• Evaluation of New and Emerging Technologies for Textile Cleaning
• Safer Adhesive And Cleanup Alternatives for Countertop Manufacturing
• Alternative Low-VOC, Low Toxicity Cleanup Solvents for the Lithographic Printing Industry
• Alternative Low-VOC, Low Toxicity Cleanup Solvents for the Screen Printing Industry

Evaluation of New and Emerging Technologies for Textile Cleaning
(August 2005) Adobe Acrobat 4.18MB
Prepared by: Mike Morris and Katy Wolf, Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA)

The Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA) conducted a technology assessment of the alternative processes to perchloroethylene (PERC) dry cleaning. The alternatives evaluated were hydrocarbon, Pure Dry, Green Earth, glycol ether, traditional wet cleaning, icy water, Green Jet, and carbon dioxide. IRTA analyzed the performance and cost of the alternatives and compared them to the plants' costs prior to conversion and developed stand alone case studies for 14 facilities.

SAFER ADHESIVE AND CLEANUP ALTERNATIVES FOR COUNTERTOP MANUFACTURING (August 2004) Adobe Acrobat 1.8MB
Prepared by: Mike Morris and Katy Wolf, Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA).

The Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA) worked with seven companies in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area that adopted alternative adhesives and cleaning agents to 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA), methylene chloride (METH) and various types of non-chlorinated solvents including toluene, xylene, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), hexane and heptane.. The companies included countertop manufacturers, cabinet manufacturers and companies involved in woodworking. The alternative adhesives the companies adopted are polyvinyl acetate (PVA) adhesives, which rely on water as a carrier, various other water-based adhesives and acetone based adhesives. The cleaning agent alternatives that the companies implemented are plain water, water-based cleaners and acetone. IRTA determined that alternative adhesives are available, perform well, can reduce costs, and can protect human health and the environment. This project was funded by a USEPA Pollution Prevention Grant, NP-97937301-0, and Cal/EPA’s Department of Toxic Substances Control.

ALTERNATIVE LOW-VOC, LOW TOXICITY CLEANUP SOLVENTS FOR THE LITHOGRAPHIC PRINTING INDUSTRY (November 2004) Adobe Acrobat 5.55 MB

Prepared by: Mike Morris, Katy Wolf and Jon Zavadil of the Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA).

The Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA) worked with ten lithographic printing facilities in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area to identify, test and demonstrate alternative low-volatile organic compound (VOC), low toxicity on-press cleaners. Businesses included in the study printed on newsprint (newspapers), coated and uncoated paper, and metal and plastic media. The types of presses were coldset web, sheet fed, and heat set web and types of ink included soy and solventborne. In all cases, IRTA identified and tested alternative cleaners that had a VOC content of 100 grams per liter or less. The alternatives that were tested and found to be most effective include water-based cleaners, soy based cleaners and acetone, blends of the three categories of cleaners and blends of the cleaners with small amounts of VOC solvents. Acetone is not classified as a VOC and is low in toxicity. This project was funded by a USEPA Pollution Prevention Incentives to States Grant, NP-98965501-2, and Cal/EPA’s Department of Toxic Substances Control.

ALTERNATIVE LOW-VOC, LOW TOXICITY CLEANUP SOLVENTS FOR THE SCREEN PRINTING INDUSTRY (April 2005) Adobe Acrobat 4.49 MB

Prepared by: Mike Morris and Katy Wolf, Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA).

The Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA) worked with nine screen printers in southern California to identify, test, develop and demonstrate alternative low toxicity, low-VOC cleanup materials that performed effectively and were cost effective. The focus was on finding suitable alternatives that would be safer and would meet the VOC limit of 100 grams per liter. The printers that participated in the project used a range of different inks (UV, solventborne, waterborne, Plastisol) and printed on a variety of different substrates including fabric, paper, metal, glass, wood, ceramics and plastics. Some small screen printers print by hand but most commercial screen printers use automated presses The low toxicity, low-VOC alternatives that were tested included water-based cleaners, vegetable based cleaners composed of soy, and acetone, a chemical not classified as a VOC and low in toxicity, was blended with other materials. All three alternatives were found to effectively clean traditional solventborne inks for specific screen printing applications. This project was funded by a USEPA Pollution Prevention Grant, NP-97978601-0, and Cal/EPA’s Department of Toxic Substances Control.