Category: Eliminate Toxicity

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity

First Plasticizer Listed in CleanGredients

Eastman 168 SG non-phthalate plasticizer is the first plasticizer to be listed in CleanGredients that meets the criteria of the EPA Safer Choice program. Eastman 168 SG represents a new category of products in CleanGredients not specific to cleaning applications, broadening the reach of the Safer Choice program into new industries and applications.

What is Eastman 168 SG, and how does it fit into Eastman’s sustainable product portfolio?

Plasticizers are often used to make plastics more pliable, particularly polyvinyl chloride (PVC or vinyl). Eastman 168 SG is a non-phthalate plasticizer, and is the main alternative to phthalates in applications from flooring and wallcoverings to toys to medical devices and many other applications that require flexible vinyl. Eastman 168 SG can also be used in some waterborne adhesives and in some rubber formulations. Eastman 168 SG has several US FDA and European food-contact clearances in adhesive and plastics applications.
Eastman 168 SG comes with the security of supply required by manufacturers of flexible vinyl products facing demanding quality assurance protocols and compliance requirements such as toys, medical devices, and food-contact articles. Eastman Chemical is the only domestic manufacturer of this vital molecule, with two facilities supplying the US and global markets.  With Eastman 168 SG, manufacturers have a proven and cost effective non-phthalate alternative to make PVC flexible. Eastman 168 SG maintains high purity standards, a clean toxicological profile, and excellent physical properties such as migration resistance, color consistency, thermal stability, RF and solvent welding, and printability.
Eastman Chemical has dedicated decades of research and development seeking sustainable solutions for the market. In addition to the success story of Eastman 168 SG, Eastman also has its Omnia solvent product listed in CleanGredients for use in cleaning solutions. Eastman Omnia™ high-performance solvent has an excellent safety profile that enables formulators and end users to comply with increasingly stringent regulatory standards and market demands for exceptional performance. This solvent is readily biodegradable and non-flammable, helping ensure the safety of people and the environment.

Why is Eastman 168 SG listed in CleanGredients when it isn’t used in cleaning products with the EPA Safer Choice label?

CleanGredients is a resource not only for formulators of products carrying the Safer Choice label, but for anyone looking to source materials with greener chemistries. Companies like Eastman want to proactively screen their products against the Safer Choice criteria to verify they are safe, and are looking for a way to communicate this information to their customers who want to purchase greener products. To meet this need, we are expanding CleanGredients to include ingredients that meet the EPA Safer Choice Master Criteria but are not necessarily used to formulate Safer Choice-labeled products. You can identify this type of listing in CleanGredients based on the term “Third Party Reviewed” in the “Safer Choice Status” field.
It can be challenging to find plasticizers with both the performance you need and the toxicological characteristics you and your customers are looking for. Eastman 168 SG fills that niche, making it a great addition to the CleanGredients database. Like all of the ingredients listed in CleanGredients, it has been reviewed by a third party profiler and meets the EPA Safer Choice Master Criteria, so you can trust that it is safer for human health and the environment.

What are the toxicological characteristics of Eastman 168 SG?

Eastman 168 SG is a well-characterized non-ortho phthalate plasticizer that passes the Safer Choice Master Criteria after a thorough assessment by a Safer Choice-authorized Third Party Profiler. Some assessors may choose to conservatively designate Eastman 168 SG as having a low-to-moderate hazard for reproductive toxicity; disagreement among toxicologists in interpretation of experimental findings is not unusual. Eastman 168 SG passes all other Safer Choice human health, ecological and fate endpoints. CleanGredients and Eastman support transparent disclosure of assessment outcomes to support safer chemistry decisions.

How can I learn more?

You can subscribe to CleanGredients to have access to data on Eastman 168 SG and other products meeting the EPA Safer Choice criteria.
screen_shot_2016-09-14_at_9-44-42_am

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity

What does TSCA Reform Mean for Green Chemistry?

On June 7, the Senate passed the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act with broad bipartisan support. The House of Representatives passed the bill on May 24, and the White House has indicated that President Obama will sign the bill into law. The bill overhauls the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) after more than a decade of debate and numerous failed attempts at reform, with support from major players in the chemical industry. It significantly expands the EPA’s authority to regulate potentially hazardous chemicals.  Although the new legislation does not contain specific provisions to promote green chemistry, increased scrutiny of new and existing chemical products may provide an opening in the marketplace for greener alternatives.

What is changing?

Existing regulation under TSCA leaves major gaps in the regulation of chemical hazards.  Under the current legal framework, it is very difficult for the EPA to impose restrictions on the use of existing chemicals. Chemicals already in use at the time TSCA was enacted were grandfathered in, and were assumed to be safe without additional review by the EPA. Very few of these existing chemicals have been subject to review or restriction since the enactment of TSCA.
An example of the difficulty in regulating existing chemicals under TSCA is the 1991 attempt to ban all uses of asbestos, whose human health hazards have been well established. The ban was overturned when a court found that the EPA failed to demonstrate that the ban was the “least burdensome alternative” to regulating asbestos, a requirement under TSCA.  Since then, the EPA has not banned a chemical under TSCA.  
The new legislation requires the EPA to prioritize existing chemicals for further review.  Under the new bill, the EPA will be able to restrict a chemical based only on human health and environmental risks.  Although economic considerations must be considered, the EPA will no longer be required to select the least burdensome alternative.
Under the existing regulatory framework, new chemicals are required to be registered with the EPA, but they are assumed to be safe unless the EPA demonstrates otherwise.  The EPA cannot require additional testing of new chemicals unless there is a demonstrated risk – which may be difficult to demonstrate before additional testing is completed. This limitation, along with limited time for review of new products, resulted in very few new chemicals being subjected to additional review under TSCA.  

tsca750

Concerns and Controversy

Because of inadequate chemical safety regulations at the federal level, several states have taken action to implement their own chemical regulations.  Although the chemical industry previously opposed TSCA reform, the current reform bill had the support of industry stakeholders hoping to avoid a patchwork of varying state regulations. The current legislation contains provisions for federal preemption of state regulations under certain circumstances. In particular, states may not enact new laws restricting the use of a chemical within three and a half years after the EPA publishes the scope of an assessment of that chemical without a waiver from EPA. Although this provision would likely reduce the number  of states promulgating their own regulations, some environmental and consumer safety groups view it as a concession to industry.  Nevertheless, if the EPA does not act in the three-and-a-half-year window, states may take action to restrict the use of the chemical, and the preemption does not apply to regulation of chemicals under other environmental laws (e.g., air, water, or waste regulations) or to monitoring or reporting requirements.
Green chemistry groups, including the Green Chemistry and Commerce Council (GC3) worked to insert language supporting development of a national sustainable chemistry strategy into the original Senate bill that was passed in December 2015.  That section, sponsored by Senator Chris Coons, established an interagency coordinating committee that would develop a national research, funding, education, and commercialization blueprint for sustainable chemistry, including identifying incentives, improved coordination opportunities, and development of metrics to track progress. However, a corresponding provision was not present in the House version of the bill, and was not included in the conference bill that is expected to be enacted. Despite strong support in the Senate, the House Science Committee, which drafted the original Green Chemistry Research and Development Act of 2004 that formed the basis of the Coon’s section, currently shows little interest in chemistry innovation.

TSCA_landing

Opportunities for Green Chemistry

Although the current TSCA reform bill does not include specific provisions to promote a national strategy on green chemistry, it may help create opportunities in the marketplace for greener products. One of the challenges in expanding and mainstreaming green chemistry is the difficulty for new green products to break into commoditized markets, due to the incumbency and entrenched supply chains associated with existing technologies. Increasing scrutiny of existing chemicals under the new legislation, including potential restrictions or bans on existing chemicals, may create openings in the marketplace for new, greener products. Some manufacturers have experienced similar opportunities in the past when concerns about health risks have arisen in connection with a particular chemical. For example, consumer concerns about bisphenol A (BPA) led to significant increases in sales of BPA-free plastics.  Nevertheless, it will be important to ensure that adequate safety information is available for any new products introduced to replace existing chemistries —something that the new TSCA reform legislation may help to achieve.
 

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity GreenBlue

Welcome Introduction: Elizabeth Ritch

Elizabeth Ritch circleThis spring, Elizabeth Ritch  joins the GreenBlue team as a project associate focused on the CleanGredients program. Elizabeth comes to GreenBlue from Ramboll Environ. Learn more about Elizabeth in the interview below.

Tell us about your background.

Growing up in southern California, I was surrounded by the contrast between beautiful natural areas and suburbia, which inspired my interest in environmental issues.  I first moved to Charlottesville for college, where I studied the intersections between sustainability, science, and society, and graduated from the University of Virginia in 2010 with a BA in Environmental Thought and Practice and Physics.

After graduating, I worked for five years as an environmental consultant with a primary focus on evaluating environmental issues in the context of mergers and acquisitions.  This gave me a great opportunity to learn about how industrial stakeholders think about environmental risks, compliance, and sustainability.  I am excited to be back in Charlottesville to put that experience to use in the CleanGredients program!

What inspired you to work in the sustainability field?

As modern Americans, we are some of the most privileged people in the history of the planet.  I believe we have an obligation to use our position to ensure that future generations can live as well as or better than we do today, without irreparably damaging the world that sustains us.

What is the one thing you would like people to know that you do in your personal life to further sustainability?

I chose to live near the GreenBlue office in downtown Charlottesville, so I am able to walk to work and leave my car in the garage.

Favorite outdoor activity

Hiking, canoeing, or kayaking!

Happiness is….

Being outside on a beautiful summer day!

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity Sustainability Tools

Safer Choice and CleanGredients – 10 years of greener chemistry

CleanGredients 10 years
This year marks the tenth year that CleanGredients has been in operation, supporting the adoption and use of EPA’s Safer Choice Standard and product labeling program. It seems appropriate to reflect on the past and to take some stock in how far we’ve come.
dfeLabel

When EPA first launched its partnership program in 1997, and then later the Safer Product Labeling Program, there were only a few resources available to provide trusted, third party verified information to institutional purchasers, facilities managers, and consumers about the safety of chemicals used in cleaning products. In the 1990s and early 2000s, organizations with a mission to promote formulated products with greener chemistries were focused on drafting criteria and methodologies for evaluating chemicals so that it was possible to define exactly what a “greener” chemical is. The norm at the time was for manufacturers to make claims that their products were “environmentally friendly,” “safe,” or “non-toxic” or “free of” a particular chemical, but there was little or no information to substantiate these claims. There was also no consensus among manufacturers, government, NGOs, or academia about what exactly constituted safer or greener chemicals, much less products worthy of those labels.

EPA’s Design for Environment program made a significant advancement in defining the term  “safer” chemicals when they published their Master Criteria, a methodology for evaluating the inherent hazard characteristics of chemicals and what constitutes the minimum or floor criteria for meeting Safer Choice product labeling requirements. On top of this baseline screen, EPA developed criteria to help formulators and their suppliers identify chemicals with the lowest hazard within specific functional classes.

CleanGredients Logo CMYK (1)
The original CleanGredients logo

By 2004 it became clear that formulators seeking EPA’s label would benefit from having greater access to information about ingredient level products that would help them meet labeling requirements. GreenBlue responded to this need in the market by working with the EPA to create CleanGredients, a database of supplier’s products that have been “pre-approved” by third party experts to meet Safer Choice criteria. The goal was to guarantee a successful outcome for formulators while making it easier, faster, and cheaper to get their products labeled.

The redesigned label, created in 2014

Since 2006, EPA’s program has grown significantly, representing more than 2,000 products in six major product categories and created the Safer Chemical Ingredient List (SCIL) to provide specific guidance about the chemicals that are eligible for use in Safer Choice products. CleanGredients has also grown during that time from representing four functional classes of products to now offering suppliers the opportunity to market their products in 16 functional classes. Since 2006, the number of suppliers listing Safer Choice approved products has grown significantly as has the number of formulators using the database to shop for these preferable ingredients.

The interest and demand for safer formulated products is only increasing as evidenced by leading retailers like Walmart, Target, Staples, and Wegmans who are implementing their own chemicals policies, seeking to offer more Safer Choice labeled products to their customers.

The future of green chemistry and the Safer Choice label as an exemplary application of the principles of green chemistry look very promising and CleanGredients will be there to support the growth and success of both.

 

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity GreenBlue Recover More Sustainability Tools Sustainable Packaging Coalition

Pharmaceutical and Biopolymers ILCs launch at SPC Advance

As one of the first working sessions to kick-off SPC Advance, the combined pharmaceutical and biopolymers brainstorming sessions generated a number of innovative ideas and set-up the process for members to engage in the two projects moving forward. There was interesting overlap in these two initiatives as both the pharmaceutical and biopolymer industries are utilizing cutting-edge technologies and present significant opportunities for innovation. We are very excited to now have both of these new ILCs off the ground and running!
Members shared a number of innovative ideas during pharmaceutical packaging brainstorming session with everyone agreeing that there are real sustainability gains to be made in both material sourcing and recovery areas of the value chain. Cold chain packaging was described by members as an example  where there is a need for solid thinking and supply chain collaboration around how to recover and/or reuse materials. The group also  discussed the need for dialogue across the supply chain, new initiatives drugstore companies are exploring, medical/hospital waste needs, and over-the-counter bottle and label recovery. It was an excellent brainstorming session that helped define the focus area (or areas) of the ILC as we move forward.
In the fascinating and emerging world of biopolymers, attendees  heard a number of valuable insights from members, most of all concerning the need for better education in the marketplace. For example, the prevailing (and incorrect) thinking that feedstocks for biopolymers necessarily disrupt what would otherwise be a food supply. Not the case. Biopolymer feedstocks are often residual material that normally gets sent to the landfill. But more than anything else, the discussion was very much focused on the potential that biopolymers present and the exciting opportunity that the SPC member companies have in exploring ways to bring these materials to the mainstream and leverage environmental benefits.
Thank you to Rob Fitzgerald, Director of Sustainable Packaging, The Estee Lauder Companies Inc.; and Owen Schultz, Vice President of Business Development, Earth Renewable for volunteering as co-chairs of the Biopolymers Working Group. Also thank you to Jason Sawicki, Senior Manager Operational Excellence and Packaging, Genentech; and Guy Gagnon of Ecolopharm for volunteering as co-chairs of the the Pharma Packaging Working Group.
Companies signed up to the Pharmaceutical Packaging and Biopolymers Working Group should look for invitations to the first conference calls to be held for each group in early November.
Through strong member support, an informed and science-based approach, supply chain collaborations and continuous outreach, the goal of the Pharmaceutical Packaging and Biopolymers Working Group is to understand the benefits, identify roadblocks and challenges, and develop solutions to bring innovations to market in a meaningful way.
 

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity GreenBlue Member Spotlight Uncategorized

In The Loop — GreenBlue heads West

In the loop 5-18-15 This week, GreenBlue is heading across the U.S. to meet with sustainability leaders in Berkeley, California and Spokane, Washington.
Nina is an invited speaker at the Washington State Recycling Association (WSRA) 35th Annual Conference and Trade Show in Spokane.She will be speaking at this afternoon’s “Designing for Zero Waste, Starting the Conversation” breakout session with Dylan de Thomas of Resource Recycling and Matt Stern of Waste Management.  This session takes a close look at the dramatically changing types and volumes of packaging materials and products entering the waste stream and the financial implications of these materials on our recycling systems. Together, manufacturers, MRF operators, and municipalities will look upstream and discuss how products and packaging can be designed to be sorted at the MRF and recycled to improved value both for recyclers and producers.
WSRA_Conference15_logo_FINAL
James will be participating in The Collaborative Network’s Cancer Free Economy meeting in Berkeley, California. He will be speaking about how material health fits within a theoretical cancer-free economic system. GreenBlue has two projects that fit within the material health sector: Material IQ and CleanGredients. Both projects aim to make ingredients and materials more transparent within the supply chain, and ultimately promote safer chemicals and materials.
If you are in the Berkeley or Spokane area let us know! We love to meet members who live across the country!

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity Recover More

Inspiring products showcased at SUSTPACK

Loliware cups (from Loliware.com)

At GreenBlue, we like to follow a sustainable materials management agenda of “use wisely, eliminate toxicity, and recover more.” Thursday morning at SustPack2015’s Innovative Packaging Flash Talks, each innovation appropriately originated from similar sustainability goals.
Jason Foster began the session talking about Replenish, a company and product designed to eliminate waste and save consumers money. Replenish uses a concentrate refill pod and a plastic bottle to create a reusable product that is typically found in a disposable package with a one-time-use product. Foster got the idea for the product after he noticed that companies were not using their products, and ultimately money wisely. Many products (particularly cleaning, personal care, and detergent products) are 90% water, and Foster thought why ship so much water in unnecessary containers when consumers have this substance in their homes already. Thus the Replenish Refill System was born. Check it out – the idea is pretty amazing and it’s hard to believe no one thought of it sooner!

Replenish Refill System (from myreplenish.com)
Replenish Refill System (from myreplenish.com)

 
 
Loliware is a start-up company only about a year old that is taking a very unique approach to foodservice packaging. Chelsea Briganti presented about her company that created the first “biodegr[edible]” cups as they like to call it. Loliware cups are biodegradable and edible! This is a new company that currently only sells cups, but it is incredible to think of other ways this technology could be used. Brigante mentioned the idea of an edible water bottle to be used in marathons or developing nations. At $12 for 4 cups, I might not trade out my disposable cups for edible ones quite yet, but I’m intrigued to see how the company and innovation grows in the next few years.
Loliware cups (from Loliware.com)
Loliware cups (from Loliware.com)

 
 
Next up was Travis Carter of Veritiv speaking about a collaborative innovation his company worked on with Dell. Veritiv helped Dell determine how to use their waste (Old Corrugated Cardboard, or OCC) to their advantage. Through the partnership, Dell transitioned from EPE foam cushion packaging to OCC molded fiber cushions. Approximately 80% of the OCC used for the new fiber cushions originated from Dell waste. This was a great example of how a material can change from “waste” to a valuable resource with the help of collaboration and innovation. I do wonder though if Dell is further working on the recovery end and articulating recyclability to their consumers to help close the loop.
veritiv-logo-h-rgb
The next innovation is based on the chemical process of creating a biodegradable plastic from methane. Molly Morse told the SustPack audience about the process and benefits of the Mango Materials technology. Mango Materials’ plastics can biodegrade in home and industrial composting facilities, and initially they are focusing on plastics that will likely end up in nature and could most benefit from biodegradability (marine environments, agriculture, etc.) Currently Mango Materials is focused on microbeads found in cleansers. These beads are typically polyethylene and often slip through the waste water treatment facilities and end up polluting our waterways. This would not be an issue with biodegradable Mango Materials plastic. Sounds like a great solution to a trending issue in the sustainability industry!
mangomaterialslogo
Last but certainly not least, Eduardo Ruiz of the Dow Chemical Company spoke about Dow’s polyethylene stand-up pouch. The stand-up pouch is a game-changer in the food industry as a recyclable alternative to standard multi-material pouches. As a pure polyethylene (PE) pouch, the package is recyclable at retail and store drop-off locations that accept other PE packages such as grocery, dry cleaning, and produce bags, case wraps, and packaging air-pillows. Ruiz gave the How2Recycle Label a mention, as these stand-up pouches are eligible to carry the Store Drop-off Label indicating to consumers their recyclability. Currently the technology is being used for pouch packages for dry and frozen foods and this will likely be expanded in the future to industries such as personal care, detergents, beverages, etc.
DOW
Be sure to keep these folks on your radar, as unique innovations such as these are bound to grow in the coming years!
 

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity GreenBlue

Is there a need for a deeper understanding of material hazards?

Every day, we are exposed to hundreds of chemicals–in the clothing we wear; the detergents that wash them; the food we eat; the cosmetics we apply to soften our skin; the drinking water from our taps… the list goes on and on. Just in the last 50 years, chemists have developed more than 50 million synthetic chemicals, and about 2,000 new chemicals are introduced each year.
Exposure to chemicals begins long before babies are born, and continues  throughout their lives. Yet, of the thousands of chemicals in use today, only a small fraction have been tested for their potential hazards as cancer causing agents, as bioaccumulative compounds, as environmental toxicants etc. Currently, hazard information for chemicals used in industry remains poorly regulated, and as a result,  major information gaps exist when trying to make informed product design decisions. Without a better understanding of chemical hazards, effectively assessing the potential risks to human and environmental health is difficult.
Regulatory Compliance-Based Hazard Evaluation
Do you know the hazardous chemicals associated with the products you use? Do you know if the company who makes those products is aware of them?  Do you care? Our answers may vary, but for the product makers, such questions are essential to putting products in the market that are deemed safe. To assess  chemical safety, we need to to understand both the hazards of substances and the estimated level of typical exposure to those hazards. This is the basic formula for figuring out the risk associated with a given substance. Yet, the number of chemicals that have known hazard profiles is quite small in a universe of chemicals used to manufacture all kinds of products.
Using a List of Lists
Much of current chemical hazard compliance is based on if the substance is found on a restricted substances list (RSL). RSLs of known substances of concern exist in many forms and are typically adjusted for a specific industry sector or product category. Examples of authoritative lists are those published by the European Union’s REACH – Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) program, California Proposition 65, US EPA Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Chemical Substance Inventory, and more. In all, there are over forty such lists from national and international regulatory sources, influential NGOs, and scientific bodies.
So, with all these lists, surely we know the relative hazards involved in product production. Well, that depends on the comprehensiveness of the lists to capture all the chemicals of concern for each of the specific hazard endpoints (e.g., carcinogenicity, reproductive toxicity, etc.). This  assumes that RSLs are sufficient to capture all hazardous substances used in industry. Unfortunately, this is not the case for commonly used chemicals, not to mention the hundreds of new chemicals that are introduced into commerce every year.
Screening  a bill of substances (BOS) or a bill of materials (BOM) for  a product against the known lists must be able to identify substances of concern that aren’t on the lists–a conundrum when relying on a relatively static set of lists to identify potential hazards in a world of rapid product innovation. For instance, if a substance has cancer causing potential, but it doesn’t yet exist on any lists, how are we supposed to identify the hazard and evaluate the potential risk of using the substance? The illustration below shows how relying on the list of lists can leave significant gaps for complex products. Notice the extensive data gaps represented by the question marks:
Product bill of materials (BOM) screened using list of lists method such as GreenScreen® List Translator
Casting a Wider Net
The compliance-based model relies on lists of known substances of concern, which doesn’t tell the full material hazard story as chemical and material innovation outpaces material health legislation. Keeping pace with material and product innovation requires a system that  goes beyond compliance to characterize material constituents; is  able to select materials and components that meet long-term sustainability of the brand.
More in depth screening techniques are needed to complete the picture in the above scenario. And, additional tools are needed to provide material manufacturers  a forum to share their formulation data, while maintaining confidentiality, and providing third-party verification to material users – the finished product makers – to confidently make decisions that limit exposure and lower risk.
Screening techniques that go beyond compliance-based lists exist, and are used by leading brands to gain knowledge about the material composition of their products. Utilizing more comprehensive screening methods such as SciVera Lens – GHSplus or GreenScreen® for Safer Chemicals can provide a fuller picture of  chemicals involved and feed the innovation process, allowing for more intelligent design outcomes. The image below illustrates a more rigorous screening of the BOM that captures a greater portion of the chemicals in use, thus reducing data gaps and enhancing design decision making.
Product bill of materials (BOM) screened using broader scoped methods such as SciVera LensTM or GreenScreen®
Data Transparency and Clarity
Significant efforts are underway across various industry sectors including outdoor products, apparel and footwear, building products, food packaging , electronics, and others to quantify the life cycle impacts of materials used in consumer products. Material health concerns are, increasingly, becoming part of many of these initiatives, with varying degrees of emphasis.
In response, GreenBlue’s Material IQ provides a platform for sharing material intelligence between material suppliers and their downstream customers. Material IQ™ offers human and environmental health data, standards/eco-certifications, and key sustainability indicators, all in one place. Material IQ can level the playing field for material health data by:

  • Significantly reducing data acquisition costs
  • Providing valuable information via a consistent evaluation methodology
  • Acting as a marketplace for material alternatives
  • Incentivizing suppliers to be more transparent

The platform allows material suppliers and intermediate component makers to feed third-party screened data to Material IQ where finished product manufacturers can view the profile in relation to relevant eco-label verification. Material IQ Profiles can also  serve as chain of custody tracking, providing a consistent way to communicate design improvements, strengthen supply chain partners’ and key customers’ sustainability positions, and enable brands to step beyond compliance-based material assessment and into design optimization strategies.
Material IQ is currently in pilot stage. We are happy to speak with you about assessing your product’s material profile. For more information, explore the GreenBlue and Material IQ websites, or contact us.
Learn More About Material Hazards:
UNSAFE: The Truth Behind Everyday Chemicals
The Toxic Baby 

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity GreenBlue Recover More

Sustainable Materials Management – A Precursor to a Circular Economy

Since the dawn of the industrial revolution, production has followed a linear path of take, make, use, and discard in a system that wastes a majority of resource and energy inputs. While this model is continuously improved for efficiencies, many of the improvements only serve to accelerate the flow of materials and products to the landfill. This is because the linear economic model is fundamentally, if unintentionally, designed to create waste. A wholesale redesign of our materials-based economy is needed and is thankfully emerging.
The circular economy (CE) is a relatively new business model that is intentionally and deliberately designed as an interactive system of value-creating and regenerative loops as diagrammed below by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF).
circular economy
The most exciting aspect of a circular economy business model is that it is not a doom and gloom scenario of doing less with less. It is economic model that allows for increasing prosperity and access to goods and services, while keeping valuable resources in productive cycles and out of landfills. Collaborative studies commissioned by EMF and led by the management consulting firm McKinsey estimate an annual net material cost savings of up to $630 billion, based on only a subset of the durable goods manufacturing sectors. The studies further estimate as much as $700 billion in savings is available in the global consumer goods market for food, beverages, textiles, and packaging via a shift to a circular business model.
Taking a deep dive into circular economy literature shows that it is a powerful synthesis of several strategies, among them:

  • Design for environment (DfE) to include a variety of nontraditional or less common attributes such as modularity, upgrade-ability, refurbishment, disassembly, re-manufacturing, etc.,
  • Industrial ecology or symbiosis, which is based on the premise that the waste from one industrial system or process becomes a resource or material input for another,
  • Products of service, whereby a producer retains ownership of a product and leases its utility, taking back the asset at end of useful life or when the lessee no longer wants or needs it; then upgrading, refurbishing or re-manufacturing it into a next generation service-product,
  • Reverse logistics, the process by which products and materials are effectively collected and maintained in a closed loop supply chain.

While not explicitly called out in the CE literature, sustainable materials management (SMM) offers another possible pathway to a closed loop business model. Since materials of all types are the basis of our global consumptive economy, SMM provides the critical building blocks that can enable a company to prepare and position itself to become a CE business.
At GreenBlue we promote the adoption of SMM practices to help companies become more sustainable enterprises based on three core principles: Use Wisely, Eliminate Toxicity and Recover More. All three are tied to design, which is the most critical element in a circular economy. Use Wisely governs the selection, sourcing, and optimization of resources and sets the stage for re-utilization. Eliminate Toxicity, removes potential barriers to product recovery, component separation and material revalorization, ensuring those molecules can stay in play in either a technical or biological cycle as depicted in the EMF diagram, above. Recover More requires development of the technologies and infrastructure, to track product assets, collect and efficiently transport them to a revalorization facility. As companies become adept at these three core principles they can develop design strategies, industrial synergies, logistics, information, financial accounting systems, and performance metrics that will allow them to make the ultimate paradigm shift to a fully circular business model.
Watch this blog for further discussion of the three core principles and building blocks as GreenBlue proceeds to develop a detailed roadmap and rigorous step-by-step implementation framework for best sustainable materials management practices.

Categories
Eliminate Toxicity

October Fun Facts: Eliminate Toxicity

This is the second of three Fun Fact entries focusing on GreenBlue’s mission alignment to Sustainable Materials Management, a robust framework with three main foci 1) Use Wisely looks at material sourcing; 2) Eliminate Toxicity from products and packaging, and 3) and Recover More value from the waste stream.
Eric DesRoberts continues his series of facts and tidbits he’s uncovered during his research to better understand materials used in products and packaging. You can check out his past Fun Facts here.

        1. The list within the list -The NRDC lists Five Dangerous Pollutants in the Air You Breathe Everyday:
          1. Diesel exhaust is a mix of more than 40 toxic air contaminants and has been linked to cancer, asthma, and premature death. Many Americans live or work near diesel hotspots such as bus terminals, truck depots, and busy intersections, and some studies have found that kids riding inside diesel buses can be exposed to higher levels of harmful diesel emissions than people in nearby cars.
          2. Formaldehyde has been linked to lung cancer, and may also cause leukemia and asthma attacks. It is used in the manufacturing of insulation, pesticides, and disinfectants, but a significant piece of the industrial emissions comes from the lumber industry and the production of plywood. Proper treatment and applications of indoor construction materials should be employed to reduce potential exposure to formaldehyde.
          3. Benzene is a carcinogen that causes leukemia and a number of other illnesses. It is used in motor fuels, solvents, detergents, and many other substances. Common exposure points include gas stations, cigarette smoke, and diesel exhaust.
          4. Particulate matter are fine particles that become embedded in your lungs and impair their ability to function. Most particulate matter comes from burning fossil fuels or wood.
          5. Ground-level ozone forms when nitrogen oxides and other pollutants emitted by cars, trucks, buses, coal-fired power plants and other fossil-fuel burners react with sunlight to form the principal ingredient in smog.
        2. A recent Harvard study found that sub-lethal exposure to the neonicotinoid class of pesticides (widely used in corn, soybeans, cotton, apples, and many other crops) may be a key driver of Colony Collapse Disorder. It is suspected that the collapse is partially due to the impairment of neurological functions. Bee pollination is responsible for more than $15 billion in increased crop value. As we transition into bio-based materials, we need to work to better understand the effects of using chemical treatments for higher yields.

bee

  1. Though the actual number is unknown, it is estimated that there are 115 million animals used in laboratory testing worldwide. The cosmetics industry is an often cited as employing animal testing, where some practices include skin and eye irritation tests (chemicals are rubbed onto the shaved skin or dripped into the eyes of restrained rabbits), repeated force-feeding studies (looking for signs of general illness or specific health hazards such as cancer or birth defects), and “lethal dose” tests (animals are forced to swallow large amounts of a test chemical to determine the dose that causes death).
  2. Top ten polluted waterways lists:
    Watersheds Receiving Toxic Releases by Volume (lbs)

    • Lower Ohio-Little Pigeon Rivers (IN, IL, KY) – 14,727,205
    • Upper New River (NC, VA) – 7,338,166
    • Middle Savannah River (GA, SC) – 5,025,161
    • Muskingum River (OH) – 4,414,602
    • Blackbird-Soldier Rivers (IA, NE) – 4,372,706
    • Lower Platte-Shell Rivers (NE) – 3,726,866
    • Buffalo River-San Jacinto (TX) – 3,557,254
    • Brandywine Creek-Christina River (DE, PA) – 3,416,615
    • Lower Des Moines River (IA) – 2,902,489

    Watersheds Receiving Toxic Releases By Toxicity (based on EPA Toxic Weighting Factors – see source above)

    • Lower Brazos River (TX) – 33,474,792
    • Lower Grand River (LA) – 1,926,751
    • North Fork Humboldt River (NV) – 1,042,622
    • Nooksack River (WA) – 1,028,364
    • Noxubee River (AL, MS) – 593,695
    • Lower Cape Fear River (NC) – 550,152
    • Lower Sulphur River (AR, TX) – 508,181
    • Lower Tennessee River (KY) – 474,284
    • Bayou Sara-Thompson Creek (LA) – 341,414
    • Middle Pearl River-Silver River (MS) – 328,186
  3. A study from Columbia University’s School of Public Health found that prenatal exposure to pollution correlated with developmental delays at age 3, fewer IQ points at age 5, and behavior problems at age 7. If New York City reduced its pollution from sources like diesel fumes by a 25%, affected children could expect to earn an additional $215 million in their lifetime.