label eco-efficiency analysis propylene carbonate
TRANSCRIPT
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 125.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Validated Eco-EfficiencyAnalysis Methodology
Label
Eco-Efficiency Analysis
Propylene Carbonate
January, 26th, 2004
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 225.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
The Label
An eco-efficiency analysis was performed in order to compare the environmental impactsand the costs from all life cycle stages of two copper wire enamel solvents, cresol andpropylene carbonate. Wire coatings, especially those based onpolyester imides, are traditionally produced with cresol as the solvent. Propylene carbonate can also be used as an alternative solvent. The eco-efficiency analysis showed that the environmental impacts between the two solvents are more striking than the differences in the life-cycle costs. Propylene carbonate is the most eco-efficient copper wire enamel solvent.
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 325.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Requirements met
1. Accomplished Eco-Efficiency Analysis according to the methodology certified by TÜV Rheinland/ Berlin-Brandenburg, Germany.
2. Verification of propylene carbonate to be more eco-efficient for the use as a solvent in wire coatings than other alternatives.3. Third party evaluation by Prof. Shonnard, Michigan TechUniversity (USA) (so-called Critical Review according ISO 14040 ff.).
4. Publication of the results via internet on website www.oeea.de, which is referred to on the label.5. Payment of the licence fee for the duration of three years.
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 425.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Certificate
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 525.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
EcoEco--efficiency analysisefficiency analysis
ComparisonComparison of alternative of alternative solvents forsolvents for thethe productionproduction of of wire wire
enamelsenamels
Silke Schmidt, GUP/CE Silke Schmidt, GUP/CE Hansjörg Nickel, EHansjörg Nickel, E--CZD/MGCZD/MGDominik Born, EDominik Born, E--CZD/MGCZD/MG
Ludwigshafen, Ludwigshafen, January January 20032003
ValidatedValidated ecoeco--efficiencyefficiency analysis methodanalysis method
Michigan Technological UniversityCritical Rev iewed Eco-Efficiency Analysis by
David R. Shonnard, Prof., Ph.D.Department of Chemical Engineering
Michigan-Technological UniversityHoughton, MI 49931 USA
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 625.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Objectives and planned use of the study
Target groups of the study– BASF Research– Decision-maker BASF – Decision-maker CZD/MG– Customers
Use of the study– Internal strategy finding– Opening up of a new market for
propylene carbonate
Objective of the studyA comparison was carried out between the use of propylene carbonate and cresol as solvents in the coating of wires.
The application properties of propylene carbonate are comparable to those of cresol. All quantitative and qualitative differences will be included if possible.
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 725.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Raw materials production and transportation
propylenecarbonate (PC)
Polyester imide(PEI)
wire enamel
Copper wire
PEI dissolvedin PC/ cresol
Production
System boundaries
Disposal
Disposal of
contaminated wastes
from the coating
Use
Application of the wire enamel
Application of alubricant
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 825.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Coating of the metallically pure copper wire in the coating plant
Copper wireDrawing ofthe wire
Removal of drawingagent residues
Winding wireCoating with lubricant
Wire is passed through coating plant 6-10 times
Application of the enamel;
Stoving; solvent evaporated and supplies energy for stoving;
crosslinking of the enamel
Cooling by air
40% polyester imide (PEI) wire enamel with 60% solvent
Process scheme
solvent
polyester imides
PEI dissolvedin solvent
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 925.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
0.7
1.0
1.30.71.01.3
Costs (normalized)
Envi
ronm
enta
l im
pact
(nor
mal
ized
)Propylene carbonate
Cresol
Comparison of alternative solvents for the production of wire enamels
Customer-relatedbenefit:
Production ofsolvents for the manufacture ofwire enamels for the coating of 1,000 m ofwinding wire(∅ 0.71 mm)(winding wire for use in motors)
Loweco-efficiency
Higheco-efficiency
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 1025.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Interpretation of the eco-efficiency portfolio
• Propylene carbonate is the most eco-efficient alternative for the coating of wires (distance from the diagonal is a measure for the eco-efficiency).
• The high environmental impact of cresol is due mainly to the high toxicity potential and the high risk potential of the solvent. Energy consumption, materials consumption and emissions only show slight differences between the individual alternatives.
• The costs for the two alternatives are about the same (propylene carbonate 0,588 Euro/CB; cresol 0,6 Euro/CB). The slight difference is due to the amount of solvent naphtha which is a little bit higher when cresol is used and the more expensive disposal of the residues from the cresolic alternative.
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 1125.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Total Total costscosts
1.82 1.83
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
Propylene carbonate Cresol
Euro
/CB
DisposalCoatingSolvent naphthaCresolPropylenecarbonate
Enamelproduction
Propylene carbonate: 1,30 Euro/kgCresol: 1,50 Euro/kg
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 1225.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Ecological fingerprint according to BASF
Least favorablealternative = 1; all others evaluatedrelative to this
0.00
0.50
1.00Energy consumption
Emissions
Toxicity potential
Risk potential
Materialsconsumption
Area required Propylene carbonateCresol
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 1325.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Interpretation of the ecological fingerprint
• There are no major differences in energy consumption, materials consumption and emissions between the alternatives considered.
• The different area required by the alternatives is due to the amount of solvent necessary for the customer's benefit.
• The main differences in the ecological fingerprint are obvious from the toxicity and risk potentials; cresol has both a high toxicity potential and a high risk potential.
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 1425.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Energy consumption of the alternatives
27.9 27.9
25.1 31.1
60.760.7
119.0 128.5
5.3 8.8
0.0
25.0
50.0
75.0
100.0
125.0
150.0
Propylene carbonate Cresol
MJ/
NE
CoatingSolvent naphthaCresolPropylenecarbonateEnamelproduction
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 1525.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Comparison of the normalized materials consumption figures
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Propylene carbonate Cresol
kg*a
/CB
SandBauxiteLimestoneIron orePhosphateSulfurRock saltLigniteOilCoalGas
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 1625.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Comparison of the global warming potentials (GWP)
The emissions of CO2, CH4, HHC and N2O are weighted according to their greenhouse potential.
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Propylene carbonate Cresol
g C
O2
equi
vale
nts/
CB
Coating
Solvent naphtha
Cresol
Propylene carbonate
Enamel production
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 1725.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Comparison of the photochemical ozone creation potentials (POCP)
The emissions of CH4 and NM VOCs are weighted according to their impact .
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Propylene carbonate Cresol
g et
hene
equi
vale
nts/
CB Coating
Solvent naphtha
Cresol
Propylene carbonate
Enamel production
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 1825.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Comparison of the acidification potentials (AP)
NOx, SO2, HCl and NH3 emissions are weighted according to their potential.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Propylene carbonate Cresol
g S
O2
equi
vale
nts/
CB
CoatingSolvent naphthaEnamel productionCresolPropylene carbonate
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 1925.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Comparison of the ozone depletion potential (ODP)
The emissions of halogenated hydrocarbons are weighted according to their impact.
0.00000
0.00050
0.00100
0.00150
0.00200
0.00250
0.00300
Propylene carbonate Cresol
g C
FC e
quiv
alen
ts/C
B
CoatingSolvent naphtha
CresolPropylene carbonate
Enamel production
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 2025.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Notes on the air emissions
The energy required for the coating process is the major contributor to global warming and acidification potential, however, these contributions are the same for both solvent alternatives. Since the energy required is independent of the solvent needed, the main differences of the individual potentials are due almost exclusively to the production of the solvents themselves.The high ozone depletion potential of the production of propylene carbonate is caused by the release of a relatively high amount of halogenated hydrocarbons. However, the ODP altogether has no impact on the emissions (cf. page 61; share of the ODP in the relevance of the air emissions: 2%).The production of cresol generally has a high impact on the air emissions considered.
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 2125.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Comparison of the normalized water emissions
* Release of a high amount of chloride in the production of the starting material propyleneoxide.
**
** Release of phosphate in the production of the intermediates in cresol production.
0100200300400500600700800900
1000
Propylene carbonate Cresol
Crit
ical
wast
ewat
er v
olum
em
³ /C
B CoatingSolvent naphthaEnamel productionCresolPropylene carbonate
** *
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 2225.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Comparison of the normalized solid waste generation
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Propylene carbonate Cresol
Was
te/C
B
CoatingSolvent naphthaEnamel productionCresolPropylene carbonate
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 2325.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Comparison of the toxicity potentials
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
Propylene carbonate Cresol
Disposal of wastes fromthe coating
Release of solventnaphtha
Release of the solvent in theapplication of the wire enamel
Production of solventnaphtha
Production of the wire enamel
Production of the solvent
T
Xi
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 2425.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Comparison of the risk potentials
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Propylene carbonate Cresol
Hazards to soil and surface watersby spilling or the like
Disposal of operatingsupplies from the coating
Coating of the wires(included: MAK value of the solvent)
Risk in transportation
Shortage of the raw materials required
Occupational accidents in the chemicalindustry
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 2525.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
0.7
1.0
1.30.71.01.3
Costs (normalized)
Envi
ronm
enta
l im
pact
(nor
mal
ized
)
Propylene carbonate
Cresol
Scenario 1: The risk of a raw material shortage of cresol no longer exists.
Customer-relatedbenefit:
Production ofsolvents for the manufacture ofwire enamels for the coating of 1,000 m ofwinding wire(∅ 0.71 mm)(winding wire for use in motors)
Loweco-efficiency
Higheco-efficiency
Light balls in the portfolioshow the base case.
Conclusion:
Even if the risk of cresol shortage is no longer a realistic risk the propylene carbonate is the more eco-efficient alternative.The risk potential has only a slight influence on the result.
Conclusion:
Even if the risk of cresol shortage is no longer a realistic risk the propylene carbonate is the more eco-efficient alternative.The risk potential has only a slight influence on the result.
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 2625.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
0.7
1.0
1.30.71.01.3
Costs (normalized)
Envi
ronm
enta
l im
pact
(nor
mal
ized
)
Propylene carbonate
Cresol
Customer-relatedbenefit:
Production ofsolvents for the manufacture ofwire enamels for the coating of 1,000 m ofwinding wire(∅ 0.71 mm)(winding wire for use in motors)
Loweco-efficiency
Higheco-efficiency
Light balls in the portfolioshow the base case.
Scenario 2: The solid content of the enamels is increased from 40% to 45% for the enamel containing cresol.
Conclusion:
If less Cresol is needed, the cresol alternative gets a little bit better concening its bad environmental influence. Propylencarbonat is still the most eco-efficient alternative.
Conclusion:
If less Cresol is needed, the cresol alternative gets a little bit better concening its bad environmental influence. Propylencarbonat is still the most eco-efficient alternative.
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 2725.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
0.7
1.0
1.30.71.01.3
Costs (normalized)
Envi
ronm
enta
l im
pact
(nor
mal
ized
)
Propylene carbonate
Cresol
Customer-relatedbenefit:
Production ofsolvents for the manufacture ofwire enamels for the coating of 1,000 m ofwinding wire(∅ 0.71 mm)(winding wire for use in motors)
Loweco-efficiency
Higheco-efficiency
Light balls in the portfolioshow the base case.
Scenario 3: The solid content of the enamels is increased from 40% to 45% for the enamel containing propylene carbonate.
Conclusion:
If less Propylencarbonat is needed, the alternative gets a little bit better concening its environmental influence. Propylencarbonat is clearly the most eco-efficient alternative.
Conclusion:
If less Propylencarbonat is needed, the alternative gets a little bit better concening its environmental influence. Propylencarbonat is clearly the most eco-efficient alternative.
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 2825.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Critical Review
Extract from the summary:
“…Overall, the inventory data for materials utilization and emissions are accurate. No major data inconsistencies with a negative impact on the quality of the study were detected, and the data and methods were presented transparently in the report.
The main conclusion that propylene carbonate is more eco-efficient compared to the cresol as a solvent in this wire coating application is consistent with the goals and assumptions of the study. The results of the study are highly credible. The entire study has been made in accordance with ISO 14040 - 14043. …”
Reviewer:David R. Shonnard, Prof., Ph.D.Department of Chemical EngineeringMichigan-Technological UniversityHoughton, MI 49931 USA
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 2925.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Eco-Efficiency ManagerBASF Aktiengesellschaft has developed a so-called Eco-Efficiency Manager, an easy-to-use program which enables customers to calculate eco-efficiency for their own specific situation. The manager is available for customers (see contact).
Comparison of the use of propylene carbonate and cresolas solvents in the coating of wires
T he figures in the blue fields can be changed!
Functional Unit: enamel wire coating of 1000 meters of wire (0,71 mm diameters)
Amount of required coating:Amount of enamel required calculated through the round copper weight:
weight of the round copper w 3,54 kg / meter
percentage of the coating (wet weight) 10%
energy for the coating 1,4 kW h / meter
Alte rnative A: polyester imide in propylene carbonate
Amount of wet film 40%
Alte rnative B: polyester imide in cresol
Amount of wet film 40%
Costs :
propylene carbonate 1,3 €/kg
cresol 1,5 €/kg
solvent naphtha 0,38 €/kg
costs of the PEIs 3 €/kg
0,7
1,0
1,30 ,71,01 ,3
costs (normaliz ed)
Envi
ronm
enta
l Im
pact
(nor
mal
ized) propylene
carbonate
cresol
Ecological Fingerprint
Risk Potential
Diagrams
Relevance Fac tors
Calcu la ting Factors
Exp lanation
low eco-efficiency
higheco-efficiency
bbbb
Eco-Efficiency 3025.01.2004
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Product Safety Regulations, Toxicology and Ecology
Contact
For more information about propylene carbonate and the Eco-Efficiency Manager please contact:
Hansjoerg NickelBASF AktiengesellschaftCZD/MG+49 621 [email protected]
For more information about the eco-efficiency analysis please contact:
Silke SchmidtBASF AktiengesellschaftGU/BK+49 621 [email protected]