Showing posts with label chemistry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label chemistry. Show all posts

Event - 2013 Sustainable Chemistry Summit

The 2013 Sustainable Chemistry Summit, will take place on June 5-7, 2013 in Montreal, Quebec. This event is presented by GreenCentre Canada, it will map the journey of green chemistry technologies from lab to market.

Following the path of innovation, the Summit will start with sessions on the genesis of discoveries, unfold along each step of the journey toward commercialization, and culminate with a look at real-life examples of technologies that have made it.

The Sustainable Chemistry Summit will connect you, educate you and inspire you– leaving you with the tools you need to chart your own course from lab to market.

For innovators in green chemistry, being new and small make it difficult to raise the capital you need to get to get to the top. Enter the VC community – financiers ready and willing to take the journey with you by providing start-up costs and seed funding for promising new green chemistry ventures.

To get to the top, join us at the Summit. At Summit 2013 you will be presenting to: Rho Canada Ventures, Braemar Energy Ventures, EnerTech Capital, Chrysalix Energy Venture Capital, Pangaea Ventures Ltd., Trellis Capital Corporation …and stay tuned, this list is growing!

For more information or to register click here.

Related Articles
Green Chemistry Bridging the Divide by Seetha Kammula
Chemical Regulation that is Good for Business and the Environment
Winners of the 2011 Green Chemistry Awards
The University of Oregon's Interdisciplinary MBA and Green Chemistry
GE is Helping Nestle with Green Chemistry
Green Chemistry is part of an Integrative Approach to Eco-Innovation
Green Product Design Network

Green Chemistry Bridging the Divide by Seetha Kammula

Green chemistry is an increasingly important player in global efforts to find more sustainable ways to minimize our impacts on the Earth. Green chemistry is the branch of chemistry concerned with developing processes and products to reduce or eliminate hazardous substances. One of the goals of green chemistry is to prevent pollution at its source, as opposed to dealing with pollution after it has occurred.

Here is a short essay on green chemistry written by Seetha Kammula in 2011. She is one of the founding partners of Simply Sustain LLC, has over 25 years of experience first at Royal Dutch Shell, and later at Basell, a Shell BASF Joint Venture. At Basell she was Senior VP Strategic Marketing, Innovation & Asset Management and a member of the Board of Directors of Indelpro (Mexico). At Shell she was Strategy Director (Houston), Director of Technology (Belgium)- both for Epoxy Resins, and Research Scientist (Amsterdam). She received a BS degree from Osmania University, India, a PhD degree in Organic Chemistry from Auburn University, and did post-doctorate research at Princeton University.

Today, the word “chemicals” is very divisive. Those inside the “fence” (producers and chemists) see themselves as responsible people who work hard to make lives better, healthier and more comfortable. Amongst many outside the fence, the chemicals raises fear, anxiety and suspicion. The question is : will green chemistry bridge this divide and pave the way for sustainable growth?

If you Google green chemistry you will find concepts from many sources: the 12 principles of Green Chemistry by the American Chemical Society, Bio-mimicry, The Natural Step, Biotechnology, Genetic engineering, Cradle-to-Cradle etc. At the heart of what they all advocate are a handful of principles: reduce waste and energy, use safer solvents, catalysts and renewable starting materials and avoid the production, use and release of toxins and chemicals that persist in nature. How is this movement going?

Patents and innovations in Green Chemistry are on the increase from academia and companies along the chemicals value chain. The bulk of these reports fall under the category of improving manufacturing efficiency such as reducing use of energy and water, release of hazardous waste and costs. Here are a few representative examples of what we have seen. Merck has made strides reducing waste, increasing process efficiency, and implementing bio-catalysis (doing more with less). Amyris, a biotechnology company, is developing ways to make chemicals from biomass (such as sugar cane) using microbial engineering and thereby avoiding use of non-renewable starting materials. Along similar lines, Dow and BASF jointly commercialized a manufacturing process to make an industrial chemical that reduced water use by 70-80%, and energy use by 35%.

While these stories excite industry insiders, they rarely make it to the front pages of the NYT or WSJ. Even if they were published, they do very little for a vast majority of outsiders such as consumers, media and activists who want products that are free of controversial chemicals such as, BPA (in epoxy can coatings), Phthalates or PVC (found in blood and IV bags), Brominated Flame Retardants (home-interior products) to name a few. They have powerful backers e.g. Mega retailers such as Wal-Mart and Institutions such as Kaiser Permanente who have significant buying power. While safer alternatives have been under development and were available for more than a decade, large-scale adoption has been slow because of initial higher costs.

Secondly, it requires many changes in all parts of long and global supply chains. Take the example of Eden Organic Foods who found a BPA-free coating that worked for some foods such as beans but not for high acidity tomato sauce. Switching to different coating types for different food types means smaller market size per coating type, a disincentive for developers. Secondly, if the supply chains have to deal with multiple chemical coatings, they will need to change their machine settings and or move to newer machines, requiring capital investment. Making these changes takes a long time, costs more and requires that everyone in the value chain agrees and is able to make these changes.

Another important area in Green Chemistry is the replacement of pesticides/chemicals of concern in agriculture. Promising work is going on in Biopesticides derived from plant or microbial “pesticides” to substitute certain chemicals of concern. Small companies such as Maronne Bio Innovations and AgraQuest inCaliforniaand large companies such as Bayer, BASF, Syngenta and Monsanto have products in this area. DuPont launched a new insect repellent based on active ingredient from the catmint plant claimed to have the same efficacy as DEET. Dow Agrosciences’ Spinosad insecticide is derived from fermenting natural soil organisms. However, in many cases large-scale adoption is likely to be slow due to issues of economy of scale. Unlike traditional “broad-spectrum” products that work against a number of pests, biopesticides tend to be specific and work at one or two pests at a time. The market size per product will be smaller which in turn means higher cost per pound. Not every one will switch to higher cost products unless they are forced to do so.

Such large-scale change needs federal-level regulation, but it is not clear at this stage how, and if, regulations will be implemented. Congress indicated an interest in updating the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which has not changed since 1976, but it has failed to do so. Environmental advocacy and consumer groups, state and local politicians who have grown increasingly frustrated with the slow pace have pushed for increased use of state laws. One report shows that there are currently over 1,000 state and local laws and regulations on the books and each of these laws is unique in one or more respects. This situation will only hamper large-scale progress.

Going back to the question of whether green chemistry will bring society and science closer, we believe it has the potential to do so. Innovations backed by sound policies and regulations will speed up large-scale adoption, even though initially costs may go up. Experience has shown that costs will come down over time. But greening chemistry alone will not be enough. Industry needs to share in real time the pros and cons of the greener choices and not just promote the positives. People inside the fence need to include and engage folks outside the fence by explaining complex and evolving scientific information in a language that is understandable to the average citizen. Those outside the fence need to understand the difficulties of the folks inside the fence, and ultimately, learn to trust them. Open communications and dialogue will be essential for sustainable growth.

Related Articles
Chemical Regulation that is Good for Business and the Environment
Winners of the 2011 Green Chemistry Awards
The University of Oregon's Interdisciplinary MBA and Green Chemistry
GE is Helping Nestle with Green Chemistry
Green Chemistry is part of an Integrative Approach to Eco-Innovation
Green Product Design Network

Chemical Regulation that is Good for Business and the Environment

The ubiquity of chemicals and our growing environmental awareness are helping to usher a new era in chemistry. Chemicals are part of modern life, yet we are increasingly aware that even tiny quantities of toxins can have harmful health effects including asthma, neuro-developmental disorders, and certain cancers. Chemicals are also being connected with a variety of distinctively modern diseases and disorders including obesity, diabetes, autism, and ADD.

According to a 2006  report (pdf) by the Center for Occupational and Environmental Health at the University of California, Berkeley, the US produces or imports 42 billion pounds of chemicals every day, 90% of which are created using oil. Moreover, it says, “Global chemical production is expected to double every 25 years for the foreseeable future.”

According to a recent biomonitoring survey by the  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the average American has trace amounts of over two hundred environmental chemicals, including arsenic, cadmium and pesticides.

The Chemical industry employs almost a million people in the US, making it an important economic force. However, the chemically derived, non-biodegradable products commonly known as plastic, makes up nearly 12% of American trash, 27 million tons of plastic ended up in landfills in 2005 and only 6 percent was recycled.

Plastics are not only destructive to the environment, they are harmful to human health. Modern plastics employ chemicals like bisphenol A (BPA) and phthalates, both of which are thought to disrupt the endocrine system, leading to developmental problems. Some 6 billion lb. (2.7 billion kg) of the BPA are produced globally each year. The CDC has found BPA in the urine of 93% of surveyed Americans over the age of 6. To better understand the health effects, the EPA has launched a new investigation into BPA.

BPA is not the only industrial chemical in common use that may alter the normal functioning of the endocrine system. Phthalates and flame retardants like polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) have been linked to reduced sperm counts and feminization in animal studies.

The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976, has failed in its mandate to regulate the chemical industry. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been able to restrict very few chemicals and it lacks the power to ban dangerous carcinogens like asbestos. The vast majority of the chemicals in use in the US have unknown human health effects as the EPA has only tested about 200 of the 83,000 chemicals in the TSCA inventory.

Under the current system, chemicals are deemed safe until the EPA can prove that they are dangerous. To be considered dangerous, the EPA must conduct tests which can take years and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Congress is considering new legislation to regulate the nation’s chemicals. The Safe Chemicals Act, proposed by Representative Bobby Rush (D-IL) and Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) would dramatically strengthen the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) ability to regulate chemicals and make industry responsible for demonstrating the safety of existing and new chemicals.

As a matter of social and self interest, the business community shares the view that chemicals need to be regulated. On April 15, the American Sustainable Business Council (ASBC) proclaimed their support for the new legislation.

Jeffrey Hollender, Co-Founder, Seventh Generation and ASBC member said, “we support updating TSCA because it is vital for protecting the health of people and the planet. It will have important benefits for us as a downstream user of chemicals through greater information and innovation. As a consumer products company, this will restore consumer trust in our industry.”

The most immediate way to reduce the global plastic impact is to simply use less of it, but for those chemicals deemed vital, there is a promising solution to the modern world’s dependence on chemicals. The new field of green chemistry designs chemicals through processes that reduce or eliminate the use and generation of hazardous substances, leave no dangerous residue and use less energy.

At this year’s annual meeting of the American Chemical Society, more than 1,600 of 12,000 presentations were dedicated to sustainability and this number will increase dramatically when the TSCA is replaced by more functional legislation later this year.

The TSCA has provided little incentive for U.S. manufacturers to invest in green chemistry technologies, but the proposed legislation directs the EPA to create a green chemistry research grant program and establish a network of research centers to help find safer alternatives to dangerous chemicals.

Although there are concerns about evaluating safety and closing loopholes for new chemicals, there is good reason to be optimistic about the passage of a chemical reform bill. The business community is working alongside government to push its passage. “Today’s astute business leaders are concerned about the health and business impacts that could arise if the products they use or sell contain toxic chemicals. A strong Safe Chemicals Act can help create a more competitive, innovative, and economically sustainable economy in the US,” said David Levine, co-founder of the American Sustainable Business Council.

The public is increasingly demanding greater accountability, irresponsible businesses that poison people and the planet risk more than legal sanctions, they risk their reputational capital and retribution through direct actions.

With the backing of the business community and the general public, it looks as though there is enough support to bring America’s unregulated use of toxins to an end. Due to a confluence of regulations, litigation, and competitive pressures, green chemistry is no longer just part of the mission of a forward looking company, it is soon to be enshrined in American law.
There’ll be a day in the future when all chemistry is going to be green,” says John Warner, director of the Warner Babcock Institute for Green Chemistry. “In that world we’d never need regulation again.”
Source: Global Warming is Real

Related Articles
Winners of the 2011 Green Chemistry Awards
The University of Oregon's Interdisciplinary MBA and Green Chemistry
GE is Helping Nestle with Green Chemistry
Green Chemistry is part of an Integrative Approach to Eco-Innovation
Green Product Design Network

Revolutionary Liquid Energy Storage Technology

Scientists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have developed a new inexpensive battery technology that could revolutionize energy storage. This new battery technology could prove to be the holy grail of renewable energy storage, particularly at night when there is no light to power solar cells or when there is no wind to turn turbines. The new storage technology could overcome the obstacle of intermittent supply which is the greatest obstacle facing the widespread adoption of clean energy.

This technology could also significantly reduce the size of electric car battery systems and potentially double the range of electric vehicles.

Initial tests have used batteries the size of a shot glass, a hockey puck, and most recently a six-inch-wide version, with 200 times the power-storage capacity of the initial version.

The new approach to batteries was created by Donald Sadoway, the John F. Elliott Professor of Materials Chemistry at MIT and the senior author of a paper along with MIT Materials Processing Center Research Affiliate David Bradwell MEng and their team. They published their research in the Journal of the American Chemical Society in 2012.

In this revolutionary technology there are two types of this semi-solid liquids one is positively charged, the other is negatively charged. These two liquids are pumped through the system which causes the exchange of lithium ions across a permeable membrane that triggers an external current. All three layers are composed of materials that are abundant and inexpensive (magnesium, magnesium chloride, and antimony) . The battery system operates at a temperature of 700 degrees Celsius, or 1,292 degrees Fahrenheit.

As reported in a Yale Environment article, lead researcher Yet-Ming Chiang says the power-per-unit potential will be 10 times greater than conventional designs.

This affordable storage capacity has greater longevity and lower cost than existing methods of energy storage and could make all the difference in the drive towards clean energy.

Related Posts
Renewable Energy Storage by Donald Sadoway (Video)
Renewable Energy Storage
The Crucial Role of Public Private Partnerships
Electric Vehicles Increasingly Competitive
Electric Vehicles Will Drive Demand for Lithium
Factors Determining Adoption Rate of EVs
Ford Partners with Google to Enhance Hybrid Efficiency
GM's Solar Powered Charging Stations

Renewable Energy Storage by Donald Sadoway (Video)




In the recent TED2012 talk Dr Donald Sadoway spoke about "The Missing Link to Renewable Energy", describing the future of large-scale batteries that store renewable energy. Energy storage is the key to harnessing renewables like solar and wind. The ability to be able to store and use power at night or when the wind is not blowing is the holy grail of renewable energy. Sadoway's battery miracle is an inexpensive, incredibly efficient, three-layered battery using "liquid metal." In this video Sadoway outlines the future of large-scale batteries that store renewable energy.

The innovative approach envisioned by Dr Sadoway will help renewable energy to bury fossil fuels. As he says: "We need to think about the problem differently. We need to think big. We need to think cheap."

Sadoway was born on March 7, 1950. Sadoway is of Ukrainian heritage and was raised in Oshawa, Ontario, he receiving his PhD from the University of Toronto in 1977. Dr. Sadoway's main area of study is on chemical metallurgy. Sadoway received a NATO postdoctoral fellowship from the ational Research Council of Canada and went to MIT to conduct postdoctoral research under Julian Szekely.

In 1978, Dr. Sadoway joined the MIT faculty. He is best known for his expertise on batteries and has done a vast amount of research on how to improve the performance and longevity of portable power sources.  Dr. Sadoway is one of the world's leading researchers in the area of materials engineering for energy-storage technologies.

© 2012, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Posts
Renewable Energy Storage
The Crucial Role of Public Private Partnerships
Electric Vehicles Increasingly Competitive
Electric Vehicles Will Drive Demand for Lithium
Factors Determining Adoption Rate of EVs
Ford Partners with Google to Enhance Hybrid Efficiency
GM's Solar Powered Charging Stations

Green Science

Green science is very important to anyone who seeks to employ sustainable business practices. Although rarely explicitly communicated in an effective marketing message, scientific evidence must implicitly support Green marketing claims. By definition scientific investigation means that conclusions will always be subject to review. Therefore it is incumbent upon sustainable businesses owners to continually reevaluate their Green promises.

Atmospheric sciences, environmental chemistry, ecology, and geosciences have all contributed to the large and growing body of evidence. Taken as a whole the results confirm climate change, reductions in biodiversity, diminished water quality, soil contamination, resource depletion, and air pollution.

Those who try to dismiss the plethora of data ignore the facts. There are those who have funded environmental research as a stall tactic. Others argue that such things as climate change are part of a normal process citing the fact that we have experienced periods of global warming (and cooling) in the past. However it is a fact that our climate is warming faster as a consequence of human habitation. This should be obvious to even the most cynical scientist, taken as a whole the weight of the evidence is irrefutable. There is no simple panacea, but there is scientific consensus: Threats to our environment are real.

Marketing messages that pander to doubters may lose the attention of their core audience. There is adequate exposure to scientific evidence to discard the views of the politically motivated or intellectually questionable luddites who feel climate change is some kind of hoax. Effective Green marketing is often best when it implicitly incorporates sustainable attributes. Knowledge does not infer wisdom, but it is an important step on the road to intelligent stewardship. Scientific observation is an invaluable tool, what we do with it, is up to us.