NGO comments on Transparency measures for nanomaterials on the market: Working conclusions

The document argues that the European Commission's conclusions on nanomaterial transparency are biased toward industry interests and ignore the need for an EU nanoregister. It highlights significant data gaps in current REACH registrations, the potential health and environmental risks of nanomaterials like nanosilver, and the benefits of traceability for workers and consumers. The authors contend that a mandatory register would improve risk management and transparency without significantly harming competitiveness or innovation.

• The authors argue that the European Commission's working conclusions on nanomaterial transparency are biased toward industry economic interests and disregard the public's right to know and environmental health and safety concerns.
• There is a significant lack of data on nanomaterials under the REACH system because the one tonne per annum threshold excludes many substances; only 9 nanomaterials are registered as such under REACH.
• Data from the French notification system contradicts the Commission's estimates, showing between 243 and 422 different substances notified as nanomaterials in France, compared to the Commission's estimate of around 20 concrete nanomaterial substances in the EU market.
• Nanosilver is identified as a high-risk nanomaterial that can bioaccumulate in soil, impact aquatic organisms, and penetrate human biological barriers to reach organs including the brain, heart, and liver.
• The authors assert that an EU nanoregister would improve occupational safety by increasing the flow of information down the supply chain, allowing workers to implement precautionary measures against exposure.
• The document claims that industry's estimates of the regulatory burden of a nanoregister are over-inflated and not substantiated by reliable figures.

APA

Center for International Environmental Law (n.d.). NGO comments on Transparency measures for nanomaterials on the market: Working conclusions. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NGO-comments-on-Transparency-measures-for-nanomaterials-on-the-market.pdf

Chicago

Center for International Environmental Law. NGO comments on Transparency measures for nanomaterials on the market: Working conclusions. n.d. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NGO-comments-on-Transparency-measures-for-nanomaterials-on-the-market.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=NGO comments on Transparency measures for nanomaterials on the market: Working conclusions |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NGO-comments-on-Transparency-measures-for-nanomaterials-on-the-market.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{centerforinternationalenvironmentallawndngo, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{NGO comments on Transparency measures for nanomaterials on the market: Working conclusions}}, publisher = {Center for International Environmental Law}, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NGO-comments-on-Transparency-measures-for-nanomaterials-on-the-market.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }