VOCs and Detailing Product Links I found

Bill D

Bill D

Hooked For Life
Recently the subject of detailing products and VOCs has come up here and there.



The following is some random information on detailing products and VOCs. These are a few links I came across regarding government reporting and eventual regulation of VOCs pertaining to detailing products.



Two of the links are reports the State of California made which appear have to been part of the process of creating stricter VOC regulation for detailing chemicals we are familiar with today. These led to recent reformuations of several products which we are discussing currently.



Another link is a review of consumer solvents used by the EPA and the last one is a very informative study of detailing products by the Danish EPA. Section 4 is of particular interest as it categorizes many of the raw chemicals used in products according to purpose. This was a true Autopian read. :D



http://www.arb.ca.gov/consprod/regact/addlcat/cpmisc.pdf ( page 6)





http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/conspro/midterm/execsum.pdf



http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiip/techreport/volume03/iii05.pdf





http://www.mst.dk/chemi/01083500.htm
 
Good post very informative, but will take some time to read through.



What amazes me is that while there seems to be this never ending "Lower VOC" kick going on in this Country, there has been no movement on Emission standards (both vehicles and industrial air pollutants)



Seems we know whose getting thier campaign dollars worth :)
 
Yeah took me a few days just to glance it over here and there. No rush for sure, if you find it interesting take your time to look at each of the links. :up
 
It doesn't make any sense to me to target consumer products when the bulk of air pollutants are from cars or the burning of fossil fuels. :mad:



Major Air Pollutants List--ozone, CO, NO2, particulate matter, SO2, lead, greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, NO), CFC's, and toxic air pollutants (arsenic, asbestos, benzene, and dioxin).



http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004695.html







Source: Jonathan Levy, Harvard School of Public Health. Based on information provided by the Environmental Protection Agency.
 
chml17l said:
It doesn't make any sense to me to target consumer products when the bulk of air pollutants are from cars or the burning of fossil fuels. :mad:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree, that's what I said when they canned #16.
 
Tree huggin hippies!



My air is plenty breathable, despite the supposedly one of the worst air quality ratings in the nation. I'd happily trade the occasional cough to have OP free paints back :sosad
 
chml17l said:
It doesn't make any sense to me to target consumer products when the bulk of air pollutants are from cars or the burning of fossil fuels. :mad:
Click to expand...



Yea, but it actually doesn't work out that way. VOC emissions from man are roughly 1/3 from consumer products, 1/3 automobiles and 1/3 commercial&industrial. Cars are heavily regulated, as are businesses. That's why putting restrictions on the VOC content of consumer products has been happening.
 
foxtrapper said:
Yea, but it actually doesn't work out that way. VOC emissions from man are roughly 1/3 from consumer products, 1/3 automobiles and 1/3 commercial&industrial. Cars are heavily regulated, as are businesses. That's why putting restrictions on the VOC content of consumer products has been happening.
Click to expand...



Not all VOC's are known ozone depleters, although I guess the EPA is trying to crack down on fugitive emissions in general.



Do you have any links to where you got the 1/3 numbers? I'd be interested to see this breakdown in more detail.
 
Please, the more links the merrier but what did you think of the links I provided? I found them interesting. The first three appear tto have been some information on part of what lead up to VOCs regs that forced products to be reformulated.
 
chml17l said:
Not all VOC's are known ozone depleters, although I guess the EPA is trying to crack down on fugitive emissions in general.
Click to expand...



Now how did you tie those two together, and why are you suddenly bringing in ozone depleters?



VOC's, by definition, are *NOT* ozone depleters.
 
foxtrapper said:
Now how did you tie those two together, and why are you suddenly bringing in ozone depleters?



VOC's, by definition, are *NOT* ozone depleters.
Click to expand...



I wasn't trying to "tie those two together" as you put it. It was merely a statement about ozone depleters and how the EPA is also trying to crack down on released emissions in general.



The ozone depleter statement was for clarification. Some people believe that all volatile organic compounds deplete the ozone layer, which is incorrect. We are in agreement with this.
 
Bill, I never read thru that stuff in any depth until now...really interesting in the second link, from their industry survey:



Automotive Rubbing or Polishing Compound, Range of VOC content: 0-55%, Proposed VOC Limit: 15%, Complying market share: 18%



Automotive Wax, Polish, Sealant or Glaze, all other forms, Range of VOC content: 0-95%, Proposed VOC Limit: 15%, Complying market share: 39%



Automotive Wax, Polish, Sealant or Glaze, hard paste wax, Range of VOC content: 60-80%, Proposed VOC Limit: 45%, Complying market share: [essentially zero]%



Automotive Wax, Polish, Sealant or Glaze, instant detailers, Range of VOC content: 0-10%, Proposed VOC Limit: 3%, Complying market share: 47%



So, before the new regs, none of the paste waxes complied, which means that even those that are still for sale had to have their solvent content changed, or at least changed to a VOC compliant solvent (I think it has been noted by some of our more chemically astute members that there are certain, more expensive, solvents which are not restricted by the VOC regs), but a paste wax is still allowed to have 45%, which means the worst case would have been 80% down to 45%, while there was something in one of the other categories which was 95% and had to be cut down to 15%! Makes you wonder whether this really changes the efficacy of the product, or whether it just causes them to change to more expensive/less user-friendly ingredients.
 
chml17l said:
I wasn't trying to "tie those two together" as you put it. It was merely a statement about ozone depleters and how the EPA is also trying to crack down on released emissions in general.



The ozone depleter statement was for clarification. Some people believe that all volatile organic compounds deplete the ozone layer, which is incorrect. We are in agreement with this.
Click to expand...





I think you're confusing stratospheric ozone and ground level ozone problems.



The stratospheric ozone problem is the infamous "Hole in the Ozone Layer". The stratospheric ozone layer limits UV light that reaches the surface.



The ground level ozone problem is just about the opposite and is the purpose for controlling VOCs in consumer products. Certain organic compounds along with NOx and several other chemicals react in the presence of sunlight to form ground level ozone. This is photochemical smog you may have read about. Ozone is a respiratory irritant that creates serious problems for sensitive people - children, elderly people, and people with respiratory diseases.



VOC is defined as an organic compound that is photochemically reactive. That is why foxtrapper said that VOCs are by definition not ozone depleting substances. It is important to note that not all organic compounds are VOCs, despite volatility. For example, acetone is not a VOC, although is is an organic compound and it certainly is volatile. VOC is a regulatory term.
 
Setec Astronomy said:
Makes you wonder whether this really changes the efficacy of the product, or whether it just causes them to change to more expensive/less user-friendly ingredients.
Click to expand...



Yes, this was what I was wondering as well. I suppose we will observe more by the time all of the products have changed over to meet the new guidelines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top