The group's main concern, Feldman says, is the use of pentachlorophenol, creosote and arsenic in the treatment of poles, the poles' subsequent exposure to their surroundings during a 40-year lifetime, and the environmental complications associated with the disposal of the poles. The use of pentachlorophenol and arsenic has been all but banned for other uses, so why is it still being used to treat wood, the report asks. According to the report, workers at wood-treatment plants and those who live near pesticide disposal sites face increased risks of cancer and other adverse health effects. But Albert Heier, an Environmental Protection Agency spokesman, said the agency studied the issue in the mid-1980s and concluded pesticide use to preserve wood posed no unreasonable risks to the public. Heier said, It's acceptable in terms of benefits.
Wood preservatives protect wood from decay, insects and fungus.
According to the EPA, wood preservatives account for one-third of pesticide use. The advocacy group's report calls upon electric utilities to use steel or concrete instead. Steel poles pose environmental problems as well, Heier said. He cited the pollution associated with the manufacture of steel poles. Heier said that benefit would be negated by the costs associated with the utilities' need to re- paint the poles every few years.