Number

124-EN

Section

General Section

Use

Abstract

HP is working to phase out brominated flame retardants (BFRs) in new products that currently contain BFRs. To evaluate whether commercially available alternatives to BFRs have a lower adverse impact to human health and the environment, an integrated assessment approach was developed for analysing potential replacements. This integrated approach incorporates a comparative chemical hazard screening step based on a tool called the GreenScreenTM for Safer Chemicals [http://www.cleanproduction.org/greenscreen.php], a framework developed by the non-governmental organisation Clean Production Action. This case study examines the integrated assessment approach in the search or suitable alternatives to BFRs.

Substituted substances

Alternative Substances

Reliability of information

Evidence of implementation: there is evidence that the solution was implemented and in use at time of publication

Reason substitution

other reasons

Hazard Assessment

Substances to be substituted: Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD) is: 1A or 1B carcinogen (CLP Regulation) as listed in the Substance Database according to SUBSPORTplus Screening Criteria (SDSC). DecaBDE is: on the OSPAR list of substances of possible concern, endocrine disruptor (SIN List) as listed in the Substance Database according to SUBSPORTplus Screening Criteria (SDSC). Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) is: 2A carcinogen (IARC), on the OSPAR list of substances of possible concern, endocrine disruptor (SIN List), edlists.org: Substances under evaluation for endocrine disruption under an EU legislation, as listed in the Substance Database according to SUBSPORTplus Screening Criteria (SDSC). This substance is very toxic to aquatic life and is very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects. Alternative substances: The alternatives disclosed are not on the database of hazardous substances according to SUBSPORTplus screening criteria, and have no official risk or hazard classification.

Description of Substitution

In response to these restrictions, several flame retardant manufacturers promoted alternate BFRs as replacements. However, the primary concern with the use of BFRs in electronics, and the driving force behind the RoHS restrictions, is the formation of dioxins and furans in incineration [at insufficiently high temperatures] at end-of-life. The alternatives promoted as BFR replacements also would give rise to dioxins and furans in the same way so these alternatives do not address the end-of-life concerns that were important to the electronics industry and the driving force behind RoHS.Recognising the need for a better way to evaluate whether alternatives have a lower overall adverse impact to human health and the environment, an integrated assessment approach was developed for analysing potential replacements. This integrated approach incorporates a comparative chemical hazard screening step based on a tool called the GreenScreenTM for Safer Chemicals [http://www.cleanproduction.org/greenscreen.php], a framework developed by the non-governmental organisation Clean Production Action.HP works with suppliers to identify alternatives to BFRs, and we use the GreenScreen™ as a core part of our analysis of replacement substances. Using the GreenScreen™, we assess individual components of a formulation to obtain a simple one to four benchmark score. The benchmark scoring system allows to quickly and easily evaluate the human health and environmental impacts of the substance. Since the pilot program began in 2007, more than 130 chemical assessments have been performed.Using the GreenScreen™ benchmark score and hazard table, HP is able to communicate the desired attributes of alternative flame retardants directly with formulators. Additionally, the direct communication with the formulators has resulted in greater understanding of the human health and environmental attributes of the materials used in electronic products. Simply communicating that human health and environmental attributes would be considered has triggered our suppliers to examine their materials and look for alternatives that have lower impact.A key success factor in the search for preferred alternatives is the relationship between HP and the suppliers formulating solutions. HP does not formulate resins or force suppliers to use certain substances; we depend on the expertise of our suppliers to innovate solutions that meet the environmental, regulatory and quality requirements our customer’s demand. To maximise efficiency and effectiveness, we began to work directly with flame retardant manufacturers and resin formulators to identify preferable materials. One outcome of this direct engagement was that the non-halogenated flame retardant group, pinfa, performed a pilot GreenScreen™ project to identify preferred alternatives. Their comments are included below:“The phosphorus, inorganic and nitrogen flame retardants association (pinfa) has engaged in a pilot project with Clean Production Action and HP to have the following substances assessed: Ammonium polyphosphate, CAS# 68333-79-9 Diethylphosphinic acid aluminium salt, CAS# 225789-38-8 Aluminium trihydroxide, CAS# 21645-51-2 Aluminium oxide hydroxide, CAS# 1318-23-6 Melamine polyphosphate, CAS# 218768-84-4pinfa opted for GreenScreen™, because it promised to be a tool to quickly assess the hazard profile of chemicals and categorise them into an easily understandable grading system. However, we also realised that the simplified GreenScreen™ approach does not allow for in-depth studies or the inclusion of exposure aspects which is normally done in a risk assessment. Nevertheless, it has proven to be a valuable tool to quickly gain insight into data gaps or ambiguous or contradictory data, often coming from public domain sources. For pinfa, tools like GreenScreen™ are important to prove and communicate the environmental and health profile of existing or new products. This also helps us achieve our goal of continuously improving our products. However, we still see room for improvement within the GreenScreen™ methodology, like the appraisal of persistence for inorganic materials or the simplification of peer review and criteria review processes. Some of these are being addressed already. “The GreenScreen™ is complementary to exposure and life-cycle assessments, and is incorporated into our integrated alternatives assessment framework. As shown in the flow chart below, the GreenScreen™ is used early in the material selection process in order to eliminate unsuitable alternatives before investing the significant time and resources needed to conduct performance, exposure, and life-cycle assessments. Importantly, the GreenScreen™ evaluates constituents and breakdown products of substances, enabling a thorough and balanced evaluation of exposure and life cycle in subsequent analyses.Based on the success of this program, HP has screened other classes of substances beyond flame retardants, and has found this method to be extremely useful in differentiating between the various alternatives to restricted substances with respect to impacts on human health and the environment. Additional material types are now being targeted for inclusion in the screening program in the future.For more information on assessing chemical and material alternatives, visit the BizNGO website (http://www.bizngo.org/), and for more information on the GreenScreen™ visit the Clean Production Action website (http://www.cleanproduction.org/).Background Documents: GreenScreen™ TV Enclosures (https://www.greenscreenchemicals.org/resources/entry/greenscreen-evaluating-flame-retardants-for-tv-enclosures), HP Global Citizenship Report (http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/globalcitizenship/environment/sustainable_design.html)

Case/substitution evaluation

This is a case description from a user. The case description provides a useful methodology of how a company can work with substitution and alternatives assessment, in this case using the GreenScreen™ for safer chemicals. The chemical alternatives disclosed pass SUBSPORTplus criteria and have been evaluated to perform better using the GreenScreen™, than the original chemicals.

State of implementation

Full capacity

Enterprise using the alternative

http://www.hp.com

Availability ofAlternative

On the market

Producer/Provider

The phosphorus, inorganic and nitrogen flame retardants association (pinfa)

Type of information supplier

User

Contact

http://www.hp.com

Further information

For more information on assessing chemical and material alternatives, visit the BizNGO website (http://www.bizngo.org/), and for more information on the GreenScreen™ visit the Clean Production Action website (http://www.cleanproduction.org).Background Documents: GreenScreen™ TV Enclosures https://www.greenscreenchemicals.org/resources/entry/greenscreen-evaluating-flame-retardants-for-tv-enclosures)Citizenship Report (http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/globalcitizenship/environment/sustainable_design.html)

Type of publication and availability

All documents listed are freely available

Date, reviewed

December 11, 2020