Introduction to the Green Chemistry and Commerce Council

New York Pollution Prevention Institute Webinar

March 28, 2013 Joel Tickner, ScD, UMASS Lowell

www.greenchemistryandcommerce.org

Drivers in the marketplace for safer chemicals

More scientific information available on chemicals of concern

Increased public and advocacy attention and concern

Increased policy and regulation (REACH, states).

Increased demands for safer chemicals in supply chain (not just the “green” companies)

New sector-focused collaborations

New tools for assessing chemicals and products

What are the consistent challenges facing GC3 companies?

Many, including the lack of: Toxicity data on many chemicals Systems, in most sectors, to track chemicals and toxicity

information on chemicals/products in supply chains Information on safer alternatives: safety, technical

performance and cost Clear, widely-accepted criteria for defining and recognizing

safer products Incentives to invest in safer chemistries and products Ways to motivate and bridge the gap between what brands

and chemical users want and what the chemical industry provides

A cross sectoral, B-2-B network of more than 75 companies

and other organizations formed in 2005 with a mission to promote green chemistry and design for environment (DfE), nationally and internationally

• Share best practices and push the frontier of business practices that promote green chemistry

• Work collaboratively on projects to develop new business strategies, technologies, tools and information

4

GC3 Mission Statement

Purpose To protect public health and the environment by harnessing the

power of innovation for promoting research and the practical application of green chemistry, green engineering, and design for environment, and making their use standard practice in product design, manufacturing, and procurement.

Core Strategic Approach Increase demand for and supply of chemicals that are designed and

manufactured based on the principles of green chemistry, green engineering, and design for environment.

Develop and promote practical approaches, tools, initiatives, policies and collaborations that advance safer chemicals and products throughout supply chains.

Foster collaboration and learning among business, government, nongovernmental organizations, and academic researchers that are working on green chemistry solutions.

How does the GC3 Work? Advisory Board

Membership dues

Project groups that meet by teleconference to work

on projects that further the mission of the GC3

Annual Meeting

GC3 Members

Chemical/Specialty Chemicals Alpha Chemical Service, Inc. BASF Corporation Bayer MaterialScience LLC The Dow Chemical Company Kluber Lubrication The HallStar Company Hubbard Hall ACS Green Chemistry Institute Diversey DuPont ecoSolv Technologies, Inc. Rivertop Renewables

Apparel & Footwear Anvil Knitwear Nike, Inc. VF/Timberland New Balance

Outdoor Industry REI

Consumer Products Avon Products, Inc. Johnson & Johnson Henkel/Dial Method Products, Inc. Seventh Generation, Inc Colgate-Palmolive Company

Aerospace Lockheed Martin

Electronics Bose Corporation HP Intel Dell EMC Corporation

Pharmaceutical BWC Pharma Consulting

Office Furniture Steelcase Herman Miller Designtex

Building Products Construction Specialties

Retail Walmart Staples Target Green Depot

GC3 Members

Software Actio Software The Wercs Product Standards & Certification Bureau Veritas Green Seal EPEAT, Inc. NSF International Consulting Inside Matters Pure Strategies ToxServices, LLC Environmental and Public Health Consulting Daley International Sustainable Research Group

Government Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Environmental Protection Agency German Federal Environment Agency Mass. Toxics Use Reduction Institute Washington State Department of Ecology Non Governmental Organizations Investor Environmental Health Network Center for Environmental Health Clean Production Action Cradle to Cradle Products Innovation Institute GreenBlue Environmental Health Fund Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Resource Center

Current Projects

1. Facilitating chemical data flow along supply chains

2. Retailer engagement to advance safer chemicals and products

3. Business and academic partnerships for safer chemicals: “The Plasticizer Project”

4. Green chemistry higher education

GC3 Summary of Accomplishments

Education and research Publication of reports, case studies and a guidance document on best

practices, challenges and opportunities for green chemistry in industry. Engaging industry and universities in research and application of alternatives

to materials of concern. Hosting of regular webinars on cutting-edge green chemistry and design for

environment topics.

Networking and dialogue Hosting an annual Innovators Roundtable, now with more than 100 business

and other stakeholders, to share challenges and best practices. Convening project groups dedicated to conducting collaborative projects

aimed at advancing the state of the art of green chemistry in business.

GC3 Summary of Accomplishments (cont.)

Policy Development of a policy report for advancing green chemistry and design for

environment with the National Pollution Prevention Roundtable. Development of model green chemistry research and development policy language

and direct advocacy for federal GC R&D Act and passage of America COMPETES Act. Support for green chemistry and design for environment research, development, and

education funding and programs in government and universities.

Outreach Regular presentations to business, government and other stakeholder audiences on

the GC3 and its activities. Publication of articles designed to promote green chemistry in industry and academia. GC3 website including Retailer Portal, list of chemicals of concern, reports, conference

presentations, etc. Media outreach on major GC3 projects and reports.

GC3 Signature Projects

Meeting Customers’ Needs for Chemical Data: A guidance document for suppliers

Topic: Chemical data

Growing the Green Economy: A State's Guide to Creating Opportunities for Green Chemistry and Design for Environment

Topic: Policy

Case studies of Nike, SC Johnson & HP

Topic: Chemical data

Retailer Portal: Tools to Evaluate Chemical Ingredients in Products

Topic: Retail

GC3 Signature Projects

Green Chemistry and Safer Alternatives Boot Camp Forthcoming in 2013

Topic: Industry Education

Collaborative evaluation of alternative plasticizers for wire and cable

Topic: Business/University Partnerships

Policy Statement on Green Chemistry in Higher Education

Topic: Higher Education

Models to address confidential business information (CBI) in B-2-B chemical data transactions Forthcoming in 2013

Topic: Chemical Data

GC3 Signature Events

2010 GC3 Retailer Summit Forthcoming in 2013:

Second National Summit

• Education • Research • Policy • Collaboration • Networking

GC3 Webinars

What is the unique niche of the GC3?

Business-to-business

Members are from:

o Many sectors

o Multiple points in the value chain: chemical producers, brands, retailers

Collaborative projects to advance green chemistry and design for environment in industry

Chemicals not broader sustainability focus

Networking

Education

Based at a university research center

What might the future hold?

More state, federal, international regulations likely to

affect supply chains and products Information requirements Restrictions on substances of concern Requirements for alternatives assessment & substitution

Greater public scrutiny and knowledge; advocacy pressure particularly on business leaders

Greater demands for information on “green” products, accountability, safer alternatives

Greater focus on products – but also impacts along the supply chain

Collaborative Plasticizer Evaluation Project

Project Objective:

To conduct a collaborative project to support informed decision-making on selecting alternatives to di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) plasticizers for electronic wire & cable applications

Project Audience:

• Electronics original equipment manufacturers (OEMs)

• Plastic compounders

• Retailers

• Plasticizer manufacturers

• Others: purchasing organizations, governments, advocates, green certification programs

• Of interest to many GC3 companies

• Leverages Univ. of Mass. Lowell’s expertise in plastics engineering

Why focus on wire & cable for electronics?

University Partners

Lowell Center for Sustainable Production

Faculty of Univ. of Mass Lowell

Suppliers

BASF

Dow Chemical

Hallstar

Teknor Apex

Government & NGOs

Washington State

Clean Production Action

Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Resource Center

OEMs/Retail

Dell

EMC

HP

Staples

Plasticizer Evaluation Project Partners

23

1. Inventory of plasticizer alt’s from lit./web research

2. Pared list from industry knowledge – availability, performance

3. GreenScreen List Translator

4. QCAT (EHS)

5. GreenScreen (EHS)

6. Performance testing

7. Final candidates

9 Plasticizers

8 Plasticizers

100 Plasticizers

19 Plasticizers

10 Plasticizers

Plasticizer Candidate Screening Process

24

- Draft reports were posted on a webpage, workgroup members were invited to comment, and comments were posted.

- Profiler reviewed assessments and comments, and revised assessments where scientifically valid and consistent with GreenScreen guidelines.

- The work group is currently finishing validation of results.

GreenScreen Assessment Process

Plasticizer

GreenScreen ™ Benchmark

Notes:

Hexamoll® DINCH® (BASF)

BM 2 Moderate endocrine activity

DOZ U Data gaps for cancer and endocrine activity

DPHP U Data gaps for cancer and endocrine activity

TEHTM U Data gaps for cancer and endocrine activity

DEHT (Eastman 168)

BM 3DG Data gaps for neurotoxicity and respiratory sensitization

DINP BM 1 High endocrine activity, developmental and reproductive toxicity

Dow Ecolibrium™ (Redacted)

Not validated

HallStar Dioplex™ and Paraplex™ (Redacted)

Not validated

Validated Results (as of Jan 2012)

26

1. Lessons on making informed decisions

• Plasticizer manufacturers found value in an independent assessment for internal communication and marketing

• Compounders found value in an independent assessment, to avoid “regrettable substitutions”

• Original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) also found value in an independent assessment to avoid “regrettable substitutions” and getting a single score to support decision-making

GreenScreen offered a robust system/program for comparative hazard assessment for all parties

Lessons Learned

2. Value of collaborative process

Pooling knowledge, funds and data to evaluate alternatives is valuable

- lowers the cost to individual companies

- creates more robust results

Lessons Learned (cont’d)

3. Challenges

• Lack of transparency in formulations

- Some GreenScreens done under NDA with a profiler

- GreenScreen results reported but not the identify of chemicals used

Lessons Learned (cont’d)

3. Challenges

• Obtaining complete data sets

- Chemical product manufacturers need up-front guidance on data requirements in order to facilitate timely collection of all available data

- Be prepared to tackle data gaps, particularly when evaluating newer chemical products and products from smaller manufacturers.

Lessons Learned (cont’d) 30

GC3 Chemical Data Working Group History

2007 Tools for chemical assessment

2008 Report on Restricted Substances Lists (RSL)

2009 In-depth case studies of

Nike, HP and SC Johnson on:

Gathering chemical data from supply chains

Use of chemical data to develop safer products

Documents available at: http://www.greenchemistryandcommerce.org/publications.php

2010: “Meeting Customers’ Needs for Chemical

Data: A guidance document for suppliers”

2011/2012

GC3 Chemical Data Standardization Project

The Problem: Lack of Standardization*

Customer (Requestor)

Supplier (Sender)

Current methods for data requests:

There are almost as many different types of forms as there are customers

needing data

Works against efforts to communicate chemical data in supply chains

Data resides In many formats Data can resides

In many formats

*Adapted from Mark Frimann, TI

Standardized Format**

Solution: Standardization*

Customer (Requestor)

Supplier (Sender)

** Using a standardized, XML based format allows 2 ways to exchange data Pull = Customer sends the XML data request with criteria and Supplier sends XML

data

Push = Supplier publishes XML data for download by customers

Automation possible by using it as a data transfer standard with any required

translators feeds from the Supplier database and to the Customer database

The electronic’s sector’s IPC175X Standard provides a framework for standardization

in electronics and other sectors

Data can still reside in ANY format

Data can still reside in ANY format

*Adapted from Mark Frimann, TI

Potential benefits of standardization

Increased data availability

Reduced cost of data gathering/communication

Improved quality of data

GC3 Project objective:

To evaluate the feasibility & benefits of standardizing chemical data types & formats in supply chains

Project Approach:

Engage in dialogue with companies in an actual supply chain Chose the Electronics Sector

Why? We could learn a lot from their experience!! Significant need for, and experience with, collecting/reporting chemical data – to respond to RoHS, WEEE, REACH, etc. Existing standard/data exchange protocol – IPC 1752 (U.S.) New, improved, international standard/data exchange protocol:

Standardized protocol for companies in electronics supply chain to track, exchange and declare information about the chemical and material composition of their products Provides software developers, specifications on the data format for the exchange of material declaration data (in XML)

Suppliers

Electronics Supply Chain Pilot

Pilot Team Members

Mark Frimann, Texas Instruments Brian Martin & Bill Haas, Seagate Lyndsey Ridgeway, HP Roger McFadden, Staples

Chemical data “superset” = Universe of Data that Will Satisfy the Needs of the Companies in Our Supply Chain

1. Requestor (Customer) Information** Company Unique ID (DUNS or equivalent) Company Name Company Address Contact Name Contact Title Contact Email Contact Phone Number Division Name Business Unit

2. Supplier (Sender) Information Company Unique ID (DUNS or equivalent) Company Name Company Address Contact Name Contact Title Contact Email Contact Phone Number Division Name Business Unit

3. General Component Information Request Date

Need Date

Requestor Component Name

Response Date

Supplier Component Name

Component Build Site

Component Mass Unit of Measure (mg, gram) Unit Type (each)

4. Component Compliance Declarations Component/ Device Status - REACH Component / Device REACH Availabilty Date Component / Product Status - RoHS EU RoHS Exemption (if applies) Component / Product RoHS Availability Date

5. Chemical Substance Information CAS Number or Other Unique Chemical ID No. Substance Name Amount in Component (mg, grams or kg) Substance Concentration in component – ppm and/or % [calculated from Component Mass and Amount in

Component above] Description of Chemical Use Function of Chemical

6. Substance & Material Group Information*

EU RoHS Substance Category From IPC 1752 Class B (when updated from IEC 62474)

Material Class ID (Number) Material Class (Name)

IPC 1752 Class C JIG 101 threshold for substance [taken from JIG] Below threshold?

REACH Substance on ECHA Substance List? (released and proposed Candidate List)

JAMP** Material Name Material Group ID Material Group Use Category

Staples is seeking additional information

1. Companies in our electronics supply chain see strong benefit of standardizing and automating chemical data flow;

2. TI & Seagate are leading efforts to develop the new, global IEC Material Declaration Standard;

3. This standard is a first step, but need the software to enable automated data exchange - key for large companies with thousands of complex products;

4. Third party software providers are jumping in to develop software;

5. Despite the standard and software, still not easy for large companies to change over their IT systems to accommodate a new approach – time, cost, and organizational inertia.

Some lessons learned

Some lessons of what we learned

6. There can be a core set of common data, but must expect that companies may want some additional data to support their internal programs. Need to accommodate this with open text fields, etc.

7. Gap: Lack of robust unique chemical identifiers (i.e., numbers) for

chemicals and materials (a key enabler of data standardization);

8. Useful for companies in a supply chain to meet on calls to learn about each companies’ data needs, why they do things the way they do, obstacles to change;

Phase 3- Addressing CBI in supply chains

Starting point: How to facilitate business to business flow of confidential data through supply chains

Steps:

Webinar/conversation on business to business confidential business information transactions.

Identification of types of confidential information that need protection and for what purpose – guiding questions

Evaluation of various approaches to addressing CBI – including webinar discussions

Matrix of tools for CBI protections

Possible Next Frontier: Explore Tools for Data Exchange to Support Nike Zero Discharge Initiative/ Joint Roadmap

http://nikeinc.com/news/nike-roadmap-toward-zero-discharge-of-hazardous-chemicals

Conclusions

Power of market place actors to create upstream and downstream pressures for safer chemistry

Need for enhanced information and transparency in supply chains

Need enhanced collaborations to address common problems and cross-sectoral solutions

• Intra and inter-supply chain collaborations

• Engagement of full supply chain, including chemical suppliers/manufacturers

• Develop new partnership models

Need for Enhanced Collaborations to Address Common Problems and Cross-Sectoral Solutions • Intra and inter-supply chain collaboration needs • Engagement of full supply chain, including chemical

suppliers/manufacturers is critical to solutions • Models for collaboration within industry and between

government, industry, and academia • Successes of partnership models – e.g., DfE