CSPA strongly supports collaborative efforts to encourage public and private partnerships with the goal of developing “greener” products and “environmentally responsible” ingredients. CSPA believes there are unique opportunities in California for research that identifies applications for green chemistry in consumer products. CSPA believes the establishment of public-private partnerships or centers; between businesses and universities within California to research new chemical technologies could help promote the development of “safer chemicals”. These partnerships could serve as incubators for innovation and provide basic research that could be used for further technological developments.
Grants and low-interest loans could also be important tools to help foster innovation, especially for small to medium-sized companies who need additional capitol to invest in green technologies. In the interest of fairness and equity, CSPA believes that such programs must also be open to all businesses.
Another example to spur innovation for safer alternatives is a program which recognizes companies that innovate and develop technologically and commercially feasible products using green chemistry. The Presidential Awards for Green Chemistry are one example of a program that has spurred and encouraged innovation to develop “Green Chemicals”. CSPA also supports recognition for companies that develop sustainable business operations and processes beyond just product specific uses for green chemistry. CSPA believes a holistic approach to sustainability and green chemistry, whereby an entire company’s processes and facilities are recognized for green innovation, is beneficial and preferred to systems that rate or review only products or chemicals.
CSPA supports company product stewardship efforts (such as our ProductCare Program) and believe these efforts should also be recognized in California. CSPA’s Product Care Program provides a framework for companies to identify and commit to stewardship principles, share ideas and information and benchmark better performance. Participating companies have pledged to develop management principles for each of seven areas in a product’s life cycle from development in a research facility through product use and disposal. Recognizing and requiring participation in these types of efforts in California could provide useful incentive to companies to increase their product stewardship efforts, which will have a net positive impact on the environmental profile of products.
The most likely impediments to the adoption of alternative chemicals with more favorable environmental and human health profiles are inferior performance and greater costs of reformulation and conversion within facilities and supply chains, and for the material itself. It will be important for alternatives to be evaluated for their life-cycle impacts compared to existing chemicals. As such, the capacity for conducting life-cycle assessments will need to be expanded. The State could establish a Center for Excellence through the University of California system to focus on life cycle assessment; the center would provide assistance in evaluating new chemicals and formulations, and in the development and dissemination of life-cycle assessment tools.
There will be a certain amount of risk for companies, financial and otherwise, associated with adopting alternative chemicals or formulating new alternative products. The State could provide incentives to mitigate risks for companies willing to develop new products. These might include tax deductions, low-interest loans, technical assistance, a stream-lined regulatory process, market exclusivity, rewards and recognition and access to government contracts.
It makes sense for California to promote green chemistry through market-based incentives while evaluating the life-cycle impacts of alternatives compared with existing chemicals. These incentives could include tax credits for research and development, low interest loans, technical assistance, a fast-track regulatory process, awards for innovation, as well as funding for university research grants, scholarships and similar programs. Positive incentives should be open equally to all innovative companies that sell products in California – not just companies located in California.
Green innovation should be recognized on all fronts. Beyond examining the development of “greener” ingredients and products, California should recognize the companies that improve the environmental footprint of their facilities and operations.
- Free Lottery tickets! - Once you get the UCBGC Seal, you can get tax rebates and maybe you can even sell product and make some money. - What’s with the “safer”? Either something is hazardous or not, isn’t it? If it’s a sliding scale, you again are going to have a lot of headaches explaining what’s safer and why. That will have to translate to lowering taxes or maybe getting a lower ranking on the lottery ban list. - Helping the public understand how they can reduce risks. Never mind - “risk” is not a factor. Only hazard. So the public just needs to be told to only buy things with the UCBGC Seal. And to rat out companies that offer something without the seal to get their just rewards in #4.
Seriously, support (through grants, low interest loans and tax breaks) R&D on life cycle thinking and design, risk evaluation and management by academia and industry. Educate and communicate the findings.
Sponsor collaborative partnerships between government, industry and universities to research and develop new chemical technologies that focus on sustainable life cycle improvements. The end result cannot be just “greener” but must provide a viable economic and social aspect as well. These partnerships should be set up without the encumbrance of anti-trust and regulatory barriers. Publicly recognize and reward through tax or grant incentives, companies that go above and beyond to develop new more sustainable products and processes including supply chain and operations. Help support more sustainable products in the market by reducing barriers produced in the government regulatory silos. Lack of communication between government agencies often represents a large obstacle for new and innovative technologies. Products that make dramatic improvements in a particular area are often blocked by regulations from another government agency without considering the overall benefit of the product. Holistic government evaluation of new technologies is important for sustainable development.
BIOCOM believes incentives should drive this program. One incentive should be tax relief for substitution of less hazardous chemicals or products based on proven risk analysis, especially to those goods produced close to point of use in order to reduce GHG contributions from transportation. Awards and public recognition for companies that successfully develop chemical or product alternatives would also be helpful. Case studies and cost analysis help to show accurate ROI data and cost savings for cradle to cradle periods. Finally, specifically labeled products showing they are the result of these types of process improvements could also be a strong incentive.
Tax Breaks, Grants, Low Interest Loans and Public Recognition and Media Education campaigns can create needed incentives for safer chemicals, applications and alternatives used by industry and the public.
Lead by example. State controlled purchases and business contracting can be pointed towards greener businesses and products. Part of the decision making would need to go through Environmental Health and Safety or a governing body that can weigh impact vs. cost. Just as the government support subcontracting small businesses in large contract awards, it should be publicized that green producers and products should also be given weight in State awards.
While incentives can promote safer alternatives, we reiterate our belief that the state should develop a comprehensive regulatory structure for managing chemicals as a driver for chemical innovation. As the recent reports on Green Chemistry from the University of California, and many other reports from around the world clearly demonstrate the current US and state regulatory structures contain several impediments to the development of safer chemicals. These impediments were characterized in the reports as the Data Gap, Safety Gap and Technology Gap. Of these, the first two are the most important, and closing them will require the state to institute mandatory public data requirements and assert increased authority to restrict the use of chemicals whenever industry is unable to demonstrate their reasonable safety. These steps would both provide the market with information it needs to select and move toward safer chemicals and put the state in the position to protect public health and the environment by removing dangerous chemicals from the market. These reforms are critical to creating the proper market signals that will encourage the market to develop safer alternatives and to create a level playing field that will enable new commercial enterprises based on green chemistry practices to compete.
Web Coordinator
9 Comments
Reader Comments (9)
CSPA strongly supports collaborative efforts to encourage public and private partnerships with the goal of developing “greener” products and “environmentally responsible” ingredients. CSPA believes there are unique opportunities in California for research that identifies applications for green chemistry in consumer products. CSPA believes the establishment of public-private partnerships or centers; between businesses and universities within California to research new chemical technologies could help promote the development of “safer chemicals”. These partnerships could serve as incubators for innovation and provide basic research that could be used for further technological developments.
Grants and low-interest loans could also be important tools to help foster innovation, especially for small to medium-sized companies who need additional capitol to invest in green technologies. In the interest of fairness and equity, CSPA believes that such programs must also be open to all businesses.
Another example to spur innovation for safer alternatives is a program which recognizes companies that innovate and develop technologically and commercially feasible products using green chemistry. The Presidential Awards for Green Chemistry are one example of a program that has spurred and encouraged innovation to develop “Green Chemicals”. CSPA also supports recognition for companies that develop sustainable business operations and processes beyond just product specific uses for green chemistry. CSPA believes a holistic approach to sustainability and green chemistry, whereby an entire company’s processes and facilities are recognized for green innovation, is beneficial and preferred to systems that rate or review only products or chemicals.
CSPA supports company product stewardship efforts (such as our ProductCare Program) and believe these efforts should also be recognized in California. CSPA’s Product Care Program provides a framework for companies to identify and commit to stewardship principles, share ideas and information and benchmark better performance. Participating companies have pledged to develop management principles for each of seven areas in a product’s life cycle from development in a research facility through product use and disposal. Recognizing and requiring participation in these types of efforts in California could provide useful incentive to companies to increase their product stewardship efforts, which will have a net positive impact on the environmental profile of products.
The most likely impediments to the adoption of alternative chemicals with more favorable environmental and human health profiles are inferior performance and greater costs of reformulation and conversion within facilities and supply chains, and for the material itself. It will be important for alternatives to be evaluated for their life-cycle impacts compared to existing chemicals. As such, the capacity for conducting life-cycle assessments will need to be expanded. The State could establish a Center for Excellence through the University of California system to focus on life cycle assessment; the center would provide assistance in evaluating new chemicals and formulations, and in the development and dissemination of life-cycle assessment tools.
There will be a certain amount of risk for companies, financial and otherwise, associated with adopting alternative chemicals or formulating new alternative products. The State could provide incentives to mitigate risks for companies willing to develop new products. These might include tax deductions, low-interest loans, technical assistance, a stream-lined regulatory process, market exclusivity, rewards and recognition and access to government contracts.
It makes sense for California to promote green chemistry through market-based incentives while evaluating the life-cycle impacts of alternatives compared with existing chemicals. These incentives could include tax credits for research and development, low interest loans, technical assistance, a fast-track regulatory process, awards for innovation, as well as funding for university research grants, scholarships and similar programs. Positive incentives should be open equally to all innovative companies that sell products in California – not just companies located in California.
Green innovation should be recognized on all fronts. Beyond examining the development of “greener” ingredients and products, California should recognize the companies that improve the environmental footprint of their facilities and operations.
- Free Lottery tickets!
- Once you get the UCBGC Seal, you can get tax rebates and maybe you can even sell product and make some money.
- What’s with the “safer”? Either something is hazardous or not, isn’t it? If it’s a sliding scale, you again are going to have a lot of headaches explaining what’s safer and why. That will have to translate to lowering taxes or maybe getting a lower ranking on the lottery ban list.
- Helping the public understand how they can reduce risks. Never mind - “risk” is not a factor. Only hazard. So the public just needs to be told to only buy things with the UCBGC Seal. And to rat out companies that offer something without the seal to get their just rewards in #4.
Seriously, support (through grants, low interest loans and tax breaks) R&D on life cycle thinking and design, risk evaluation and management by academia and industry. Educate and communicate the findings.
Sponsor collaborative partnerships between government, industry and universities to research and develop new chemical technologies that focus on sustainable life cycle improvements. The end result cannot be just “greener” but must provide a viable economic and social aspect as well. These partnerships should be set up without the encumbrance of anti-trust and regulatory barriers.
Publicly recognize and reward through tax or grant incentives, companies that go above and beyond to develop new more sustainable products and processes including supply chain and operations. Help support more sustainable products in the market by reducing barriers produced in the government regulatory silos. Lack of communication between government agencies often represents a large obstacle for new and innovative technologies. Products that make dramatic improvements in a particular area are often blocked by regulations from another government agency without considering the overall benefit of the product. Holistic government evaluation of new technologies is important for sustainable development.
BIOCOM believes incentives should drive this program. One incentive should be tax relief for substitution of less hazardous chemicals or products based on proven risk analysis, especially to those goods produced close to point of use in order to reduce GHG contributions from transportation. Awards and public recognition for companies that successfully develop chemical or product alternatives would also be helpful. Case studies and cost analysis help to show accurate ROI data and cost savings for cradle to cradle periods. Finally, specifically labeled products showing they are the result of these types of process improvements could also be a strong incentive.
Tax Breaks, Grants, Low Interest Loans and Public Recognition and Media Education campaigns can create needed incentives for safer chemicals, applications and alternatives used by industry and the public.
Lead by example. State controlled purchases and business contracting can be pointed towards greener businesses and products. Part of the decision making would need to go through Environmental Health and Safety or a governing body that can weigh impact vs. cost. Just as the government support subcontracting small businesses in large contract awards, it should be publicized that green producers and products should also be given weight in State awards.
While incentives can promote safer alternatives, we reiterate our belief that the state should develop a comprehensive regulatory structure for managing chemicals as a driver for chemical innovation. As the recent reports on Green Chemistry from the University of California, and many other reports from around the world clearly demonstrate the current US and state regulatory structures contain several impediments to the development of safer chemicals. These impediments were characterized in the reports as the Data Gap, Safety Gap and Technology Gap. Of these, the first two are the most important, and closing them will require the state to institute mandatory public data requirements and assert increased authority to restrict the use of chemicals whenever industry is unable to demonstrate their reasonable safety. These steps would both provide the market with information it needs to select and move toward safer chemicals and put the state in the position to protect public health and the environment by removing dangerous chemicals from the market. These reforms are critical to creating the proper market signals that will encourage the market to develop safer alternatives and to create a level playing field that will enable new commercial enterprises based on green chemistry practices to compete.