II. R&D NEEDS AND POTENTIAL PROJECTS
B. Chlorinated Solvents
1. Background
Traditionally, the metal finishing industry has used chlorinated hydrocarbon solvents to remove oils, fats, waxes, and other organics from metal surfaces prior to finishing. Chlorinated solvents have been widely used until recently because they are very effective cleaners and are safe in the sense that they are nonflammable. The solvents most commonly used are 1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (CFC-113); 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA; also called methyl chloroform); trichloroethylene (TCE); tetrachloroethylene (also called perchloroethylene, or PERC); and dichloromethane (also called methylene chloride).
In the 1970s it was realized that some chloroflurocarbons (CFCs)
undergo chemical changes in the upper atmosphere that subsequently
lead to the destruction of stratospheric ozone which filters out
much of the sun's harmful ultraviolet radiation. For this reason,
the international community has sought to eliminate production
and use of these ozone depleting compounds (ODCs). In addition,
other chlorinated solvents, although not ODCs, are potential or
probable human carcinogens. The Montreal Protocol and its London
Amendments (1990) led to future changes in the U.S. Clean Air
Act. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) established
a time frame to eliminate all fully halogenated CFCs, certain
chlorinated hydrocarbons, and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs).
Because most of the chlorinated solvents are either carcinogenic
or are ODCs, the general trend is to replace these solvents with
more environmentally friendly chemicals.
2. Uses
Chlorinated solvents have always been very effective cleaning
chemicals for metal finishers because of their great solvency
for oils and greases, their high volatility that results in rapid
drying and no residual film, and their non-flammable nature.
A number of alternatives to chlorinated solvents have been developed
in the metal finishing industry including various types of aqueous
cleaning solutions; organic compounds with varying level of water
miscibility such as terpenes, esters, and glycol ethers; non-chlorinated
petroleum hydrocarbons; alcohols; supercritical fluids; and carbon
dioxide snow and pellets. Unfortunately each of these alternatives
has its own drawbacks. For example, much attention has been focused
on aqueous cleaners that contain surfactants and sequestering
agents to enhance their solvency. With these materials, however,
there is the possibility of flash rusting and the need for energy-intensive
drying prior to subsequent operations. In addition, the aqueous
cleaning processes always generate a wastewater stream which must
be treated and/or disposed of in some way.
Terpene-based cleaners can be very effective in cleaning oil and
grease, but many times they have very low flash points and, therefore,
must be handled carefully. In addition, the odors produced by
some of these compounds can be very irritating to workers. Supercritical
fluids, with water and carbon dioxide being the most common in
cleaning, are very effective in cleaning; their physical properties
facilitate their separation from the soil after the cleaning process
is complete. Because of the high pressures involved in supercritical
processes, however, the cost of equipment is prohibitive except
in special cases.
A problem with many of the substitutes for chlorinated solvents
is that they are very dependent on the method and form of delivery.
Therefore, the equipment that is used to apply the cleaning
chemical is extremely important and must be designed on almost
a case-specific basis.
3. Federal Survey
The Federal survey yielded seven projects in alternatives to chlorinated
solvent cleaners and strippers, and the Pacific Northwest database
added one funded by a State agency to that number. Total funding
was approximately $3.3M. All projects looked at alternatives,
including aqueous and semi-aqueous operations, ultrasonic, liquid
carbon dioxide, various innovative mechanical equipment, and others.
Surprisingly, there were no studies devoted to recovery or "closing
the loop" of chlorinated solvents-based cleaning or stripping
systems; although one project is studying recovery of aqueous
wash waters. EPA and DOD Army and Air Force are major funders
of the work, which is usually demonstration and technology transfer.
4. Projects
The following are possible R&D projects.
a. Evaluate new alternative cleaners that have recently come on
the market.
b. Evaluate the feasibility of wastewater recycling for aqueous
and semi-aqueous systems.
c. Develop a life cycle analysis model for determining when it
makes sense and when it does not make sense to replace chlorinated
solvent cleaners with non-chlorinated organic, aqueous, and non-aqueous
cleaners.
d. Evaluate the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors to prevent
flash rust.
e. Compile information on the nature, use, and results of various
testing and evaluating methods used by manufacturers to measure
the cleanliness of a substrate necessary to allow subsequent processing.
f. Further evaluate non-hazardous abrasive cleaning processes
such as carbon dioxide snow and pellets.
g. Demonstrate membrane filtration for aqueous cleaners.
h. Investigate which ingredients of cleaners cause the most trouble
in wastewater treatment.
i. Investigate which low-emission solvent degreasing systems do
the best job and have the lowest emissions.
j. Investigate improving upon ultrasonic cleaning as a substitute
for solvent and alkaline cleaning technology.
k. Investigate laser-assisted cleaning.
l. Demonstrate emissionless vapor degreasing equipment.
m. Conduct a study to determine whether flash rusting can be tolerated
if the surface shows no contamination and is coated soon after
aqueous cleaning.
n. Evaluate additional rinses with high purity water to remove
any surface contamination and to reduce flash rusting.
o. Develop alternative degreasers for repair processes that are
different from manufacturing degreasing processes. Alternatives
used in manufacturing can become entrapped and compromise overall
structure when used in a repair operation. Alternatives for repair
operations are needed and should be investigated.