Monday, October 18, 2010

The Surfactant Market - A $25 Billion a Year Global Industry


The overuse of surfactants, especially in the formulas of laundry detergents, is literally choking our planet and damaging the health of many living species, including us.    Most of us are aware that detergents are toxic to some extent or another, we've known this for the past 50 or 60 years yet there has been very little, if any significant progress made by detergent makers to bring to market a demonstrably safer product.  What is surprising in all this is, it seems when it comes to the danger of laundry detergents, the average consumer has remained relatively silent.  It is as if it is an unquestionable truth that detergents are dangerous by nature and nothing can be done.
Nearly all consumers accept the fact that laundry detergents are inherently dangerous, that in order to do what they are designed to do - get clothes clean - detergents must contain toxic chemicals.   We know the toddler who swallows a mouthful of detergent will need to be rushed to the hospital to prevent serious injury or even death.  We know water containing recommended dosages of detergent will kill fish, and, we know we have to run at least two rinse cycles in order to get enough of the chemicals (surfactants) out of our clothes for them to be worn safely.  For most consumers, this has become second nature, the common sense of doing the wash and an accepted price to pay for clean clothes.  


Admittedly, for the 99% of us who don't suffer from surfactant-related allergies,  there is a sense of sinful pleasure in crawling under freshly laundered linens.   Clean is nice, but to be excessively so can do more harm than good.   Today, if you don't know what's in your cleaning and personal care products, and you are not attempting to limit your exposure to these chemicals, you are not just hurting yourself.  By adding more dangerous substances into the environment than you should, you are exposing your neighbor (and the frogs and fish that live in your local pond) to even greater amounts of toxins.   This could, perhaps should,  be considered the chemical exposure equivalent to  "second hand smoke".   In my view, exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke is benign when compared to the danger present in exposure to toxic chemicals.  Any damage caused by second hand tobacco smoke is limited to the unfortunate few surrounding a particular smoker.   One can always move to another table or leave the restaurant to get away from the offender.  In the case of chemical toxins in the environment however, damage is not just local and not just to mankind, it is worldwide and encompasses all living species, especially those dwelling in water.  We can't walk away from this source of pollution,  it is everywhere,  even in our ocean.   One report estimates the amount of oil that reach the ocean is "enough to cover the entire surface, a few molecules thick, every two weeks".    Global Warming: The Solution   The author of this article could not estimate the amount of man made surfactants that reaches the oceans but a fair guess is it equals that of oil, perhaps much more.  The scale of damage being done today by the overuse of surfactants is unimaginable and if the world is to survive, the business of "doing laundry as usual", has got to stop.


Surfactants are not necessary to get clothes clean, Help Stop Their Inclusion in Detergent Formulas


Is it true that surfactants need to be used in order to make an effective laundry detergent?    The answer is no.   If one could get away from conventional wisdom and accepted practices of the detergent industry, one could come out with a surfactant-less formula that would clean laundry as well as today's surfactant-containing detergents, I know because I use such a product.  This product was not developed by a detergent maker, it was developed by a water research company.   With the exception of this one product however,  all  laundry detergents today contain surfactants, including green brands.  The detergent I use was developed in Japan.  It will clean my clothes as well as any national brand and will not kill fish.  A strong background in science is not necessary to know the significance of this, common sense allows most of us to understand that the detergent that doesn't kill  fish is safer than the one that does.  If it's safer for fish, the chances are its safer for other living organisms, including us.   So, why don't the big makers introduce this product or something similar to their customers?   Don't know for sure but here are four guesses.


1. The difficulty in overcoming conventional wisdom.   There is nearly 100% agreement among detergent chemists that it is impossible to come up with an effective laundry detergent without using one kind of surfactant or another.   The surfactant is the active cleaning agent in detergent.   In fact, the wording you find on some detergent packages, "cleaning agent" is another somewhat less noxious term for surfactant.   If you have any expertise in this area, you too believe surfactants are necessary.  If you've barely paid attention to surfactants and don't know if this is true or not, try to find a a friend with some knowledge in the area and ask.   The betting is, you won't find one person claiming an effective, commercially viable detergent can be made without using a surfactant.  "The surfactant is the detergent, stop asking such idiotic questions" is a likely reply.  This could be one reason detergent makers haven't come out with a surfactant-free detergent, they aren't looking for one because they are convinced it can't be done.
2.  The reluctance to give up on an idea and to move on.   Surfactant and detergent makers have been trying to find a safe surfactant for the past 60 years.   There has been a tremendous amount of man hours invested in this effort.  But the inherent qualities chemists look for in a surfactant  (the compound's ability to mix chemicals of variant surface tensions i.e. the ability of the chemical to mix water with oil for example, and the ability of the chemical to penetrate surfaces, including your skin, while safe in the lab, makes the substance inherently dangerous out in the real world.    A safe surfactant has yet to be discovered and by the very nature of the substance, it's a good bet a safe surfactant for detergents will never be found. 
3.  The dilemma of marketing a surfactant-free detergent.   If you were the CEO at a big detergent company, how would or could you market this product?   Are you going to tell the world the surfactant-free product is safer than the other brands we sell?   Wouldn't you be concerned about questions concerning the safety of those other brands?    Would a board of directors, at any company, risk the reputation of their current best sellers by introducing a brand-new untested brand?   Would the board of directors vote for a product that risked a whiplash from the consuming public - a consuming public that has been buying  surfactant-containing products for the past 50 years?    No reason to risk a tobacco industry-like scandal, the cost may be more than even the biggest laundry detergent could bear.  Although detergent formulas are under increasing scrutiny from government regulators, environmental and consumer groups, the producers of these formulas can not change their stance on the relative safety of today's surfactants.   To say, we're sorry, we made a mistake at this stage, 60 years after introducing surfactants into the home, would only damage the company's reputation.  While CEO's are undoubtedly sincere in their desire to make their products safer, their only recourse is pray that someone comes up with a miracle surfactant, an unlikely prospect for the reason already stated. If you're the CEO, could you make the right choice at the risk of losing your job or even worse, bankruptcy?   "This is real life people, I'm not getting paid to play superman in the movies!"
4.  The formulation of the surfactant-free detergent is too simple,  not enough profit in it.    The surfactant -free detergent I know has only 6 ingredients, all are well-known, in abundant supplies, easily accessible and cheap.   Without a variety of impossible-to-pronounce chemicals in their formulations, it would become more difficult to differentiate one product from another and impossible to justify keeping their multi-million dollar research labs.   If one company begins marketing this detergent, competitors could easily duplicate the formula, or so they think.   Competition would mean lower prices and lower profits.  In addition, this product could create problems for other lines of axillary laundry products like softeners, bleaches and whitening agents.  If consumers actually begin to make safety and the environment the top priority in their selection of a laundry detergent, surely they would stop buying laundry softeners,  bleaching agents and laundry fresheners as they contain hazardous ingredients as well.  It's almost a no-win, all loss situation for current laundry makers.  If they produced the surfactant-free formula and nobody bought it, they would be out their initial investment.  But even worse than this, if customers bought the product, the company would likely lose sales in all other in-house brands plus lose revenues from other laundry-related products.  In this context, it is not difficult to understand why big laundry makers are not going to be selling anything labelled surfactant-free.


By continuing to ignore the wasteful and harmful way we do laundry, we continue to add to the Earth's burdens.  


Collective Laundering, a few numbers:
   In the US:
   Number of wash loads:                           40,000,000,000/yr   (40 billion)
   Barrels of surfactants 
   dumped down the drain:                            4,000,000/yr (168 mil. gallons)
   Gallons of Fresh Water Used
    for laundry and discarded:                      1.2 trillion gallons/yr (conservative)
   Amount of Household CO2
    produced from Laundering:                    15 billion lbs./yr  (conservative)
  
   Global Market
   Worldwide surfactant market:                $25 billion/yr
   Value of Surfactants for
    Laundry Detergents:                             $12-12.5  billion/yr (rough guess)
   Laundry Detergent Market:                  $40-50 billion/yr


Concerning the above,  2 Critical Points:


1.  4 million barrels of oil (crude and plant-based surfactants) poured collectively into our washers and dumped down the drain.  This is essentially equivalent to the estimated 4.1 million barrels that spilled into the Gulf of Mexico  after the BP oil rig blow out.   Americans pour down the sink the same amount, each and every year, a chemical compound which is arguably more damaging than even crude oil.   The teaspoon or two of surfactant you put into every wash, collectively adds up to an ecological disaster.    And we shouldn't be comforted or fooled by claims that surfactants are effectively captured by waste water treatment plants and the little that is not treated, biodegrades quickly.  If so, explain how detergent surfactants found in the ocean got there?   
2.  The consensus is we are on the verge of a global fresh water shortage crisis, so why are we still required to rinse our clothes twice?  Assuming we use an average of 10 gallons for each of the three wash cycles (1 wash, 2 rinses), we could save conservatively 400 billion gallons of fresh water a year by simply cutting our rinse cycle from 2 to 1.   How much is 400 billion?   Enough to meet the water needs of 10 million people for a year.  This is in the US alone.   What's the number worldwide?  In a time when water is expected to become the new oil, this is a great waste of a precious natural resource.  
A surfactant-free detergent would require only one rinse because the reason you need to rinse twice is the difficulty of trying to get rid of the sticky surfactant in your clothing.  (Even if you rinse twice however, an estimated 30% of the surfactant is still left on your clothing and your linens, a great source of dermal toxicity.  Every time you put on clothing, minute traces of surfactant is seeping into your body through your skin, not good.)


While surfactants are found in all cleaning products and nearly all personal care products, almost half of total surfactant use is for laundry detergents, therefore attempting to decrease the use of surfactants in laundry soaps is a very big first step.  If we can reduce the use of surfactants in laundry detergents, the chances are we will find ways to reduce the amount of surfactants used in other cleaning products such as dish washing detergents, shampoos, body soaps, window cleaners and so on.  


Consumers must re-evaluate their priorities when selecting a laundry detergent.  If you don't already, learn to ignore the ads that attempt to lure you into buying the latest new detergent with images of the perfect clean and the aroma of a fresh spring breeze, developed for you in the labs of companies whose only concern is bringing you good products, at least that's the image conveyed.   It is just an image, and pure manipulation by people who are very experienced in the art of persuasion  There is a reason daytime TV dramas have long been known as "soaps".   Doing laundry has serious consequences to our health and the environment and the consumer's first priority in selecting their detergent must be;  find the product that can do the job with the least amount of harmful chemicals. 


Questions concerning surfactants and human health
   Number of people suffering from surfactant-based allergies?
   Number of people suffering from surfactant-based asthma?
   Number of people suffering brain, nerve and/or liver damage due
   to exposure to surfactants?
   How much has surfactants and rise in environmental estrogen
   increased the rate of women with breast cancer?
   How do surfactants interact with human DNA?


Since the introduction of synthetic chemicals in laundry detergent formulations from the 1940's, laundry detergents have always been problematic.  ( Historical Prospective on The Phosphate Detergent Conflict ) Consumers have been conditioned to believe harsh chemicals were unavoidable if you expected to get clothes clean.   Consumers need to be made aware that a safer alternative is now available that will change the perception of what constitutes a good laundry detergent.  We can make an effective, safer, surfactant-free detergent which consumers must embrace in order to at least slow the release of harmful surfactants and give our planet, our oceans, a better chance to fight back. 


Ironic, isn't it?   The products that are suppose to help keep us clean are actually contaminating our bodies and polluting our environment.  How dumb is that?   


Morphing to help save Earth,
Morphomon






     


                                         




  
  

No comments:

Post a Comment