ASTM E3027-2017 Standard Guide for Making Sustainability-Related Chemical Selection Decisions in the Life-Cycle of Products《产品生命周期相关可持续性化学选择决策制定的标准指南》.pdf

《ASTM E3027-2017 Standard Guide for Making Sustainability-Related Chemical Selection Decisions in the Life-Cycle of Products《产品生命周期相关可持续性化学选择决策制定的标准指南》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ASTM E3027-2017 Standard Guide for Making Sustainability-Related Chemical Selection Decisions in the Life-Cycle of Products《产品生命周期相关可持续性化学选择决策制定的标准指南》.pdf（7页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、Designation: E3027 17Standard Guide forMaking Sustainability-Related Chemical Selection Decisionsin the Life-Cycle of Products1This standard is issued under the fixed designation E3027; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the case of revisio

2、n, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 This guide outlines sustainability factors for productmanufacturers to consider when comparing alternat

3、ive chemi-cals or ingredients across the life cycle of a product. Such ananalysis could be used in product development, answeringcustomer inquiries, or replying to regulatory requests, amongothers.1.2 This guide integrates many of the principles of greenchemistry and green engineering in evaluating

4、the factorsacross the social (including human health), economic, andecological attributes in the use of a particular material andpotential alternatives in a particular product.1.3 This guide provides an outline for the contents of areport of the results of the analysis, including an executivesummary

5、, detailed report, and retrospective.1.4 This guide does not provide guidance on how to performchemical risk assessment, alternatives assessment, life-cycleassessment, or economic analysis, or how the alternativesdecision-making framework will be completed.1.5 This guide does not suggest in what ord

6、er the social,ecological, or economic attributes of sustainability should beevaluated or which one is most important. This is a decision ofthe company performing the decision-making evaluation.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if any, associated with its use. I

7、t is theresponsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standard:2E2114 Terminology for Sustainability Relative to the Perfor-mance of Buildings2.

8、2 NSF/ANSI Standard:3NSF/ANSI Standard 61: Drinking water system component-sHealth effects2.3 Other Standards:US EPA Design for the Environment (DfE) AlternativesAssessment Criteria for Hazard Evaluation4Clean Production Action GreenScreen for Safer Chemicals53. Terminology3.1 Definitions: For defin

9、itions related to sustainability notdefined within this guide, refer to Terminology E2114.3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:3.2.1 alternatives decision-making framework, nprocessby which the alternatives are evaluated in any product life-cycle stage/phase with the goal of creating a

10、 product with animproved or less impactful result.3.2.2 assessment, alternative, nthe activity of comparingthe existing material and the material identified as a possiblealternate.3.2.3 confidential business information, nbusiness detailsincluding, but not limited to financial data, businessrelation

11、ships, product ingredients, or manufacturing processesthat are unique to and held as proprietary to an organization.3.2.3.1 DiscussionConfidential business information mayalso be referred to as trade secret information, especially as itrelates to product formulation and manufacturing processes.3.2.4

12、 data gap, nlack of information, quantitative data,modeled data, or estimations based upon read-across evidenceused to determine the relative impact measure of an ingredient,process, or product.1This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E60 on Sustainabilityand is the direct responsibil

13、ity of Subcommittee E60.80 on General SustainabilityStandards.Current edition approved Jan. 1, 2017. Published January 1, 2017. Originallyapproved in 2015. Last previous edition approved in 2016 as E3027-16a. DOI:10.1520/E3027-17.2For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org,

14、orcontact ASTM Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual Book of ASTMStandards volume information, refer to the standards Document Summary page onthe ASTM website.3Available from NSF International, P.O. Box 130140, 789 N. Dixboro Rd., AnnArbor, MI, 48105, http:/www.nsf.org.4Available from US E

15、PA, Safer Choice Program, Office of Pollution Preventionwhereas,others may use ecological attributes such as energy and waterconsumption, generation of greenhouse gases, carbonfootprint, and others.6.5.3.2 The end-user input may heavily influence the otherfactors that should be included across all l

16、ife-cycle stages andall three attributes of sustainability.6.6 Economic Considerations of End of Life:6.6.1 End-of-life considerations differ with products.6.6.2 Disposal methodology will impact economics. Forexample, if a product is considered hazardous per environmen-tal regulations, there may be

17、additional handling and disposalcosts incurred by the user, local tax base, or producer.6.6.3 Compostability, recyclability, biodegradability, take-back programs and the ability to repurpose a product or properdisposal costs will have economic considerations. For example,while it may be viable econo

18、mically to recycle a specificmaterial in some geographic areas, the lack of collection orprocessing infrastructure, lack of a viable market to use therecycled or reclaimed products or other factors may make itinfeasible in others.7. Ecological Considerations7.1 General:7.1.1 Ecological consideration

19、s of alternatives are to beincluded in the decision-making framework coupled with otherfactors the organization deems appropriate for their goals, suchas the product type, the range of usage, and other product-specific characteristics.7.1.1.1 An environment-centric risk assessment using eco-logical

20、toxicology data should be used for each life-cycle phaseconsidering the appropriate modes of entry into the environ-ment.NOTE 3There are many tools and methods available for doing suchassessments. For comparability, the same method should be used for eachalternative being considered or rationale bei

21、ng supplied for circumstanceswhere methods differ.7.1.2 Ecological considerations include compliance with allapplicable laws related to environmental protection.7.1.3 A list of ecological factors should be created for eachlife-cycle stage based upon the system boundaries and eachalternative compared

22、. Using impact categories commonly con-sidered in life cycle assessments may provide a basis forconsideration.7.1.4 While all life-cycle phases/stages have ecologicalconsiderations, the phase(s)/stage(s) of most importance willdiffer from product to product or even one product of the samekind to ano

23、ther but should, at minimum, include the evaluationof net energy consumption, net water consumption, andemissions/discharges to the environment.7.2 Ecological Considerations at the Raw Material Acqui-sition Stage:7.2.1 The overall effects on the local environment are ofconsideration in raw material

24、acquisition. Effects include, butare not limited to, severity, longevity, and extent of impact.7.2.2 Ecological impacts deriving from the intrinsic charac-teristics of a raw material as well as the method by which it isattained should be considered. Many raw materials haveseveral means of attainment

25、, some of which may have fewer orless significant impact than others.7.2.2.1 The various raw materials being considered shouldbe compared by all viable routes of raw material acquisition toensure completeness.7.2.3 Specific ecological factors may differ greatly depend-ing upon the type of resource.7

26、.3 Ecological Considerations at the Material TransportStage:7.3.1 The means of transport coupled with distance can havesignificant ecological impacts.7.3.2 The nature of the material will impact factors such asmaterial handling during transport, packaging choices, distri-bution options, delivery to

27、customer, and other related factors.Goods especially harmful to the environment may requirespecial handling and possibly be restricted in transport method.This could generate an ecological cost of the product life-cyclethat may offset any benefit.7.3.3 Additional considerations may involve net produ

28、ctionof carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases associated withtransport as an organization considers means of transport.7.4 Ecological Considerations of the Manufacturing Stage:7.4.1 Existing equipment capabilities may need to be con-sidered. The need for additional environmental controls, can be

29、an ecological factor in determining what to produce and withwhat materials. Special handling equipment may add to theseneeds.7.4.2 While there can be variation, companies may oftenfind they are using many of the same sustainability factors asused for raw material acquisition considerations and thetr

30、ansport part of this stage from the manufacturing plant to thepoint of purchase.7.4.3 For products that transform significantly during manu-facturing through reactions or other transformation processes,considerations shall be made for the intermediate and finalproduct as well.E3027 1757.4.4 Disposal

31、 and impact of by-products or wastes fromone product-chemical pair versus another should be consideredalong with the quantity as relative ecological harm may differgreatly.7.4.5 Additional impacts such as energy use in themanufacturing, thermal pollution, water use and waste water,should be consider

32、ed as appropriate.7.5 Ecological Considerations of the Use Stage:7.5.1 During the use phase, a variety of factors should beidentified and evaluated including how the selection of aparticular alternative affects the amount of product used (for aconsumable product) or product useful life (for a durabl

33、eproduct), how an alternative may affect other ecological issuesassociated with the product use (for example, energyconsumption), the need for additional products to use with theproduct in question, and other secondary ecological impacts.7.5.2 Companies may find the analysis of the use phase tobe th

34、e area in which user input through marketing exercisessuch as use habit observation, voice of the customer, or othermethods found in marketing texts may support decision mak-ing.7.5.3 The user input may influence the other factors acrossall life-cycle stages and all three attributes of sustainabilit

35、y.7.6 Ecological Considerations of End of Life:7.6.1 As products differ greatly, so will end-of-life consid-erations.7.6.2 Disposal management is likely a major factor toconsider. For example, one should consider if a product or itscomponents is considered hazardous by regulation, or needsspecial ha

36、ndling, such as incineration or traditional landfilling,if they are not recyclable, reusable, or compostable.7.6.3 The release of emissions or substances upon decom-position or reclamation should be considered. Some product-chemical pairs may create or release emissions or substancesthat pose the po

37、tential for ecological impact. Similarly, if amaterial is not easily recycled, reclaimed, biodegraded,composted, taken-back or otherwise meets end-of-life in whatmay be considered a more ecologically preferable manner inmany geographic areas, then that needs to be considered in theanalysis.8. Report

38、sDecision, Analysis, and Retrospective8.1 Decision Report:8.1.1 The decision regarding the selection of an alternativeshould start with a concise statement, a baseline of data, and anarray of factors used in the decision-making process. Theseelements are an executive summary of the analysis report a

39、ndgenerally would be free of confidential business information.8.1.2 The decision statement should include the criteria forselecting an alternative that best satisfies the desired factorsidentified.8.2 Analysis Report:8.2.1 The analysis report should be considered a full,detailed report that can be

40、used for internal projectdocumentation, submitted for regulatory reporting or used forcertification per a voluntary sustainability performance stan-dard.8.2.2 Provide detailed outlines, calculations, and rationalefor all analyses. The calculations should be based upon thesame system boundary definit

41、ion; include baseline data of theoriginal product-chemical pair for comparison, a list of thefactors for comparison, and the criteria for making decisionswithin the decision-making process.8.2.3 Depending upon the audience, it may be acceptable touse generic identifiers for specific items such as ra

42、w materialnames, Chemical Abstracts Services Registry Number (CAS#), or other identifiers specific to the ingredients or finishedproducts being analyzed to protect confidential business infor-mation.8.2.3.1 In such cases, general information should still beprovided. For example, if a material is a c

43、yclic ketone beingconsidered for a new application, the name and CAS # could bewithheld, but the material could be identified as a “cyclicketone” or by its functional role. The description should besufficient such that a knowledgeable reader can retrace thesteps in the assessment and validate the ba

44、sis for its conclusion.8.2.4 All alternative assessments and the related ecologicaland human toxicological analyses shall be provided, againallowing for the ability to protect confidential business infor-mation such as specific names if warranted.8.2.5 All analyses should cover the five life-cycle p

45、hasesacross the three attributes of sustainability.8.2.6 The analysis should address apparent data gaps in thealternatives decision-making framework, not only in the alter-natives assessment or risk assessment, but also in other parts ofthe decision-making process, including economic analysis.Ration

46、alization and assumptions made in addressing the miss-ing data should be explained. The implications of the data gapsto the decision-making process should be presented.8.3 Retrospective:8.3.1 Aretrospective is key in continual improvement of thesustainability of a product.8.3.2 The retrospective may

47、 include areas of improvementthat may inform the development or use of future generationsof products or technologies derived from products.8.3.3 The retrospective should also include a review of whatadditional information would result in modifying the overallfindings of the decision-making process.

48、Is it efforts to gatherspecific data gaps? Is it a better understanding of the marketand factors that influence market changes and consumerbehavior? Is it a regulatory change?8.3.4 A retrospective should also include an objective re-view of the analysis process and how it may be improved forperformi

49、ng future evaluations.9. Keywords9.1 alternatives assessment; chemical selection; greenchemistry; green engineering; life-cycle; sustainability attri-butesE3027 176ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentionedin this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the riskof infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical commi