few months ago was to invest in two kilograms each, of , I think it was four different cadmium yellows plus one kilo of cadmium red and one kilo of orange. this allows me to at least have enough pigments for many years, as an insurance against a ban . if there is no ban well at least I have the pigments…..the whole idea of banning these pigments is ridiculous to be polite about it…
I paint in oils, I prefer Harding or Old Holland because the colours are truer than cheaper oils and are closest to those used by the old masters. I work long hours to get the result I’m striving for. Like most painters I work in an airy space and have never been tempted to put the paint anywhere near my mouth strangely enough. I am however getting sick to my stomach of different legislative groups dictating what type of paint I can use. I’m a grown up and am intelligent enough to make my own mind up about this without the nanny state breathing down my neck. I won’t tell them how to run their business and I’d really appreciate them keeping their noses out of mine. #bloodycheek
exactly, you have stated the case perfectly….well said
As an artist, I use non heavy metal acrylic, on the advice of my oncologist after treatment for prostrate cancer.
I would ask Derek, if your oncologist knows what he is talking about?? just like I question all the medical profession, and make up my own mind after doing my research….he may be right but equally he may be misinformed and only giving you an opinion.,,,,,,,you decide..
I don’t put any paint waste down the sink at all. For oil painting, I clean by brushes with oil, and my oily rags and such are disposed of at a community collection center. I collect the rinse water from water-based paints in a 5 gallon bucket. The pigment is separated from the water with aluminum sulfate and hydrated lime, and filtered with a coffee filter. The filter is allowed to dry before disposal, and the resulting pH neutral clean water can be reused.
Frankly, I feel that their claims are baseless. Oil painters don’t clean their brushes at the sink at all. Acrylic painters shouldn’t either, because the acrylic polymer is bad for plumbing, regardless of toxic pigments. I think watercolorists would be most likely to rinse brushes at the sink, but they use such small amounts of pigment compared to other media. Plus, watercolorists generally prefer pigments that are more transparent than cadmiums anyways. I think there’s probably something else going on here, such as illegal dumping.
T here are no regulations on the use of cadmium in the “aircraft industry”. Also there is much cadmium in the artificial fertilisers used today. This ban is only a way for politcians to find someone to blame the problem upon. To be able to use these phosphorous fertilisers (that naturally contains cadmium) the agriculturar industry instead try to claim that the cadmium is from the sluage fertilisers. Regarding the sluage fertilisers – the cadmiums comes from airports, industry, tobbacco, and leakage from the use of artificial fertilisers. And those industries want to put the blame on someone else.
Everyone who don’t like cadmium: you should not eat vegetabilies from crops that are grown with artificial fertilisers and eat meat from animal fed on such crop. This is almost ALL food. You should only eat food that are marked as Ecologically sustainable. You should NEVER EVER fly in an aeroplane. And you should not by electrical products like mobile phones or computers.
The calculations of cadmium levels from artists paints made by the former Swedish Government seams to be made on the assumption that all tubes that has the name “cadmium” on the lable actually all contain cadmium. It assumes that almoust everything in the tubes goes down the drain – and not much on the canvases. And that all cadmium colours sold in our Capital Stockholm is actually used in Stockholm (when much are sold on mailorder).
There will be a decition made about the ban next december. An eventually ban will then propobbably be enforced a year later arround 1/1-2017
As I commented on ather treads. The former Swedish Government proposed this ban on cadmium paint at the same time they removed taxes on artifilcial phosphorous fertilisers. Then (an other organisations) they went out in media about ALL cadmium coming from artists use of cadmium colours. So it is only a scapegoat project.
Now we have a new government, and suddenly there is on the News that there is very very much cadmium from airports that contaminate the sludge (since the airicraft industry internationally are unrestricted about almoust everytning).
But hey….
The latest UN panel just presented the sitauation abut the Green House Effect. If we do not nearly TOTALY cut our emissions of CO2 and Methan gas emission by 2020 – our children/grandchldren will have to live on a planet with such a hostile environment that there will be severe starvation all around the globein 50-100 years.
The latest UN panel just presented the sitauation abut the Green House Effect. If we do not nearly TOTALY cut our emissions of CO2 and Methan gas emission by 2020 – our children/grandchldren will have to live on a planet with such a hostile environment that there will be severe starvation all around the globein ……….ABSOLUTE UTTER NONSENSE, SHEER LUNACY, STUPIDITY INCARNATE. GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT A MAN MADE PHENOMENA IF IT EXISTS AT ALL. NOR ARE CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSION OR METHANE EMISSION A CAUSE FOR CONCERN, IN FACT DOUBLE THE PRESENT LEVELS WOULD CREATE A MUCH MORE EQUATABLE PLANET!!! CONCERN OH, AND AL GORE REPORTEDLY HAS A TEN MILLION DOLLAR HOUSE ON THE BEACH LAST i HEARD!! STUPID HYPOCRITES. ALTHOUGH THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CADMIUM DEBATE SEEING AS IT WAS MENTIONED I FELT I HAD TO RESPOND..VEHEMENTLY
Yes, you are right about this having nothing to do with the EU-ban on Cadmiums. But I only wanted to be satirically that it is a lesser issue, and that the EU should spend more time and money worrying about bigger issues. Like Cadmium in fertilisers and the Industry. And the largest of them all: the global up-warming.
And this discussion should hence belong to an other forum somewhere else.
The Monitor is welcome to delete my last words in the earlier comment, and all of this reply.
But…
Nobody agrees with you. A few promilles of all researchers and scientists do – and of them the majority are working for the oil industry. Those 99+% that agree about global up-warming, states in the latest report that they are 95% sure that mainly ALL of this is due to CO2 and other green house gases – directly or indirectly – emitted by us humans living today (and not in any major way from other natural sources). They are only 5% unsure if there also may be other natural sources to the global up-warming. They are 100% sure that there is a global up-warming taking place.
And even some of the “big fishes” in the American oil industry now accepts this knowledge and stops investing in their former industries and goes “green”. It will cost us some to “go green”, but not that much – since it will create many jobs. And in the long run we vill benefit from it: economically – directly and indirectly. (OECD)
If you wam’t to argue why almost all scientists are wrong in their research and analyses – you better come with a scientific theory that shows why they are wrong , and evidence to back it up.
you are totally wrong MANY agree with me or rather I agree with many, there is absolutely NO man made global warming, maybe one degree if we are being generous.. please study the subject. it is entirely an agenda of political and financial control, mass programming, and other things, a foil to hide other issues the Cabal want kept hidden that are taking place. This cadmium issue certainly has a bearing on it in that once again, we have a few in power dictating to the masses what to do and not to do. it can be described either as a form of fascism or socialism ….once more behind it I suspect part of an overall agenda..I have many links to back up what I am saying..
Nick you are correct in the fact that that global warming is a natural occurrence in nature where the planet gives off its own emission through nature such as rotting vegetation etc .
Hence the word natural.
Even Cadmium is a natural element and is found in the air we breathe.
The point you fail to see is:
When un-natural emissions of CO2 and CH4 (methane) are added to this equation i.e. man made, it will exacerbate and add more to the emission levels than what would occur naturally. The green house effect is natural, but the Anthropogenic Green House effect is not. It is the anthropogenic green house effect and the man made emissions that are causing the global warming shift to increase and speed up.
The last CO2 atmosphere count was over 680 parts of CO2 per million.
The last ice age core sample of CO2 in the atmosphere was considerably below this. Yet every peak in CO2 was prior to an extreme global cooling event (ice age).
Prior to this, if temperatures increase we run the risk of crop migration, disease spread to areas that have not suffered certain regions. How does a Malaria, Typhoid, Plague or even an Ebola outbreak sound in Kent? Don’t forget African killer bees have already been found in the UK.
When was the last time you saw 4 feet of snow in the south of England? I am middle aged and remember having snow on my 10th birthday at the end of April in Surrey.
So unless you haven’t noticed the general temperature of the globe is increasing, and to follow a train of thought because someone says so as it suits their agenda and profits in their pockets doesn’t make it correct. Look out the window and decide for yourself.
Effectively by cutting our emissions can only be a good thing. It saves wasting very few resources this planet has left. Oil, Gas and Coal doesn’t replenish itself overnight so if political groups are campaigning for the reduction in consumption what do they gain out of it, it most definitely won’t be financial gain or is it just out of the concept that it will benefit the human race in the long term.
At least I can look my grandchildren in the face and say I tried my best but unfortunately greed and ignorance is a concept that human nature will carry with it and will never change.
An Old Native American Indian Proverb:
We Do Not Inherit the Earth from Our Ancestors; We Borrow It from Our Children.
How very true.
I am sixty and have vivid memories of snow, Boy have I sen snow!! back in the sixties and seventies.. anyhow, I take the position the so called global warming scenario is one heck of a scam by hypocrites and liars such as Al Gore, and others like him. I think we can leave the topic now. I say, man has very little impact if any at all on global temperatures and will leave it at that. That is my position so, back to the oil painting….might make a bit of cadmium Yellow LOL Thank you kindly for your response , I wish you the very best, maybe you would be interested in my facebook group where these and other issues are talked about a lot? if so, let me know and I can pass the link..
The “Restriction report” asserts that alternatives are available. Clearly the author did not have a clue what they were talking about, but the argument is very persuasive.
I’ve just reviewed the “Opinion” on the parallel restriction “Cadmium and its compounds (in paints)” — not to be confused with the restriction consultation “Cadmium and its compounds (in artists’ paints)”! — and the draft opinion is to agree to the restriction. I read the “Restriction report” for that consultation and more than 30 comments were clearly submitted to the wrong dossier/consultation – they should have been submitted to the “artists’ paints” consultation but they were submitted to the “paints” consultation by mistake. The author of the restriction report noticed the error in each case and chose to disregard the comment. There appears to have been no attempt to move those comments to the correct consultation.
Ignorant bureaucrats.
On balance I tend to support staying in the EU, but this experience alone makes me want to get out.
Why can’t we bring W&N paint production back to the UK (it was moved to France), get out of the EU and carry on with our beloved cadmiums…?
Until then, stock up!
(As I wrote in another forum) Unfortunately the former Swedish Government – who took the initiative to this ban – based the “artistic viewpoint” on information by someone who did not know anything about painting. A Professor/teacher (name not stated) in Painting at one of our Art Colleges advised on the subject that there is no real differense between the cadmiums and other yellow-reds. “Its a small difference in hue, but that can be solved by using complementaries”; “The cadmiums are a bit mor opaque, but one only paints thicker or paints over it several times”, “It does not matter to artist today if their paintings are permanent or not”…
But what do you expect when they don’t paint at Art College here anymore. The Professor in Painting at our Royal College of art even stated in an TV-debate a few years ago, that figurative and realistic painting is “decadent” and should not be allowd to be taught at any Art College in Sweden.
But this is the “knowledge” on the subject that the decision will be based upon.
A decision will not be made until next december. And then an eventual ban will probably not be enforced until around january 2016 – so we will have some time to “stock up” after we know – hopefully the pigment and paint manufacturers not raising prices during this period. I also assume it will be possible to buy cadmium paint in the USA after that – and with an upcoming free-trade agreement EU-USA it will be hard to prevent private import (and hopefully the good quality European manufacturers will continue to make cadmiums for the non-EU market, since the ban doesn’t seem to regulate such production).
[…] Cadmium Crisis email newsletter and blog post written by Michael Craine of Spectrum Paints has created quite a stir and thousands of emails, […]
[…] on from our report on the EU’s threat to ban Cadmium pigments and therefore severely reduce the palette of professional quality colours available to […]
[…] Cadmium in Crisis […]
[…] Cadmium in Crisis […]
I am disappointed that I have contributed
to animal suffering to test cadium
ingestion when that is the only time that it
would affect someone. The small amount
in paint is not toxic. Poor animals, how
much suffering did they go through? Now
paint companies are using this cadmium
toxicity info to create cadmium free paint
and charging even more for not adding the
expensive ingredient to the paint. So
typical of companies greed!