J.J. ?

[Tim V.]

is the O2 chemicals green? if so what makes them green? I'm not talking the color either

 

[Dolly Llama]

please define your definition of "green" , first.

there is a sliding scale of what "green" means these days and most don't have a clue


..L.T.A.

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

Which one of these "Green" categories? Or all of them? And the greatest question is how you tightly define each category.

Any product that meets stringent definitions of each, is a rare find.

1.Outdoor environmental impact and footprint
2. Indoor environmental quality impact
3. Sustainability and the use of renewable resources
4. Packaging, refilling and recycling issues
5. Reducing use of natural resources
6. Health impact upon the occupants of the home or business, as well as the cleaning technician themselves.
7. Impact of the chemistry upon the construction and texture of the surface being cleaned
8. Cost - A product that requires more $ to obtain, requires more impact to acquire
9. Transport- Is the product locally manufactured, or is fuel expenditure required to transport?
10. Cleaning effectiveness - This may well be the most important measurement of whether the solution is truly "green." If cleaning is defined as "the proper removal, collection, and disposal of unwanted matter from a surface or environment," then cleaning itself is a "green process."

 

[renegade_cowboy]

I agree that its tough to "be it all green". I look at health safety first when choosing a cleaning products. I do what I can to be as "green" as I can in this industry. But I look at chemical safety first.

 

[Leslie Judson Jones]

I'm going to post an MSDS sheet for the organge oil. This is probably the most significant factor that makes the O2 system green...not using butyl which is a carcenogen, low phosphate, and very low Ph.

http://www.judsonlabs.com/JudsonWebForm ... neMSDS.pdf

les

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

Not to be a buzzkill, but....

Delimonene(citrus terpenes) used to enjoy a rather honeymoon status among hydrocarbon solvents for three principle reasons;

1. It is principally extracted from orange peels.
2. People perceive natural status as a safe source, especially plant derived, even if inedible.
3. Relatively new, the effects have not the scrutiny of traditional hydrocarbon solvents with track records.

Delimonene has grown a lot more controversial as a "Green solvent" in recent years, and may become quite a bit more so. In fact GreenSeal GS-37certification forbids all citrus terpenes in cleaning products (not that I support GS-37), but it remains.

I, myself used to formulate quite a bit with delimonene, with the idea that it was the safest of all alternatives. I still hold to its use. Just my perspective a s "green" product has softened a bit.

What follows is a perspective and conclusions that seem to be gaining some prevalence. if nothing else it is food for thought and discussion ...

"After years of emotional rhetoric about environmental correctness, and escalating VOC restrictions, most of us in the cleaning industry have been conditioned into thinking that petroleum-based solvents are by nature toxic pollutants, in contrast with vegetable-based products, which are supposedly nontoxic, biodegradable and “earth-friendly.” An article that has been circulating conveys some revealing clues about the way our society increasingly relies upon these kinds of impressions, rather than objective knowledge, when it comes to assessing the environmental impact of industrial solvents.

Citing a report on market trends by the Freedonia Group, the article characterizes alcohols, esters and terpenes as “green,” asserting that such solvents are inherently “eco-friendly,” fully biodegradable, and pose little threat of air pollution, in contrast to “hydrocarbon” and chlorinated solvents, which have traditionally been so valuable to the cleaning industry. I called the Freedonia Group to find the basis for these statements and found nothing but subjective impressions, based upon a common assumption that since trees are green, their byproducts must be good for the environment. Apparently this opinion is no fluke, as many people even within our industry are now prone to adopting these same values without question.

Given this carte blanche on anything vegetable, terpene-based hydrocarbons are thus presumed to exhibit negligible photochemical reactivity, leaving no polluting effects on ambient air. One terpene supplier even advertises their products as “naturally occurring … produced by the living tissue of plants.” This same company goes on to tout terpenes as not contributing to smog.

While such claims abound on the Internet, scientific smog chamber studies clearly show that nothing could be further from the truth. According to Dr. William Carter,1 a-Pinene and d-Limonene clock out at 0.96 and 0.72 on the reactivity scale, which falls right in between toluene, at 1.26, and ethyl benzene, at 0.55. The major constituents of mineral spirits, nonane and decanes, all fall well below 0.2 on Carter’s reactivity index, and yet they are headed for virtual extinction under California’s proposed VOC rules. How do the terpenes, which are about six times more photochemically reactive, get away with it? Perhaps the learning curve out there is still a little flat.

Between 1975 and 1989, three categories of air pollutants (CO, SOx and lead) had dropped a combined average of 62% in the United States. Yet, in spite of arduous controls over VOC emissions, average ozone levels had only declined by about 14%. This is most likely due to the fact that natural VOC emissions, which occur on a global scale 10 times higher than anthropogenic VOC emissions, pose a major roadblock to limiting VOC photochemical oxidation potential in many of America’s urban and rural areas. Regulated air pollutants that arise from atmospheric terpene reactions include ozone, smog, haze and fine particulate matter. Technically speaking, terpenes should also fall under the “greenhouse gas” category, which could target them for reductions under international protocols. Thus, given the diversity of pollutant categories that terpenes are known to contribute to, I would be hard-pressed to classify them as “green” simply because they grow on trees.

Another impression that is often conveyed in the industry leads people to believe that biodegradability is somehow limited to terpenes or other “natural” vegetation-based raw materials. However, it is this very same quality that enables petroleum derivatives to be readily broken down, processed and absorbed by numerous organisms in the environment. Environmental researcher Bernd Simoneit explains how toxic terpenes and other VOCs are effectively neutralized in the environment: “Diterpenoids in paper pulping effluents have been demonstrated to be toxic to fish ... Biodegradation or detoxification of diterpenes has been elucidated with the microorganisms Flavobacterium resinovorum and Alcaligenes eutrophus. Certain yeast and fungal strains can metabolize resin acids. The pinenes can be microbially oxidized by Aspergillus niger. Vegetation can take up and convert organic pollutant compounds as well as natural emissions. Gaseous hydrocarbons, aromatic hydrocarbons, alcohols, aldehydes, ketones, acids, and phenols can be detoxified by plants after absorption.”2

Obviously, natural ecosystem management can go only so far when faced with voluminous spills. So comparing oranges to oranges, what would be the environmental impact of a 10,000-gallon spill of xylene, compared with natural gum turpentine, or concentrated citrus oil? Environmentally speaking, there would probably be little difference. Most likely, local terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems would be temporarily sterilized.

All of these industrial concentrates share the typical properties of organic solvents. In addition to toxicity, limonene and turpentine are both flammable liquids, with flash points of 115ºF and 95ºF, respectively, earning them the same shipping status as most aromatic hydrocarbons, Class 3, Packing Group III. Ever heard of “green” hazardous waste? Well, you better get used to it — the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act isn’t going away anytime soon. Waste streams with flash points below 140ºF are still hazardous by ignitability, classified as D001 waste, regardless of their “natural” origin.

Affordability is another important consideration in the assessment of earth-friendly qualities. It takes a great deal of raw material unit acquisition and processing to achieve the same volume of solvent from pine forests as we get from oil wells. That’s one reason why citrus terpenes run anywhere from 10 to 20 times higher than petroleum solvents. If affordability is an indicator for ecologically correct goods and services, which solvent is greener, turpentine at $9 per gallon, terpenes at $14–$24, or xylene at $1.20?

In light of resource supply and demand, what is so “green” about terpenes? While citrus oil is extracted from waste citrus rinds, pinenes come from conifers. The citrus oil market is obviously limited by agricultural resources and contingencies. Now consider the environmental ramifications of an entire industrial sector that would shift its demand from oil wells to coniferous forests and citrus groves, in search of raw materials. What is so green about switching from contained oil wells, pumping from underground reserves, to a significant expansion in timber and agriculture? How will that affect the future of existing grasslands, wetlands, rivers and other valued ecosystems and habitats? How can we really support such a shift in demand at the same time that we are rapidly expanding our national park system? Perhaps we should first take note of the hostile social, political and regulatory forces that currently threaten the timber industry before putting our corporate eggs into that basket.

Along with being earth-friendly, “green” status also implies being free of health hazards. Don’t forget though that the natural solvent, ethanol, derived primarily from corn or barley distillates, is responsible for much of the world’s suffering — not only from dysfunctional lives and relationships, traffic mortality from drunk driving, murder, rape and other crimes, but also for severe acute and chronic health effects including CNS depression and deterioration, liver and kidney disease, birth defects, significant cancer rates, and of course death. Wood alcohol, another good old-fashioned “green” solvent, is so poisonous that it can cause permanent blindness, coma and even death from ingestion of relatively low doses.

Now notice the health hazards listed on a can of gum turpentine: “Danger! Vapor Harmful. May affect brain or nervous system causing dizziness, headache or nausea. Causes nose and throat irritation. May be harmful if absorbed through skin. Notice: Reports have associated repeated and prolonged occupational overexposure to solvents with permanent brain and nervous system damage. Intentional misuse by deliberately concentrating and inhaling the contents may be harmful or fatal. Contains terpenes which can cause kidney and bladder damage ... Do not breathe vapors or spray mist. Vapors may cause flash fire.”

Coincidentally, the label for that 100%-natural solvent reads exactly like one for the natural petroleum distillate, xylene. One MSDS for steam-distilled wood turpentine even adds the following verbiage: “Ingestion causes gastric pain, nausea, vomiting, coughing and choking. Adult lethal dose anticipated to be 4–6 oz., with death usually due to respiratory failure.”

Limonene, which is usually accompanied by methyl pyrrolidone or other petroleum-based hydrocarbons in paint strippers is touted in “green” purchasing guides as the active ingredient in “eco-friendly” cleaning products, pet dips, and pesticides. But in fact, limonene concentrate is a hazardous industrial chemical that, like any other concentrated organic solution, can pose harmful acute and chronic health effects. The following verbiage adorns the MSDS for a popular citrus terpene concentrate: “… Harmful if swallowed. Ingestion may cause vomiting, headache, and other medical problems. May be irritating to skin and eyes. Skin contact may cause slight redness. Contains a potential skin sensitizer. Eye contact can cause moderate to high irritation. Inhalation can cause nose, throat, and respiratory tract irritation, coughing and headache. Prolonged or repeated exposure can cause drying, defatting, and dermatitis of skin.”

Notice, too, that terpenes are not just toxic to humans, but the environment as well: “Do not hose spills down drains, sewers, or waterways. D-Limonene may be toxic to aquatic organisms.”

Limonene is also a known carcinogen in male rats. One of the more surprising specifications that citrus terpene suppliers now list on their concentrates is residual aldehyde content, just one family of toxic chemicals that are naturally occurring in vegetation-based concentrates. Since OSHA has a special standard dedicated to formaldehyde, users of “natural” solvents may be in store for new industrial hygiene programs that they never anticipated. Oh, and don’t forget, unlike agricultural concentrates, crude oil contains no residual pesticides.

So don’t assume that just because it comes from cereals, trees or lemon peels, it is intrinsically safe, under any conditions of use. There is no such thing as a free lunch. We would still have hazard communication and most of the other regulatory requirements, even if we absorbed the significant costs of switching over to “green” solvents.

I’m not saying that there is no place for vegetable-based organics in industry. Let’s just not get carried away with romanticism, for lack of objective risk assessment. Generalizations that are based upon subjective impressions or associations do not render hazardous chemicals nonhazardous, whether petroleum or vegetable in origin. Seeing how misleading such generalizations can be, let us therefore be careful not to rashly assess goods and services without first reading the fine print. What we assume to be “green” may actually be “browner” than the old-fashioned standards, in the light of good old-fashioned scrutiny."

 

[Dolly Llama]

"Biodegradation or detoxification of diterpenes has been elucidated with the microorganisms Flavobacterium resinovorum and Alcaligenes eutrophus."

I knew that......................... what?



elucidated



transitive verb : to make lucid especially by explanation or analysis <elucidate a text> intransitive verb : to give a clarifying explanation




...L.T.A.

 

[captaincarpet]

Shawn:

Now thet was a good post!

 

[Greenie]

Bring on the Butyl?

Great cause now we can get the cost of JJ down to really embarrass the mainstream.

 

[Art Kelley]

Not to be a buzzkill, but....

Limonene is also a known carcinogen in male rats. ."

To me, that is the most striking point in Shawn's fine post. The amount of product we injest into our systems prespraying carpets every hour, every day, for years at a time, is significient and will have an important effect on our health in the long term. I make a conscious effort to stay away from products that contain butyls and delimonene used in the broad manner of prespraying carpets. I do not want to die the same cancer death as my father and my brother.

 

[Mikey P]

I had to dump my tank in a sewer clean out today be fore starting another job.


20 seconds in and a cast iron cap ten feet away shot up and about 20 pounds of raw turd came burping out all over the side walk. Corn, nuts, you name it.
For some strange reason two cloth wrapped turd burritos/diaper looking things came out as well. Never seen or imagined any thing like ever before.

I completely ruined a good square 1/4 mile of peaceful urban squall for the evening.



That was not too Green of me.

 

[Leslie Judson Jones]

Not to be a buzzkill, but....



*TOO MUCH WATER CAN KILL YOU *
WATER INTOXICATION
The facts you need to save your life
By TNT
Rule #1 - you can’t drink too much water.
Rule #2 - too much salt will kill you eventually.

If you live by those 2 rules - and you exercise / work regularly in hot weather, read on, it just might save your health.

The truth is, too much water and not enough salt can kill you. Most people know that dehydration can cause serious health consequences. What most don’t realize is that too much of a good thing — WATER — can also be dangerous, even deadly.

They call it WATER INTOXICATION or more technically HYPONATREMIA. It happens when the body’s balance of salt and water become quickly diluted. It affects the production of nerve impulses, and impairs mental processes. Cells take on extra water and expand. As they swell, they put stress on the body’s organs, particularly the brain, which has little room to expand within the skull. Sometimes Hyponatremia is caused by an underlying medical condition.

Hyponatremia isn’t unique to the military. Indeed, marathon runners, tri-athletes, even high-desert hikers all can succumb. “Most people aren’t aware of the risk of drinking too much water,” said Bob Murray, director of Gatorade Sports Science Institute. Sport drinks are engineered to replace both salt and fluids depleted during exercise. Drinking sports drinks can help; but it alone can’t maintain adequate sodium levels for people engaging in rigorous, endurance–level activity.

The point is you need to replenish not only the fluids you lose when you sweat, but the salt as well. Nothing that comes out of your body is pure water. So you’ve got to replace it with both the salt and water, Not Just Water.

Water Intoxication typically occurs over 4 to 6 hours or more. It attacks participants in High–Endurance events, such as marathons, long road marches and triathlons in which participants swim, bicycle and run long distances in non–stop succession.

WHY YOU NEED SODIUM

Sodium helps maintain the body’s electrical processes essential to transmitting nerve impulses and contracting muscles. When the body’s sodium content is depleted at the same time water level is increased, cells absorb more water and swell. Excessive water in the brain cells can cause seizures and in rare cases death.

TAKE RESPONSIBILITY

(1) If you are drinking and drinking and still feel horrible you need to let someone know.

(2) Besides setting drinking limits, you can maintain proper sodium level by eating chow hall food or MRE’s.

(3) Follow Hydration Instructions based on Activity Levels as well as Temperature Levels.

The Problems with Hyponatremia is that conditions may be accelerated by some existing physical condition such as;

(1) Cystic fibrosis – a condition that causes a person to lose large amount of sodium through sweating.

(2) Another problem is that initial symptoms of Hyponatremia – dizziness & headaches are the same for Dehydration and Heat Exhaustion. But the repeated vomiting common with Hyponatremia usually doesn’t occur with dehydration or heat exhaustion. So if they are not making a rapid recovery and vomiting. It’s recommending that they should be evacuated because they might have Hyponatremia.

Although civilian fatalities are rare, most race directors have seen cases that presented with seizures or comas and had to be hospitalized and some times put on the ventilator. While Hyponatremia is preventable, it also is highly treatable. Depending on the severity; the condition can be corrected by eating salted food or in more serious cases; by administering Saline Solution directly into the blood stream with IV. But only a small percentage require hospitalization.

Note: IV should only be administered by qualified medical personnel.

To Much of a Good thing

People have assumed that it’s difficult or impossible to get too much of a good thing and that if you drink too much your kidneys will get rid of the excess water. That’s not necessarily true. On average, during rest the body can rid itself of 1 to 1 ½ quarts of water in an hour through urination. If you drink more than that per hour, in excess of what you need, the body will retain water and dilute body fluids.

3 key factors

Physical conditioning, genetics, acclimatization to heat determines how much sodium you lose through sweat. The better your physical conditioning and the better your heat acclimation the more sodium you will retain.

How much salt you need to consume depends largely on how active you are. Athletes and Soldiers who carry a full pack 10 miles a day needs more than those whose primary job keeps them behind a desk.

The American Heart Association recommends daily intakes of no more than 2,400mg. of sodium per day, about 1 ¼ teaspoon. But Murray said; "people who are active for more than a few hour can sweat out many times that amount".

While rate vary; Murray said that for an hour’s workout at the gym most people can sweat ¾ of a quart to 1 ½ quart an hour and sometimes twice that rate. The average person will sweat about 1 gram of sodium for every quart of sweat. So those amounts should be replenished through food and sport drinks.

But Don’t Stop drinking water, you just need balance.

To help maintain the proper fluid and salt level; its advised that you weigh yourself before and after heavy physical exercises. For each pound lost, drink 1 pint of fluid. But if you weigh more you’ve drank too much. Says Armstrong former president of American College of Sports Medicine.

Telling the Difference

Although the symptoms are similar in both dehydration and Hyponatremia, there are some differences. With hyponatremia the person is more likely to vomit repeatedly than someone suffering from dehydration is. Seizures are more likely also.

New Medical Evacuation Guidelines

If the person vomits at least twice, and hasn’t shown marked recovery after 1 hour of re-hydration and continues to generally deteriorate they need medical help.

Equal Opportunity Health Risk

In the general population hyponatremia seem to occur more often in women, but it also occurs in men. People who tend to become hyponatremic are vigilant water drinkers who maintain low– salt diets. As a rule of thumb people who drink more than 3 quarts of fluids a day need to be certain to get enough salt. The dietary guidelines that recommend watching salt consumption are great for couch potatoes. But when people are physically active the rules change. And don’t think you can maintain a low– salt diet and make–up for it with sport drinks. Sport drinks aren’t salty enough.

Tips to Prevent Hyponatremia

(1) Switch to a saltier diet in anticipation of High Endurance activity, whether it’s running a marathon or a long road march.

(2) Eat pretzels over the last half of a long race or march.

(3) Favor sport drinks over water and drink 5 to 8 ounces every 15 to 20 minutes.

(4) Young, healthy and very physically active people need salt. THE EXCEPTIONS: those with high blood pressures or kidney disease.

(5) Replace the fluid you’re losing while you exercise. The best thing to drink if you want to work hard and recover quickly isn’t water. It’s a sport drink that can replenish Electrolytes and Nutrients lost through sweat.

Hyponatremia symptoms

(1) Nausea and vomiting

(2) Disorientation

(3) Lack of coordination

(4) Headaches

(5) Dizziness

(6) Looks an awful lot like those of Dehydration

How too much water makes you sick

(1) Exposure to heat and exercise: The body cools itself by sweating, carrying sodium and water out through the skin.

(2) Drinking water only: Replenishing fluids by drinking only water dilutes the sodium level in the fluid surrounding the body’s cells.

(3) Cell reaction: The relative imbalance of sodium outside the cells causes them to absorb excess water, swelling their size. If this happens to rapidly, it can inflame the lungs, swell the brain and possibly cause death.


FLUID REPLACEMENT GUIDELINES

When temperatures climb, people need more rest and water to keep working. The work – rest cycles and amounts of water that the Army says are needed to sustain performance and hydration for at least 4 hours of work:

Source: u.s. army research institute of environmental medicine

Average service member wearing hot weather BDU’s
HEAT CATAGORY TEMPERATURE FAHRENHEIT EASY WORK MODERATE WORK HARD WORK
Work/Rest Cycle (Minutes) Water Intake (Qts) Work/Rest Cycle (Minutes) Water Intake (Qts) Work/Rest Cycle (Minutes) Water Intake (Qts)
1 78-81.9 No Limit 0.5 No Limit 0.75 40/20 0.75
2 82-84.9 No Limit 0.5 50/10 0.75 40/20 0.75
3 85-87.9 No Limit 0.75 40/20 0.75 30/30 1
4 88-89.9 No Limit 0.75 30/30 0.75 20/40 1
5 >90 50/10 1 20/40 1 10/50 1


Examples of work intensities are shown below
EASY WORK MODERATE WORK HARD WORK
weapon maintenance walking on loose sand2.5 mph, no load walking on hard surfaces at 3.5 mph with more than a 40# load
walking on hard surfaces at 2.5 mph with less than a 30# load walking on hard surfaces at 3.5 mph with less than a 40# load walking on loose sand at 2.5 with load
rifle drills with load calisthenics
marksmanship training patrolling
individual movement techniques (low crawl)
digging foxhole


NOTE: you shouldn’t drink more than 1 ½ qts of water an hr. or more than 12 qts a day.
TNT



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Desk Jockey]

So correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying we are paying at least 3-times as much for the terpenes and they are not any better environmentally that those on the hit list?

:shock:

 

[Greenie]

This what i got from Shawn's brief post:

"I’m not saying that there is no place for vegetable-based organics in industry. Let’s just not get carried away with romanticism, for lack of objective risk assessment. Generalizations that are based upon subjective impressions or associations do not render hazardous chemicals nonhazardous, whether petroleum or vegetable in origin. Seeing how misleading such generalizations can be, let us therefore be careful not to rashly assess goods and services without first reading the fine print. What we assume to be “green” may actually be “browner” than the old-fashioned standards, in the light of good old-fashioned scrutiny."

I STILL feel better about an ounce of D-limonene than I do about an ounce of Butyl on the truck....period.

I'm also reasonable, I don't think if something has 1/2 of 1% butyl content, you are going to grow a third eye and adopt the nickname Blinky, I'll bet 1/2 of the cleaners under the kitchen sink contain butyl and your wife loves her 409.

 

[Desk Jockey]

I don't know Greenie, have you ever noticed how ugly carpet cleaners are, I blame the butyl. :wink:

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

I STILL feel better about an ounce of D-limonene than I do about an ounce of Butyl on the truck....period.

Alright, that's fair.

However, that was never disputed. The greater point is that Delimonene being labeled "Green" is strictly a subjective marketing point, and not an objective environmental or health related descriptive assessment. There are many plant extracts wherein incidental exposure is of no great concern. But to then quantify turpentine, citrus terpenes, benzaldehyde, and the like as "safe" alternatives, just because of their seemingly harmless origins, to the point of being "green" is way off the chart.

Maybe its not as bad as calling Sunshine Makers' "Simple Green" a Green product, as SG contains a relatively enormous amount of Butyl Cellosolve. But it is still erroneous.

 

[renegade_cowboy]

This is a great thread. It shows the kinks in the armour regarding the green movement. I think there needs to be better regulations and defination on what green is as related to our industry. I think over time these questions will be answered and defined but until now its a free for all. Just because it says green may not mean you can drink it or its as healthy as water. Buyer beware.

We all know "green" cleaning products are going to be a bigger part of the industry in the future, so who is responsible for regulation and standards? EPA? Government? IICRC? Chemical makers?

 

[Leslie Judson Jones]

Shawn, I appreciate you putting information up concerning D-limonene …but seeing that this thread was directed to my product, Judson Juice, and you posted this incorrect information, I feel you have been extremely misleading. If you had been responding to a post of D-limonene cleaners in general, then this information might have been warranted.

I went to extremes before releasing the Judson Juice product to the market to make sure I was using the absolute best raw materials that can be obtained. What I would like for you to do is to go to the MSDS sheet of the D-limonene product that I am using. Scroll down to section 15. You will see Proposition 65, The California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986. Will you please post what it says about the D-limonene that I am using in my product?

http://www.judsonlabs.com/JudsonWebForm ... neMSDS.pdf

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

Les,

It says it is not listed as a carcinogen. Which is not saying anything, other than that the sate of California does not consider it to cause cancer in humans. Most hydrocarbon solvents also fit this description.

While carcinogenicity would disqualify anything from being "green", lack of carcinogenicity is not in any way a de-facto indicator of the positive nature of environmental and health stature of a chemical.

While not totally irrelevant to this thread, the proposition 65 exclusion is not a singular "green" status indicator.

But make no mistake, I am not the opponent of delimonene that you might insinuate. I simply do not think it is completely responsible to characterize it as so safe as to be "Green", in any context. And that was the principle subject of this thread. Moreover, the bulk subject matter of my particular post was to point out some of the misconceptions that "naturally derived" solvents seem to enjoy, often quite erroneously.

While some people look at things quite carefully, sometimes they are not afforded the benefits of hindsight. More recent studies have pointed out that citrus terpenes have some the same issues of environmental incompatibilities as other terpenes. Why? Simply because they are so chemically similar, whether we like it or not.

 

[Leslie Judson Jones]

Shawn, I see that you are a very serious person. So what did you mean by the term Buzzkill?

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

"Buzzkill", in the context as meant:

A person or thing that puts a damper on all the good and happy thoughts within a prevalent medium by the issuance of sobering or serious news/information.

 

[Leslie Judson Jones]

"Buzzkill", in the context as meant:

A person or thing that puts a damper on all the good and happy thoughts within a prevalent medium by the issuance of sobering or serious news/information.

I get the part about the damper on all good and happy thoughts, but the part I don't get is the part about "the sobering or serious news information".

When you posted your information on D-Limonene, were you talking about this specific D-Limonene I'm using?

PRODUCT DATA
Preparation Date: May 2006

DESCRIPTION

D-Limonene is a biodegradable solvent occurring in nature as the main component of orange peel oil. D-Limonene’s positive environmental profile and pleasant orange aroma have earned the product acceptance in many diverse chemical applications. D-Limonene can be used in its pure form, blended with other solvents, or easily emulsified to make water soluble cleaning products. D-Limonene is 100% bio-based and is GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) rated.


USES & APPLICATIONS

D-Limonene is a safer alternative to toxic, hazardous, and dangerous petroleum-derived chemicals. It can be used to formulate parts cleaner, engine degreaser (automotive, aircraft, and aerospace industries), electronics cleaner, tar cleaner, asphalt release agent, graffiti remover, grease trap maintainer, heat transfer fluid, lift station and sewage treatment solvent.

D-Limonene is excellent in household, institutional and industrial product formulations such as: hand cleaner, adhesive remover, hard surface cleaner, floor cleaner, automotive cleaner, ink cleaners, carpet/stain cleaner, metal cleaner, petroleum tank cleaner, asbestos abatement cleaner, and oil field solvents. It is also commonly used as a an aerosol ingredient, fragrance additive, or odor mask in formulated products.

New applications for D-Limonene are emerging daily. D-Limonene is also showing promise in medical and pharmaceutical fields.

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

When you posted your information on D-Limonene, were you talking about this specific D-Limonene I'm using?

Yes, indeed.

And I also have seen the same and similar statements about d-limonene/limonene/delimonene being "generally regarded as safe" by proponents of the product. In my post is even referenced an entity making such a claim. When I was a formulator myself, I also was intrigued by the potential safety of d-limonene as an alternative solvent. In speaking to Sunkist, the initial vendor from whom we purchased d-limonene, the sales pitch included the mention of the food uses of rinds or "zests" of oranges, when used as a spice-like constituent to jazz up some edibles. Most certainly have heard of adding a "twist" to a beverage mixer. What we are talking about is taking a sliver of citrus rind and twisting it to release the aromatic volatile oils in the rind, which is essentially unfiltered d-limonene. When consumed in these rather insignificant quantities, the product presents no relative safety hazard that we know of.

Now, when we instead take that same "spice-like" chemical, and go from milligrams of exposure to grams or kilograms, one might assume that the relative safety is of little or no concern, especially when we ponder the source as being nothing more than the zest of an orange. However, not until ten or fifteen years ago did enterprising companies look to this same "natural resource" as a viable alternative to hydrocarbon solvents, which were taking a hit as being potentially damaging to the environment. Formulators sought something that would be a popular alternative to things like Stoddard Solvent, Mineral Spirits, and other medium volatile hydrocarbon solvents derived from petroleum. Pine oil terpenes have been around for a while, and we do know of their potential hazzards. Orange oil seemed to have some potential, because odor was extremely palatable, and it had a clear preconception of safety. But that is all it was, a preconception. producers like Sunkist and Florida Chemical jumped on it with vigor and virtually nobody had an impetus to counter the enthusiasm. Naturalists saw the product as the panacea of all solvents, so to speak. Why? Simply because it had all the attributes they wanted to see. First, it was seemingly a waste product of agriculture. Second, it was all-natural, by all accounts. Third, it had seen use as the spice-like food additive as in rind zest.

Not until recently have we really looked into the the "gift horses mouth" to compare it's chemical makeup with other plant terpenes to determine that there are more similarities than differences. What previously had been recognized as GRAS by all those who had an opinion has changed as time has passed and no longer is there a consensus. Certainly the previous preconceptions that orange oil is by nature a "green" product has been called into question by the actual chemical characteristics that citrus terpenes share with other terpenes.

Again, I have to stress that I am by no means suggesting that use of delimonene is in anyway approaching devious or even less than the right thing to do. What I am saying is that to characterize the solvent as "green" tends to violate a great number of the definitions of the term, possibly more than it does to be consistent with such. It is not an attack on the product, or entities that utilize it. But that there exists some serious alternate points of view having to do with similarities to chemicals that do not enjoy any semblance of environmental compatibility acceptance.

 

[captaincarpet]

WOW This is what a board should be right here... I'm impressed with JJ and Shawn... This is what all BB's should aspire to be!

 

[SRI Cleaning]

Well said Shawn!

 

[DRScrivner]

Well said Anthony!

 

[Leslie Judson Jones]

I'm not going to get into a word battle with Shawn. What I am going to do is defend my product and back what I say.

#1 The D-Limonene I use is 100% biobased and is GRAS rated. It will be this way until proven otherwise.

#2 The D-Limonene that I am using is not a carcinogen.

#3 To answer the original post, Judson Juice is a green chemical until PROVEN otherwise.

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

And i want to say that I am sorry if our discourse seemed to be a "battle".

I don't disagree with your #1 and #2 there, either.

The #3, is simply subject to interpretation. One may subscribe to any of a myriad of definitions of the term "Green" and from a marketing standpoint, announce that the subject product is "Green" by their own standard. Since there is no regulation of the term as of yet, the standard is set by the beholder. So in essence, the pronouncement need only be followed by the qualifier, "according to whom". If the statement is only self supporting, or meets only one or a few definitions, then it follows that almost anyone could make their own determination that the statement is equally false for it does not meet their own differing set of standards. the concept of, "until proven otherwise", becomes a moot point.

The bottom line is that we can agree to disagree on aspects of definition, as long as both points are supported with sound reasoning and no legal entity has decided the matter. Any consensus definition of Green is probably a long way away and as we have seen even the CRI and GreenSeal have completely parted company on an agreement of standards.

Respectfully,

-Shawn-

 

[Leslie Judson Jones]

Shawn,

I am 49 years old and I've seen this industry basically from the beginning. I have never seen any other industry become so saturated with products that take advantage of the end user.

I am referring to equipment and chemicals. For instance, when I first wanted to get a green seal for the O2 System, I started shopping the market. I thought this green seal deal was a government entity.

Then I contacted all the so-called Green Seal agencies and discovered that they were actually all privately owned companies. When I got all their standards I realized they were all different.

The money they wanted for "Green Seal" approval was ridiculous! So I kept shopping the market until I found a small company in Columbia, SC that is mainly into janitorial chemicals and ended up getting their seal, strictly because it was the lowest price and they were local.

I did not use their standards as a minimum when it comes to development of the O2 System. I took it on as a personal endeavor to make sure that I developed a product that was as safe as possible.


The bottom line is this: What the industry needs more than anything is someone like you to weed out the conartists from the legitimate businesses.

What I would like to see you do is form a governing body and determine an absolute standard for "green" chemicals.

I also think Mikey's Board is fortunate to have you on board and I do agree posts like this is what makes Mikey's Board differnt from any other.

Respectfully,

LES

 

[Mikey P]

Shawn told me today that he invited Les to stay at his home during MF5.


I wonder what breakfast juice they will be partaking in.