1、Designation: E3027 15E3027 16Standard 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
2、 revision, 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 product manufacturers to consider when comparing
3、 alternative chemicals oringredients across the life cycle of a product. Such an analysis could be used in product development, answering customerinquiries, or replying to regulatory requests, among others.1.2 This guide integrates many of the principles of green chemistry and green engineering in e
4、valuating the factors across thesocial (including human health), economic, and ecological attributes in the use of a particular material and potential alternativesin a particular product.1.3 This guide provides an outline for the contents of a report of the results of the analysis, including an exec
5、utive summary,detailed report, and retrospective.1.4 This guide does not provide guidance on how to perform chemical risk assessment, alternatives assessment, life-cycleassessment, or economic analysis, or how the alternatives decision-making framework will be completed.1.5 This guide does not sugge
6、st in what order the social, ecological, or economic attributes of sustainability should be evaluatedor which one is most important. This is a decision of the company performing the decision-making evaluation.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associate
7、d with its use. It is the responsibilityof the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatorylimitations prior to use.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:2E2114 Terminology for Sustainability Relative to the Performance
8、of Buildings2.2 NSF/ANSI Standard:3NSF/ANSI Standard 61: Drinking water system componentsHealth effects2.3 Other Standards:US EPA Design for the Environment (DfE) Alternatives Assessment Criteria for Hazards Evaluation4Clean Production Action GreenScreen for Safer Chemicals53. Terminology3.1 Definit
9、ions: For definitions related to sustainability not defined within this guide, refer to Terminology E2114.3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:3.2.1 alternatives decision-making framework, nprocess by which the alternatives are evaluated in any product life-cyclestage/phase with the go
10、al of creating a product with an improved or less impactful result.1 This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E60 on Sustainability and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E60.80 on General SustainabilityStandards.Current edition approved Dec. 1, 2015July 1, 2016. Published Ja
11、nuary 2016August 2016. Originally approved in 2015. Last previous edition approved in 2015 asE3027-15. DOI: 10.1520/E3027-1510.1520/E3027-16.2 For referencedASTM standards, visit theASTM website, www.astm.org, or contactASTM Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM Standardsvolum
12、e information, refer to the standards Document Summary page on the ASTM website.3 Available from NSF International, P.O. Box 130140, 789 N. Dixboro Rd., Ann Arbor, MI, http:/www.nsf.org.4 Available from US EPA, Safer Choice Program, Office of Pollution Prevention whereas, others may useecological at
13、tributes such as energy and water consumption, generation of greenhouse gases, carbon footprint, and others.6.5.3.2 The end-user input may heavily influence the other factors that should be included across all life-cycle stages and allthree attributes of sustainability.6.6 Economic Considerations of
14、 End of Life:6.6.1 End-of-life considerations differ with products.6.6.2 Disposal methodology will impact economics. For example, if a product is considered hazardous per environmentalregulations, there may be additional handling and disposal costs incurred by the user, local tax base, or producer.6
15、.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 economically to recycle a specific materialin some geographic areas, the lack of collection o
16、r processing infrastructure, lack of a viable market to use the recycled orreclaimed products or other factors may make it infeasible in others.7. Ecological Considerations7.1 General:7.1.1 Ecological considerations of alternatives are to be included in the decision-making framework coupled with oth
17、er factorsthe organization deems appropriate for their goals, such as the product type, the range of usage, and other product-specificcharacteristics.7.1.1.1 An environment-centric risk assessment using ecological toxicology data should be used for each life-cycle phaseconsidering the appropriate mo
18、des of entry into the environment.NOTE 3There are many tools and methods available for doing such assessments. For comparability, the same method should be used for eachalternative being considered or rationale being supplied for circumstances where methods differ.7.1.2 Ecological considerations inc
19、lude compliance with all applicable laws related to environmental protection.7.1.3 A list of ecological factors should be created for each life-cycle stage based upon the system boundaries and eachalternative compared. Using impact categories commonly considered in life cycle assessments may provide
20、 a basis forconsideration.7.1.4 While all life-cycle phases/stages have ecological considerations, the phase(s)/stage(s) of most importance will differ fromproduct to product or even one product of the same kind to another but should, at minimum, include the evaluation of net energyconsumption, net
21、water consumption, and emissions/discharges to the environment.7.2 Ecological Considerations at the Raw Material Acquisition Stage:7.2.1 The overall effects on the local environment are of consideration in raw material acquisition. Effects include, but are notlimited to, severity, longevity, and ext
22、ent of impact.7.2.2 Ecological impacts deriving from the intrinsic characteristics of a raw material as well as the method by which it isattained should be considered. Many raw materials have several means of attainment, some of which may have fewer or lesssignificant impact than others.7.2.2.1 The
23、various raw materials being considered should be compared by all viable routes of raw material acquisition to ensurecompleteness.E3027 1667.2.3 Specific ecological factors may differ greatly depending upon the type of resource.7.3 Ecological Considerations at the Material Transport Stage:7.3.1 The m
24、eans of transport coupled with distance can have significant ecological impacts.7.3.2 The nature of the material will impact factors such as material handling during transport, packaging choices, distributionoptions, delivery to customer, and other related factors. Goods especially harmful to the en
25、vironment may require special handlingand possibly be restricted in transport method. This could generate an ecological cost of the product life-cycle that may offset anybenefit.7.3.3 Additional considerations may involve net production of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases associated withtra
26、nsport 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 considered. The need for additional environmental controls, can be anecological factor in determining what to produce and with what mat
27、erials. Special handling equipment may add to these needs.7.4.2 While there can be variation, companies may often find they are using many of the same sustainability factors as used forraw material acquisition considerations and the transport part of this stage from the manufacturing plant to the po
28、int of purchase.7.4.3 For products that transform significantly during manufacturing through reactions or other transformation processes,considerations shall be made for the intermediate and final product as well.7.4.4 Disposal and impact of by-products or wastes from one product-chemical pair versu
29、s another should be considered alongwith the quantity as relative ecological harm may differ greatly.7.4.5 Additional impacts such as energy use in the manufacturing, thermal pollution, water use and waste water, should beconsidered as appropriate.7.5 Ecological Considerations of the Use Stage:7.5.1
30、 During the use phase, a variety of factors should be identified and evaluated including how the selection of a particularalternative affects the amount of product used (for a consumable product) or product useful life (for a durable product), how analternative may affect other ecological issues ass
31、ociated with the product use (for example, energy consumption), the need foradditional products to use with the product in question, and other secondary ecological impacts.7.5.2 Companies may find the analysis of the use phase to be the area in which user input through marketing exercises suchas use
32、 habit observation, voice of the customer, or other methods found in marketing texts may support decision making.7.5.3 The user input may influence the other factors across all life-cycle stages and all three attributes of sustainability.7.6 Ecological Considerations of End of Life:7.6.1 As products
33、 differ greatly, so will end-of-life considerations.7.6.2 Disposal management is likely a major factor to consider. For example, one should consider if a product or its componentsis considered hazardous by regulation, or needs special handling, such as incineration or traditional landfilling, if the
34、y are notrecyclable, reusable, or compostable.7.6.3 The release of emissions or substances upon decomposition or reclamation should be considered. Some product-chemicalpairs may create or release emissions or substances that pose the potential for ecological impact. Similarly, if a material is not e
35、asilyrecycled, reclaimed, biodegraded, composted, taken-back or otherwise meets end-of-life in what may be considered a moreecologically preferable manner in many geographic areas, then that needs to be considered in the analysis.8. ReportsDecision, Analysis, and Retrospective8.1 Decision Report:8.1
36、.1 The decision regarding the selection of an alternative should start with a concise statement, a baseline of data, and an arrayof factors used in the decision-making process. These elements are an executive summary of the analysis report and generallywould be free of confidential business informat
37、ion.8.1.2 The decision statement should include the criteria for selecting 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 used for internal project documentation,submitted for reg
38、ulatory reporting or used for certification per a voluntary sustainability performance standard.8.2.2 Provide detailed outlines, calculations, and rationale for all analyses. The calculations should be based upon the samesystem boundary definition; include baseline data of the original product-chemi
39、cal pair for comparison, a list of the factors forcomparison, and the criteria for making decisions within the decision-making process.8.2.3 Depending upon the audience, it may be acceptable to use generic identifiers for specific items such as raw material names,Chemical Abstracts Services Registry
40、 Number (CAS #), or other identifiers specific to the ingredients or finished products beinganalyzed to protect confidential business information.E3027 1678.2.3.1 In such cases, general information should still be provided. For example, if a material is a cyclic ketone being consideredfor a new appl
41、ication, the name and CAS # could be withheld, but the material could be identified as a “cyclic ketone” or by itsfunctional role. The description should be sufficient such that a knowledgeable reader can retrace the steps in the assessment andvalidate the basis for its conclusion.8.2.4 All alternat
42、ive assessments and the related ecological and human toxicological analyses shall be provided, again allowingfor the ability to protect confidential business information such as specific names if warranted.8.2.5 All analyses should cover the five life-cycle phases across the three attributes of sust
43、ainability.8.2.6 The analysis should address apparent data gaps in the alternatives decision-making framework, not only in the alternativesassessment or risk assessment, but also in other parts of the decision-making process, including economic analysis. Rationalizationand assumptions made in addres
44、sing the missing data should be explained. The implications of the data gaps to thedecision-making process should be presented.8.3 Retrospective:8.3.1 A retrospective is key in continual improvement of the sustainability of a product.8.3.2 The retrospective may include areas of improvement that may
45、inform the development or use of future generations ofproducts or technologies derived from products.8.3.3 The retrospective should also include a review of what additional information would result in modifying the overallfindings of the decision-making process. Is it efforts to gather specific data
46、 gaps? Is it a better understanding of the market andfactors that influence market changes and consumer behavior? Is it a regulatory change?8.3.4 Aretrospective should also include an objective review of the analysis process and how it may be improved for performingfuture evaluations.9. Keywords9.1
47、alternatives assessment; chemical selection; green chemistry; green engineering; life-cycle; sustainability attributesASTM 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
48、 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 committee and must be reviewed every five years andif not revised, ei
49、ther reapproved or withdrawn.Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standardsand should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of theresponsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you shouldmake your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959,Un
