Detoxing Manufacturing Part III: Tools & Resources

Adidas Group, Puma, Levi Strauss Co., Nike, and many other manufacturers in the textile industry segment proactively formed their own Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals program in 2011, and published a “roadmap,” designed to drive change across the industry by working together.

OK, you’ve read “Detoxing Manufacturing Part I and Part II. You’re convinced that you need to detoxify your plant and operations. Where do you start? How do you do it? Cream City Ribbon, Construction Specialties, and other manufacturers that have done so have taken advantage of the many tools and resources available.

Academia

It’s no surprise that universities are a wellspring of chemistry knowledge, and many of them offer fresh-out-of-the-research-lab help in making safer substitutes for toxic chemicals. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) offers a user-friendly wizard that simplifies the substitution process (see Figure 1). Users simply click on a bullet for one of four options:

1. Chemical to Replace
2. Process to Replace
3. Alternative Chemical
4. Alternative Process

Figure 1: MIT’s chemical substitution wizard is a wiz to use.

So if you’re using methyl chloroform and want to find a replacement, you click on “Chemical to Replace,” choose it from a pull down list, and let the wizard find the replacements for you. The wizard even lists pros and cons.

The University of Wisconsin offers a similar substitution mechanism, though not as nifty as the MIT wizard (see Figure 2).

Figure 2

Government Programs

U.S. EPA. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency may make the rules, but it also provides the tools to comply or cooperate. The EPA is, itself, a deep and broad resource, offering voluntary programs such as the Economy – Energy – Environment (E3) and the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) to help manufacturers, as well as lists of “safer substitutes.”

E3 – is a coordinated federal and local technical assistance initiative that is helping manufacturers, their supply chains, and communities across the U.S. adapt and thrive in today’s green economy, the agency states.

SNAP is the EPA’s program to evaluate and regulate substitutes for the ozone-depleting chemicals that are being phased out under the stratospheric ozone protection provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

Section 612(c) of the Clean Air Act authorizes the EPA to identify and publish lists of acceptable and unacceptable substitutes for class I or class II ozone-depleting substances.

The stated purpose of the program is to allow a safe, smooth transition away from ozone-depleting compounds by identifying substitutes that offer lower overall risks to human health and the environment.

In the SNAP program, the cleaning solvent sector refers to substitutes for non-aerosol solvents used in industrial cleaning in vapor degreasing, cold batch cleaning, or automated cleaning equipment. SNAP reviews alternatives for ozone-depleting cleaning solvents such as CFC-113 and methyl chloroform used to remove oil, grease, solder flux, and other contaminants.

Some of the substitutes for CFC-113 and methyl chloroform that have been designated as acceptable include aqueous and semi-aqueous cleaners, trans-1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-ene, trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, methylene chloride, supercritical fluids, plasma cleaning, and UV cleaning, for example. http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/solvents/solvents.pdf

Municipalities. Cream City Ribbon was tapped to participate in a Milwaukee-administered sustainability program that is aligned with the EPA’s E3 program.

Matt Howard, Milwaukee environmental sustainability director, leads the city’s collaborative E3 program with the EPA.

Matt Howard, Milwaukee’s environmental sustainability director since 2010, leads the city’s efforts to improve the sustainability of city government operations and to promote sustainability as a best practice for area businesses, to enhance the city’s natural assets, and improve overall livability. He facilitated the city’s partnership with the EPA’s E3 program.

Nearly 160 facilities have participated in the city/EPA E3 program. “E3 has a triple-bottom-line impact on our community, so that the businesses, the local economy, and our environment will profit from this initiative,” said Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.

Business/Environmental Coalitions

Construction Specialties enlisted the help of BizNGO, a collaboration of businesses and environmental groups working together for safer chemicals and sustainable materials. The tool sets benchmarks for how manufacturers, retailers, and purchasers can track their progress toward using chemicals in products that are safer for human health and the environment, the organization said.

“This practical, easy-to-use guide is intended to revolutionize the way companies are able to move away from hazardous chemicals and replace them with safer alternatives,” said Dr. Mark Rossi, co-chair of BizNGO and lead author of The Guide. “Today’s business leaders recognize that comprehensive programs for safer chemicals are essential to innovation, informed decisions, and clear communication with suppliers.”

BizNGO advises manufacturers that want to be eco-responsible to adopt and implement the following four guiding principles in forming an effective strategy for promoting, developing, and using chemicals that are environmentally preferable across their entire lifecycle:

1. Know and disclose product chemistry. Manufacturers will identify the substances associated with and used in a product across its lifecycle and will increase as appropriate the transparency of the chemical constituents in their products, including the public disclosure of chemicals of high concern. Buyers will request product chemistry data from their suppliers.

2. Assess and avoid hazards. Manufacturers will determine the hazard characteristics of chemical constituents and formulations in their products, use chemicals with inherently low hazard potential, prioritize chemicals of high concern for elimination, minimize exposure when hazards cannot be prevented, and redesign products and processes to avoid the use and/or generation of hazardous chemicals. Buyers will work with their suppliers to achieve this principle.

3. Commit to continuous improvement. Establish corporate governance structures, policies, and practices that create a framework for the regular review of product and process chemistry and that promote the use of chemicals, processes, and products with inherently lower hazard potential.

4. Support public policies and industry standards. Advance the implementation of the above three principles, ensure that comprehensive hazard data is available for chemicals on the market, take action to eliminate or reduce known hazards, and promote a greener economy, including supporting green chemistry research and education.

Industry Segment Groups

Adidas Group, Puma, Levi Strauss Co., Nike, and many other manufacturers in the textile industry segment proactively formed their own zero discharge of hazardous chemicals (ZDHC) program in 2011, designed to drive change across the industry by working together (see Lead image).

The group published the Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals Joint Roadmap, which outlines the group’s vision and mission: “We envision an apparel and footwear industry that delivers high quality products, using safe chemistries, and operating in ways that keep communities free from unintended downstream environmental impacts. The ZDHC Programme and its multi-stakeholder group of partners will transform the global apparel and footwear industry by improving environmental performance and chemical safety; thereby delivering a safer and cleaner environment as we work towards zero discharge of hazardous chemicals in the lifecycle of all products by 2020.”

Strategies to achieve zero discharge of hazardous chemicals include elimination or substitution of hazardous chemicals in members’ products, and the development of a transparent process to screen and eliminate those chemicals. The group published a manufacturing restricted substances list that specifically details which textile-industry-specific chemicals are restricted and their safer substitutes.

Sustainable Businesses

Chemical manufacturer IHS published its own 427-page “IHS Chemical Global Solvents Report: Opportunities for Greener Solvents.” The manufacturer published it to provide an in-depth analysis of the global solvents market, including supply and demand, suppliers, and market outlook for solvents, but also regulatory insights and a comprehensive comparison of the different solvent types relative to effectiveness, toxicity, and environmental impact. {https://www.fmanet.org/materials/global-solvents-industry-becoming-greener-environmental-regulatory-pressures-increase}

Additional Organizations

REACH. The European Commission’s Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) says it aims to ensure a high level of protection of human health and the environment from the risks that can be posed by chemicals, and to promote alternative test methods. REACH defines substances of very high concern (SVHC) in its article 57, as a first step to identify chemicals that should be subject to authorization within the EU. Similar terms, like ‘substances of (high) concern’ or ‘priority substances,’ are used by different organizations to refer to hazardous chemicals that should be substituted.

Although it provides a comprehensive list of hazardous chemicals, REACH falls far short of offering easily understood substitution mechanisms. Independent companies and agencies offer their assistance in the area for a fee.

ChemSec. The International Chemical Secretariat, a nonprofit organization founded in 2002 by four environmental organizations, offers its Substitute It Now, (SIN) list, aligned with the EU’s REACH regulation, comprising blacklisted chemicals. Like REACH, however, the group neglects to provide tangible substitutions.

Eliminating known carcinogens and toxins from the chemicals used in manufacturing can be complex. Hopefully, these resources can help. The approach that the textile industry has taken is an admirable and effective one, and a model for other industry segments.

Editor’s Note: This is the third article in a three-part series on detoxing manufacturing. Part I provides an overview of specific legislation and regulations, regulated chemicals, and the reasons they’re on the list. Part II relays the stories of manufacturers that have successfully eliminated the toxic content, explains how they have done so, and presents the results. Part III takes a closer look at safer substitutes, strategies, tools, programs, and agencies available to help manufacturers detoxify their products and processes.