SEPAWA Congress Venzmer Joachim 2
Dr. Joachim Venzmer

Evonik Operations GmbH

Head of Research Interfacial Technology at Evonik

Current lectures/posters

16.10.2024

15:00

-

15:30

-

Biosurfactants – Greenwashing or Green Washing?

(available in the SOFW media library after the congress)

English

It is possible to lower the carbon footprint of e.g. a laundry detergent by replacing part of the petrochemically-derived surfactants by a biosurfactant, which is not only fully biobased, but also made biologically. Is this, however, already green washing (or just greenwashing)? Starting from the fact that Rhamnolipids are produced by enzymes, it should not come as a surprise that biosurfactants are inherently compatible with proteins. Likewise, the lack of interaction with cationic groups of a protein is also the reason why the deposition of cationic polymers on hair is greatly improved, in case the classical anionic surfactants in a conditioning shampoo was completely replaced by Rhamnolipids. Likewise, in laundry detergents, substituting only a small portion of the classical surfactants by biosurfactants is hardly sufficient to utilize their full potential: Green washing requires new formulation concepts, based on the special properties of biosurfactants. In addition, biosurfactants must have some compatibility with microorganisms, at least with their producers, while inhibiting others. This is an important aspect, since it is commonly expected by consumers that washing hands using soap helps to fight microbes. A selective antimicrobial action might thus help to reduce harmful germs while protecting the natural skin microbiota.

17.10.2024

10:45

-

11:15

-

Regulatory Challenges from a Physico-chemical Perspective

(available in the SOFW media library after the congress)

English

There is a number of regulatory questions physical chemists are frequently being asked, for example: Is a material a surfactant (according to Customs Tariff and EU Detergent Regulation)? Is a (polymeric) material water-soluble (relevant e.g. for PolymerREACH and Microplastics Restriction). While these questions sound trivial, they are often almost impossible to answer, because the only (legally) existing methods are not applicable to surfactants and surface-active polymers, if taken literally. The CESIO Working Group “Test Methods of Surfactants” (TMS) and the TEGEWA Working Group “Surface Active Substances” have identified these challenges and have looked into norms and guidelines concerning surface tension and solubility of surfactants and/or surface-active polymers. The motivation to care about this topic was that assignment of materials as e.g. surface-active should be on account of their properties, but should not be caused by shortcomings of the analytical methodology. The OECD Guideline 115 on surface activity is based on norms from the pre-computer era, describing the plate and ring methods which are real classics (>100 years old!). Unfortunately, these methods suffer from the general problem of ill-defined surface age, which could be especially problematic in case of surface-active polymers. Advances in image processing/computing power during the past two decades have allowed drop shape analysis (Pendant Drop Tensiometry) to develop into a well-established, better alternative to determine surface tensions. However, a corresponding norm or guideline for the field of surfactants is missing. Respective activities within DIN NMP NA 62-5-63 and CEN TC 276 WG2 have been initiated. Concerning the determination of water-solubility, it is unclear how the OECD guideline 105 should be applied to surfactants and surface-active polymers, since this method is based on a saturation concentration which most surfactants do not have. But there is not even a clear definition whether a substance is – legally speaking – a surfactant.