PROGRAM SCHEDULE Tuesday, July 21 Sustainable Concepts 7:30 – 8:00 a.m.
Continental Breakfast
8:00 – 9:00 a.m.
Sustainability Overview- It’s Difficult Being Green Nat Brooks, Strategy Shapers, LLC
9:00 – 10:00 a.m.
Sustainability- A Business Imperative Joseph Fiksel, The Ohio State University Discovery Themes
10:00 – 10:15 a.m.
Break
10:15 -11:15 a.m.
Introduction to Life Cycle Analysis David Evers, Hexion Inc.
11:15 a.m.–12:15 p.m.
Regulatory and Compliance Activities Nathan Cardon, Keller and Heckmen LLP
12:15 - 1:15 p.m.
Lunch
1:15-2:15 p.m.
Understanding the Risks of Green Marketing Ujjval Vyas, Alberti Group, LLC
2:15-3:15 p.m.
Challenges/Strategies in Identification of Sustainable Alternatives and the Role of 21st Safety Assessment Approaches Pam Spencer, Dow Chemical Company
3:15 - 3:30 p.m.
Break
3:30 – 4:30 p.m.
A Case Study: Two Pilot Projects using Prominent Screening Tools Suggest Opportunities for Improving Hazard and Exposure Assessments for Commercial Products Ann Mason, American Chemistry Council
4:30 – 5:00 p.m.
Panel Discussion
PROGRAM SCHEDULE Wednesday, July 22 Sustainable Chemistry in Practice 7:30 – 8:00 a.m.
Continental Breakfast
8:00 – 9:00 a.m.
Sustainable Chemistry vs Alternative Non Sustainable Chemistry, Cost vs Performance Comparison Stephen Willging, H. B. Fuller
9:00 – 10:00 a.m.
Incorporating Product Stewardship and Sustainable Thinking into Business Development Lisa Marie Nespoli, Bayer MaterialScience LLC
10:00 – 10:30 a.m.
Break
10:30 – 11:30 a.m.
Manufacturer/Suppliers Metrics -Material Transparency Reporting Paul Bertram, Kingspan Insulated Panels, Inc.
11:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.
Lunch
12:30 – 1:30 p.m.
Building and Construction- Architect/Specifier Perspective David Stutzman, Conspectus, Inc.
1:30– 2:30 p.m.
Wrap Up
Session Description Kermit the Frog Learns Strategy Or “It’s Difficult Being Green” Nat Brooks- Principal of Strategy Shapers, LLC. “Sustainability” has become THE watchword for modern industry … much in the same way “progressive” was in the 1950’s or “fair dealing” was in the 1850’s. It is a term freighted with beliefs, intentions and emotions. It also implies economic and certainly social and political connotations. But what does it really mean? What does it imply? What does it require? What is Sustainable? What is not Sustainable? How does it or should it impact business decisions? In this discussion, we will attempt to pin down the definition of sustainability. We will then discuss how business should think about Sustainability, what tenants should it adopt or reject, and how Sustainability should inform business strategy and decision making. We will take a look at examples where the embrace of Sustainability has helped firms and where it has hurt. Finally, we’ll forecast some trends in Sustainability and even explore what the next big social or economic imperative might be lurking out in the future to replace Sustainability.
Sustainability- A Business Imperative Dr. Joseph Fiksel - Executive Director, Sustainable & Resilient Economy. The Ohio State University Discovery Themes
Profitability is necessary but not sufficient to generate long-term shareholder value. Portfolio analysts and investors increasingly evaluate companies based not just on projected financial performance, but also on "intangible" value drivers, such as leadership and innovation. The business case for sustainability rests on generating two types of value: tangible financial value derived from growth, efficiency, cost reduction, and risk reduction, and (b) intangible value derived from technology, branding, human capital, and stakeholder relationships. More recently, companies have recognized the need for resilience to ensure business continuity and adaptability to changing conditions. This talk will illustrate how leading companies in the chemical, pharmaceutical, and other industries are applying sustainability and resilience principles in ways that increase shareholder value. The speaker will draw upon his consulting experience for numerous companies and industry consortia, including the World Business Council for Sustainable Development.
Life Cycle Analysis David Evers- Sustainability Specialist at Hexion
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is the process of gaining insights into the materials and energy you use to create your product, and the potential impacts of the residual materials and energy on the environment: including humans and other biota. Currently there is increasing demand for an Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) LCA report, which is one method of reporting the results of an LCA. This brief introduction to LCA will show the connections between LCAs Standards, Guidelines, and EPDs so that the attendee can be an informed consumer.
Interpreting Regulatory and Compliance Nathan Cardon, Keller and Heckmen LLP
Regulatory and compliance activities are underway in states across the nation, from Maine to California. Some require labels, some require reformulation, and others are simply flat-out limits or bans. Understanding what the laws and rules are—and where they are headed—is vital to companies across the supply chain all the way through to the end user. This session will address the proliferation of requirements, how the legislative and regulatory process actually works, and strategies for ensuring compliance and addressing new and impending requirements.
Understanding the Risks of Green Marketing Ujjval Vyas- Principal at Alberti Group, LLC
Many companies find themselves behind the curve in managing their relationship to eco-labels, and how they handle regulatory compliance changes and public perception. This session will present a basic analysis of the issues and suggest ways to address various forms of environmental advocacy both internally and externally. Specific examples from Health Product Declarations and nanotechnology will help illustrate the challenges of marketing green responsibly.
Challenges/Strategies in Identification of Sustainable Alternatives and the Role of 21st Safety Assessment Approaches Pam Spencer-Scientific Director of Toxicology and Environmental Research & Consulting at the Dow Chemical Company Today, more than ever, chemicals and products deemed to have undesirable human health or environmental effects are being targeted for replacement with “greener” alternatives. New greener candidates must be technologically feasible, deliver the same or better value in cost and performance while providing an improved profile for health and environmental issues. For scientists developing new products, this means early detection of toxicological effects can be the difference in launching a more sustainable product or one targeted itself for future deselection. Given the significant time, resources and money required to develop a new product, early identification of nonviable candidates can conserve finite business resources. This presentation will introduce one approach to integrate early toxicological assessments in a disciplined but flexible “stage gate” process with well-defined advancement criteria designed to help drive innovation and introduction of new, more sustainable alternatives. Case studies will be used to illustrate how chemists can work with toxicologists to improve the screening of new chemical candidates or formulations using new “21st century” safety assessment tools.
A Case Study: Two Pilot Projects using Prominent Screening Tools Suggest Opportunities for Improving Hazard and Exposure Assessments for Commercial Products Ann Mason- Senior Director at American Chemistry Council The general public and retailers are asking for disclosure of chemical ingredients in consumer goods. An increasing number of hazard assessment tools, frameworks and programs are being used in the marketplace as a means to differentiate lower versus higher hazard chemicals or to certify ”greener” chemicals and/or products. To respond to this demand, a number of chemical alternative assessment screening tools have been developed to disclose chemical ingredients, and beyond that, to evaluate and rank the “greenness” of individual chemical ingredients and/or formulations. The majority of these tools are hazard-based only, and because they disregard exposure, cannot provide human health risk information. Two small pilot projects investigated the feasibility of advancements in existing tools. The first pilot project was conducted to assess five influential hazard screening tools and/or frameworks 1) for their ability to discriminate between toxicity profiles of seven chemicals and 2) to identify the concordance of results between tools. Results indicate that 1) the tools varied in the level of discrimination in the output for these seven chemicals and 2) the tool output “classifications” of the same chemical varied widely between the tools/frameworks -- ranging from ‘low hazard’ to ‘very high hazard.’ The findings from this case study highlight the need for greater transparency and user understanding of the designed basis for each tool, and appropriate conditions for the intended use of the tool. The case studies, of some chemicals like caffeine and citric acid, point out a need to take a step beyond a hazard screen to look at exposure routes and amounts to achieve appropriate outcomes. The second pilot project was developed to determine the feasibility of using two ‘off the shelf’ commonly-used tools connected through a user-friendly interface to estimate exposure from consumer products. Twenty-one hazard endpoints covering human health and ecological toxicity, chemical persistence and partitioning, and flammability were evaluated. The combined models provided the flexibility to yield relative hazard and exposure rankings for each chemical in each product formulation. In addition, quantitative “margin of exposures” were determined. A number of challenges were identified including the need to obtain concentration data for each component within the formulation; to establish a database of up-to-date toxicological data for each endpoint; and to determine the key endpoint for comparison to exposure estimates. These data are the first to evaluate the ability of commonly used tools to provide consistent screening level hazard and exposure assessments. Sustainable Chemistry vs Alternative Non Sustainable Chemistry – Cost vs Performance Comparison Stephen Willging – Global Technology Advisor at H. B. Fuller Company
The current high interest in renewable/sustainable materials has been driven by high energy/petrochemical costs and growing consumer concerns about the environmental impact of non-renewable energy/petrochemical usage. The transition from a non-renewable economy to a more sustainable one faces a number of challenges. This presentation will look at some of these challenges and their impact on the introduction of renewable/sustainable
materials into the market place.
Incorporating Product Stewardship and Sustainable Thinking into Business Development Lisa Marie Nespoli-Manager, Product Safety and Stewardship at Bayer MaterialScience As consumers’ interest in the health, safety and environmental impacts of the chemicals used in their daily lives increases, often the potential hazard of the materials is emphasized over any other consideration. Bayer MaterialScience LLC believes that approaches to evaluating materials and products are more sustainable when built on principles of product safety, product stewardship, life-cycle analysis and risk-based science. We offer a portfolio of raw materials that bring value to a very broad range of products, including adhesives and sealants. This presentation presents a new approach to incorporating concepts of product safety and stewardship along with sustainable thinking into our business development process when evaluating new products and applications globally.
Manufacturer/Suppliers Metric- Material Transparency Reporting Paul Bertram-Director, Environment and Sustainability at Kingspan Insulated Panels, INC This presentation is an update on the pressures of Material Transparency reporting that are impacting “End Product” manufacturers and their supply chain. The objectives of Material Transparency reporting are discussed in relationship to the challenges of establishing responsible approaches to compliance requirements. Review of various NGO reporting formats and third party verification programs that are acceptable include: LEEDv4, LCAs, EPDs, PCRs, HPDs, C2C, DeClare, JUST and Living Building Challenge, what is proposed in the GreenGlobes ANSI update, various developing ASTM standards and REACH. Clearly understand that “End Product” manufacturers are being put in a position to drive their suppliers to this reporting. The business case, in response to these pressures, is discussed from the perspective of unknown risk considerations. Proactive and reactive strategies are examined as related to opportunities and challenges. The presentation wraps up with a discussion on what is a design professional truly qualified to consider in material selection and deselection and how is “Human Health” to be weighed against functional performance and compliance. Building and Construction- Architects/ Specifier perspective David Stutzman- Principal at Conspectus, INC What product attributes will an architect and specifier consider when selecting sealants and adhesives? There is chemistry, performance, sustainability, paintability, and even warantability. Not all have equal importance, and importance is relative to the point of view, depending whether it is the architect or specifier. What may seem inherently important to manufacturers, sometimes receives little attention from architects while remaining paramount to specifiers. So what are the differences between architects and specifiers and how should project data be presented to satisfy both?