Printech Archive
Re: Use of acetone in reformulated products


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Deb Kramer (dkramer@wmrc.hazard.uiuc.edu)
Date: Mon May 24 1999 - 07:07:41 CDT


Gary - Thank you for taking the time to provide such an informative (and
helpful) explanation. I'm sure this will clear things up for many of the
other
Printech/Printreg users as well.

Deb Kramer

At 12:10 AM 5/24/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Marci:
>
>After reading all of the postings regarding your question, it is apparent
>that there is a considerable amount of interest in acetone. It also appears
>that your original question has not been addressed. As you know, a small
>group of us have been working with EPA on the petition to delist ink oils as
>a VOC. In the discussions with EPA, the issue regarding acetone has been
>discussed. At this point in the review of EPA's policy of photochemical
>reactivity and how it is defined, it appears that acetone will remain on the
>list of exempt compounds. EPA did not mention any plans to take acetone off
>the list of exempt compounds.
>
>In the discussions with EPA on how photochemical reactivity is defined,
>acetone should be viewed as an anomaly. While it seems to be certain that
>ethane will be used as the benchmark for comparison, the measure of
>reactivity has gone through some changes. In the decision to delist acetone,
>EPA used the gram basis to justify its decision. The gram basis looks at the
>weight of ozone produced per weight of test compound compared. The other
>measure is molar, which is best thought as a concentration and not weight.
>Since the vast majority of chemical reactions are examined on a molar basis,
>mole comparisons are more scientifically acceptable. It is interesting to
>note that on a molar basis acetone produces more ozone than ethane.
>
>When EPA delisted acetone and those who follow this issue realized the
>significance of the shift in policy from a molar to a weight basis, EPA was
>flooded with petitions, including ours for ink oil. After the acetone
>decision, EPA began to examine its revised policy and has decided that a
>weight basis is far more difficult to defend and is not technically
accurate.
>Therefore, in the methyl acetate decision, EPA stated that only those
>compounds that produce less ozone than ethane on a molar basis will be
>considered for delisting. The good news for methyl acetate is that is less
>reactive than ethane on both a molar and gram basis.
>
>EPA has not yet decided what to do with those petitions that were submitted
>as a result of the acetone decision that have compounds that are less
>reactive on a gram basis, but more reactive on a molar basis. Ink oils fall
>into this category.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Debra Kramer
NOTE: New E-mail Address dkramer@wmrc.hazard.uiuc.edu
IL Waste Management & Research Center / IL Dept of Natural Resources
(PNEAC/GPP http://www.pneac.org)
1010 Jorie Boulevard, Suite 12
Oakbrook, IL 60523
630/472-5019
630/472-5023 Fax
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view
 
PNEAC
Disclaimer / Copyright Info
Email the PNEAC Webmaster