Greenlist(tm) Bulletin 12/14/2007
This is the weekly bulletin of the TURI Library, reporting a selection of recently published titles we have acquired. Our pledge is to keep the bulletin relevant to your work and brief -- no more than 10 titles. You are welcome to send a message to jan@turi.org if you would like more information on any of the articles listed here.
Titles here, abstracts below:
- Green chemistry: industry accelerates new product rollout
- A survey of environmental, health and safety risk management information needs and practices among nanotechnology firms in the Massachusetts region
- MapEcos [website]
- Waterborne carbon increases threat of environmental mercury
- Literature review -- Flat panel displays: end of life management report
- ATHENA(r) EcoCalculator for Assemblies
- Small businesses take big steps into green practices
- BioInitiative Report: a rationale for a biologically-based public exposure standard for electromagnetic fields (ELF and RF)
1. Green chemistry: industry accelerates new product rollout
Author: Scott, Alex
Source: Chemical Week, October 24, 2007 pp23-26
Abstract: Green chemistry, also known as sustainable chemistry, is assuming an increasingly important position in R&D centers across the global chemical industry. Chemical manufacturers say they are attracted by the potentially lucrative markets for "greener" chemicals, from which companies' less sustainable products may be excluded. Drivers include tightening environmental regulations, such as the European Union's (EU) Registration, Evaluation, and Authorisation of Chemicals (Reach) program, that aim to curb the production and use of potentially harmful substances, and growing consumer demand for products that are energy saving and derived from renewable raw materials, executives say. The specific amount of R&D currently focused on green chemistries remains unclear, although industry leaders including Akzo Nobel, BASF, Bayer, Dow Chemical, DSM, Evonik Industries, and Sud-Chemie, among others, have launched innovation programs that feature a growing number of sustainable or green products, based on the broadest definition of the term. The number of applications for which greener chemicals or chemistries offer a distinct business advantage is increasing, industry executives say. Applications include batteries, solvents, catalysts, polyols, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals, as well as lower energy-using processes, they add.
2. A survey of environmental, health and safety risk management information needs and practices among nanotechnology firms in the Massachusetts region
Authors: Lindberg, John E.; Quinn, Margaret M.
Source: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, December 2007
Abstract: The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies has released the results of a new survey of New England-based nanotechnology companies aimed at discovering how firms in almost every sector of the economy address the possible environmental, health and safety (EHS) impacts of new nanoscale materials and products. The survey found that these firms lack a clear roadmap of government EHS expectations and regulations for successful commercialization, as well as the information needed to meet those expectations.
Last year, worldwide investment in nanotechnology topped $12 billion dollars and the value of nanotechnology goods manufactured globally reached $50 billion. But the survey indicates that as nanotech industrial and consumer applications enter the market, U.S. companies need more information and guidance from suppliers, trade associations, government regulatory bodies and others to manage risks effectively.
The report, authored by John Lindberg and Margaret Quinn of the University of Massachusetts Lowell, is drawn from an online survey distributed to 180 managers from nanotechnology firms in the Northeast. It included in-depth, follow-up interviews with 12 firms.
The region is home to one of the greatest concentrations of companies, universities, government laboratories and organizations working on nanotechnology in America. Some firms in the study are located in Cambridge, Mass., the nation’s second locality to consider a nanotechnology reporting ordinance.
Lindberg and Quinn found that 80 percent of large firms were taking steps to manage nanotechnology EHS risks, compared to only 33 percent of small and micro companies and 12 percent of firms at start-up stage.
Link: http://www.nanotechproject.org/145
3. MapEcos [website]
Source: MapMundi, 2007
Abstract: MapEcos is a collaborative website designed to provide an evenhanded view of industrial environmental performance. It combines information on industrial pollution with information from facility managers about their environmental improvement efforts.
Our information on industrial pollution comes from the US Environmental Protection Agency. MapEcos locates and summarizes pollution information for all of the facilities that reported to the agency's Toxic Release Inventory in 2005 (the most recent year for which data are available).
Our information about how managers are improving their facility's performance comes from the facility managers themselves. We have asked (via email) a representative from each of over 20,000 facilities to tell us about their environmental management, and we encouraged them to post this information on MapEcos. On MapEcos, you can search for facilities by name, corporate ownership, industry, and emissions level. You can also find the top emitters in any county or state. You can go to a particular location (address, city, or zip code), or you can just browse the map.
For each facility, we provide information about the volume of chemicals released directly into the environment by the facility (what we call onsite emissions), a hazard score for these emissions, and comparison information about trends and emissions from analogous facilities. Each facility also includes an "Management" tab which displays all of the data about a facility's environmental management that managers chose to divulge.
Link: http://mapecos.org
4. Waterborne carbon increases threat of environmental mercury
Source: TerraDaily, December 11, 2007
Abstract: Mercury is a potent neurotoxin and a worrisome environmental contaminant, but the severity of its threat appears to depend on what else is in the water. Researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison have found that the presence of dissolved organic material increases the biological risk of aqueous mercury and may even serve as an environmental mercury source.
Mercury is present throughout the environment in small quantities in rocks and in watery environments, including lakes, wetlands and oceans. It accumulates in fish living in mercury-contaminated waters, posing a health risk to animals and humans who eat the tainted fish.
The greatest threat comes from a form called methylmercury, which is more easily taken up by living tissues. The methylation process, therefore, is key to understanding the potential danger posed by environmental mercury, says UW-Madison geomicrobiologist John Moreau.
Many previous studies have focused on the chemical interactions between mercury and sulfur, which is known to bind to inorganic mercury and may regulate how well the bacteria can absorb it. However, scientists do not understand the factors that control the methylation process itself.
Moreau and colleagues at the U.S. Geological Survey, UW-Madison, the University of Colorado and Chapman University chose to look at the role of dissolved organic carbon (DOC), a richly colored brew created as plants and other organic materials decay into a soup of proteins, acids and other compounds. DOC can tint wetlands and streams shades of yellow to dark brown.
"We found that different DOCs have different positive effects on methylation - they both seem to promote mercury methylation, but to different degrees," Moreau explains.
Because DOC is virtually ubiquitous in aqueous environments, its effect on mercury processing may be an important factor in determining mercury bioavailability.
Link: http://www.terradaily.com/reports/
Waterborne_Carbon_Increases_Threat_Of_Environmental_Mercury_999.html
5. Literature review -- Flat panel displays: end of life management report
Source: King County (WA) Department of Natural Resources and Parks, Solid Waste Division, 2007
Abstract: The purpose of this report is to summarize available information obtained from the literature, Internet sources, and through conversations with manufacturers, recyclers, and others about:
• Dominant flat panel display technologies that are used in televisions, computer monitors, and other electronic devices;
• Potentially hazardous components contained within these devices;
• Potential health and environmental impacts associated with end-of-life management; and
• The potential for recycling of flat panel display devices and their components.
Flat panel displays (FPDs) are thin, lightweight video displays used in a variety of applications, including laptop and desktop computers, televisions, microdisplays, medical devices, and industrial instruments. They feature a flat surface and a thickness generally less than 4 inches. By 2008, devices that contain FPDs are projected to account for nearly 85 percent of the total U.S. demand for these products; by 2013, the percentage is predicted to reach 94 percent.
FPDs are predicted to replace cathode ray tubes (CRTs) in almost every application, particularly in desktop computer monitors and television sets. Liquid crystal displays (LCDs) are the dominant flat panel technology. In 2003, they accounted for approximately 85 percent of the demand for FPD devices in the United States. Plasma displays are expected to increase market share to 13 percent, primarily for high definition television (HDTV) and other large screen applications. Microdisplays, light emitting diode arrays, vacuum fluorescent displays, organic light-emitting diodes, and electroluminescent displays are projected to remain a small portion of the total flat panel market.
While relatively few FPD devices have entered the waste stream at this time, they represent a potentially large volume of material that will be reused, recycled, or discarded in the future. Potentially hazardous components and materials are contained both in the display unit itself and in the electronic device containing the display unit (e.g., computer monitor, television); these include substances common to electronic waste in general, for example lead, cadmium, chromium, antimony, beryllium, and brominated flame retardants. Several substances are unique to flat panels or are present in greater quantities in devices that contain flat panels; these include mercury and liquid crystals. Mercury is used to manufacture the cold cathode fluorescent lamps (CCFLs) that are used to backlight LCD panels.
Link: http://www.metrokc.gov/dnrp/swd/takeitback/electronics/documents/FPDReport.pdf
6. ATHENA(r) EcoCalculator for Assemblies
Source: Athena Institute, 2007
Abstract: The building sector is being called upon to help fight climate change by achieving ambitious reduction targets for greenhouse gas emissions while at the same time incorporating other “green” considerations. Life cycle assessment (LCA)–which allows the impartial comparison of building designs based on measures such as global warming potential–is an essential part of this effort and, thanks to the ATHENA® EcoCalculator for Assemblies, is now more accessible than ever before to mainstream design professionals.
With introduction of the EcoCalculator, architects, engineers and others now have access to instant LCA results for hundreds of common building assemblies. The results embedded in the tool are based on detailed assessments completed with the ATHENA®Impact Estimator for Buildings, which in turn uses ATHENA’s own widely-acclaimed datasets and data from the US Life Cycle Inventory Database (www.nrel.gov/lci).
Developed by the ATHENA Institute in association with the University of Minnesota and Morrison Hershfield Consulting Engineers, the tool was commissioned by the Green Building Initiative™ (GBI) for use with the Green Globes™ environmental assessment and rating system. Because of its value as an indicator of climate change impacts, the GBI also supported the team’s creation of a generic version for use by the entire sustainable design community.
Link: http://www.athenasmi.ca/tools/ecoCalculator/
7. Small businesses take big steps into green practices
Author: Iwata, Edward
Source: USA Today, December 2, 2007
Abstract: As environmental practices sweep much of the corporate world, U.S. small businesses also are jumping in.
Tens of thousands of small companies — from mom-and-pop stores to manufacturers — are going green by cutting energy costs and reducing the "carbon footprints" from their facilities, offices and fleets of vehicles.
Many work with corporate giants, such as Wal-Mart and General Motors, that now require supply-chain partners to adopt ecologically sound practices, says Joel Makower, founder of GreenBiz.com, an Oakland clearinghouse on business and environmental topics.
"Small businesses have barely scratched their potential," Makower says. "In every market now, there's a retailer, dry cleaner, auto mechanic, coffee shop with a green consciousness."
Small businesses report savings of 20% to 30% by making energy-saving moves, says Byron Kennard, executive director of the Center for Small Business and the Environment. "As energy and gasoline prices rise, small businesses can voluntarily and profitably lower their energy bills," he says.
It's too early to tell how many of the 26 million U.S. small-business owners are going green. But their numbers are rising.
Surveys by trade groups show that small firms are worried about the global climate, rising fuel costs and other environmental issues.
Some 80 small-business owners queried recently by the National Small Business Association, which represents 150,000 small firms, found that 73% would invest more in energy-saving products and services if energy prices keep rising, and 76% said that cutting energy costs would boost profits.
Link: http://www.usatoday.com/money/smallbusiness/2007-12-02-greenbiz_N.htm
8. BioInitiative Report: a rationale for a biologically-based public exposure standard for electromagnetic fields (ELF and RF)
Source: BioInitiative Working Group, 2007
Abstract: A working group composed of scientists, researchers and public health policy professionals (The BioInitiative Working Group) has joined together to document the information that must be considered in the international debate about the adequacy (or inadequacy) of existing public exposure standards. This Report is the product of an international research and public policy initiative to give an overview of what is known of biological effects that occur at low-intensity EMFs exposures (for both radiofrequency radiation RF and power-frequency ELF, and various forms of combined exposures that are now known to be bioactive). The Report examines the research and current standards and finds that these standards are far from adequate to protect public health.
Recognizing that other bodies in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, many European Union and eastern European countries as well as the World Health Organization are actively debating this topic, the BioInitiative Working Group has conducted a independent science and public health policy review process. The report presents solid science on this issue, and makes recommendations to decision-makers and the public. Conclusions of the individual authors, and overall conclusions are given in Table 2-1 (BioInitiative Overall Summary Chart).
Eleven (11) chapters that document key scientific studies and reviews identifying low-intensity effects of electromagnetic fields have been written by members of the BioInitiative Working Group. Section 16 and 17 have been prepared by public health and policy experts. These sections discuss the standard of evidence which should be applied in public health planning, how the scientific information should be evaluated in the context of prudent public health policy, and identifies the basis for taking precautionary and preventative actions that are proportionate to the knowledge at hand. They also evaluate the evidence for ELF that leads to a recommendation for new public safety limits (not precautionary or preventative actions, as need is demonstrated).
Link: http://www.bioinitiative.org/index.htm
You are welcome to send a message to jan@turi.org if you would like more information on any of these resources. Also, please tell us what topics you are particularly interested in monitoring, and who else should see Greenlist. An online search of the TURI Library catalog can be done at http://slk060.liberty3.net/turi for greater topic coverage.
This page updated Friday December 14 2007