Examining the Hidden Dangers of Asbestos Exposure in Steel Manufacturing and Its Lasting Impact on Worker Health

Asbestos, a naturally occurring mineral known for its heat resistance, tensile strength, and insulating properties, was extensively used in U.S. industry during the majority of the 20th century. Its fibrous structure made it an attractive material for a wide array of applications, including in building materials, fireproofing products, automotive parts and many household items, among others.

Historically, the steel industry was not among the primary users of asbestos. Yet, certain applications existed within the manufacturing processes that caused steelworkers, maintenance personnel, equipment operators and other plant workers to come into contact with asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) while on the job. This exposure also meant that many workers brought fibers home to their families.

Understanding the historical context of asbestos use within the steel industry is important for determining the potential impact on employees and their families and ensuring that these individuals are adequately protected moving forward. This article will take a look at the health impact of asbestos exposure and how regulatory measures in the steel industry have proven to be critical for warding off asbestos-related illnesses.

Inhaling or ingesting asbestos fibers can lead to numerous chronic, and often life-threatening, health complications, including asthma, emphysema, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asbestosis, lung cancer, and mesothelioma, to name a few. Once fibers are inhaled or ingested, they tend to adhere permanently to internal tissues, initiating inflammation that can serve as a precursor to a range of diseases.

The symptoms of asbestos-related conditions often come with a lengthy latency period, manifesting decades after the initial exposure. This delay complicates diagnosis and can reduce treatment success, making a patient’s prognosis poor. Making matters even worse, symptoms tend to be nonspecific, and many individuals don’t realize they’re suffering from an asbestos-related condition until it has significantly progressed.

Because of this, regular screenings are essential, especially for those who’ve worked in high-risk industries and their families. Actively monitoring for signs that fibers have latched themselves onto internal issues, causing inflammation and increasing the likelihood of disease, is critical. Steelworkers with known asbestos exposure should discuss screenings with their health team as soon as possible, and family members of these workers should consider doing the same.

Specific Uses of Asbestos in Steelmaking & Federal Regulations

During asbestos’ heyday, steel companies used the mineral primarily in gaskets, insulation materials, protective clothing, and some refractory materials. Gaskets made from asbestos prevented leaks in steam lines and machinery, while insulation and refractory materials containing the substance protected equipment from extreme heat. Cloths and clothing woven with asbestos fibers were also used by workers to shield themselves from potential burns.

As knowledge of the dangers of asbestos use grew, however, manufacturers began to seek safer alternatives and implement safety measures within the industry. 

While much needed at the time, these regulations, unfortunately, came after years of direct exposure and many industry executives sweeping the dangers of asbestos use under the rug in favor of maximizing profits.

From the 1970s to the mid-2000s, a significant transition finally occurred in the regulatory landscape with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) introducing stricter exposure guidelines and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rolling out a partial asbestos ban. 

These milestones prompted companies like U.S. Steel to implement safety measures, including new guidelines for air monitoring and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE).

Taking a closer look at historical data in the years after federally mandated protocols were put into place and implemented by steel manufacturers can help determine how successful these efforts have been over the years.

Occupational Exposure to Asbestos in the Steel Industry (1972–2006): An Overview

In their article titled “Occupational Exposure to Asbestos in the Steel Industry (1972–2006),” published in the Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology, Dennis J. Paustenbach, Michael E. Stevens, Brett P. Tuttle, Ross A. Shore, Sabina Ligas, and David W. Brew detailed just how effective asbestos-focused regulatory measures have been in the steel industry post-mandate. The authors analyzed the historical uses of asbestos in steel manufacturing as well as changes that occurred as a result of protective measures and safer alternatives.

The team focused specifically on associated airborne concentrations of asbestos collected from sixteen U.S. Steel facilities between 1972 and 2006, focusing on how well the company adhered to exposure guidelines over the years. 

The authors reviewed a total of 495 airborne samples from U.S. Steel’s industrial hygiene records, collected across four distinct time periods aligned with changes in OSHA’s permissible exposure limit (PEL). Out of these samples, 68% (n = 337) were representative of an employee’s workday, while the remaining 158 samples were task specific. Below is a breakdown of their findings.

Temporal Distribution of Asbestos Exposure

Average fiber concentrations measured for each facility and department generally fell below the agency’s PEL during each period. Specifically, the mean representative workday asbestos air concentration decreased from 1.09 fibers per cubic centimeter (f/cc) between 1972 and 1975 to just 0.02 f/cc between 1986 and 1993, and 0.03 f/cc from 1994 to 2006. Task samples also demonstrated a downward trend, with mean air concentrations dropping from 3.29 f/cc in the early years to 0.01 f/cc and 0.03 f/cc in later periods. Notably, only 11 out of the 495 samples (2.2%) exceeded OSHA’s PEL, with most violations occurring prior to 1978.

Analysis by Facility and Department

While none of the mean fiber concentrations exceeded the PELs for asbestos during the period studied, specific facilities, such as Gary Works (1972–1975) and Fairless Works (1976–1985), recorded samples that did exceed PELs. 

The melt shop and central maintenance departments also had elevated concentrations during these periods. In the early years of the study (1972–1975), airborne asbestos concentrations were highest, particularly among task samples. Certain job categories, such as mold workers in the melt shop and insulators in central maintenance, also had exposure levels above recommended limits.

Specific Applications

The team analyzed each of the uses for asbestos in the steel industry to further determine whether application-specific discrepancies existed. They reported the following:

Brake Pads & Industrial Machinery

Chrysotile was primarily used in brake pads for cranes and conveyors. Overall, the authors determined that these asbestos concentrations from brake mechanics and crane operators generally felt below OSHA limits during the time periods studied. U.S. Steel’s industrial hygiene reports from the 1980s confirmed that dust from used brake pads contained less than 1% chrysotile, indicating minimal exposure risks after the 1970s, particularly after the company rolled out stricter safety mandates.

Protective Clothing & Insulation

Steel workers used protective clothing containing asbestos, such as gloves and blankets, to ward off burns when using blast furnaces. Like brake pads, these textiles were primarily woven with chrysotile asbestos, and the authors found low airborne fiber concentrations between the 1970s and early 2000s. By the 1980s, asbestos clothing had been gradually replaced by safer alternatives, too, further reducing exposure risk. Refractory materials containing ACMs, like asbestos paper used in furnace linings, degraded during operation into harmless silicates, and this was phased out by the mid-1970s, minimizing risks during equipment maintenance and repairs.

Hot Tops

Hot tops—protective coverings placed on the tops of steel ladles during the casting process—historically contained asbestos and were essential in steelmaking for controlling cooling and improving product quality. Major brands like Ferro and Foseco produced these liners until the mid-1970s. However, by the late 1970s, most became asbestos-free, and the introduction of continuous casting in the 1980s further decreased exposure risks. This new steel production method eliminated the need for molds, hot tops, and their associated cleaning processes altogether.

Some exposure concerns persisted after the transition to safer alternatives due to lingering remnants of asbestos in certain products. Yet, the authors noted that most asbestos-containing products were not cut or sanded and were consumed by heat during use, reducing the likelihood of fiber release.

The Introduction of Asbestos Abatement & Stricter Exposure Protocols

In addition to U.S. Steel implementing stricter anti-exposure protocols in the 1970s onward, including the use of respirators and other protective gear, establishing detailed cleaning procedures, and mandating external disposal services for ACMs, by the early 1980s, asbestos removal in steel plants shifted from employee-delegated to being handled by licensed abatement workers. Workers were also provided with educational information on the dangers of asbestos use and exposure with organized training offered upon employment.

Summary of Findings

In general, this article demonstrates that monitoring compliance can be highly effective for ensuring workers and their families are protected against the dangers of asbestos exposure. Regulatory bodies like OSHA and the EPA are essential for ensuring corporate compliance and responsibility, and enforcing measures designed to protect workforces against exposure can keep employees safe from predatory companies looking to turn a profit at all costs.

U.S. Steel’s decision to become an active participant in implementing much-needed protocols and rolling out guidelines has also helped steelworkers protect their health since the 1970s. This case study serves as an example of the great things that can happen when companies and federal agencies work together to promote public safety.

Moving Forward

Asbestos, once valued for its heat resistance and durability, became widely used in various industries during the 20th century, including steel manufacturing. Though the steel industry wasn’t a primary user of asbestos, many workers were exposed to asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) in equipment, protective clothing, and during specific processes like steel casting. This exposure had serious health consequences for steelworkers and their families, as fibers could be brought home on clothing. However, the transition to safer practices in the 1970s and ‘80s, driven by regulatory bodies like OSHA and EPA, marked a critical turning point, ensuring that workers were educated on the dangers of asbestos and provided with necessary protective gear.

The Importance of Getting Screened If You’re At Risk

The health risks of asbestos exposure, including lung cancer, mesothelioma, and chronic respiratory diseases, make regular health screenings, especially for those who worked in high-risk environments, essential. The long latency period between initial exposure and symptom onset coupled with the fact that asbestos-related diseases can present with nonspecific symptoms in their early stages, drives home this importance.

Although asbestos use in steelmaking has been reduced significantly, continued air quality monitoring, adhering to safety protocols, and regular health assessments can minimize future risks for workers and their families. The study outlined here also draws attention to the need for ongoing awareness and preventive measures to protect current and future generations.

While the damage of prior past asbestos use can’t be undone entirely, moving forward, an ongoing focus on corporate responsibility and accountability is key to keeping the mistakes of the past in the past.