International Conference: A Green Chemical Deal

The third and last session, which was chaired by Wolfgang Kroutil (University of Graz), revolved around the strategic and policy approach to support innovation as well as sustainable chemistry. After the introduction by Martin Wimmer (Austria’s Federal Ministry for Climate Action) and Ofelia Bercaru ( ECHA), the focus was not only on the Green Deal and the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability, but also on the new "Sustainable Product Initiative". In the subsequent presentations, different concepts to evaluate sustainability were presented by Carla Caldeira (Joint Research Centre) and Julian Schenten (Darmstadt University of Applied Sciences). In the closing lecture, Thomas Haas (Evonik) gave a practical example of a sustainable chemistry project involving several parties.

Find short summaries of the presentations below:

The number of hazardous substances that could be affected by this zero pollution goal is high: Estimates range from a few thousand to tens of thousands, depending on different assumptions about the hazard categories. In this context, the concept of “essential use”, introduced by the CSS to justify time-limited exemptions from the restriction on substances of concern, was lively discussed. While it should be easy to agree on uses that are either “definitely essential” or “definitely non-essential”, the difficulty lies with uses that are “in between”. In these cases, the key question is: is there an adequate alternative? In the absence of such an alternative, societal opinions on essentiality will be quite controversial and it will be difficult to come to terms.

Even amongst panellists, views differed on which mix of measures is best to achieve the three major goals of zero toxicity, circularity, and ecological sustainability. There was agreement that hazard should always be critically assessed first and that the most hazardous substances should be substituted as soon as possible. For other substances of less concern, opinions about the most appropriate management decisions differed. Some panellists expressed their view that, even if such substances would help to safe energy or water consumption, they would be an unacceptable choice. Others called for a more integrated and balanced view that should consider also our high technical ability for controlling exposure. A similarly stimulating topic was the discussion of making products long living for reuse versus the objective of rapid bio-degradability, once these products diffuse into nature. This shows once again that it is important to always think back from the product via the supply chain to the substance and not vice versa.

Great interest was shown in the current development of indicators and criteria for “safe and sustainable by design”. The Commission, in collaboration with the JRC, is developing a science-based metric system to provide a methodology to classifying substances as more or less “safe and sustainable”. At present, this development is taking place within in a scientific framework; a regulatory approach is not yet envisaged in Europe.

Expectations of legal approaches also varied among the panellists. Some called for comprehensive and strict rules, others favoured a less stringent, but clear approach which leaves industrial companies more flexibility, for example to find an appropriate compromise that ensures both the transformation to circularity and sustainability and the functionality demanded by customers.

An important aspect for legislation is the appropriate approach to safeguarding confidential business information (cbi). While much more transparency about production processes and parameters is needed, the information requirements and the accessibility to the data needs to be clearly defined without jeopardizing cbi. The REACH regulation has demonstrated that this can be established in a quite satisfactory way. However, all agreed that the legislation should be as simple as possible, and enforcement should be strict.

Above all, the panel discussions showed that the issues discussed require cooperative and system-oriented thinking. All agreed that more research is needed with close cooperation between universities and industry. One example: the functionality required for a particular use of a substance may be directly linked to its (eco)toxic properties. In some cases, non-chemical alternatives may need to be developed, but such solutions can only be found in a well-co-ordinated discussion of all involved partners. Another likewise complex field discussed, is the behaviour and reduction measures for microplastics, and, more generally, of polymers.

All panellists stressed the importance of exchange and communication between all stakeholders in the different areas of sustainable chemistry, e.g. between science and industry, but also between different policy initiatives. One attempt of the Commission to develop a better link between the chemical and the waste and recycling industry, is the creation of the SCIP database at the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). The basic concept, established under the Waste Framework Directive, is the notification of manufacturers and importers of articles that contain substances of high concern to ECHA, where these data are stored in a database that can be accessed by waste management companies to be used in their efforts to increase recycling rates. Although the concept is simple and straightforward, SCIP has not worked satisfactorily so far.

One aim of the conference was to discuss existing overlaps and the lack of coherence of the current policy in this area. Some participants strongly felt that safety should be the overarching, most important goal. Others argued that all three aspects should be considered in a more balanced way. The idea was even expressed that it might be necessary to expand the current definition of risk of humans and the environment from the use of a substance to include risks related to the chemical´s lack of circularity or/and sustainability. In this context, a cross-reference was made to the concept of “essential use”, which is a main concept discussed in the current revision of the REACH regulation.

There was a wide consensus that the implementation of the concepts of “safe and sustainable by design”[1] and “circularity” [2] for chemicals requires a coherent approach based on commonly agreed values and objectives. As this involves different fields such as chemicals policy, sustainable products policy and waste and circular policy, there is urgent need for intensified discussions. The participants agreed to call for better communication between industry and science to develop technically and economically feasible alternatives.

The participation of the chemical industry is crucial to achieving the goals of the Green Deal. All representatives from companies and industry associations demonstrated a clear commitment to this transformation. Presentations about specific projects, e.g. for the use of carbon dioxide as chemical feedstock, showed that these ambitions are already aligned with the three objectives. Some participants pointed out that the creation of a legal framework that provides a clear basis for assessing safety, circularity and sustainability, would support companies in making decisions regarding their future strategies and investments.

At the conference, an already quite advanced methodology, developed by the Joint Research Centre (JRC) in Ispra, Italy, for defining a harmonized set of criteria to describe operatively “safe and sustainable by design” for chemicals, was presented. Further discussion concerned the recently published draft for a new Ecodesign Regulation by the European Commission. The draft proposes to set specific minimum requirements and information obligations with regard to safety, circularity and sustainability for the production and use of products. Since chemicals and chemical mixtures comprise the material basis of most products, this in turn results in obligations for manufacturers and importers of chemicals.

The chair of session two, Thomas Jakl (Federal Ministry for Climate Action), reminded participants that the goal of chemical production is not to create new substances as such, but to provide chemicals to meet specific service requirements. Therefore, chemicals should be considered according the principles of safety, circularity and sustainability in their function within processes, including even the option for non-chemical alternatives.

The participants agreed that data availability and transparency are of utmost importance for the envisaged transformation of the chemicals sector towards the Green Deal´s objectives, and industry participants clearly committed to an open and unconstrained discussion.

[1] as promoted by the European Commission´s Chemical Strategy for Sustainability, COM (2020) 667 final

[2] as promoted by the European Commission´s A new Circular Economy Action Plan, COM (2020) 98 final