Companies are interested in improving chemicals to reduce environmental impacts, also known as green chemistry. The 12 principles of green chemistry outline a framework for identifying a greener chemical or process, spanning aspects in health hazard, ecological risk, and resource efficiency across a product lifecycle. However, that framework does not detail how to measure performance. Furthermore, collecting the data required, beyond simple health hazard ratings, is resource intensive. This paper describes an approach for establishing green chemistry metrics (GCM), to evaluate chemicals and chemical processes against the 12 principles, using readily available data, such as the data compiled in compliance with the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). Using the GCM, chemicals or processes can be ranked by a hierarchy of metrics: (1) scores for each of the 12 principles, (2) three category rankings between new and improved chemicals/processes (improved resource use, increased energy efficiency, and reduced human and environmental hazards), and (3) a summary comparison ranking. The GCM approach is unique in that it is robust and flexible enough to encompass a diverse product portfolio, inexpensive to implement with on-hand data, based on generally accepted industry practices, and allows meaningful communications about chemical sustainability options.

Green chemistry is being implemented in chemical manufacturing to advance sustainability. A scouting survey and recent industry-wide reports find that several green chemistry principles and related metrics are routinely being implemented in the chemical manufacturing sector. A cross-section of stakeholders surveyed agree that broader adoption of the principles of green chemistry can be promoted by collaboration among companies to identify best practices and define opportunities to increase green chemistry implementation in chemical manufacturing. Active collaborative efforts to improve implementation include identifying common attributes of effective process metrics, developing means of tracking sector-wide implementation, and defining industrial needs for translating promising green chemistry ideas into implementable, cost-effective, and low business risk technologies.

A systems thinking approach to incorporating green chemistry and safety into laboratory culture is vital, as chemists will be at the molecular level of the innovative solutions to our global challenges. Training chemists to have the skills and culture to accomplish this feat in the safest way possible is pivotal to safe working conditions within the chemical industry and extends to society in a sustainable future for the planet. Today, we know green chemistry to be the framework for conducting chemistry in a manner that is conducive to life. In this article, we emphasize how framing green chemistry through the lens of systems thinking can build a culture of safety in the laboratory. This can shift the focus of safety culture from compliant to proactive, as assessing the risk of performing a reaction gives chemists ownership and control of their safety. The Guide to Green Chemistry Experiment for Undergraduate Organic Laboratories is highlighted as one approach. The guide utilizes the green chemistry metric, DOZN 2.0, which allows for a quantitative method toward recognizing and assessing the risks of hazards in a chemical reaction. Within the research enterprise, green chemistry is a cornerstone of the Green Laboratories movement and helps institutions to meet both safety and sustainability strategies. Yet, in order for these efforts to be successfully implemented, environmental health and safety (EH&S) and sustainability professionals must engage one another and communicate effectively. Understanding how motivational focus affects our perceptions and attitudes can allow stakeholders to better partner on Green Laboratories initiatives and more successfully implement these techniques.

No abstract

Random copolyesters of dimethyl terephthalate (DMT), ethylene glycol (EG) and propane-1,3-diol (PrG) and the homo-polyesters poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) and poly(trimethylene terephthalate) (PPrT) have been subjected to differential thermal analysis (DTA) and thermogravimetry (TG). Thermodynamic parameters like enthalpy of fusion (LJH,), entropy of fusion (LJS,) and percent crystallinity (X,) are discussed in terms of structural differences, particularly the effect of composition and chain flexibility. Kinetic order and activation energy for the thermal degradation of the copolyesters are discussed.