Reversing the Conventional Leather Processing Sequence for Cleaner Leather Production

Download Reversing the Conventional Leather Processing Sequence for Cleaner Leather Production

Post on 05-Feb-2017




3 download


Reversing the Conventional LeatherProcessing Sequence for CleanerLeather ProductionS U B R A M A N I S A R A V A N A B H A V A N , P A L A N I S A M Y T H A N I K A I V E L A N , J O N N A L A G A D D A R A G H A V A R A O , * , B A L A C H A N D R A N U N N I N A I R , A N DT H I R U M A L A C H A R I R A M A S A M I Chemical Laboratory, Centre for Leather Apparels &Accessories Development, Central Leather Research Institute,Adyar, Chennai 600 020, IndiaConventional leather processing generally involves acombination of single and multistep processes that employsas well as expels various biological, inorganic, andorganic materials. It involves nearly 14-15 steps anddischarges a huge amount of pollutants. This is primarilydue to the fact that conventional leather processing employsa do-undo process logic. In this study, the conventionalleather processing steps have been reversed to overcomethe problems associated with the conventional method. Thecharges of the skin matrix and of the chemicals and pHprofiles of the process have been judiciously used for reversingthe process steps. This reversed process eventuallyavoids several acidification and basification/neutralizationsteps used in conventional leather processing. Thedeveloped process has been validated through variousanalyses such as chromium content, shrinkage temperature,softness measurements, scanning electron microscopy,and physical testing of the leathers. Further, the performanceof the leathers is shown to be on par with conventionallyprocessed leathers through bulk property evaluation.The process enjoys a significant reduction in COD and TSby 53 and 79%, respectively. Water consumption anddischarge is reduced by 65 and 64%, respectively. Also,the process benefits from significant reduction in chemicals,time, power, and cost compared to the conventionalprocess.IntroductionConventional leather processing involves four important setsof processes, viz., pre-tanning, tanning, post-tanning, andfinishing. It includes a combination of single and multistepprocesses that employs as well as expels various organicand inorganic materials (1). The conventional method ofleather making involves 14-15 steps comprising soak-ing, liming, reliming, deliming, bating, pickling, chrometanning, basification, rechroming, basification, neutraliza-tion, washing, retanning, dyeing, fatliquoring, and fixing. Thisconventional technique discharges enormous amounts ofwastewater along with pollutants (2). This includes BOD,COD, TDS, sulfides, chlorides, sulfates, chromium, etc.This is primarily due to the fact that the conventionalleather processing employs do-undo process schemessuch as swell-deswell (liming-deliming), pickle-depickle(pickling-basification), rechroming-basification (acidifica-tion-basification), and neutralization-fixing (basification-acidification) (3). In other words, conventional methodsemployed in leather processing subject the skin/hide to widevariations in pH (4). Such pH changes demand the use ofacids and alkalis, which results in the generation of salts ofcalcium, sodium, and chromium ions. This results in a netincrease in COD, TDS, chlorides, sulfates, and other mineralsin tannery wastewaters (5).Conventional chrome tanning generally involves pickling,tanning using basic chromium sulfate (BCS), and followedby basification processes. Spent pickle liquor has high TDSand a considerable amount of COD, since pickling involvesthe use of 8-10% sodium chloride salt along with sulfuricacid (2). Spent chrome liquor contains significant amountof chromium, sulfates, and TDS. The conventional methodof post-tanning involves 7-8 major steps comprising re-chroming, basification, neutralization, washing, retanning,dyeing, fatliquoring, and fixing. Post-tanning processesemploy a pH range of 4.0-6.5 and a variety of chemicals.The post-tanning processes contribute significantly to TDS,COD, and heavy metal pollution, as reported by Simonciniand Sammarco (6). Several attempts have been made torender the leather processing steps cleaner (7, 8). However,these improvements are specific to a unit operation. Imple-mentation of all the advanced technologies and eco-friendlychemicals involves financial input and machinery require-ments as well. This calls for the development of integratedleather processing methods and revamping the processsequence.Very few attempts have been made to revamp the wholeor part of leather processing steps. Thanikaivelan et al. haveattempted to process leather in a narrow pH range from 4to 8.0 (5, 9). Later, a three-step tanning process was developedwhich involves enzymatic dehairing, fiber opening usingenzyme or alkali, and pickleless chrome tanning at pH 8.0(10, 11). Recently, integrated one-step wet finishing processeshave been developed (12, 13). Further, process integrationhas been attempted by combining tanning and post-tanningsteps in one bath (14).In this study, an attempt has been made to reverse theconventional leather processing steps. This is by treating thedelimed pelts with post-tanning chemicals such as syntans,dye, and fatliquors, followed by chrome tanning at pH 5.0-5.2 (15). The percentage of post-tanning chemicals have beencarefully designed and calculated, taking into account theshaved weight parameters. The performance of the finalleathers has been evaluated in terms of physical as well asorganoleptic properties. Softness of the leathers has beenquantified and compared with that of conventionally pro-cessed leathers. The pollution parameters, such as CODand TS, have been quantified and analyzed. Techno-economic viability of the developed process has also beendiscussed.Experimental MethodsMaterials. Conventionally delimed/bated goatskins werechosen as the raw material. The chemicals employed forleather processing were of commercial grade. The chemicalsused for analytical techniques were of laboratory grade.Process Chemistry of Conventional and Reversed LeatherProcesses. In this study, delimed goatskin was chosen as thestarting material for conventional and reversed leather* Corresponding author phone: +91 44 2441 1630; fax: +91 442441 1630; e-mail: Chemical Laboratory. Centre for Leather Apparels & Accessories Development.Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 1069-107510.1021/es051385u CCC: $33.50 2006 American Chemical Society VOL. 40, NO. 3, 2006 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 9 1069Published on Web 12/23/2005processing. The delimed goatskin is partially anionic incharge. In the conventional leather process, the delimedgoatskin is treated with sulfuric acid in order to convert thematrix charge into a cationic charge, prior to chrome tanningto avoid surface deposition as shown in eq 1. Salt is used tosuppress the swelling by maintaining the ionic balance ofthe skin matrix.During chrome tanning, chromium is irreversibly boundwith the collagen matrix by cross linking with collagencarboxylic groups through coordinate covalent linkage, asillustrated in eq 2. Chrome-tanned leather is positive incharge.Chrome-tanned leathers are neutralized in order to avoidthe surface fixation of negatively charged post-tanningchemicals on the positively charged chromium cross linkedmatrix. This is achieved by using mild alkalis such as sodiumbicarbonate. During neutralization, the pH of the chromiumcross linked matrix is raised to 5.0-5.2 (eq 3). Hence, thepenetration of negatively charged post-tanning chemicals isachieved on a neutral matrix (eq 4).To fix the post-tanning chemicals, the amino group ofthe chromium cross-linked leather matrix is ionized bybringing down the pH to 3.5-4.0 using formic acid (eq 5).The positively charged amino groups form an electrostaticlinkage with the negatively charged post-tanning chemicals,such as syntans (R(S)-), dyes (R(D)-), and fatliquors (R(F)-),as shown in eq 5.The modified leather making process reverses the con-ventional process sequence by making use of the chargecharacter of the delimed pelt. The charge of the delimed peltis partially negative. Interestingly, the chemicals used forpost-tanning are also negative in charge. Hence, the post-tanning chemicals are treated with the delimed pelt withoutany problem in penetration, as shown in eq 6.After treating with post-tanning chemicals, the pH isbrought down to 5.0-5.2 (eq 7); this would not only facilitatethe fixation of the post-tanning chemicals but also providesproper conditions for the application of basic chromiumsulfate salt for pickleless tanning (16). The mechanism ofchrome tanning at this condition is similar to that of picklelesstanning (16). In other words, a simultaneous penetrationcum fixation of chromium molecules would take place (16).The final pH of leather as well as the spent liquor is around3.8-4.0, due to the hydrolysis of chromium molecules. Hence,the amino groups of the collagen matrix, if any, are ionizedand form electro static linkage with the negatively chargedpost-tanning chemicals (eq 8).Hence, it is seen that the crust leathers processed fromconventional and modified methods are basically similar incharacter (see eqs 5 and 8).Process Description. Twenty delimed/bated goatskinswere converted into shoe softy upper leathers throughconventional and reversed processes. Ten skins were usedfor each process (for process details and comparativeflowchart for conventional and reversed leather process, seethe Supporting Information).Objective Assessment of Softness Through Compress-ibility Measurements. Softness of leathers can be numericallymeasured based on their compressibility (17). Circular leatherpieces (2 cm2 area) from experimental and control crustleathers were obtained per IUP method (18) and conditionedat 80 ( 4 F and 65 ( 2% relative humidity over a periodof 48 h. The samples were spread uniformly over the solidbase of the C & R (compressibility and resilience) tester. Theinitial load acting on the grain surface was 100 g. The thicknessat this load was measured 60 s after the load was applied.Subsequent loads were added and the change in thicknesswas recorded one minute after the addition of each load.Logarithm of change in leather thickness (Y axis) was plottedagainst logarithm of load (X axis).1070 9 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / VOL. 40, NO. 3, 2006Physical Testing and Hand Evaluation of Leathers.Samples for various physical tests from experimental andcontrol crust leathers (five each) were obtained per IUPmethod (18). Specimens were conditioned at 80 ( 4F and65 ( 2% relative humidity over a period of 48 h. Physicalproperties such as tensile strength, % elongation at break,tear strength, and grain crack strength were examined as perthe standard procedures (19-21). Five crust leathers fromthe control and five from the experiment were assessed forsoftness, fullness, grain tightness, grain smoothness, andgeneral appearance by hand and visual examination. Theleathers were rated on a scale of 0-10 for each functionalproperty by two experienced tanners; higher scores indicatea better property.Chromium Content and Shrinkage Temperature ofLeathers. Samples from the official butt portion (18) ofexperimental (wet processed stage) and control wet blueleathers were taken for chromium estimation. A known weight(1 g) of the sample was taken, and the amount of chromiumwas estimated as per standard procedures (22). Samples wereinitially analyzed for moisture content (23), and chromecontent was expressed on the dry weight basis of leather.The shrinkage temperature of the leathers was measuredusing a Theis shrinkage tester (24).Scanning Electron Microscopic Analysis. Samples fromexperimental and control leathers after crust stage were cutfrom the official sampling position (18). Samples were cutinto specimens with uniform thickness. All specimens werethen coated with gold using an Edwards E306 sputter coater.A JEOL JSM-840A scanning electron microscope (SEM) wasused for the analysis. The micrographs for the grain surfaceand cross section were obtained by operating the SEM athigh vacuum with an accelerating voltage of 15 KV in differentlower and higher magnification levels.Chromium Exhaustion. Chrome liquor collected fromthe control chrome tanning process was analyzed forchromium content per the standard procedure, and uptakeof chromium was calculated (25). In the case of the reversedleather process, the final liquor was collected and used forthe analysis.Analysis of Composite Waste Liquor. Composite liquorsfrom control and experimental processes were collected fromall the unit operations except pre-tanning processes (soakingto deliming) and analyzed for COD and TS (dried at 103-105C for 1 h) per the standard procedures (26). From this,emission loads were calculated by multiplying concentration(mg/L) with volume of effluent (L) per metric ton of rawskins processed.Results and DiscussionChromium in Leather and Spent Tan Liquor. The amountof chromium present in the leather and spent tan liquor hasbeen analyzed to assess the chromium uptake behavior ofthe reversed process. The amount of chromium present inthe leathers is given in Table 1. The leathers from the reversedprocess possess a higher amount of chromium compared tothe control leathers. This is due to the presence of carboxylgroups of collagen in ionized form during the entire courseof chrome tanning of the reversed process, as shown in eqs7-8. The mechanism of this process is similar to that of apickle-basification-free chrome tanning process (16). Thechromium uptake values of conventional and reversedprocesses are presented in Table 1. It is seen that the uptakeof chromium is significantly increased in the reversed processcompared to the conventional process. This is in accordancewith the trend observed in the chrome content of leathers.The chromium concentration of the spent tan liquor fromconventional and reversed process is 2286 and 528 ppm,respectively. The shrinkage temperature of leathers from bothcontrol and reversed processes is more than 120 C.Softness Measurement. Objective assessment of softnessfor both control and experimental leathers has been madethrough compressibility measurements. Softness is directlyproportional to compressibility of the leather. Hence, thelogarithm of change in thickness was plotted againstlogarithm of change in load for the control and experimentalleathers, which exhibited a linear fit (17). The plots are shownin Figure 1. The line equation was obtained from the fit. Thenegative slope angles were calculated from the line equationand the values are 8.40 and 8.46 for control and experimentalleathers. It has been reported that the negative slope angleof a very soft sheep-based glove leather and for a soft graingarment leather was 8.56 and 5.69, respectively (17). Highernegative slope angles imply more softness in the leather. Inthis study, it is seen that both the control and the experimentalleathers exhibit a higher negative slope angle comparable tothe values of very soft leathers. In other words, the reversedleather processing is capable of producing leathers with asoftness similar to that of the conventional process.Strength and Organoleptic Properties. The averagestrength values of five leathers from both the conventionaland the reversed processes are given in Table 2 along withthe standard deviation. Strength properties of the leathersobtained from the reversed process are comparable to thatof conventionally processed leathers, and all of them meetthe Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) specifications (27). Theaverage rating for the five leathers from control and experi-ment, evaluated by two independent tanners, were calculatedfor each functional property and is given Figure 2 along withthe standard deviation. Softness, fullness, grain smoothness,and grain tightness of the leathers from the reversed processare comparable or even better than the conventionallyprocessed leathers. This is because of the improved uptakeof chemicals. Generally, the appearance and overall perfor-mance of the leathers from reversed process is comparableto the conventionally processed leathers.Scanning Electron Microscopic Analysis. Scanning elec-tron micrographs of crust leather samples from conventionaland reversed processes showing the grain surface at aTABLE 1. Comparison of Chromium Content and ShrinkageTemperature of Leathers and Percent Exhaustion of Chromiumfrom Conventional (C) and Reversed (E) Processesasample% Cr2O3(dry weight basis) % exhaustion Ts (C)C 3.05 ( 0.10 78 >120E 3.84 ( 0.08 92 >120a Moisture free tanned leather weight.FIGURE 1. Plot of log of change in load vs log of change in thicknessfor conventional and reverse processed leathers.VOL. 40, NO. 3, 2006 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 9 1071magnification of 50 are given in Figure 3a and b. The grainsurface and the hair pores of both control and experimentalcrust leather samples are clean without any solid foreignparticles. This shows that there is no surface deposition ofchromium or any other performance auxiliaries. There is nochange in the surface morphology of the leather uponreversing the conventional leather process steps. Scanningelectron micrographs of crust leather samples from con-ventional and experimental processes showing the crosssection at a magnification of 100 are given in Figure 3c andTABLE 2. Physical Strength Data of Control (C) and Experimental (E) Leatherstensile strength(kg/cm2)% elongationat breaktear strength(kg/cm)grain crack strength(average valueb)bursting strength(average valueb)sample average valuea average valuea average valuea load (kg) distension (mm) load (kg) distension (mm)C 223 ( 8 65 ( 2 57 ( 2 45 ( 0.5 11.2 ( 0.2 46 ( 0.5 12.3 ( 0.2E 216 ( 6 62 ( 3 62 ( 2 45 ( 1.0 10.8 ( 0.4 47 ( 0.5 12.0 ( 0.3BIS norms27 200 40-65 30 20 7a Average of mean of along and across backbone values for five leathers. b Average of load and distension values for five leathers.FIGURE 2. Bulk properties of conventional and reverse processed leathers. Values in each property are the average rating for five leathersas evaluated by two tanners. Error bars indicate the standard deviation.FIGURE 3. Scanning electron micrographs of crust leather samples showing the grain surface at a magnification of 50 from (a) conventionaland (b) reversed leather processing; cross section at a magnification of 100 from (c) conventional and (d) reversed leather processing.1072 9 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / VOL. 40, NO. 3, 2006d. The fiber bundle weave pattern from grain to corium forboth the samples seems to be similar. Higher magnification(500) micrographs show that the splitting of fiber bundlesafter the mechanical operations is similar for leathers fromboth conventional and reversed processes (see Figure 3e andf, in the Supporting Information).Water Consumption. In principle, the reversed processenables significant reduction in the consumption of waterbecause it avoids several acidification, deacidification andwashing steps. Hence, a water audit has been made forconventional and reversed processes. The quantity of wateremployed and discharged for processing 1 kg of raw skinthrough conventional and reversed methods is given in Table3. It is apparent that the reversed process enjoys a reductionin water consumption and effluent discharge by 65 and 64%for processing 1 kg of raw goatskin. It has been reported that,by 2025 AD, 1.8 billion people will live in countries or regionswith absolute water scarcity (28). In this context, the abilityof the reversed process to reduce the water consumption isone of the significant achievements.Environmental Benefits. The composite liquors havebeen collected from all the unit operations except soaking,liming, and deliming. COD and TS have been chosen toanalyze the environmental impact of the conventional andreversed processes. A direct comparison of the observed CODand TS values may not give proper consequences on theenvironmental impact. Hence, these values have beenconverted into emission loads. The COD and TS values andthe calculated emission loads are given in Table 4. It isinteresting to note that the concentration of TS is significantlylower in the effluent from reversed process compared to theconventional process, despite the low hydraulic load. Thisis primarily due to the fact that the reversed process eliminatesseveral acidification-deacidification steps that are practicedin conventional leather processing, as seen in eqs 1-8. It isknown that acidification-deacidification steps would leadto the formation of neutral salts that contribute to dissolvedor total solids. It is seen that the concentration of COD in theeffluent from the reversed process is slightly higher than theconventional process. This is due to the presence of pollutantsin a significantly low amount of water. There is, however, asignificant reduction in the COD and TS parameters whenthey are converted into emission loads. The reduction inCOD and TS loads are 53 and 79%, respectively. Thesereductions are not only due to the elimination of severalprocesses but also due to the better uptake of chemicalssuch as chromium, syntans, dyes, and fatliquors. It isintriguing to note that these reductions are without alteringthe process chemicals or using any speciality chemicals.Techno-Economic Viability. Implementation of anydeveloped process in the industry demands technicalfeasibility and cost-effectiveness. In this study, a reversedleather process has been developed to achieve reductions inwater, time, power, as well as better quality of leather andeffluent. It is already shown (Table 3) that the reversed leatherprocess enjoys a reduction in water consumption by 65%compared to the control process, which provides savings inwater cost. This reduction in water consumption lowers thehydraulic load by 64%, and thereby reduces the operatingcost of ETP. The consumption of process time and power forthe control and experimental processes is shown in Table 5.Time consumption of the reversed process (drumming time)is 42% lower than the control process. Furthermore, thereis also a significant reduction in the time lag betweenconventional chrome tanning and wet finishing, which isusually a minimum of 12 h (overnight aging). The reductionin the energy consumption for the reversed process is about42%, compared to the control process, which leads to asavings of about US$ 16 for processing 1 metric ton of rawskins. The total chemical consumption for the conventionaland reversed processes is given in Table 6. It is seen that thereversed process reduces the total chemical consumptionby 54%. The chemical cost was not carried out for BCS,syntans, dyes, and fatliquors because there is no change inTABLE 3. Comparison of Water Consumption and Discharge for Conventional (C) and Reversed (E) Leather Processing of 1 KgRaw SkinsaC Eunit processes input (L) output (L) input (L) output (L)pickling 0.80 0.40chrome tanning/reversed process 0.40 0.78 0.40 0.38washing 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.58washing 0.60 0.48neutralization 0.30 0.28washing I 0.60 0.58washing II 0.60 0.60retanning, dyeing and fatliquoring 0.30 0.29washing 0.60 0.60dilution of acids/alkalis andemulsification of fatliquors0.30 0.30 0.16 0.16total 6.10 5.91 2.16 2.12a Weight of skins before soaking; water audit was not made from soaking to deliming because they were constant for both conventional andreversed process.TABLE 4. Spent Liquor Analysisaemission load(kg/ton of raw skinsc processed)process COD (ppm)b TS (ppm)bvolume of effluent(L/ton of raw skinsc) COD TSC 6483 ( 18 32432 ( 32 5910 38 192E 8150 ( 22 18672 ( 36 2120 18 40a Composite liquors were collected from all the unit operations expect from soaking, liming, and deliming. b Average of three measurements.c Weight of skins before soaking; C is conventional leather processing and E is reversed leather processing.VOL. 40, NO. 3, 2006 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 9 1073the type and percentage of chemicals between the twoprocesses. However, the reversed process provides a con-siderable reduction in chemical cost by about US$ 20 forprocessing 1 metric ton of raw skins by avoiding the acidsand alkalis required for several acidification and deacidifi-cation processes. Hence, it is evident that there is a significantreduction in the consumption of water, time, energy, andchemicals. This would provide an overall reduction in thecost of leather processing.The global leather industry is looking for a viable cleanerleather processing methodology to overcome environmentaland economic constraints. The sustainability of leatherproduction would depend on the development of analternative system for leather making. In this scenario, thedevelopment of reversed leather processing by rationallychanging the order of the conventional process sequenceprovides a technically as well as economically viable alterna-tive. However, a commercial level study may be required tovalidate the perceived economic and technical benefits.AcknowledgmentsThe authors thank Dr. R. Rajaram for physical testingmeasurements. S.S. thanks the CSIR, New Delhi for providinga senior research fellowship.Supporting Information AvailableProcess details, comparative flowchart for conventional andreversed leather process, and scanning electron micrographsof the crust leather samples at higher magnification (500)from conventional and reversed process. This material isavailable free of charge via the Internet at metric ton 1000 kgBating Treating the unhaired hides or skinswith a commercial enzyme for-mulation in order to remove cer-tain undesirable proteinous con-stituentsBCS Basic chromium sulfateBIS Bureau of Indian standardsBOD Biochemical oxygen demandCOD Chemical oxygen demandControl leather Leather made using conventionalprocess sequenceCrust Dried and flexed leather after posttanningDrum Rotating cylindrical container (usu-ally made of wood) used in leatherproductionETP Effluent treatment plantExperimental leather Leather made using reversed processsequenceFatliquor An emulsion of oils or greases inwater, usually with an emulsifyingagent, used to lubricate the fibersof leatherFatliquoring It is a process in which the leather istreated with fatliquors for lubri-cating the fibersIUP International Physical Testing Com-missionOfficial butt portion That part of the hide or skin coveringthe rump or hind part of theanimal, where the samples are cutfor physical or chemical testingPelt Skin/hide without hairSammying Removal of free water by pressing thewet chrome tanned leather be-tween two felt rollersSyntan Synthetic tanning agent used to fillthe voids of leather matrixTDS Total dissolved solids, comprise in-organic salts and small amountsof organic matter that are dissolvedin waterTS Total solids, which includes dissolvedand suspended solidsUpper Leather meant for top portion offootwearWet blue Chrome tanned leather in wet con-ditionLiterature Cited(1) Germann, H. P. The ecology of leather production - Presentstate and development trends; Proceedings of the XXV IULTCSCongress: Chennai, 1999.(2) Aloy, M.; Folachier, A.; Vulliermet, B. Tannery and Pollution;Centre Technique Du Cuir: Lyon, France, 1976.TABLE 5. Time and Power Consumption for the Conventional(C) and Reverse (E) Processesatime (h)unit operations C Epickling 1.5chrome tanning/reversed process 3.83 7.0washing 0.16 0.16washing 0.16neutralization 1.83washing I 0.16washing II 0.16retanning, dyeing and fatliquoring 3.16fixing 1.33washing 0.16total 12.45 7.16total power consumption (kwh) 373.5 214.8cost (US$) 37.35 21.48a 1 h running ) 30 KWh; 1 KWh ) US$ 0.1.TABLE 6. Table 6. Chemical Consumption for the Conventional(C) and Reversed (E) Leather Processingkg/ton of rawskins processedchemicals C Esodium chloride 80sulfuric acid 9.6basic chromium sulfate 40 40sodium formate 11sodium bicarbonate 11syntans 36 32dyes 9 8fatliquors 24 21.3formic acid 6 4total 226.6 105.31074 9 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / VOL. 40, NO. 3, 2006(3) Bienkiewicz, K. Physical Chemistry of Leather Making; KriegerPublishing: Malabar, FL, 1983.(4) Heidemann, E. Fundamentals of Leather Manufacture; EduardRoether KG: Darmstadt, 1993.(5) Thanikaivelan, P.; Rao, J. R.; Nair, B. U. Development of a leatherprocessing method in narrow pH profile. Part 1. Standardisationof unhairing process. J. Soc. Leather Technol. Chem. 2000, 84,276-284.(6) Simoncini, A.; Sammarco, U. The possibility of reducing the CODsderiving from the fatliquoring of the softy leathers in residualbaths; Proceedings of the XXIII IULTCS Congress: Germany,1995.(7) Thanikaivelan, P.; Rao, J. R.; Nair, B. U.; Ramasami, T.Progress and recent trends in biotechnological methodsfor leather processing. Trends Biotechnol. 2004, 22, 181-188.(8) Thanikaivelan, P.; Rao, J. R.; Nair, B. U.; Ramasami, T. Recenttrends in leather making: processes, problems, and pathways.Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 35, 37-79.(9) Thanikaivelan, P.; Rao, J. R.; Nair, B. U. Development of a leatherprocessing method in narrow pH profile. Part 2. Standardisationof tanning process. J. Soc. Leather Technol. Chem. 2001, 85,106-115.(10) Thanikaivelan, P.; Rao, J. R.; Nair, B. U.; Ramasami, T. Steppinginto third millennium: third generation leather processing -A three step tanning technique. J. Am. Leather Chem. Assoc.2003, 98, 173-184.(11) Thanikaivelan, P.; Rao, J. R.; Nair, B. U.; Ramasami, T. Bio-intervention makes leather processing greener: An integratedcleansing and tanning system. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37,2609-2617.(12) Ayyasamy, T.; Thanikaivelan, P.; Chandrasekaran, B.; Rao, J. R.;Nair, B. U. Development of an integrated wet finishing process:Manufacture of garment leathers. J. Am. Leather Chem. Assoc.2004, 99, 367-375.(13) Ayyasamy, T.; Thanikaivelan, P.; Rao, J. R.; Nair, B. U. Thedevelopment of an integrated rechroming-neutralization-posttanning process: Manufacture of upper leathers from goatskins.J. Soc. Leather Technol. Chem. 2005, 89, 71-79.(14) Thanikaivelan, P.; Saravanabhavan, S.; Rao, J. R.; Nair, B. U.Integration of chrome tanning and wet finishing process formaking garment leathers. J. Am. Leather Chem. Assoc. 2005,100, 225-232.(15) Saravanabhavan, S.; Thanikaivelan, P.; Rao, J. R.; Nair, B. U.;Ramasami, T. Transposed process for making leather. US PatentApplication 20050138738, 2005.(16) Thanikaivelan, P.; Rao, J. R.; Nair, B. U.; Ramasami, T. Underlyingprinciples in chrome tanning: Part 2. Underpinning mechanismin pickle-less tanning. J. Am. Leather Chem. Assoc. 2004, 99,82-94.(17) Lokanadam, B.; Subramaniam, V.; Nayar, R. C.; Compressibilitymeasurement and the objective assessment of softness of lightleathers. J. Soc. Leather Technol. Chem. 1989, 73, 115-119.(18) IUP 2, Sampling. J. Soc. Leather Technol. Chem. 2000, 84, 303-309.(19) IUP 6, Measurement of tensile strength and percentage elonga-tion. J. Soc. Leather Technol. Chem. 2000, 84, 317-321.(20) IUP 8, Measurement of tear load - Double edge tear. J. Soc.Leather Technol. Chem. 2000, 84, 327-329.(21) SLP 9 (IUP 9), Measurement of distension and strength of grainby the ball burst test. In Official Methods of Analysis; The Societyof Leather Technologists and Chemists: Northampton, 1996.(22) IUC 8, Determination of chromic oxide content. J. Soc. LeatherTechnol. Chem. 1998, 82, 200-208.(23) IUC 5, Determination of volatile matter. J. Soc. Leather Technol.Chem. 2002, 86, 277-278.(24) McLaughlin, G. D.; Theis, E. R. The Chemistry of LeatherManufacture, Reinhold Publishing Corp.: New York, 1945.(25) OFlaherty, F.; Roddy, W. T.; Lollar, R. M. The Chemistry andTechnology of Leather; Krieger Publishing Company: Florida,1977; Vol IV.(26) Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater,17th ed.; Clesceri, L. S., Greenberg, A. E., Trussell, R. R., Eds.;American Public Health Association: Washington, DC, 1989.(27) Specification for glaze kid upper leather; IS 576. Bureau of IndianStandards New Delhi, India, 1989.(28) International Water Management Institute, Projected WaterScarcity in 2025. November 2005).Received for review July 17, 2005. Revised manuscript re-ceived November 20, 2005. Accepted November 28, 2005.ES051385UVOL. 40, NO. 3, 2006 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 9 1075


View more >