Chrysotile Asbestos: Understanding Its Uses, Risks and Future

Chrysotile asbestos is a term that still evokes fear, and rightfully so! Commonly known as “white asbestos,” this type of asbestos has been the most common form utilised across the globe. Currently it is still mined in parts of the world such as China, India and Russia. Chrysotile has been used in various industrial and consumer applications for more than a century due to its impressive tensile strength, ability to withstand heat, the fibre flexibility allowing it to be spun/ woven and excellent insulating properties. Nevertheless, the widespread use of this product has been overshadowed by mounting worries about potential health hazards and environmental issues. As a result, numerous countries, the EU, Australia, US, including the UK, have implemented stringent regulations and even outright bans.

Chrysotile asbestos has a fascinating history, stretching back to ancient civilisations that valued its fire-resistant properties. The commercial exploitation gained momentum during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, coinciding with the rise of industrialisation. The material’s exceptional qualities and ability to withstand heat/fire have made it highly sought after in various industries such as construction, shipbuilding, and automotive manufacturing. Chrysotile experienced a significant increase in global production and distribution, establishing itself as the most widely used types of asbestos worldwide. Despite its extensive usage, concerns regarding its potential health hazards started to emerge as early as the beginning of the 1900s. These concerns were largely ignored until they gained further traction in the 1960’s.

Chrysotile is a fibrous silicate mineral. It is commonly known as “white asbestos,”. Its characteristic fibrous structure is a result of its chemical composition, specifically magnesium silicate hydroxide. Chrysotile has gained popularity in various industrial applications due to its exceptional flexibility and resistance to heat. Perfect for products such as brake linings, roofing materials, and insulation. However, unlike other forms of asbestos, chrysotile fibres have a serpentine structure, which means they are curly instead of straight. This unique structure allows for a wider variety of applications and uses when compared to other Amphibole (long and straight) asbestos fibre types.

Chrysotile has been widely utilised in various industries, including automotive, where it can be found in brake pads and clutch linings. The exceptional durability of this material proved to be indispensable in these specific uses.

Chrysotile was frequently used in construction for cement products, woven textiles, gaskets and insulation materials. Its integration into building materials was motivated by its exceptional fire resistance, chemical resistance, and durability, making it a favoured option for improving the strength and safety of structures.

In addition to its industrial applications, chrysotile was also present in a range of consumer products, such as certain textiles, paper, and even household items like ironing board covers. Nevertheless, its prevalence in consumer goods greatly diminished as a result of health concerns until the final UK ban in Late 1999.

When chrysotile fibres are inhaled, they have the potential to become trapped in the lungs and other tissues. This can result in inflammation, scarring, and ultimately, the development of severe health conditions. Chrysotile’s fibrous nature poses a challenge for the body to eliminate, leading to potential long-term harm. Although there are differing opinions on the relative harm of chrysotile compared to other forms of asbestos, studies have demonstrated its potential to cause serious respiratory conditions and death.

Several serious diseases are strongly associated with exposure to chrysotile asbestos. One of the most prevalent diseases resulting from asbestos exposure is asbestosis, which is characterised by scarring of the lung tissue. In addition, exposure to chrysotile has been identified as a proven cause of lung cancer and mesothelioma, a less common but aggressive form of cancer affecting the lining of the lungs. These conditions frequently have extended latency periods, implying that symptoms may not manifest until many years after exposure.

There have been many case studies that emphasise the severe consequences of being exposed to chrysotile, especially for workers in industries that extensively used the material. These studies have played a crucial role in influencing public policy and advocating for more stringent regulations.

Chrysotile asbestos has faced significant restrictions or bans in numerous countries worldwide, including the UK (banned in 1999), Europe, and certain regions of Asia. Since 2005, the European Union has implemented a complete ban on all types of asbestos, including chrysotile. Chrysotile is listed as a hazardous material in the Rotterdam Convention, an international treaty. As a result, informed consent is necessary before trading it.

Nevertheless, certain countries, especially those in the developing world, continue to permit the unregulated use of chrysotile. There is a strong global movement to ban the use of asbestos, led by organisations such as the World Health Organisation (WHO). They are actively working towards eliminating asbestos-related diseases by advocating for a complete cessation of asbestos use as widely as possible.

Regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) have greatly reduced the use of chrysotile asbestos in the United States. On March 18, 2024, the administration of Joe Biden implemented a regulation to ban the use of chrysotile asbestos. Advocates view the new ban as a significant milestone and a positive step forward, despite the fact that it does not explicitly prohibit all forms of asbestos and allows for a 12-year phase-out period.

Industries in countries that continue to utilise chrysotile should adhere to stringent safety protocols. These measures encompass the use of protective equipment, regular monitoring of air quality, and comprehensive training on the hazards associated with asbestos exposure. These measures have been implemented to ensure the safety and well-being of workers, while also minimising the risk of occupational diseases. The reality in many of these countries however (where health and safety legislation is seen as more of a hinderance) is often very different for workers on the shop floor where asbestos product manufacturing takes place.

Historically, chrysotile asbestos was widely used in various construction materials, including roofing, insulation, flooring, and cement products. Today, numerous countries have implemented bans or strict regulations on its use, and modern construction materials have predominantly replaced asbestos with safer alternatives. Nevertheless, older buildings continue to have ACM’s containing chrysotile, which can be hazardous when undergoing renovations or demolitions. Studies have demonstrated that when asbestos-containing materials are not handled properly, it can result in significant health risks for both workers, and occupants or family members. For occupants of a building or family members we call this ‘secondary exposure’.

Several alternative materials have been developed in response to the health risks associated with chrysotile. These fibres, such as aramid and ceramic fibres, provide comparable properties without the same potential health hazards.

Although there are safer alternatives to chrysotile, they often have drawbacks in terms of cost, performance, or environmental impact. For instance, certain alternatives may not provide an equivalent level of fire resistance or could be more costly to manufacture.

Supporters of chrysotile claim that it can be utilised without risks when proper precautions are taken, especially in developing nations where other materials may be scarce or expensive. They argue that modern safety protocols are adequate in addressing health risks. The argument is generally put forward by asbestos product manufacturers and/ or their paid lobbyists.

However, almost all health experts and advocacy groups strongly advocate for a total prohibition on chrysotile due to the undeniable connection between asbestos exposure and severe health conditions. They strongly assert that no level of exposure can be considered safe and advocate for the universal adoption of safer alternatives.

There are numerous case studies that demonstrate the extensive utilisation of chrysotile in a variety of industries. As an illustration, in the automotive sector, the transition from brake linings that contained asbestos to safer alternatives showcases the industry’s response to increasing health worries. Prolonged exposure to asbestos has had a devastating impact on entire communities in certain industrial towns, leading to a high prevalence of asbestos-related diseases.

Firsthand accounts from people impacted by chrysotile shed light on the lasting health consequences and emphasise the significance of implementing preventative measures. These case studies provide valuable lessons and emphasise the importance of strong regulations.

Opinions on the safety of chrysotile vary little among experts. While there are differing opinions on the matter, some argue that implementing strict regulation and controlled use can help mitigate risks. These people are in the minority and often connected with asbestos mining and manufacturing groups, while majority believe that the best approach to ensure public health is to enforce a complete ban.

There are significant legal and ethical concerns surrounding the use of chrysotile asbestos. Numerous nations have encountered lawsuits from individuals who have been exposed to asbestos, resulting in significant compensation claims and protracted legal disputes. Morally, the ongoing utilisation of chrysotile, especially in nations with less stringent regulations, is a subject of debate. Corporations engaged in the production and distribution of chrysotile have faced criticism for downplaying the potential risks and actively lobbying against the implementation of more stringent regulations.

Chrysotile continues to be extensively used in many developing countries, primarily because of its low cost and the absence of strict regulations. There are considerable health risks involved, especially for workers in industries such as construction and manufacturing. People in these regions who are particularly at risk may not be fully aware of the dangers, which unfortunately results in avoidable asbestos-related illnesses and death. It is of utmost importance to prioritise efforts in educating and safeguarding workers in these regions, as the consequences of chrysotile on their health can be absolutely devastating.

It is expected that the push for more stringent regulation of chrysotile asbestos will persist, as people become more aware of its detrimental health effects and the existence of safer alternatives. There is a possibility that future regulations will impose stricter controls or even complete bans in additional countries.

Continued investigation into alternative materials is essential in order to eliminate the use of chrysotile. Advancements in nanotechnology and material science have the potential to produce alternative materials that provide the advantages of asbestos while minimising the related health hazards.