Green chemistry: understanding barriers and opportunities

We have a long way to go to mainstream green chemistry. Now in its 10th year, the Green Chemistry and Commerce Council (GC3), a network of some 70 companies across sectors and supply chains, has undertaken a number of projects, aimed at supporting dialogue and model collaborations that advance research, development and adoption of green chemistry solutions.

These efforts have helped to: establish approaches to enhance chemical information flow, through supply chains, while protecting confidential business information; support informed decision making through supply chains on alternatives to priority chemicals; educate professionals across firms on the fundamentals and value of green chemistry and adoption models; connect firms across sectors to learn from each other’s challenges, and approaches to overcoming them; and support funding for research and development in green chemistry. 

Ten years ago, major barriers that we identified were resistance to change, concerns about lower performance of green chemistry solutions, lack of data to make the business case, lack of good information through supply chains, and uncertainty about what we mean by green chemistry. While some of these have been addressed over the past ten years, several still remain. A survey of GC3 members in 2014 identified a number of practical impediments including the high cost of research and scaling of green chemistry solutions and the lack of technically, and economically, viable options.

To better understand the barriers to, and opportunities for, accelerating green chemistry, and to build its “Agenda for Mainstreaming Green Chemistry”, the GC3 commissioned three reports for its 10th annual innovators Roundtable, held in April at Nike, Inc:

Making the business and economic case for green chemistry (Released on 5 May). Co-sponsored with the American Sustainable Business Council and undertaken by the consultancy Trucost, this explores the business and value of green chemistry through document review, interviews with key experts, and data analysis;

Barriers to green chemistry adoption and means to accelerate growth along the supply chain (to be released in June). This report, researched by chemical industry experts T Fennelly & Associates, identifies, through more than 50 interviews and document analysis, nine key deterrents to growth as well as four accelerators to more effectively drive it; and 

Measuring progress towards green chemistry (to be released in June). This white paper, drafted by Environmental & Public Health Consulting, examines the landscape of different types of metrics that can and are being used to measure progress and proposes ways they can enhance this.

These three reports, combined with 10 years of cross-sectoral dialogue in the GC3, note that the opportunities for adoption are promising but activity in this space is sporadic and mostly in reaction to some identified problem, rather than part of a comprehensive innovation strategy. A number of key barriers still exist, including:

• the lack of robust analyses and data on economic opportunities and risks, specific to adoption on an industry-wide scale;
• limited, widely used metrics to evaluate progress in research and adoption;
• supply chain complexity, which creates fragmentation of demand for innovations by application, volume, specification, customer expectation and geography. Complex supply chains also create a barrier to change because they have established infrastructures, strong supplier-customer relationships and mature cost positions; 
• incumbency, where existing industry infrastructure is so efficient that it is hard for new entrants to compete with the established supply chain; 
• price/performance, where existing chemicals have set the standard. In other words they work well and are cost competitive. This becomes a greater barrier when the sustainability heads of brands or retailers ask for new, more sustainable options but the sourcing decision makers in the same organisation want those options at similar or lower cost;
• concerns about switching risk, where changing to green chemistry alternatives could lead to market failures, such as market loss due to a product’s poor performance, brand tarnishing and other hidden costs, such as changes to process or equipment, material incompatibility, workforce training, or customer education;
• lack of demand, where there is not enough, real or perceived, to make increased production worth the investment and where stakeholders are cautious to move forward to commit to demand or supply; and
• market confusion, where conflicting information from studies and research, policy uncertainties and lobbying efforts lead to the value and risks of a green chemistry investment being unclear.

While the challenges are real, these research efforts and dialogue have identified a number of enablers, many of which are related to addressing supply chain misalignment, including:

• increasing consumer awareness, particularly that of large institutional consumers and retailers – has been a significant driver of demand for safer chemistries. In the future, these large consumers need to have a greater understanding of the options available or on the horizon as well as realistic expectations of the process of developing and gaining required approvals and certifications for new chemicals;
• developing smart policies. If these are well-designed, both supportive and restrictive, they can provide important incentives for green chemistry development, adoption and scale. For example, the proposed Sustainable Chemistry Research and Development Act would establish an advisory committee and action agenda for incentives, technical and information support, collaborations, demonstration, and education;
• increasing collaboration and partnership across the value chain, including give and take (compromise). Addressing supply chain misalignment will require improved communication and joint working, at the earliest stages possible. This can help address issues such as cost and risk sharing, performance expectations, and demonstrating demand. Business to business collaboration needs to be supplemented with enhanced academic-business partnerships and mechanisms to link those with green chemistry challenges with those who might provide solutions;
• using market forces effectively to drive innovation. Recent efforts in the health care, building and retail sectors demonstrate the important leverage that large purchasers have. For example, the GC3 has convened a group of seven major retailers (the Retailer Leadership Council) to engage in dialogue with large chemical manufacturers to accelerate development of green chemistry solutions for priority chemical functions. Brands, for example, in the footwear and apparel sector, can also collaborate in a pre-competitive space to drive innovative solutions;
• understanding and informing the marketplace. Research is needed to better understand market forces and where they may be leveraged to the benefit of green chemistry, through knowledge of costs, barriers, policy and trends in demand, and workforce needs. Additionally, getting the right kind of information – on green chemistry solutions, incentives, success stories, etc - to the people who need it, such as supply chain actors and policy makers can help spur informed actions; 
• developing better data and narratives and a more consistent metric: there is a clear need for data to make a strong business case. This includes quantifiable economic and health-related data, but also case examples that provide both transferable models and compelling evidence of successes. A more effective set of metrics can help better characterise momentum towards mainstreaming green chemistry; and
• educating the next generation of leaders and champions in green chemistry. Building a cultural and institutional change will require significant changes in education – both within firms (and supply chains) and university training for scientists (as well as other disciplines) so that they can understand and evaluate how chemical design affects health and environment and are able to work in multi-disciplinary teams to solve product and material challenges, applying green chemistry techniques.

Recent research, and ten years of collaborative projects through the Green Chemistry and Commerce Council, have demonstrated that there is increasing energy and commitment toward mainstreaming green chemistry. The challenge is now in channelling that energy towards a strategic and integrated vision. 

While green chemistry may not yet be mainstream, the tools and approaches to getting there are evolving: cross-sectoral, value chain collaboration is growing; innovative new chemistries and materials are being developed; and education and awareness are progressing. The challenge for the coming years will be to move from niche to scale. 

anotec environmental      

alert

IDENTITY THEFT (1/2): If you’ve ever had your identity stolen, you’ll know the impact can be financially and emotionally...

Posted by NSW Police Force on Sunday, 17 May 2015

Odour management is key to anaerobic digestion plants

For the anaerobic digestion (AD) sector to flourish, two key principles need to be addressed. First, the Government needs to enforce the diversion of food waste from landfill and incineration. Second, existing AD facilities must be designed with the best available technology and to the best operational standards. Biffa is running Europe’s largest food waste processing AD facility. Its energy deal with Sainsbury’s Cannock store allows the retailer to be powered by its own food waste using an electricity cable direct from the AD plant in Poplars.

This project brought the plant under the national spotlight and cemented its status as one of the UK’s most influential green ventures. When the company took over the facility from its building and commissioning contractors, it was falling well short of its contractual requirements for odour control. The biofilters designed and built to treat odorous air from the plant were not fit for purpose, and created a focal point of dissension from residents and the regional Environment Agency (EA) team. As any operator of a waste facility will know, protecting neighbours from unwanted environmental effects is a crucial part of fostering acceptance and respon­sible long-term engagement with local residents and businesses. In the Poplars case, residents – some of whom lived just 200m from the plant – were disappointed about the level and frequency of odour escaping from the plant. Biffa was thereby obligated to develop a robust and bespoke solution for long-term community harmony. With board-level commitment from Biffa to invest in an exemplar facility, we had the in-house skills to make it happen.

The EA had no template or pre­defined standards for an odour management plan for AD, so it took the company’s in-house engineering team to come up with the solution. Poplar AD 1 They researched across other industries to establish best prac­tice in technologies and manage­ment procedures, gradually drafting the odour management plan step-by-step. Sampling and testing each possible source of odour, and then benchmarking against best available technologies, the team finally engineered a robust odour man­agement system for the Poplars site. Biffa invested in a novel vortex scrubber system which uses a combination of speed, turbulence and moisture to separate volatile organics (odorous compounds) from the air stream.

The removal rate of the vortex scrubber is far superior to that of a conventional scrubber: its installation made a significant and lasting improve­ment. Pre-treated air from the vortex scrubber was then passed to the main odour control treatment plant, providing a double barrier to odour escape. While this pro­vides an effective abatement solu­tion, further works were needed to ensure robust 24/7 operations.
Once the new scrubber was installed, addressing any remain­ing odour followed the law of diminishing returns. The team introduced systems, procedures and equipment to tackle the challenge. There was no single cure, so the final plan included aspects of training, housekeeping, instru­mentation, controls, maintenance and system management. Despite the years of challenging problems,
Biffa has addressed the issues head on, investing a further £4m in process improvements at Poplars. This demonstrates the value that the company places on this flagship facility. The conditions and checks set out in the detailed odour management plan ensure that the plant operates to the highest possible standards and achieves mini-mal impact on the local environ­ment. The Poplars team is now proud to have received zero compliance assessment reports from the EA in the past 12 months, as well as a dramatic fall in odour complaints.

 Poplar AD 2 Taking three years and 15 drafts, the odour management plan was finally approved by the EA in March 2015. The improvement has elevated Poplars AD to a ‘best in class’ status with the EA. It is a UK first for such a facility and sets an example for others in the industry to follow. Lisa Pinney, EA area manager for West Midlands, said: “Biffa has made significant investment at the Poplars site. Through 2014, the AD plant has operated not only in line with its permit but also best practice for the industry, which shows what can be achieved when we work together well.” The Poplars management plan is now being used as a template for Biffa’s mechanical biological treatment facility in West Sussex, and is publicly available on the EA website for other AD developers and operators to learn from. Following this experience, the EA is now requiring that any pro­posed AD facilities have an approved odour management plan before being granted a licence to operate. This will further help the industry to raise its standards and prove that, as a green solution for society, AD is here to stay and will only improve.
The UK generates 14.8 million tonnes of food waste each year, yet many AD facilities are struggling to access this feedstock. Without more Government support for food waste collections, we run the risk of plants failing, financially and operationally. So Biffa is working hard to convince the Gov­ernment that separate food waste collections from homes and businesses is the right way to go. We would encourage operators to review their odour manage­ment systems and procedures, and to learn from what has been, at times, a challenging process. Despite separate food waste col­lections being unsupported by the main political parties, the Green Investment Bank’s recent report Smarter, Greener Cities:

Ten Ways to Modernise and Improve UK Urban Infrastructure highlights AD as ready to be “rolled-out immediately and at scale across the country”. Tackling the technology weak spots will pay dividends, particu­larly issues of odour release in urban settings. The EA is right to insist that odour management plans are approved as a prerequi­site to new AD developments. If AD is to fulfil its potential as the poster child for low-carbon Britain, we all need to play our part in protecting its reputation and delivering excellence.

Dr John Casey is Energy Division managing director at Biffa Economies of scale made it possible Compared with most AD facilities in Europe, Poplars is a giant. It treats 120,000 tonnes of food waste each year and generates 6.5MW of renewable energy, enough to power 15,000 homes.

The scale of Poplars has made Biffa’s investments possible, and it is important that the company helps the industry to follow in its footsteps.

Controlling sources of odour In order of priority:

1 Eliminating or reducing the source of the odour
2 Disrupting the transmission pathway to site boundary 3 Actively capturing and treating the odour, or increasing dilution and dispersion.

http://anotec.com.au