environment magazine

Sustainability within the coatings industry.

By Brian Widdop

Sustainability and ‘eco’ or ‘green’ coatings are words that are commonly used with any new development in the coatings industry today. Every coatings company now has environmental policies, sustainability targets and specialist functions within their business. It is evident that larger coatings companies are particularly active in trying to establish themselves as industry leaders in environmental practices, to banish the confusion surrounding paints and to foster an understanding within our customers that we are responsible in our actions.

But what do we actually mean?

Since the 1980s sustainability has been used to refer to our human sustainability on Earth as quoted by the Brundtland Commission: “sustainable development is the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. It is widely recognized that to consume resources at the current rate is untenable. But when we talk about being ‘green’ there is a wealth of different understandings.

When I think about ‘green’ I am reminded of the definition of Green Chemistry, a philosophy of chemical research and engineering that encourages the design of products and processes that minimize the use and generation of hazardous substances. This often gets confused and misinterpreted as ‘eco’ which simply refers to a more natural state.

What exactly is a ‘Green’ paint?

Every paint company has approached the concept of green paint in a different way; some have opted to increase content of renewable raw materials, some transfer to water based systems and some, as Crown Paints has done, have committed to making carbon reductions across the entire product portfolio. In the growing number of claims how do we know who has the right approach? We can only say what we believe and comment on how we have approached our own sustainability initiatives. As understanding increases, and demand for evidence rises we are more and more confident that a holistic approach to the full lifecycle is necessary. To concentrate on only one aspect is to ignore the effect of the whole system.

Of course, all harmful materials and processes should be avoided and renewable/ sustainable resources should be used wherever possible. The difficulty with some natural or sustainable products is that their total impact is sometimes greater than that of the synthetic alternative. Just because something is described as natural doesn’t necessarily mean that it has a low environmental burden. It’s noticeable, for example, that synthetic red oxides, used as pigments, have far less of an impact than natural red oxides. This is because synthetic red oxides are created as a by-product of another process whereas natural red oxides require a significant amount of energy to burn them before processing. So which do you choose?

Our research into our own environmental performance has highlighted some interesting features. Aspects of our carbon footprint that we initially perceived to be high, such as transport and manufacture are surprisingly small in the scheme of things comprising typically less than 20% of a products carbon footprint. The other 80% is mainly generated in raw material production and occurs before the materials reach our plants. Of this 80% one of the main issues surrounds TiO2. TiO2 is essential to provide opacity. All paints, including those branded as natural or eco, contain TiO2 and there is currently no alternative that can provide the same level of performance.

For this reason we have set ourselves ambitious carbon reduction targets, 10% by 2015 and 25% by 2020 and will only be achieved if we help our customers to make the right purchasing decisions based on environmental impact, product quality and durability and if we assist our suppliers to deliver lower impact products that maximise efficiency.

The least environmental product is one that doesn’t work

One of the key areas in assessing the environmental burden of a paint is its performance. The effectiveness of a product is just as important as the way it is made. A simple way to reduce the environmental impact is to reduce the levels of TiO2 in the formulation. This will undoubtedly lower the carbon footprint of a tin of paint, however the danger then is that the paint doesn’t perform as required and 4 or 5 coats are applied compared to the original 2 coats. Any improvements in the tin are totally negated in application. Any environmental claims should be supported by evidence and practical tests.

In our opinion, functionality or performance is the essential starting criteria, and environmental impact, human health and substrate protection are given different values according to the application. For example, a paint on the outside of a building that has excellent performance would justify a higher environmental burden than an ordinary emulsion for use inside a house.

Added functionality

The idea that coatings companies are new to improving their environmental performance is a misconception. For many years coatings companies have been striving to develop their paints in a responsible way. It is right that all harmful materials and processes should be avoided and true that most coatings companies are working to remove those aspects of their processes well before legislation makes it compulsory.

The recent changes in VOC legislation would suggest that VOC reduction was something enforced on the coatings industry, when in reality Breatheasy, our first zero added VOC paints was first introduced back in 2000.

There is a whole range of new ideas and technologies born out of the desire to eliminate waste, remove hazardous processes and reduce environmental impact; water based alkyds, polyurethanes from recycled plastics and calcium carbonates from recycled paper to name just a few. These technologies are new and still under development, but it is easy to see that the coatings industry is pioneering some of the most exciting advances in sustainable materials.

It’s not just the raw materials that are breaking new ground. With new coatings that kill germs, resist flames or reflect heat, the benefits of advanced systems will begin to balance the environmental impact.

Beyond the actual paint

As manufacturers we are also heavily focused on minimizing waste and recycling wherever possible. Post consumer waste is a big issue and as an industry we are committed to finding ways of reducing the burden, whether that be through Can Back schemes, recycled paint initiatives or community regeneration projects.

Our responsibility as manufacturers extends beyond the production of a tin of paint. It is our duty to develop paints and varnishes to achieve a level of protection and durability that extends the life of the substrate and removes the need to reapply unnecessarily. Our customers also depend on us to provide them with the best information to make the most appropriate choices.

Conclusion

Just about everyone these days has a green product, however with no industry-wide definition of what green paints actually are and the ability to modify the definition to support a particular message or point of view, it’s no wonder the consumer is confused by the wealth of information out there. By providing a level of transparency and tackling all aspects of a product lifecycle we aim to demystify those claims and provide real information on our environmental performance.