White House Rejects EPA Proposal to Strengthen Smog Standards

September 19th, 2011

On Friday, September 2, 2011, the White House directed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to withdraw and reconsider a proposal to strengthen National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone, the primary ingredient in smog. The announcement marked the first time that the Obama Administration formally returned one of its own agencies proposals, and it could indicate heightened executive scrutiny of forthcoming rules economic impacts. The heart of the Clean Air Act, NAAQS, set maximum levels for six criteria pollutants at levels necessary to protect public health and welfare, implemented through State Implementation Plans covering a broad range of  sources. The ozone NAAQS were last revised in 2008, when the Bush Administration set a primary standard of .075 parts-per-million (“ppm”�) — more lenient than the .06-.07 ppm range recommended by EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee.

For more information on smog standards in your city view:
Top Toxic States, Who’s Doing New Studies?

  • Share/Bookmark

No Comments »

Top Toxic States, Who’s Doing New Studies?

August 17th, 2011

This study was conducted in 2009, Have you seen new reports?

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) have come up with the ‘toxic 20′ highlighting the 20 US states with the most toxic air.  The NRDC report was compiled from data collected for the Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxics Release Inventory, which ranked the 20 worst states based on air pollution from power plants. Power plants are heavy polluters of the environment and are constantly burning our already depleted supply of fossil fuels.

The Toxic 20 States from 2009, with Ohio being the worst:

1. Ohio
2. Pennsylvania
3. Florida
4. Kentucky
5. Maryland
6. Indiana
7.Michigan
8. West Virginia
9. Georgia
10. North Carolina
11. South Carolina
12. Alabama
13. Texas
14. Virginia
15. Tennessee
16. Missouri
17. Illinois
18. Wisconsin
19. New Hampshire
20. Iowa

The EPA estimates that reducing pollution by levels proposed in the “Mercury and Air Toxics” standards, expected to be finalized in November, could save as many as 17,000 lives and prevent more than 12,000 hospital visits every year.

So, if you live in Ohio, Pennsylvania or Florida, you’re at the highest risk of toxic air pollution.  Appealing to your local government to make changes to the policies for operating power plants would be a step in the right direction.

To learn more about fossil fuels, view:
Can Carbon Dioxide Emissions be a Useful Product Too?

As California Goes, Does the Nation Follow?

  • Share/Bookmark

No Comments »

Using less, Living Better Drives Green Week Conference

June 22nd, 2011

Green Week is the biggest annual conference on European environmental policy and took place from May 24th to the 27th in Brussels and around Europe. This year’s theme: “Resource Efficiency – Using less, living better”.

The conference addressed the problem of resource depletion and scarcity, as well as the challenges and opportunities presented by constraints on resources. Albemarle’s European Advocacy Departmentsustainable growth. Over the past decade, the conference has established itself as ‘the event not to miss’ for anyone involved with protecting Europe’s environment. attended this conference that aimed to encourage a shift towards a resource-efficient, low-carbon, low-waste economy to achieve

Sustainability topics ran the gamut of industries and markets. Presentations and discussions focused on phosphorous depletion (focus on agricultural/food use), green chemistry, sustainable consumption and production (SCP), as well as Green Public Procurement (GPP).

Some of the Presentations/discussion panels included:

If you missed the event and want to learn more about Europe’s sustainability progress, visit the Green Week 2011 site.

For more on Albemarle’s sustainability initiatives, visit the Albemarle and the Earthwise sites.

  • Share/Bookmark

No Comments »

Manufacturers and Fire Safety Solution Suppliers Work Together to Increase Environmental Initiatives for Planet, Employers and Consumers

October 26th, 2010

Our Green lab from earthwise - VECAP

Meet Danielle Goossens, Global Product Stewardship Director
Meet the EarthWise Team is a series of inspirational and often untold stories about the people behind important solutions, technologies and products that make our lives better and safer every day.

The series presents some of the key scientists and business professionals who have contributed to the development, progress and implementation of the green chemistry products, processes and principles of Albemarle and the Earthwise brand.

Albemarle Corporation, headquartered in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, is a leading global developer, manufacturer, and marketer of highly-engineered specialty chemicals for consumer electronics, petroleum refining, utilities, packaging, construction, automotive/transportation, pharmaceuticals, crop protection, food-safety and custom chemistry services.

Earthwise™ is a new division of Albemarle Corporation. The brand represents a family of products that follows strict environmental-friendly standards, along with practicing green chemistry principles and include new green fire safety alternatives to existing fire safety solutions.

Albemarle is the global leader in flame retardants. Flame retardants or fire safety solutions that are critical ingredients in many consumer electronic products, as well as the interiors of automobiles and airplanes, save lives and protect property from fires.

A group of manufacturers of flame retardants launched an initiative to raise awareness of best practices in chemical handling processes among the companies that utilize these flame retardants. Let’s learn more about the Voluntary Emissions Control Action Programme (VECAP) from Danielle Goossens, Global Product Stewardship Director at Albemarle, who is based in Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.

Danielle, tell us about your role at Albemarle and the VECAP program
I am Danielle Goossens and I direct health, safety and environmental issues for Albemarle in Europe, the Middle East and Africa, except for manufacturing plants. I make sure the company is in compliance with the regulations in all the countries we serve. I also manage product stewardship worldwide. Which means I advise customers, who are themselves manufacturers, on the best ways to handle the products they purchase from us and how to avoid any environmental releases.

I received my undergraduate and doctorate degrees from the Catholic University of Louvain (Belguim) in 1979. I have worked mainly in research at the University and at Belgian pharmaceutical companies. In 1992, I joined Ethyl (which later spun off its chemical businesses as Albemarle) as an analytical chemist. I then moved to the Customer Technical Service area and assumed my current role in 2008.

What exactly is VECAP? How does it affect consumers and businesses?
As a voluntary program that promotes best practices for the handling of flame retardant chemicals, VECAP has a rather pragmatic goal: to make sure the customers are using the product safely at every stage. Albemarle and other flame retardant producers together acted on their concerns to limit the possible ways that these chemical products might enter the environment during manufacturing processes. In 2004, the companies launched this pioneering program. It’s highly unusual that the industry developed VECAP on its own, because often government regulators impose these kinds of standards on industry.

The three companies who formed VECAP are Albemarle Corporation, Chemtura Corporation and ICL-IP. Together, they sell to more than 500 customers worldwide. In 2009, the members of VECAP surveyed more than 135 sites in Europe, and perhaps another 100 each in North America and the Asia/Pacific regions. The number continues to grow in 2010, of course. At each company, there are between three and eight professionals (engineers, scientists, technical and advocacy staff) involved in the efforts, as well as third-party independent consultants.

By adhering to the best practices advocated by VECAP in sensitive areas, the makers of the plastic products and components that use flame retardants will reduce the potential contamination of food, air, water and earth. Plus, they limit their own employees’ and, downstream, consumers’ exposure to chemicals.

Additionally, there is a certification component; Bureau Veritas is an independent auditor that will certify a company is VECAP compliant and a seal can be placed on their website and packaging. Albemarle’s Magnolia plant, which is the principal facility in the US that produces brominated flame retardants, has been certified.

Finally, it is important to note the methodology for the initiative is a model that has already been adopted for other products by several chemical companies and can be modified for use by manufacturers in other industries.

How do you work with customers to let them know about VECAP?
We conduct a survey in a face-to-face meeting with the customer who purchases our flame retardant solutions. We ask about certain practices and calculate the potential chemical emissions. We then share with them the best practices and perform a separate calculation for the emissions that would be produced by following these new procedures. In some cases, the difference is astonishing and customers are surprised to learn by how much they might lower their emissions and be eco-friendly to the earth and workplace, while making these simple changes.

For example, the area that can have the greatest impact on emission reductions is the handling and disposal of packaging. Albemarle delivers the flame retardant powder to the customer either in small paper bags or in polypropylene supersacs. The paper bag-type of package holds 25 kilograms. We determined that, in the process of emptying the package, there was a waste factor of 150 grams in each one.

In contrast, we suggest a 1,000 kilogram polypropylene bag, something that is 40 times larger, yet it has a remarkably lower waste factor: compare 500 grams remaining in the large bag to 6,000 grams for the many smaller ones. Customers immediately recognize the impact of the amount of product that is purchased and not wasted:

When it comes to disposing of the packaging, whether paper or polypropylene, we encourage our customers to incinerate the bags or to bury them in a chemically controlled landfill.

In many countries, it does not cost any more to implement this best practice and the payoffs in reduced waste and safer operations are obvious, as is the positive impact on the environment.

Please tell us about VECAP’s other areas of best practices in the next blog post.
That will be my pleasure.

  • Share/Bookmark

8 Comments »

As California Goes, Does the Nation Follow? – Part 2

September 25th, 2010

The prospect of new regulations from the California Department of Toxic Substance Control has re-kindled concerns among consumer goods manufacturers, chemical companies and other businesses, as the January 1, 2011 deadline for implementation approaches.

As discussed in a prior blog post, this is not an issue of simply local concern. Laws and regulation in California that address environmental and safety issues often are precursors to similar legislation in states across the nation.

According to a recent article in the North Bay Business Journal, some believe the language of the initial law is so loosely worded that virtually any consumer product would be subject to review in the Green Chemistry Program. In addition, manufacturers of industrial products that use chemicals deemed toxic will be required to seek “safer alternatives.”

As the deadline nears, this issue will heat up further, so look for updates here.

  • Share/Bookmark

1 Comment »

Toxic Chemical Levels Continue to Fall in NZ, Other Countries

September 10th, 2010

Green chemistry and eco-friendly news and information from Earthwise- toxic chemical levels fall

International and national efforts to reduce the level of exposure to some persistent toxic chemicals is working according to the latest results of a New Zealand study.

The chemicals, called persistent organic pollutants, are harmful to people and wildlife, accumulate in our bodies and are retained for long periods.

The latest study shows that the levels of persistent organic pollutants in our bodies has fallen by a further 40 percent in the past ten years. This follows the finding of an earlier study showing a 70 percent decline in the decade prior to the latest study.

The chemicals include the banned pesticide DDT; banned industrial chemicals such as PCBs; and unintended industrial by-products like dioxins and furans.

Similar declining rates have been shown in many other countries, though the study shows New Zealand has low relative levels compared to other similar countries.

The study was done through testing breastmilk in young mothers.

During the ten years to 2008:
• dioxin and furan levels in breast milk declined by 40%
• dioxin-like PCBs levels declined by 54%
• organo chlorine pesticides (like DDT) declined by 34-90%
• levels of dioxins, furans, PCBs and OCPs tended to be higher in rural areas
• levels of PBDEs (flame retardants) tended to be higher in urban areas.

This survey looked for the first time at breast milk levels of brominated flame retardants (BFRs) including PBDEs. The New Zealand levels of these compounds are moderate to low by international standards. Despite bans in some countries (US and Europe) many of these retardants remain in use internationally.

New Zealand’s level of these chemicals is lower than the US and Australia (we have half the levels found in Australia) and similar to or higher than European countries (Belgium has half our level). The researchers note that the levels of these flame retardant chemicals are likely to be considerably higher in our blood.

The Ministry intends to continue to monitor these chemicals.

New Zealand’s exposure to fire retardants is largely from retardants added to foam in imported furniture; to plastics and to electrical or electronic equipment. Flame retardants are added to products to reduce their ability to burn and help add vital seconds to the time required for people to get out of a burning building.

Younger mothers had lower levels of all dioxins, furans, PCBs and OCPs – but levels of flame retardants showed no link with age.

Exposure to many of these chemicals is unavoidable – through diet and inhalation – and the best approach to reducing exposure is through international and national efforts to reduce the overall levels in the environment. Some brominated flame retardants have been added to the list of chemicals targeted for elimination or reduction under an international agreement called the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and the European and US bans will encourage the use of different chemicals as flame retardants.

Further testing of chemicals in the blood, some of which is planned for next year, is expected to show a continued trend of a slow reduction in the level of these chemicals in New Zealanders. The tests will also give an indication about whether the levels of flame retardants are increasing or decreasing over time.

  • Share/Bookmark

1 Comment »

Can Carbon Dioxide Emissions be a Useful Product too?

August 2nd, 2010

Carbon dioxide (CO2), which is released through the burning of gasoline and other fossil fuels, represents a significant threat to air quality and the environment.

However, some see reducing carbon dioxide emissions as an opportunity to transform the volume of CO2 that affects our earth.

The U.S. Department of Energy recently announced six companies were selected to receive government and private funds for projects that develop processes to convert captured carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from industrial sources into useful products.

One of the proposed processes will transform CO2 into polymers, a basic plastic compound, that can be used to make a wide range of products.

Novomer Inc. has teamed with Albemarle Corporation and Eastman Kodak Co. to use a new catalyst technology that permits carbon dioxide to react with petrochemicals and then create thermoplastic polymers. These polymers are the basis for a material that can be used to manufacture bottles, films, laminates, coatings on food and beverage cans, and in other wood and metal surface applications.

Capturing the carbon dioxide emitted through the consumption of fossil fuels and recycling it obviously reduces the CO2 emissions in the environment and has a major impact on air quality in the vicinity.

Green chemistry and eco-friendly news and information from Earthwise- CO2 can be a useful product

Presently, carbon dioxide emissions from large power plants are captured and put in long-term storage underground, a process known as geologic sequestration.

Now, Novomer and its partners will use some of that CO2 inexpensively and turn it into a raw material for production of consumer and industrial packaging.

According to Novomer’s CEO Jim Mahoney, “It would be a much better use of carbon dioxide to turn it into something a company can develop a business around, rather than relying on government subsidies to bury it.”

In announcing the six awards, U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu said, “These innovative projects convert carbon pollution from a climate threat to an economic resource.”

This exciting innovation in carbon dioxide processing will likely yield many new products and applications, such as the plastic bottles pictured here, starting next year.

Do you know of any other innovative programs related to Carbon Dioxide Emissions?

  • Share/Bookmark

1 Comment »

Debate Grows as OEMs Realize “Green” Goes Beyond


 Halogen Versus Non-Halogen Flame Retardants

August 2nd, 2010

Green chemistry and eco-friendly news and information from Earthwise- China RoHSOne of many topics discussed at China RoHS annual conference receiving support and interest in further talks from OEMs and MIIT 5 Institute’s Luo Daojun
A hot topic at the conference opened up many new discussions on the applications of flame retardants in E&E products. Noted by several industry experts, presentations detailed the misperceptions and facts about the relationship between Flame retardants and the environment concerning water, toxic gas and dioxin.

Regarding non-halogen, speakers emphasized that it is simply a marketing term used by many companies intending to brand themselves “green” and “caring for consumers,” though, in fact, “non-halogen” does not necessarily mean “less hazard to people and environment.” As with any chemical, the eco-friendliness of any specific fire safety chemical must be determined on a case-by-case basis. No broad category (halogen, non-halogen, mineral…) can be said to be “more green” than another. Small changes in molecular structure can have substantial impact on the persistence, toxicity and bio-availability of any chemical technology.

The point was echoed by the MIIT 5th Institute in its presentation. The presentations generated enormous discussions among the audience. Many OEMs agreed that non-halogen should not be misused as green label. Some said that the discussions could be a good starting point to rethink the non-halogen trend and find a sustainable way that will benefit all rather than being bound by the unreasonable term.

Luo Daojun from MIIT 5th Institute stood by the presenters on this issue saying that these years of work are rewarding, especially with a reputable partner with quasi-governmental background. Luo Daojun is a director of the 5th Institute and is a key drafter of China RoHS.

Regarding China RoHS, the standard is now being reviewed and will cover more categories in addition to IT products. It is likely that the future will be on par with the EU RoHS.

The RoHS catalogue will not cover new products in near future. The MIIT seeks to “test the water” by introducing a voluntary certification system regarding hazardous substances detection before China Compulsory Certification (CCC) is applied. It caused much debate because many members think they are not involved in the policy making process while are only notified after the decision was made. Current situation shows again that China RoHS will be very different from EU RoHS in procedures and working model.


  • Share/Bookmark

No Comments »

Green in, Green out

July 19th, 2010

In the 1980s, computer programmers coined the phrase GIGO as an acronym for “Garbage In, Garbage Out.” This shorthand referred to the fact that computers are literal and will only process the information that is given to them. Therefore, if the input data is sloppy or inaccurate, the result will be similarly inadequate.

Extending the idea that “the quality of the output is a function of the quality of the input” to sustainable products, the acronym GIGO takes on a new aspect, if not a new definition, and becomes “Green In, Green Out.”

Green chemistry and eco-friendly news and information from Earthwise- GIGO

Green, sustainable and recycled are terms that refer to how the processes, production and distribution of a given item impact the planet. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has developed guidelines so that consumers can better understand how companies invoke claims of sustainable, green and recycled in labeling and advertising the entire gamut of products. The FTC also describes the limitations on such labels and ads, so that consumers are not deliberately misled.

Similarly, “organic” refers to the manner in which the product is grown and processed. Many food items and other products may be labeled as “organic;” and, in fact, there are government standards that govern the usage of this label from The National Organic Program of the US Department of Agriculture. In addition, the nonprofit organization NSF International has its own certification process that labels a product “contains organic ingredients.”

Whether green or organic, many companies have launched new sustainable products and implemented environmentally sensitive processes in response to consumer demand that even the components of complex products, such as televisions and computers, be more green.

In addition, these businesses work with corporate customers and suppliers to promote their adoption of eco-friendly standards.

For example, Albemarle, a manufacturer of a sustainable flame retardant and other specialty chemicals, has developed low-impact manufacturing processes for its chemical solutions. In addition, Albemarle encourages its customers to join the business in participating in the Voluntary Emissions Control Action Programme (VECAP), that aims to eliminate all harmful products from the environment.

Retailers, too, are responsive to consumers and together they are putting pressure on manufacturers to become more green, sustainable and organic.

Whole Foods, known as “the country’s first national certified organic grocer, has launched an initiative to require all personal care items, such as shampoo, bath soap and cosmetics, that are labeled “organic” to be independently certified organic. by June 1, 2011. Any products that do not meet the standard may be sold at their stores, but they will not be labeled organic.

In other words, NGI NGO; Not Green (Ingredients) In, Not Green Out.

Has your company made an effort to use green ingredients in their products? Tell us about it, or write up a post about your experience, and maybe we’ll feature it here at our green lab.

n the 1980s, computer programmers coined the phrase GIGO as an acronym for “Garbage In, Garbage Out.” This shorthand referred to the fact that computers are literal and will only process the information that is given to them. Therefore, if the input data is sloppy or inaccurate, the result will be similarly inadequate.

Extending the idea that “the quality of the output is a function of the quality of the input” to sustainable products, the acronym GIGO takes on a new aspect, if not a new definition, and becomes “Green In, Green Out.”

Green, sustainable and recycled are terms that refer to how the processes, production and distribution of a given item impact the planet. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has developed guidelines so that consumers can better understand how companies invoke claims of sustainable, green and recycled in labeling and advertising the entire gamut of products. The FTC also describes the limitations on such labels and ads, so that consumers are not deliberately misled.

Similarly, “organic” refers to the manner in which the product is grown and processed. Many food items and other products may be labeled as “organic;” and, in fact, there are government standards that govern the usage of this label from The National Organic Program of the US Department of Agriculture. In addition, the nonprofit organization NSF International has its own certification process that labels a product “contains organic ingredients.”

Whether green or organic, many companies have launched new sustainable products and implemented environmentally sensitive processes in response to consumer demand that even the components of complex products, such as televisions and computers, be more green.

In addition, these businesses work with corporate customers and suppliers to promote their adoption of eco-friendly standards.

For example, Albemarle, a manufacturer of a sustainable flame retardant and other specialty chemicals, has developed low-impact manufacturing processes for its chemical solutions. In addition, Albemarle encourages its customers to join the business in participating in the Voluntary Emissions Control Action Programme (VECAP), that aims to eliminate all harmful products from the environment.

Retailers, too, are responsive to consumers and together they are putting pressure on manufacturers to become more green, sustainable and organic.

Whole Foods, known as “the country’s first national certified organic grocer, has launched an initiative to require all personal care items, such as shampoo, bath soap and cosmetics, that are labeled “organic” to be independently certified organic. by June 1, 2011. Any products that do not meet the standard may be sold at their stores, but they will not be labeled organic.

In other words, NGI NGO; Not Green (Ingredients) In, Not Green Out.

  • Share/Bookmark

2 Comments »