Methanol in K12 is a Preventable Hazard

Methanol in K12 is a preventable hazard and many high school science departments have methanol (methyl alcohol; wood alcohol; wood spirits; carbinol; methyl hydrate) in their chemical store rooms safely locked in a flammables safety chemical cabinet.  That is the best place for that substance to be kept. The recent tragic chemistry experiment events which occurred in Virginia last week where three students and the teacher were injured, this clearly illustrates the dangers of using methanol in a school laboratory setting and the risks of handling this substance safely.  I feel it is my duty to inform science educators and school principals as well as district supervisors about methanol usage in secondary school environments based on my twenty-plus years specifically in this area working for some of the most recognized science education supply companies in North America.  I have spent my career exclusively in this area and am compelled to provide my perspective in order to raise the level of awareness surrounding methanol used in science and STEM programs.  

I DO NOT LIKE METHANOL BEING USED IN SCHOOLS.  Period. 

There is an Alternative

From my experiences in my role as a former Director of Education, and the Director of Safety & Compliance for a large chemical supplier as well as being a certified teacher and from a rich combined history of providing many jurisdictions with safer or ‘greener’ alternatives for certain hazardous chemicals, I feel that I have an obligation to discuss this professionally and to proactively prevent another similar fire and injury from occurring involving methanol in schools.  Often the simple substitution of methanol with a more stable alcohol like ethanol will still allow students to achieve the same expected results from a lab activity or experiment in the chemistry laboratory.  There are great organizations such as Science Safety that can assist with selecting more environmentally sensitive options and professional educator associations such as the NSTA, ACS, ACT, NABT, NSELA, and CSSS who can also provide some assistance to ensure teachers and students have a robust science program in a safer teaching and learning environment.

Often as our safety and health awareness increases with research and understanding across our educational communities and society at large we change our perspectives on once commonly used products, materials, and technologies. 

Some toxins have already been removed from schools

We have a greater knowledge of compounds that are now recognized toxins and known or ‘highly likely’ carcinogenic and we have legal, safer professional standards and hazard communication protocols for these items.  This heightened safety and health knowledge is the reason that we no longer collectively accept the use of PCB’s, leaded gasoline, benzene, asbestos, Teflon, DDT, BPA, and many more formerly common products in mainstream ways in our modern world.  We are fortunate to have oversight from regulatory agencies such as the EPA and the FDA to ensure that our communities are safer and that quality controls are in place to protect the general public interest.  We should consider removing methanol from school science departments because it is a risk to our most cherished and prized assets – our children, also known as ‘students’ in school ecosystems.  We owe them and the educators the conversation about methanol from this vantage point to explore the risks and benefits of keeping this chemical in their school inventory.

This is the same mindset that resulted in the reality that most secondary schools no longer have once commonly used heavy metal compounds like lead, cadmium, chromium, arsenic, mercury, and their derivatives used in school chemistry activities.  Most of these chemicals have been removed or purged from the shelves of high school chemical inventories as they have a limited educational value when compared to the risks associated with having these chemicals on hand in schools today.  Many are known carcinogenic or mutagenic substances that have serious health hazards associated with them.  This is the same rationale for removing older museum mount specimens stored in jars or glass cases and prohibiting the sale of formaldehyde (formalin) fixed biological specimens such as the memorable fetal pig, the rat, and sheep hearts, eyes, and brains used for dissections in biology laboratories across the country.  Educators understood that there were health concerns for them and their students from traditional formaldehyde-preserved specimens and suppliers quickly developed safer alternatives for schools to use to perform these dissections to meet these safety and health concerns. If we made these decisions and implemented changes based on combined and accepted safety and health awareness and understanding of biological specimens, we should be evaluating methanol using the same critical lens and making a decision to REMOVE METHANOL FROM SCHOOL LABORATORIES. 

Methanol in K12 is a Preventable Hazard

Now I have enough experience in the science education sector to know that some chemistry teachers, department heads, and some experienced educators will say that I am not allowing for the safer handling and use of methanol in schools by some teachers who can responsibly use it.  They will recount many experiences performing demonstrations like the ‘Colorful Rainbow’ or the ‘Whoosh Bottle’ or versions of these attention-getting demos.  While I agree that these are visually powerful and stunning introductions or reinforcement of prior learning for students, the use of methanol due to its low flash point and low vapor point is very dangerous in the chemistry program in their high school.  THE RISK EXCEEDS THE VALUE.  Methanol advocates will inform us that it is used in organic synthesis reactions, as an alternative fuel, as a solvent, and as a component of windshield washer or antifreeze and that it is also used to produce biodiesel via a recognized transesterification reaction and in certain fuel cells.  I am not saying that it does not have industrial applications but that again, METHANOL DOES NOT BELONG IN K-12 SCHOOLS. 

Some advocates will claim that removing methanol from school science departments is just another way to weaken the overall experience for students and that with proper safety training, methanol can be used safely and appropriately. Well, I disagree with that sentiment and while I may be biased as a safety advocate who prefers the ‘less is more’ approach to chemical usage, this is not the first time that accidents involving methanol have injured students and teachers in the US and sadly will not likely be the last.  As a matter of public record, methanol was found to be involved in the 2006 Calais Webber accident in Ohio; the 2014 Denver school accident that injured five students; the 2014 Halloween ‘burning pumpkin’ accident in Chicago that injured students and the teacher; the $55 million dollar judgment in NYC accident; 2015 in Fairfax Virginia serious injuries to five students and the teacher; twenty-two students and the teacher injured in Bakersfield CA in 1999; and there are many other incidents which are all attributed to methanol. 

METHANOL IS A HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE AND SHOULD ONLY BE HANDLED IN CONTROLLED CONDITIONS BY TRAINED AND EXPERIENCED EDUCATORS.

Ultimately as professional educators, we want to provide students with the opportunity to have the most memorable and safer experiences possible in their classes that serve to make connections between the theoretical and practical science knowledge content being discussed.  The key word in that sentence is ‘safer’.  Read that again if you are still considering allowing methanol to be used in your schools. 

Duty of Care

As educators we are governed by a Duty of Care obligation which clearly applies to the choice to use methanol in the science department, especially with students present while knowing the risks and deciding to conduct the demo or worse yet, allowing students to handle methanol themselves.  How would you explain to a parent that their child, your student, was badly burned in an accident in the school science laboratory?  Then tell them that it was the result of methanol being used.  You should be very concerned if there was a severe accident in the science laboratory, since the teacher, the administrator, and the school district could be found to be negligent or worse – ‘reckless, involving deliberate indifference.   As part of the annual Risk Management Review in your school district, I encourage you to have the conversation about methanol use and judiciously evaluate the risks and make an informed decision and make an amendment to your Chemical Hygiene Plan during your annual review with the Chemical (Environmental) Hygiene Officer.

A Case for Removing Methanol in K12

As a lifelong learner, I am aware that traditional science education has been based on having engaging demonstrations as a cornerstone of the progression of students through the grade levels and students do appreciate the fire, sparks, smoke, and loud noises that accompany many of these teacher-led demonstrations.  These can stimulate students and provide them with a springboard for their innate curiosity and increase engagement simultaneously.  I employed many of these tried-and-true activities personally and have facilitated the teaching of safer practices for many science and STEM educators over the past 20+ years.  When I was conducting some seminars or training sessions I emphasized that ‘each demonstration must have an educational purpose – and not just done to amaze or impress students.  There needs to be a clear intention for doing that demonstration for your students. That said it is incumbent on the science teacher and their employer (school district) to perform a hazard analysis for each activity planned or performed in the laboratory.  This involves a thorough review of the SDS and having a comprehensive understanding of the chemical hazards, interactions, risks, and the associated PPE, storage, and handling procedures as well as chemical waste management and making an evaluation and any safety actions resulting from the risk assessment.  When conducted improperly, this evaluation or hazard analysis can make using methanol attractive for some teachers since it provides a beautiful blue flame and it is quite readily available in the chemical stock room.  There is much more to a hazard analysis than wanting to make the class remember when the teacher did some ‘magic’ in the room. 

DO NOT GET INTOXICATED BY THE ALLURE OF METHANOL – IT IS A POISONOUS SUBSTANCE.    

Chemicals have been and are still commonly used in chemistry and general science programs as they have for well over a century.  The use of chemicals in science and STEM education will not disappear since these compounds offer tremendous value to student learning and their personal trajectory through STEM programs into post-secondary and into the workforce.  Balancing this positive impact with the understanding that many chemicals have inherent risks such as being flammable, water-reactive, corrosive, or incompatible with other chemicals even due to proximity makes having chemicals in the school science program designated as ‘hazardous’.  The importance of teacher safety training with formalized, certificated, verifiable assessments and grade and discipline-specific are central to mitigating risks and minimizing liability.  This needs to include how to complete a hazard analysis and risk assessment for all teachers of science and STEM.   Recognizing some red-flag items such as methanol should be part of the safety training to proactively reduce safety concerns by removing or substituting these hazards before the demonstration or lab activity occurs.

Just for clarity, I am not advocating for removing all chemicals from science department inventories and performing virtual chemical reactions as a rule.  Instead, I am suggesting that a conversation should occur within the school district involving the Chemical Hygiene Officer, the Science/STEM Supervisor, the Risk Management Officer, experienced chemistry teachers, and other stakeholders in science education about the continued purchase, storage, and use of methanol in schools.   The added dimension is that many newly hired teachers lack practical classroom experience and often the understanding of the risks associated with chemicals being suggested for use in demonstrations or student investigations can be a significant problem and a potential for liability or legal entanglement.  If the need to demonstrate the properties or reactions involving methanol is that central to the educators’ pedagogy, there are simulations and videos of these same ‘essential’ core experiences that can be digitally shared with no risk of harm to themselves or to the students in their care while in the science laboratory.  A blended learning experience may be the safer choice in these circumstances.     

As a final thought, many science educators, supervisors, and leaders should continue the conversation about methanol and its use in science and STEM programs across the US and make a determination and potentially encourage larger professional bodies to develop a position statement about using methanol with students.  According to Dr. Roy and Dr, Love in the most recent study of STEM and CTE facilities in 2021, they reported that 35% of these teachers have never had any formalized safety training and that teachers with safety training are 48% less likely to have an accident in their classes.  This is another dimension to consider when making a decision about using methanol in your science programs.    

*If you have the conversation and hold a democratic vote and it results in a 50/50 tie, I offer my vote in support of REMOVING METHANOL FROM SCHOOL SCIENCE PROGRAMS for all the reasons listed above.*  

For those that choose to continue to use methanol in the lab or classroom you need to consider a methanol safety training course as a requirement. As a reference Science Safety Inc. is providing free access to teachers as response to the Virginia accident. Virginia schools can register and access the free methanol safety module at anytime. 

For further Review:

• Be safe, Virginia Chemistry Accident – lit students on fire
• Key Lessons for Preventing Incidents from Flammable Chemicals in Educational Demonstrations” in Wake of Several Serious Methanol Accidents that Injured Children and Adults
• He was engulfed in flames when a school chemistry experiment erupted. He just won $60M
• Fire Injures Five High School Chemistry Students

The opinions in this article are solely those of its author. 

Subscribe to edCircuit to stay up to date on all of our shows, podcasts, news, and thought leadership articles.