1
A Student, Chemical Engineer
Nalge Nunc International Corporation
Outdoor Products Division
75 Panorama Creek Drive
Rochester, NY 14625 U.S.A.
Nalge Nunc International Corporation
Outdoor Products Division
75 Panorama Creek Drive
Rochester, NY 14625 U.S.A.
Dear Mr. Mackinder,
We are pleased to inform you that our work on behalf of the company Nalgene has progressed and is
coming to a close. We have obtained our data and research and have outlined our findings in the body
of this report, which we hope meets with your approval.
Recently, our company, Nalgene, was ordered by the Food and Drug Administration to cease
production of water bottles containing BPA due to the fact that BPA causes very serious health
problems, especially in women. Over the course of the last three months, our team of chemical
engineers has been researching the effects of Bisphenol-A (BPA) in the human body. The compound
BPA is found in product packaging (such as in water bottles); it has been determined that at high
temperatures, BPA “leaks” into the water and is then ingested into the human body. Within the body,
BPA is recognized as the primary female sex hormone, estrogen, and can lead to extremely adverse
effects such as breast and ovarian cancer.
The goal of our team was to determine how BPA interacts with the human body and leads to these
deadly diseases. In addition to health research, we were asked to find a better alternative plastic to
BPA with which water bottles can be manufactured. We also needed to determine if this new plastic
would withstand various tests (high-pressure or high-temperature tests, strain tests, stress tests) to
ensure its durability and harmless biodegradability. Cost and manufacturing analyses were considered
so that Nalgene could determine if switching production from one plastic to another would be in the
company’s best interest.
We have expounded on our findings in our report. Please let us know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
A Student
2
FDA-Mandated Alternative to BPA in Water Bottles
Eric Johnson, FDA; Head of Food Packaging, Nalgene
Head of Research and Development, Nalgene; Head of
Manufacturing, Nalgene
A Group of Students
3
Table of Contents
List of Illustrations
4
Abstract
5
Executive Summary
6
BPA Effects on Human Physiology
8
Alternative Polymers
13
Manufacturing Analysis
18
Conclusion
23
Recommendation
23
Appendix A: References
24
Appendix B: Image Citations
26
Appendix C: Copolyester MSDS
27
4
List of Illustrations
Figure 1
9
Figure 2
11
Figure 3
13
Figure 4
14
Figure 5
15
Figure 6
16
Figure 7
17
Figure 8
18
Figure 9
18
Figure 10
18
Figure 11
19
Figure 12
19
Figure 13
21
5
Abstract
The chemical Bisphenol-A (BPA) is a compound found in many water and pop bottles. Studies have
shown that upon heating the containers, BPA diffuses into the liquid and is therefore ingested by the
body. When BPA enters the bloodstream, it has a similar effects as estrogen, which is the primary
female sex hormone. Because of this, BPA is linked with diseases such as breast cancer and prostate
cancer due to uncontrollable cell growth influenced by fluctuations in hormone levels. The purpose of
this project is to determine how BPA interacts with the human physiology, what possible alternatives to
BPA are available, and how the cost and manufacturing of the alternative plastics would compare with
those for BPA.
6
Executive Summary
Background Information
Bisphenol-A (BPA) is the chief component in the plastic lining of water and pop bottles. When the
plastic bottles containing BPA are heated (such as when they are left out in the sun), BPA “travels”
from the lining of the bottle and into the liquid in a process called leeching. When this happens, BPA
can be ingested into the body. The human body recognizes this chemical as the female sex hormone
estrogen (Linda B. White, 2009).
Estrogen is primarily found in women. However, men do have trace amounts of estrogen in their
bloodstreams, just as women have trace amounts of testosterone in their bloodstreams. Because of this,
BPA in the bloodstream would not seem like an immediate cause for concern.
However, studies have shown that an increased level of BPA in the bloodstream may lead to breast and
prostate cancer. Because BPA mimics estrogen, it is recognized by both breast cancer cells and
prostate cancer cells. As a response to BPA, the tumor cells increase their growth and proliferation.
BPA promotes two very common and deadly types of cancer. CITATION
Statement of the Problem
Because of the severe health problems caused by BPA, Eric Johnson, a representative for the Food and
Drug Administration, has approached our company Nalgene, a manufacturer of plastic water bottles.
The FDA has mandated that Nalgene switch from using BPA in their plastics to a less hazardous
plastic. The interactions of BPA with the human body must be determined so that a proper alternative
may be decided upon; a manufacturing analysis must also be conducted so that the feasibility of
manufacturing the new plastic may be determined.
Statement of Task
The task for our team is to determine how BPA interacts with the human body (i.e., how it enters the
bloodstream, what cell receptors it targets, how it leads to tumor growth). Once we have determined
these interactions, we will be better equipped to determine a better alternative plastic to BPAcontaining plastic that does not produce the same harmful effects. When we have gathered some
alternatives, we need to research the plastics’ durability to high temperature, pressure, stress, and
strain. After we have evaluated the properties of the alternative plastics, a manufacturing analysis
needs to be conducted to better determine which new plastic should be implemented into the
manufacturing of Nalgene’s water bottles.
Statement of Purpose
The purpose of this report is to discuss our research on the effects of BPA on the human body; the
possible alternative plastics available and their properties; and the manufacturing techniques of each of
the possible alternatives.
7
Statement of Conclusion
From the research we have gathered, we have discovered that previously determined amounts of BPA
allowed to be ingested by the body were actually more harmful than expected. In fact, a dose 1000fold less than the previous lowest effective dose is hazardous. Although BPA contains estrogen-like
qualities, it behaves slightly differently than estrogen. It can bind to hormone-binding receptors;
however, it is not recognized by the sex hormone regulation system in the bloodstream. If too much
BPA is in the bloodstream, it will continue to build up and affect the body as if a build up of estrogen
were taking place; the regulatory protein would not recognize it and would do nothing to curb the high
BPA concentration.
The alternative plastics we have chosen to consider are polyethylene terephthalate (PETE), Eastman
Tritan copolyester, and polystyrene. When considering the alternative plastics, many different material
properties need to be taken into consideration. Some of these are thermal stability (durability against
heating and cooling temperatures), tensile strength (durability against high pressure), and ultraviolet
radiation stability (durability against dehydration at high temperatures). Considering only these
properties, the choice plastic would be Eastman Tritan copolyester.
The manufacturing of each of these alternatives has to be taken into consideration as well. The
manufacturing analysis is based upon safety (i.e., which alternatives are less flammable, do not cause
runaway reactions, etc.), quality, and retooling (what new equipment needs to be implemented).
Taking manufacturing into account, PETE would be the best plastic with which to replace BPA
because PETE is safer and has better quality.
Statement of Recommendation
We recommend that all BPA-containing water bottles be replaced with PETE-containing water bottles.
Although the Eastman Tritan copolyester has better material properties than PETE has, PETE is safer
than the copolyester and is also of better quality. Because safety is the primary concern and quality is
the secondary concern, our recommendation is to use PETE.
Discussion
When BPA is ingested into the body, it is recognized by the body as estrogen, the primary female sex
hormone. This has caused concern for the public health because studies have shown that increased
levels of estrogen in the body can lead to tumor growths (CITATION).
An important issue regarding the amount of BPA in plastic bottles is the fact that scientists have
misjudged the appropriate level of BPA allowable in the human blood stream. Half of the allowable
amount of BPA causes serious developmental problems.
Although BPA is similar to estrogen in the way it binds to hormone-binding receptors, it cannot be
regulated by sex-hormone binding globulins (SHBGs). SHBGs allow the body to regulate the
concentration of certain hormones in the bloodstream at any given time. If hormone concentration
goes too high, the SHBGs are activated to reduce the concentration so as not to interfere with normal
body functions. Because BPA does not respond to SHBGs, it will build up in the blood stream and
impact the body’s functions.
8
The alternative plastics under consideration are polyethylene teraphthalate (PETE), polystyrene (PS),
and Eastman Tritan copolyester. Each of these alternatives is tough and transparent, although
polystyrene can be brittle. These new materials were subjected to various durability tests to determine
if they were fit to be used in water bottle manufacturing. Some of the tests include thermal stability,
ultraviolet radiation stability, liquid stability, toughness, and tensile strength. Based off these material
properties only, Eastman Tritan copolyester would be the best plastic to use.
When comparing how these alternatives are manufactured, many other factors need to be considered
such as safety, quality, and retooling. Based off these factors, PETE would be the best plastic to use
because it is safer and of better quality.
BPA Effects on Human Physiology
Health Hazards of BPA
Corporate and health research groups have all extensively studied the toxicity of BPA. However, many
of these groups have evaluated the toxicity of BPA incorrectly, and thus drawn incorrect conclusions
about the effect BPA has on biological systems. Specifically, many scientists have incorrectly
determined the lowest effective dose for BPA when ingested under toxicology studies. This section
will review literature that discusses the new experiments used to determine the lowest amount of BPA
required to produce an effect, by investigating BPA using principles of endocrinology.
Just like any other system that functions as a result of a multitude of organized processes, the human
body relies on the cardiovascular system to circulate blood; the musculoskeletal system for mobility;
the neurological system for control; and the endocrine system for growth and development. If one of
these systems is not functioning correctly, the human body could develop serious complications, such
as disease or improper growth. The goal of this section is to explain how the endocrine system
functions and how BPA causes changes to the system. Moreover, the specific diseases caused by BPA
ingestion over time will also be evaluated.
The endocrine system comprises the cellular signal systems that allow the cells within organ systems to
communicate with one another. Similarly, the endocrine system regulates the types and amounts of
hormones circulated throughout the human body. Hormones control many different bodily functions,
and will even affect the growth and development of an organism (Welshons, Nagel, & Vom Saal,
2006). Moreover, the efficacy of certain hormones increases if an organism is exposed to relatively
small fluctuating levels during fetal periods (Welshons, Nagel, & Vom Saal, 2006). Hormones have
very specific functions, and an increase in the level of hormones in an organism, whether small or
large, can change the way that organism develops over time. Fluctuations in hormones can even
permanently change the size and function of organs in a developing organism.
Cancer has become a major concern for people of any level of health, due to its ubiquitous nature.
Cancer is a general term that refers to uncontrollable cell growth, where the affected cells begin to form
tumor masses. Incidences of cancer have increased in many parts of the developing world, and breast
cancer specifically has increased by 40% in the quarter century in the United States (Markey, Luque,
Munoz de Toro, Sonnenschein, & Soto, 2001). Medical professionals have known that unnatural
fluctuations in hormones, specifically in estradiol and other estrogen hormones, can cause unnatural
cell proliferation in some organs and thus induce cancer. Because an organism relies on its hormones
to regulate its development, any change in hormone levels could lead to unnatural cell growth such as
cancerous tumor growth.
9
How is BPA Ingested?
Many items encountered in everyday life are made from, or contain a component of, polycarbonate
plastic manufactured from BPA. BPA is also used as a plasticizer, to introduce desirable physical
properties to other types of plastics and polymers. It is no surprise then that Nalgene manufactures
several food and beverage containers from materials containing BPA, and Nalgene customers are safe
as long as BPA stays in its polymer form in the container and does not leech into the food or beverage.
However, due to the chemical structure of BPA, shown in Figure 1, it is very possible for the polymer
to undergo a chemical reaction that releases free BPA into the food or beverages.
Figure 1. The structure of BPA and the mechanisms by which it can be reduced to its monomeric form.
The structure of BPA plastics is basically composed of individual BPA monomers, linked to one
another by an ester bond, to form the long molecular chains that constitute a polymer. When the ester
bond binds each BPA monomer, that BPA is harmless. However, the ester bond linking the BPA
monomers together is easily broken by a reaction with water molecules, called hydrolysis. The rate of
hydrolysis increases as temperature increases (Welshons, Nagel, & Vom Saal, 2006), as well as when
acidic or basic substances are applied to the polymer (Kanga, Kondo, & Katayama, 2006). The result
is that the storage of acidic foods or beverages such as coffee, soda, or juices can greatly accelerate the
rate of hydrolysis of the ester bond, which will accelerate the release of free BPA monomers into the
food or beverage. Furthermore, repeated washing of the storage containers with a basic cleaning agent
will also accelerate the release of BPA monomers.
The real question is not whether or not BPA is leeching into food or beverages, but how much BPA is
leeching into food or beverages. Human immune systems and biological functions are bombarded with
adverse chemical substances on a daily basis; but these “bombardments” are in such small amounts that
it makes no difference. Studies have shown that BPA is primarily ingested orally through intake of
food or beverages (Vandenberg, Hauser, Marcus, Olea, & Welshonse, 2007). Scientists also found that
the amount of BPA ingested by the general public dietary sources was 52-74 ng/kg per day
(Vandenberg, Hauser, Marcus, Olea, & Welshonse, 2007). This level of consumption is below the
former predicted safe dose of 50,000 nanograms per kilogram per day found by some studies
(Welshons, Nagel, & Vom Saal, 2006). However, in this report we review literature that contradicts
the predicted safe dose of 50,000 nanograms per kilogram per day, stating that the true safe dose is far
less than that predicted by some research groups, and that average environmental exposure levels to
BPA are in fact dangerous. The dangers of exposure to BPA at average environmental levels will be
discussed in later sections of this report.
BPA usage is fairly ubiquitous, especially concerning food and beverage containers produced by
Nalgene. A review of the literature on BPA shows that it is possible for BPA to depolymerize into its
monomer form, allowing the BPA monomers to leech into food or beverages contained within a
polymer storage unit. Furthermore, studies have shown that people do ingest BPA, most likely from
10
food or beverages stored in BPA polymer containers. Because BPA exposure is ubiquitous, and BPA
is ingested regularly, the effects of BPA must be monitored to ensure that public health is protected.
Validity of FDA Claims against BPA
The endocrine system consists of the hormone secreting glands of an organism. The hormones
secreted by these glands control many bodily functions, and play an important role in the development
of young organisms. BPA is known as an endocrine-disrupting chemical (EDC), due to its similarity in
molecular structure to the sex hormone estradiol, a member of the estrogen hormone family (Welshons,
Nagel, & Vom Saal, 2006). Because of the structural similarity, BPA exhibits effects similar to
estradiol when ingested and transported to specific sites in the human body. Thus, rather than being
particularly toxic when ingested, the danger lies within BPA’s structural similarity to a hormone that
regulates many bodily functions.
The main problem with past BPA research has been the amounts of BPA tested. In the past, possibly
harmful substances under suspicion were tested using toxicology methods. Toxicology testing
involves dosing relatively large quantities of the suspicious substance to test animals, observing the
symptoms, and correlating that information to human immune systems. The problem with this sort of
testing on substances that exhibit endocrine-like behavior is that the substances generally exhibit a
large effect on the endocrine system when dosed in very small quantities. With BPA in particular, the
research consisted of dosing BPA to test animals in large doses, observing the effects in the animals,
and then extrapolating the data down to the reported daily exposure level of 50,000 nanograms per
kilogram per day (Welshons, Nagel, & Vom Saal, 2006). The problem with this sort of testing is that
the groups responsible for these tests never actually tested the 50,000 nanograms per kilogram per day
in a biological model. Instead, the group simply made a prediction based on their data. The groups
should have focused the research on whether or not BPA affects the cellular estrogen receptors in the
test animals. Instead, the groups used doses of BPA that saturated the estrogen receptors with the
lowest doses, a thousand-fold higher than a predicted safe dose (Welshons, Nagel, & Vom Saal, 2006).
Saturation of the estrogen receptors prevented the scientists from observing any hormone disruption
effects from BPA ingestion.
In order to determine whether or not a chemical exhibits any hormone like effects on human
physiology, the chemical must be tested in doses small enough to elicit a change in cell response. In
order to observe a change in an estrogenic response to BPA in a test animal, a change in the occupancy
of estrogen receptor sites within the animal’s cells must be initiated (Welshons, Nagel, & Vom Saal,
2006). This means that the dose required to observe a change in estrogenic response must be below the
level that causes the saturation of the receptor sites. Because the experimental conditions used to
predict the lowest effective dose of BPA saturated the endocrine receptors in the test animals, the
experiments prove nothing about how low doses of BPA affect the endocrine system in these animals
or in the human endocrine system.
Results show that at dosages much smaller than the aforementioned lowest effective dose, humans will
experience a myriad of symptoms. For example, studies have shown that concentrations of BPA of 25
nanograms per kilogram per day in an individual can stimulate mammary gland development, as well
as peripubertal mammary gland development (Kanga, Kondo, & Katayama, 2006). Moreover, a dose
of 25 nanogram per kilogram per day was seen to alter the postnatal development, rate of sexual
maturation, and estrous cycle in the offspring of test mice (Welshons, Nagel, & Vom Saal, 2006). This
dose of 25 nanograms per kilogram per day is far lower than the old lowest effective dose of 50,000
nanograms per kilogram per day, and it still has vast adverse effects on developmental aspects of
organisms. Such a low dose has a large affect due to the nature of the endocrine system, where low
concentrations of hormones within the body control many vital developmental functions.
11
As shown above, BPA has proved to have biologically adverse endocrine activity at concentrations
smaller than the previously established lowest effective dose of 50,000 nanograms per kilogram per
day. Furthermore, many of the biologically effective doses are lower than the average consumption of
BPA, indicating that people are consuming a relevant amount of BPA. Similarly, the dose of 25
nanograms per kilogram per day is lower than the average ingested concentration of BPA, which is
between 52-74 nanograms per kilogram per day. This data shows that the FDA claim of BPA as a
dangerous endocrine disruptive chemical is valid.
Mechanisms of BPA on Endocrine System
Until recently, the exact pathway that BPA uses to cause fluctuations in hormone levels (and thus
developmental characteristics in organisms) remained a mystery. Particularly, the medical community
assumed that BPA used the same biological mechanisms as estradiol to regulate cellular functions.
However, current research shows that BPA actually follows a different path through the body than
estradiol.
Natural hormones interact with cells by binding to specialized cellular receptors on the cell surface,
initiating a change within the cell that generally cascades into a much larger overall effect. The first
part of this process is getting the hormone to the cell receptors, in a manner that leaves the hormone
molecules free to react with the cell receptor sites, as seen in the diagram in figure 2. If another
molecule chemically or physically binds to the hormone molecule, the hormone will not bind to the
receptor site and will be rendered ineffective.
A class of protein molecules called Sex-Hormone Binding Globulin (SHBG) scavenges the
bloodstreams of many organisms, specifically to bind and inactivate the hormones, in an effort to
regulate the hormone effects (Welshons, Nagel, & Vom Saal, 2006). For example, if levels of estradiol
rise too high for an organism, that organism will release SHBG molecules to inactivate some estradiol,
making sure that the rest of the cells in that organism are free from the adverse effects of hormone level
spikes.
However, results indicate that the SHBG molecules have very weak binding affinity to BPA molecules,
and that most BPA molecules ingested will circulate through the bloodstream, ready to bind to cell
receptor sites and initiate endocrine effects (Welshons, Nagel, & Vom Saal, 2006). This means that
rather than being adsorbed onto an organism’s hormone regulating systems, BPA will float relatively
freely through the blood stream of an individual who ingested it. Put simply, ingesting BPA is worse
than ingesting the same amount of estrogen.
Figure 2. Amplification of the signal hormone estrogen to produce gene expression.
12
Once bound to the cell receptors, BPA initiates some unique cellular functions that even differ from its
structurally similar, naturally occurring counterpart, estradiol. Many hormones are involved in gene
regulation and expression, an action which essentially controls every bodily function. Research shows
that BPA and estradiol initiate different functions when binding to cellular receptors (Welshons, Nagel,
& Vom Saal, 2006).
At the cellular level, many signaling hormones have the ability to bind to different types of hormones,
but the amounts of hormones binding to each receptor are usually equal. ERalpha and ERbeta are the
two primary estradiol receptors on cells (Welshons, Nagel, & Vom Saal, 2006). The problem arises in
the structural differences between the naturally occurring estradiol and artificial BPA, and the different
affinity each chemical has towards binding with the estradiol receptors. Studies have shown that BPA
binding to one cellular receptor, ERbeta, has over a 500-fold greater potency than to ERalpha, the other
cellular receptor responsible for binding estradiol-like chemicals (Welshons, Nagel, & Vom Saal,
2006). This shows that free BPA circulating throughout an individual’s bloodstream can cause a
cascade of undesirable effects, even worse than an increase in a naturally occurring hormone that binds
to the correct type and amount of cellular receptors.
Not only is an organism relatively unable to bind and deactivate the free BPA roaming throughout its
bloodstream, but also those same BPA molecules can wreak havoc on the gene expression within an
organism. If an organism cannot deactivate the free BPA, very few other pathways exist for the
clearance of BPA. Moreover, BPA favors binding to one hormone receptor five hundred times more
than the other receptor, unlike natural estrogen. This information sheds new light onto the theory that
BPA ingestion can change developmental factors in an organism and classifies BPA as a new kind of
dangerous synthetic chemical.
BPA Epidemiology: Mouse Prostate and Mammary Glands
Previous evidence shows that BPA can bind to the same cellular receptors as the sex hormone estradiol
and does so in an unnatural and unbalanced way favoring ERalpha over ERbeta. These specific
cellular receptors are partly responsible (along with other factors beyond the scope of this report) for
regulating DNA synthesis within the cells, specifically the cells of the mammary glands and prostate
glands (Richter, Taylor, Ruhlen, Welshons, & Saal, 2007). The mammary glands and prostate glands
both control the development of mammals, specifically rate of sexual maturation in mammals, as well
as a myriad of other important functions. Furthermore, studies have shown that specific cell types
located in the prostates and mammary glands of mammals are very sensitive to fluctuations in hormone
levels because the glands are designed to respond to hormones.
In order to measure abnormal cell proliferation, scientists usually measure the amount of DNA
synthesized by a cell, since a cell must copy its DNA before it divides. Cells that experience abnormal
growth, such as cancerous or pre-cancerous cells, would experience a large surge in DNA synthesis,
compared to a cell under normal conditions. Researchers discovered that, when giving test mice doses
of BPA, DNA synthesis in mammary gland and prostate cells increased compared to the DNA
synthesis in BPA-free mice. Specifically, exposure to BPA caused DNA synthesis to increase after six
months of age in mouse mammary gland cells, compared to normal surges in DNA synthesis occurring
at ten days (Markey, Luque, Munoz de Toro, Sonnenschein, & Soto, 2001). The mouse mammary
gland cells affected by BPA still showed a maximum of DNA synthesis well after the ten days. The
BPA affected mouse cells are replicating their DNA to prepare for division and growth in an unnatural
time frame, and this situation is associated with cancer cell formation (Markey, Luque, Munoz de Toro,
Sonnenschein, & Soto, 2001). BPA acts as a carcinogen because BPA causes abnormal growth in
mammary gland cells.
BPA also causes abnormal growth of prostate cells, in a manner similar to how it affects mammary
gland cells. Scientists dosed BPA at different concentrations to mice and observed their development.
13
The scientists found that when BPA binds to prostate cell receptors, the signal causes the cells to
produce more estradiol and growth factor receptors, and this data is shown in figure 3 (Richter, Taylor,
Ruhlen, Welshons, & Saal, 2007). Moreover, the shaded concentrations were environmentally relevant
and within the range found in human blood (Richter, Taylor, Ruhlen, Welshons, & Saal, 2007).
Essentially, BPA exhibits the same response in prostate cells as estrogen, causing the cells to grow and
develop. The increase in size and development of the prostate cells results in a permanent increase in
prostate size usually associated with cancer (Richter, Taylor, Ruhlen, Welshons, & Saal, 2007). BPA
initiates developmental changes similar to the effects of estrogen, and these changes usually indicate
cancerous cellular growths.
Figure 3. Amount of hormone receptor expression induced in prostate cells per test dosage of BPA (dark gray shading
shows environmentally relevant concentrations).
Alternative Polymers
“[The] toughest part is defining your problem.” This quote from process engineer Nancy Jackett
(personal communication, July 12, 2010) is essential about defining what needs to be done to correct a
problem. This section of the report will define the physical and chemical properties our replacement
material needs; introduce the possible replacement polymers to polycarbonate; and compare the
replacement materials to each other using the defined properties. The recommendation for a new
plastic will be given solely based upon these properties.
Property Specifics
The goal of this section is to determine which properties are necessary to consider for a new plastic.
Since the material is to be used in the production of outdoor water bottles, it has to survive many forms
of weather and applied impacts. The material needs to be transparent and has to be able to hold water
without the material degrading or collapsing. The properties to consider are listed in Figure 3, which is
given below.
14
Properties
Strength
Toughness
Liquid Stability
UV Radiation
Stability
Thermal Stability
Details
Resisting pressure applied to material. If you stuff
the bottle in a bag, will it hold its shape?
Bends before breaks, but not easily. If you try to
crush it, will it bend or brake?
Is it going to hold water or be dissolved by your
drink?
Is it going to not dissolve into your water in the sun
or break down?
Will it survive a normal range of heating or cooling?
Figure 4. List of material properties necessary to consider for alternatives.
Strength of a material is defined as how much stress the material can handle before it deforms or
breaks, where as stress is defined as the force per unit area applied to the material and is related to
pressure. The type of strength we are considering is tensile strength, which is the stress applied by
stretching a material. When a water bottle is picked up, the weight of the water applies tensile stress to
the bottle. For many polymers, break and yield values exist for tensile strength. Yield is the stress
applied that causes a noticeable deformation (University of South Carolina Upstate, 2001). The higher
a material’s tensile strength, the more strength that material has.
Toughness is defined as a material’s resistance to force and whether or not the material bends before
breaking. The first value we look for is percent elongation. This represents how much longer a
material will be when it breaks as compared to the material’s length before force was applied.
Therefore, one hundred percent elongation means the breaking length is twice as long as the original
length.
The second value considered is Izod impact strength. Izod refers to the specific test method that
produces units of energy to break the material per width of notch (Ram, 1997). For example, when a
water bottle is dropped from the top of a set of bleachers, the bottle undergoes a sharp increase in stress
when it hits the ground. If the bottle has good impact strength it will survive; if it does not, it could
break.
Liquid stability is determined by whether or not a material can still behave properly in the presence of
solvents. The water bottle should be able to withstand water, cleaning detergents (aka soap), alcohol,
and pop without being decomposed and losing its chemical nature.
Ultraviolet radiation stability deals with how polymers react towards the high-energy ultraviolet light.
Ultraviolet radiation from the sun can cause sunburns and skin cancer and can break bonds between
atoms and molecules. This leaves the atoms or molecules readily available for other reactions with
water or air, which prevent the previous bond from reforming. If this happens to both bonds that make
chains of polymers and the polymer is near the surface, monomers from the polymer can break from
the main chain and dissolve into the water. Although this happens at a small rate, some components of
polymers are not safe, even in very low concentrations. Certain molecule groups absorb ultraviolet
radiation and encourage the breakdown of the polymer. These molecule groups are benzene rings,
double-bonded carbons, carbonyls, alcohols, and carboxylic acids (Harper, 2006). If a polymer does
not contain these ultra violet-absorbing molecules, the polymer has more ultraviolet stability.
15
The last property is thermal stability. This property measures how well the material can withstand
normal temperature fluctuations. The properties of polymers change with temperature, and the
transitions between the properties are the glass transition temperature, deflection temperature, and
melting temperature. The glass transition temperature represents the change from a crystal-like state
where the molecules are locked in place to a liquid-like state where the molecules have some limited
movement (University of South Carolina Upstate, 2001). Simply stated, the material becomes softer.
Deflection temperature is the temperature at which a material deforms under a defined load (Ram,
1997). This represents the highest temperature of a material at which it can still be used. Melting
temperature for a polymer usually occurs over a range of temperatures because the melting temperature
is usually much higher than the materials normal exposure temperature. Melting temperature is more
important in manufacturing than in consumer use. The ideal material will have a low glass transition
temperature, a high deflection temperature and a low melting temperature.
The most important property is liquid stability. If the material cannot survive its main function of
holding water, the material is worthless. The ranking of properties from the view of this report from
best to least is liquid stability, toughness, ultraviolet stability, thermal stability, and strength.
Polymer Replacements
The research conducted into alternative polymers to polycarbonate has brought forward three polymers
of interest, which are as follows: polyethylene terephthalate (PETE), polystyrene , and Eastman Tritan
Copolyester. They all appear to have an appropriate amount of strength and toughness; the properties
for each alternative will be discussed in more detail.
Polyethylene terephthalate (PETE) is a polymer that has played a large role in the bottling industry.
The monomer form of PETE can be seen in Figure 4. When processed with blow molding and biaxial
stretching, PETE increases its toughness and decreases its permeability to gases (Ram, 1997). Because
of these properties, PETE is a viable alternative to BPA.
Figure 4. A monomer of PETE (Taylor & Francis Group, 2010).
Polystyrene is a rigid material, although it is somewhat brittle. The Figure #, below, is a monomer of
polystyrene. The specific form in our case is atactic polystyrene (Taylor & Francis Group, 2010).
Atactic refers to the position of the phenol groups to each other. In the atactic form, the phenol groups
have random positioning in relation to each other and have no particular pattern (University of South
Carolina Upstate, 2001). Three phenol groups may exist above the chain and two below the chain, and
then the next five phenol groups might alternate up and down. This lack of a certain pattern would be
true throughout the polymer. In the atactic form, polystyrene has an amorphous internal structure,
which is very similar to the internal structure of glass (Taylor & Francis Group). Polystyrene can be
16
processed in many forms and is often mixed with other monomers. According to Ram (1997, p163):
“Foamed polystyrene appears as a rigid and tough material in containers and packaging, water vessels
and plant pots as well as insulation boards in construction.” Because of polystyrene’s rigidity, it is also
a viable alternative to BPA.
Figure 5. A monomer of polystyrene (Taylor & Francis Group, 2010).
Eastman Tritan copolyester is a relatively new material that was brought to attention when
investigating other polycarbonate replacements (Nalgene, 2008). Like PETE, copolyester is an
extremely tough material. Although the specifics of the internal structure are not available, adequate
data is available on the overall properties (see Appendix A), and the FDA (Eastman, 2010) has
approved the material.
Material Comparison
This section will compare actual data on each of the material properties. First the value for BPA will be
discussed. Then the values for each alternative will be given. Finally, the meaning of values in relation
to the project will be discussed. The data on properties was obtained through two databases “Polymers,
a property database” from Taylor & Francis Group (2010) and “Product List” from Eastman (2010).
The first property considered is tensile strength. The given value for given yield tensile strength
values of polycarbonate are ranged between 58.0-72.0MPa. The break values are ranged between 60.0121.0 MPa. The break value for PETE is 172 MPa. Polystyrene has a tensile value of 42.0 MPa and a
break range between 35.9-56.6 MPa. Copolyester has the yield value of 45 MPA and a break value of
52 MPa. Based on these values, the ranking of the polymers from best strength to least is PETE,
polycarbonate, copolyester and polystyrene.
The second property considered toughness, which is considered in conjunction measured with
elongation and Izod impact strength. The elongation at the breaking point for polycarbonates ranges
between 65%-107%. The Izod impact strength for polycarbonate is dependent on notch depth value
with 107.0-160.0 J/m for a deeper notch and 640.0-854.0 J/m for a shallower notch value. PETE has an
elongation value of 100% and impact strength of 240 J/m. Polystyrene has an elongation range from
1.3-2.4% and impact strength range of 14.0-24.0 J/m. Copolyester has an elongation of 139% at break
and impact strength of 842 J/m. The ranking based on elongation from best to least is copolyester,
PETE, polycarbonate and polystyrene. The ranking based on Izod impact strength is copolyester,
polycarbonate, PETE and polystyrene. The overall toughness ranking is copolyester, polycarbonate,
PETE and polystyrene.
17
The third property considered is liquid stability. PETE is insoluble in ethanol, which is the alcohol in
the average beer. It is resistant to hydrocarbons, dilute acids and dilute bases, which means it will
survive if gasoline, soft drinks or cleaning products are spilled on it. Most importantly, it will survive
holding water. Polystyrene is resistant to bases whether dilute or concentrated. Taylor & Francis
Group (2010) tells: “[Polystyrene] stability is generally unaffected by dilute aqueous solutions.”
Therefore polystyrene is unaffected by water. Polystyrene containers can hold dilute acids, but not for
extended periods. Information on copolyester is somewhat vague on the ability of the copolyester to
resist these conditions. Based on the material safety data sheet (See appendix) for copolyester and
FDA approval of the material for repeated food contact, copolyester should survive the intended
condition of use. The ranking in liquids stability for these compounds is PETE, copolyester and
polystyrene.
The fourth property considered is UV radiation stability. The best polymer has the least number of the
UV-absorbing molecule groups. The groups are benzene rings, double-bonded carbons, carbonyls,
alcohols, and carboxylic acids (Harper, 2006). The Figure 6 is a monomer of PETE. PETE has a
benzene ring and two carbonyl groups. The Figure 7 is a monomer of polystyrene; it has the UVabsorbing group of benzene. The monomer of copolyester is unknown, however since this is a
copolyester, it will have at least two carbonyl groups. The ranking for UV radiation stability is from
best to least is polystyrene, copolyester and PETE.
Figure 6. A monomer of PETE
(Taylor & Francis Group, 2010).
Figure 7. A monomer of polystyrene
(Taylor & Francis Group, 2010).
The final property considered is thermal stability, which is considered in conjunction with glass
transition temperature, deflection temperature and melting temperature. The order of importance for
the three temperatures is deflection temperature, glass transition temperature and melting temperature,
the values to be reported will be reported in this order. The temperatures for polycarbonate are
138.0oC, 145.0oC and 177.0-247.0oC. The temperatures for PETE are 65.0oC, 125.0oC and 245.0258.0oC. The temperatures for polystyrene are 77.0-103.0oC and 85.0-110.0oC, the melting
temperature for polystyrene is unknown. The temperatures for copolyester are 85oC, 119oC and 205oC.
The ranking for deflection temperature from best to least is polycarbonate, copolyester, polystyrene
and PETE. The ranking for glass transition is polystyrene, copolyester, PETE and polycarbonate. The
ranking for melting temperature is polycarbonate, copolyester and PETE, with polystyrene being
excluded. The overall ranking is copolyester, polystyrene, polycarbonate and PETE.
Choice Material When Considering Properties
The recommended replacement material for polycarbonate is Eastman Tritan copolyester. The three
compounds examined in this report are Eastman Tritan copolyester, polyethylene terephthalate (PETE),
and atactic polystyrene. The compounds are ranked overall in the following order from best to least:
copolyester, PETE, and polystyrene. Our final recommendation is copolyester because its properties
far outrank the other two materials’ properties.
18
Manufacturing Analysis
As shown previously several different polymers would fit the physical requirements that are needed for
producing plastic water bottles. These three polymers are polystyrene (PS), Polyethylene Terepthalate
(PETE) and Triton Copolyester from Eastman. The methods used to produce these chemicals will be
discussed here in brief. The next step in determining what the appropriate replacement material is to
look at some of the manufacturing concerns. The first is safety, which is itself broken up into three
sections; reactivity danger, heat danger, and runaway danger. The second is material quality. The third
is necessity of retooling. Each of these sections will be covered in this report.
Production Method
Both safety and material quality are determined by the reaction that each of the materials uses to
polymerize. Two main methods of polymerizing materials exist. The first is called chain reaction
polymerization. The second method is called condensation polymerization.
The chain polymerization method makes use of radicals to produce the
polymer. It is used on molecules that have a small base unit like
polystyrene as shown in Figure 8. In order for the material to be produced
in a chain reaction polymerization, it must have a double bond in the
location of the desired polymerization.
Figure 8: A styrene molecule
As discussed in Solomons & Fryhle (2004), all chain reactions follow the same steps. The first is the
initiation step. In this step, the base unit reacts with a radical; by doing so, the base unit becomes a
radical itself. Figure 9 shows this reaction. The initial radical is produced by bombarding peroxide
with high frequency ultraviolet light.
Figure 9: The Initiator Step of a Chain Polymerization
The second step is the propagation step. In this step, the base radical molecule attaches to another base
molecule that is not yet a radical. Figure 10 shows this reaction. This step repeats indefinitely until the
final step. This can happen hundreds or thousands of times depending on the amount of available
material and the amount of radicals initially input.
Figure 10: The Propagation step of a Chain Polymerization
19
The final step is the termination step. In this step, two molecules that are both radicals meet and react
together. The result is a molecule made up of a varying number of the repeating base molecules with
one of the initiator molecules on each end. This reaction pairs the radicals together. The resulting
molecule is not a radical and can no longer perform the propagation step. By exposing this polymer to
a low concentration acid bath, the initiator molecules are pulled off and neutralized by the acid leaving
only the polymer behind.
The second type of polymerization reaction is called condensation polymerization. In condensation
polymerization, reactive groups on both ends of each monomer react with one another (The Macro
Group, 2006). This means that any molecule that is going to be polymerized using this method must
have an active reaction site on both ends of the molecule. It is also important that the molecules do not
have more than two reaction sites that can react with each other or no control will exist over which
polymer will be obtained as the final product.
Two steps are involved in producing PETE from condensation polymerization. The first step is to
activate the base material so that it has two ends that are reactive with each other. Figure 11 shows this
reaction. This adds a reactive functional group to both ends of the molecule and produces water as a
byproduct.
Figure 11: Activation of a Base Molecule of PETE
The second step is to have the new molecule react with itself. This happens with no energy or material
input although increasing the temperature of the system will increase the speed of the reaction. Figure
12 shows this step.
Figure 12: Reaction Step of a Condensation Polymerization
20
Safety
There are several safety concerns that we are interested in while producing polymers. The first of these
is reactivity danger. The second is heat production. The last is the possibility of a runaway reaction.
Depending on what methods are used to polymerize the base material, the inputs or other stages may be
dangerous.
Chemical Hazard
The method used to polymerize polystyrene, chain polymerization, has several associated chemical
hazards. The first is that polystyrene needs an initiating radical. All radical molecules are extremely
reactive, which means that any direct contact with the initiator material would cause severe chemical
burns. The second hazard is that the reaction causes the polymer to be a radical partway through the
reaction. This means that while polymerizing, the material that is being produced will also cause
chemical burns. Finally, once the polymerized material has finished reacting, it has one hydroxide
group attached to either end of the molecule. These are removed by a mild acid wash, which creates
another chemical burn hazard.
The method used to polymerize PETE, condensation polymerization, is essentially free from chemical
hazards. This method starts with activating the base material with a chemical that is not reactive with
anything except materials similar to the base material. The base material when activated will react
with itself and not with another material. This means that no chemical burn hazards exist anywhere in
the reactive process.
The last material is copolyester. This material is proprietary and it is therefore not possible to
determine the exact reactions that are used in its production. However, the material is the same class of
material as PETE; therefore, its manufacture will be similar to PETE as will its potential hazards.
Heat Hazard
Many reactions produce heat and therefore could cause either the material or the reaction vessel to be a
hazard to anyone coming into contact with either the material or the vessel.
When producing polystyrene with chain polymerization, the reaction produces significant amounts of
heat with each additional base unit added. The termination step will release twice as much energy as
the previous steps. This results in significant energy release and a large amount of heat release by the
reaction over time.
The production of PETE with a condensation polymerization will also release heat with each molecule
added to the chain. However, the heat release will be less for each step because the reaction must
break bonds that have a similar amount of energy as the bonds that will be formed. No final step exists
so there is no extra energy released. The amount of energy released will result in noticeable heat being
generated, but it will be less than what is generated by a chain polymerization.
The copolyester should also use condensation polymerization; therefore, the heat released will be on
the same order as for PETE.
21
Runaway Hazard
If a reaction can increase the rate at which it occurs by reacting in the first place, then the reaction may
be a runaway reaction. This results in huge increases in heat production; if the heat production is not
brought under control, the reaction will result in major damage to the reaction vessel and often to the
plant and personnel.
Two conditions exist that make it possible for a reaction to easily runaway. These two conditions are if
the reaction used is a fast reaction or if the reaction produces large amounts of heat. The PS reaction
meets both of these conditions. The large amounts of heat that it generates make a runaway reaction a
significant concern. There is also almost no energy required to start the reaction. This means that
cooling it will slow the reaction but it would take a large decrease in temperature to make a significant
change. This means that any runaway reaction would be very difficult to bring back under control.
The PETE reaction is also relatively fast and produces heat as well. While it does produce heat it
produces less than the PS reaction does in a given time and therefore it is harder for it to begin a
runaway reaction. This reaction also has a significant energy requirement to start the reaction so
cooling will quickly slow the reaction and may allow the reaction to be brought under control relatively
easily.
The potential for a runaway reaction of the Copolyester should be similar to that of PETE.
Quality
In all chemical production processes, a certain amount of material that will be produced is not the
actual material desired. This happens because in a process that generates a significant amount of
material, all possible reactions will occur. Better reactions simply produce less material that is
undesired than less efficient ones.
The polystyrene reaction is a radical reaction. One of the largest disadvantages of this is that it a less
controllable reaction. According to (Burman, 2010) “Radical reactions are very inefficient. They will
react at all atoms on a molecule which results in very low yields of the desired products.” There are
five different possible results from the reaction. Fortunately, the two that we desire are the most
favored but the net output is still approximately 70%. Additional processing can offset this low purity
some. The other materials that are produced will include a benzene ring in their backbone structure.
Several examples are shown in figure 13. This is a very distinct configuration. Removing these would
require an additional production step with a special catalyst to remove them.
Figure 13: Undesirable Chain Polymerization results.
The reaction for PETE is a substitution reaction. There are only two different possibilities for the
reaction and because the base is symmetrical the result is identical. There are other molecules that
could react in the reactor vessel but these reactions are going “uphill.” They absorb energy rather than
release it so they are likely to reverse again even in the rare case that they successfully form. This
22
results in a yield of between 90% and 95% depending on the temperature. The greater the temperature
the poorer the yield as the additional energy will make the energy absorbing reactions more favorable.
Since the reaction for the Copolyester is a condensation polymerization like PETE its’ product purity
will be better than PS. It is unlikely that the base molecule is both symmetrical and only contains two
identical reaction sites. This means that its’ unlikely to have as good a yield as PETE. This will be the
case because there are additional possibilities that will release energy. These possibilities are stable
and will reduce the purity of the final product.
Retooling
In order to produce material in significant quantities it is necessary to have large amounts of hardware.
This equipment is extremely expensive and is an upfront expense.
The costs of manufacturing hardware are a serious concern for any company that
actually makes a product. The machines cost millions of dollars and are often used for
years. The largest reason they are used for so long is that it takes so long for them to be
paid for. In a major industrial process it can take years for this to happen. (Norton,
2010)
Retooling a process is almost as costly as starting a new process. This means that if it is possible to
avoid retooling the process it is almost guaranteed to be preferred. In the case of this production line
all three of the replacement materials use the same general process in the production of the bottles.
During this process the material is heated up to its’ glass temperature and then placed into a mold.
Being at the glass temperature means that the material behaves in ways associated with both a solid and
a liquid. It will maintain a semblance of a shape without any outside support but will still flow like a
liquid if put under enough force. It can also take on the shape of the container that it is placed in.
The process that is used to manufacture plastic bottles is simple. First heat the plastic until it reaches
the upper limit of the glass phase. Next pour some of the plastic into a mold that is shaped like the
outside of the bottle that you want to produce. Then blow pressurized air into the mold. As the plastic
is blown against the sides of the mold it takes the desired shape and cools down which causes it to
solidify.
For all three replacement materials and BPA the glass temperature is within a 40 degree Celsius range.
This means that it should be possible to use the same equipment that is already in the company’s
possession to heat the plastic. PETE poses a unique, among the replacements, challenge. In addition
to the standard processes it must also undergo biaxial stretching. This process changes the way that the
polymer strands line up in the structure of the produced bottle. Doing this helps to give the bottle the
strength that is associated with PETE plastic. This means that only PETE would require additional
retooling of the equipment being used for the bottle manufacture.
Choice Material When Considering Manufacturing
There are three different aspects of the manufacturing process that are being examined to determine
which plastic if preferred. These three aspects are safety during the production of the plastic, quality of
the plastic being produced, and the need to retool the bottle making equipment.
In terms of safety PETE is the best material as it has no chemical hazards, the heat danger is
reasonable and while a runaway reaction is possible it would be possible to bring back under control.
Copolyester is second because of its similarity to PETE. In terms of chemical, heat, and runaway
23
dangers it will be similar to PETE but in a manufacturing setting it is better to know the hazards faced.
PS is last because of the numerous and highly reactive chemicals involved, the large amounts of heat
the process generates and the difficulty of preventing or controlling a runaway reaction.
In terms of quality PETE is once again the best material. Its’ yield is high because of the type of
polymerization used and its simple and symmetrical structure. Copolyester is second because it also
uses condensation polymerization but it is unlikely that it is as simple or symmetrical as PETE. The
poorest choice is PS once again. It is the last of the three in terms of quality because of its’
comparatively low yield which an effect of using chain polymerization in its production.
In terms of retooling both PS and Copolyester tie for first. Neither will require any additional retooling
of the equipment. PETE is last because it will require the alteration or more likely replacement of the
blown molding equipment which is an expensive process.
Overall, we would suggest the use of PETE as the replacement material. Its superior safety and quality
properties more than outweigh the extra cost that will be required. Copolyester is a close second
choice however. If not for the fact that we cannot say for certain what its safety properties are we
would recommend it above PETE because it does not require any additional retooling. We cannot
recommend PS as a choice because of its numerous safety hazards and its’ low production. The fact
that it does not require any extra retooling fails to override these considerations.
Conclusion
In this report, we have discussed the company Nalgene and that they are a manufacturer of water
bottles; however, they have been using BPA in their water bottles. Due to BPA’s toxic nature, the
FDA has mandated that we cease production of the BPA-containing water bottles and use a new
plastic. BPA can have negative impacts on the human body because it causes cancerous tumors to grow
in the prostate and breast regions of the body. These negative effects occur at much smaller doses than
originally thought by scientists.
The alternatives available to us are PETE (phenylethylene terephthalate), polystyrene, and Eastman
Tritan copolyester. By comparing the material properties of these alternatives (such as ultraviolet
stability, thermal stability, and toughness), Eastman Tritan copolyester is the best material to use.
However, when comparing the manufacturing techniques for each of these alternatives, safety, quality,
and retooling need to be considered. When these properties are taken into consideration, PETE is the
best material to use because it is safer and is of better quality.
Recommendation
Based off the material properties and the manufacturing techniques, the best material with which to
replace BPA in water bottles is PETE because it is a safer compound; is much more easily controlled
than the other two alternatives; and is of better quality than the other two alternatives.
24
Appendix A
References
Jackett, N. (2010, July 12). (G. Jackett, Interviewer)
Taylor & Francis Group. (2010) Polymers, a property database. Retrieved from
http://poly.chemnetbase.com
Ram, A. (1997). Fundamentals of Polymer Engineering. p83-84,92,148-210. Retrieved from
http://knovel.com.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/web/portal/browse/display?_EXT_KNOVEL_DISPLAY_booki
d=414&VerticalID=0
Harper, Charles A. (2006). Handbook of Plastics Technolgies. p327-31. Retrieved from
http://site.ebrary.com/lib/wayne/docDetail.action?docID=10155017
US Environmental Protection Agency. (1990) Report to Congress: Methods to Manage and Control
Plastic Wastes. p 30. Retrieved June 22, 2010 from National Service Center for Environmental
Publications website: http://nepis.epa.gov/
Nalgene. (2008) BPA and Nalgene. Retrieved June 2010 from http://www.nalgeneoutdoor.com/technical/bpaInfo.html
Eastman. (2010). Product List. Retrieved from
http://www.eastman.com/Products/Pages/ProductList.aspx?keyword=Tritan+Eastman+Copolyester
University of South Caroline Upstate. (2001). Polymer Chemistry. Retrieved June 26, 2010 from
http://faculty.uscupstate.edu/llever/Polymer%20Resources/MainMenu.htm
Linda B. White, M. (2009). Plastics: What's Dangerous, What's Not. Topeka: Ogden Publications, Inc.
Burman, A. (2010, July). (I. Norton, Interviewer)
Norton, P. (2010, July). (I. Norton, Interviewer)
Solomons, G., & Fryhle, C. (2004). Organic Chemistry. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
The Macro Group. (2006). Polymers and Macromolecules - learning resources for schools and
colleges. Retrieved July 27, 2010, from Macro Group UK:
http://www.macrogroup.org.uk/schools/polymer_chemistry.php#chain
Kanga, J.-H., Kondo, F., & Katayama, Y. (2006). Human exposure to bisphenol A. Toxicology , 79-89.
Linda B. White, M. (2009). Plastics: What's Dangerous, What's Not. Topeka: Ogden Publications, Inc.
Markey, C. M., Luque, E. H., Munoz de Toro, M., Sonnenschein, C., & Soto, A. M. (2001). In Utero
Exposure to Bisphenol A Alters the Development and Tissue Organization of the Mouse Mammary
Gland. BIOLOGY OF REPRODUCTION , 1215-1223.
Richter, C. A., Taylor, J. A., Ruhlen, R. L., Welshons, W. V., & Saal, F. S. (2007). Estradiol and
Bisphenol A Stimulate Androgen Receptor and Estrogen Receptor Gene Expression in Fetal Mouse
Prostate Mesenchyme Cells. Environmental Health Perspectives , 902-908.
25
Vandenberg, L. N., Hauser, R., Marcus, M., Olea, N., & Welshonse, W. V. (2007). Human Exposure to
Bisphenol A (BPA). Reproductive Toxicology , 139-177.
Welshons, W. V., Nagel, S. C., & Vom Saal, F. S. (2006). Large Effects from Small Exposures. III.
Endocrine Mechanisms Mediating Effects of Bisphenol A at Levels of Human Exposure.
Endocrinology , 56-69.
26
Appendix B
Image References
http://wiz2.pharm.wayne.edu/module/sexsteroids.html
http://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Welshons, W. V., Nagel, S. C., & Vom Saal, F. S. (2006). Large Effects from Small Exposures. III. Endocrine
Mechanisms Mediating Effects of Bisphenol A at Levels of Human Exposure. Endocrinology , 56-69.
http://poly.chemnetbase.com
Figure 8
http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/ethene/etheneh.htm
Figure 9
http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/ethene/etheneh.htm
Figure 10
http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/ethene/etheneh.htm
Figure 11
http://www.macrogroup.org.uk/schools/polymer_chemistry.php#chain
Figure 12
http://www.macrogroup.org.uk/schools/polymer_chemistry.php#chain
Figure 13
http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/ethene/etheneh.htm
27
Appendix C
MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET
Revision Date: 09/22/2009
MSDSUSA/ANSI/EN/150000070698/Version 2.0
1. CHEMICAL PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION
Product Name
Product Identification Number(s)
Eastman Tritan(TM) Copolyester WX500
WX500, P32174FZ, P32174FC, P32174FF, P32174FB,
P32174FA
Eastman Chemical Company
200 South W ilcox Drive
Kingsport, TN 37660-5280
US
+14232292000
Eastman Product Safety and Health
not applicable
984748
not applicable
not applicable
plastic
nonhazardous
Manufacturer/Supplier
MSDS Prepared by
Chemical Name
Synonym(s)
Molecular Formula
Molecular Weight
Product Use
OSHA Status
For emergency health, safety, and environmental information, call 1-423-229-4511 or 1-423-229-2000.
For emergency transportation information, in the United States: call CHEMTREC at 800 -424-9300 or call
423-229-2000.
2. COMPOSITION INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
(Typical composition is given, and it may vary. A certificate of analysis can be provided, if available.)
Weight %
>99%
<1%
Component
copolyester
additive(s)
CAS Registry No.
proprietary
not applicable
3. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION
CAUTION!
MOLTEN MATERIAL WILL PRODUCE THERMAL BURNS
HMIS® Hazard Ratings:
Health - 1, Flammability - 1, Chemical Reactivity - 0
HMIS® rating involves data interpretations that may vary from company to company. They are intended only for rapid,
general identification of the magnitude of the specific hazard. To deal adequately with the safe handling of this material,
all the information contained in this MSDS must be considered.
©COPYRIGHT 2009 BY EASTMAN CHEMICAL COMPANY
Visit our w ebsite at www.EAST MAN.com or email emnmsds@eastman.com
Page 1
28
4. FIRST-AID MEASURES
Inhalation: If symptomatic, move to fresh air. Get medical attention if symptoms persist.
Eyes: Any material that contacts the eye should be washed out immediately with water. If easy to do,
remove contact lenses. Get medical attention if symptoms persist. If molten material contacts
the eye, immediately flush with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes. Get medical attention
immediately.
Skin: W ash with soap and water. Get medical attention if symptoms occur. If burned by contact with
molten material, cool as quickly as possible. Do not peel material from skin. Get medical
attention.
Ingestion: Seek medical advice. Material is not expected to be absorbed from the gastrointestinal
tract so that induction of vomiting should not be necessary.
Note to Physicians: Burns should be treated as thermal burns. The material will come off as healing
occurs; therefore, immediate removal from the skin is not necessary.
5. FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES
Extinguishing Media: water spray, carbon dioxide, dry chemical
Special Fire-Fighting Procedures: Wear self-contained breathing apparatus and protective clothing.
Hazardous Combustion Products: carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide
Unusual Fire and Explosion Hazards: Powdered material may form explosive dust-air mixtures.
6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES
Sweep up and place in a clearly labeled container for chemical waste.
7. HANDLING AND STORAGE
Personal Precautionary Measures: Avoid contact with molten material.
Prevention of Fire and Explosion: Keep from contact with oxidizing materials. Minimize dust generation
and accumulation. In the United States of America, refer to NFPA® Pamphlet No. 654, "P revention
of Fire and Dust Explosions in the Chemical, Dye, Pharmaceutical, and Plastics Industries."
Storage: Keep container closed.
8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION
Country specific exposure limits have not been established or are not applicable unless listed below.
Ventilation: Good general ventilation (typically 10 air changes per hour) should be used. Ventilation
rates should be matched to conditions. Supplementary local exhaust ventilation, closed
©COPYRIGHT 2009 BY EASTMAN CHEMICAL COMPANY
Visit our w ebsite at www.EAST MAN.com or email emnmsds@eastman.com
Pag
e2