Less-Polluting Solvents Available, Study Finds

More than half of the nation’s most commonly used polluting industrial solvents could be eliminated in a decade without significant cost to industry, according to a controversial study made public Wednesday.

The $1-million study by the Metropolitan Water District and the Environmental Defense Fund found that environmentally preferable substitutes for the five most widely used industrial solvents already are available or soon will be. At a news conference, the report’s sponsors described their effort as “path-breaking.”

The solvents, used by industries ranging from aerospace plants to dry cleaners, contribute to ground-water pollution, air pollution and depletion of the protective ozone layer. Some are potential carcinogens.

Many alternatives are not being used because of potential costs, unacceptable trade-offs or inadequate information, the report said. In some cases, an alternative may require a short-term investment that a firm is unable to make even though it would save money over the long term.

The study also found that government regulation does not “consistently encourage” industry to reduce use of the solvents. Instead, regulations focus on treatment of the waste they produce.

The report, largely a technical guide for industry, has been controversial since the initial project manager resigned nearly two years ago. She charged that MWD and the group that co-sponsored the study ordered her to alter the conclusions.

Former manager Katy Wolf visited 75 industrial solvent users in Southern California and compiled much of the technical data. When she resigned in April, 1990, the chemical physicist complained that the Environmental Defense Fund and the MWD wanted her to exaggerate the potential for eliminating solvent use and recommend unproven technologies as possible alternatives.

Though the final report’s conclusions do not differ dramatically from hers, Wolf said she would have stressed more strongly that alternatives may pose their own environmental problems. She also complained in an interview that much of the report is now outdated.

District officials and David Roe, senior attorney for the Environmental Defense Fund, have long denied that they tried to force Wolf to alter her conclusions. Roe rejected much of Wolf’s criticism as unjustified “footnote nit-picking.” Officials from Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. of Pasadena, which completed the report, said they were given “technical freedom.”

State and federal environmental regulators are expected to use the study to help companies reduce use of the hazardous solvents.

Throughout the report, substitutes are analyzed for their potential drawbacks and advantages.

For instance, the study found that replacing one of the solvents with a water-based cleaner would substantially raise a firm’s energy use. However, the increased energy use becomes insignificant when weighed against the energy needed to make that solvent, the report said.

The report’s projections on reducing solvent use do not take into account a ban on two substances that will go into effect in 1996. The report said these two, CFC-113 and 1,1,1-trichloroethane, or TCA, could be reduced by about as much as 60% by 1995.

In fact, the federal government is mandating their elimination by 1996 because they deplete the ozone layer. Both substances are used to clean electronic components and metal.

Roe stressed that the report is conservative and only takes into account substitutes that can be applied now.

In addition to the ozone depleters, the study looked at trichloroethylene, used in metal cleaning; perchloroethylene, used to clean both metals and clothes, and methylene chloride, largely used for paint stripping.