Smarter Chemistry: Green, Circular and Safe-by-Design

9

Introduction
The chemical industry is at a crossroads, faced with the dual challenges of sustaining its pivotal role in society and reducing its environmental impact. Historically, the industry has operated under a “take-make-dispose” model, relying heavily on finite resources and contributing significantly to pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Today, there is an urgent need to pivot towards more sustainable practices, especially as societal demands for environmental responsibility grow. While Green Chemistry (1, 2), Circular Chemistry (3), and Safe and Sustainable-by-Design (SSbD) (4-6) have emerged as frameworks to guide this transition, their true potential lies in their integration. A smarter approach to chemistry that blends these principles could be the key to achieving a sustainable, circular, and safe chemical industry (7).

 

The Need for a Smarter Approach
Green Chemistry, Circular Chemistry, and SSbD are individually powerful tools for advancing sustainability, but when applied in isolation, they often fall short of delivering the systemic change required to address the industry’s environmental footprint (8, 9). Green Chemistry focuses on reducing hazardous substances and minimizing waste (1). Circular Chemistry emphasizes resource efficiency and keeping materials within a closed-loop system (3, 10).
SSbD, meanwhile, prioritizes designing products and processes that are inherently safe for human health and the environment throughout their lifecycle (4-6). Each framework tackles a specific aspect of sustainability, but the chemical industry needs more than isolated solutions. To achieve lasting change, the sector must embrace a more holistic approach—one that seamlessly integrates these frameworks into a unified vision of smarter chemistry (11).

 

Integration: A Pathway to True Sustainability
A smarter approach to chemistry is not just about reducing negative impacts; it is about reimagining the entire lifecycle of chemical products to maximize positive outcomes (12).

By combining the best aspects of Green Chemistry, Circular Chemistry, and SSbD, the industry can transform its operations and products in ways that go beyond mere compliance or incremental improvements. This integration can be particularly impactful in three key areas: raw material selection, process optimization, and end-of-life management.

 

Raw Material Selection: From Fossil Fuels to Renewable Resources
A core aspect of smarter chemistry involves rethinking the sources of raw materials. The chemical industry’s heavy reliance on fossil fuels has not only led to a significant carbon footprint but also put its long-term viability at risk. By applying principles from Green Chemistry and Circular Chemistry, the industry can shift towards using renewable feedstocks such as biomass, recycled materials, or carbon dioxide (13). Moreover, by integrating SSbD into the design phase, it ensures that these renewable materials do not introduce new risks or hazards to human health or the environment. This approach ensures that the transition to bio-based or recycled materials is safe, sustainable, and aligned with circular economy principles.

 

For example, the production of bio-based plastics like polylactic acid (PLA) from corn or sugarcane illustrates this shift. PLA production not only reduces dependence on fossil fuels but, when designed with SSbD principles, can also be made non-toxic and safe for consumers. Integrating circular strategies ensures that PLA products are designed to be reused or recycled, creating a closed-loop system that minimizes waste (14). Thus, smarter chemistry drives the simultaneous adoption of renewable resources, safety considerations, and circular design, fostering a more sustainable industry.

Process Optimization: Enhancing Efficiency and Safety
In the quest for sustainability, how chemicals are produced is just as important as what chemicals are produced. Traditional chemical processes often prioritize yield over energy efficiency or environmental impact, resulting in significant carbon emissions and hazardous waste.
By incorporating Green Chemistry principles into process optimization, the industry can reduce the generation of waste and minimize the use of toxic reagents. At the same time, Circular Chemistry principles guide the redesign of processes to enable the reuse and recycling of materials, maximizing resource efficiency (15).

 

Smarter chemistry emphasizes the need to integrate safety and circularity from the outset of process design. This means developing catalytic processes that are not only more efficient but also safer and designed for circularity. Catalysis plays a crucial role here, offering a way to lower energy requirements while enabling the reuse of reaction intermediates. Additionally, SSbD ensures that process innovations consider safety from the start, reducing risks of toxic releases or accidents (16). For example, advances in electrocatalytic processes for converting CO2 into valuable chemicals can enable low-carbon, safe, and circular solutions for industrial applications, if designed with integrated principles.

 

End-of-Life Management: Designing for Degradation and Reuse
One of the critical challenges of the chemical industry lies in managing the end-of-life phase of products. Many chemical products are designed without consideration of their disposal, leading to persistent waste in the environment, such as plastics that contribute to marine pollution (17). Circular Chemistry focuses on keeping materials in use for as long as possible through reuse, recycling, or repurposing (3). When combined with SSbD, the focus shifts to designing products that are safe throughout their lifecycle, ensuring that they degrade into non-toxic substances or can be effectively recycled.

 

Smarter chemistry emphasizes the need to consider end-of-life options as early as the design stage. This could mean developing materials that are inherently biodegradable under natural conditions or designing products with modular components that are easier to disassemble and recycle.

 

The integration of SSbD into Circular Chemistry ensures that even when products reach the end of their useful life, they do not pose new environmental or health risks. This integrated approach can help mitigate issues like microplastic pollution, where materials break down into non-toxic components rather than persisting in the environment.

 

Operationalizing Smarter Chemistry: A Call for Industry Action
The transition to a smarter chemistry framework requires more than just theoretical alignment of principles—it necessitates action from industry, academia, and policymakers alike. To operationalize this vision, several strategies are essential:

 

Collaborative Research and Development: Smarter chemistry thrives on interdisciplinary collaboration. Partnerships between chemical companies, academic researchers, and technology providers can accelerate the development of new materials and processes that embody the principles of Green Chemistry, Circular Chemistry, and SSbD. For instance, developing scalable methods for CO2 capture and conversion into valuable products can benefit from combined expertise in catalysis, materials science, and environmental engineering.

 

Regulatory Alignment and Incentives: Policymakers have a crucial role in creating an enabling environment for smarter chemistry. This involves aligning regulations with the integrated principles of Green, Circular, and Safe-by-Design Chemistry, providing incentives for innovation and penalizing unsustainable practices (16). Regulations should be forward-looking, encouraging the industry to exceed minimum compliance requirements and aim for truly sustainable solutions.

 

Innovation-Driven Business Models: The industry needs to adopt business models that prioritize the function and service provided by chemical products over the volume of chemicals sold (18). This shift could involve embracing service-based models, where companies retain ownership of materials and products and manage their lifecycle, ensuring circularity and safety. For example, leasing models for chemical-based products can create incentives for manufacturers to design for long-lasting performance and ease of recycling.

Conclusion: Towards a Sustainable Future with Smarter Chemistry
The chemical industry has a critical role to play in addressing global sustainability challenges, from climate change to resource scarcity (19). By adopting a smarter chemistry approach that integrates Green Chemistry, Circular Chemistry, and SSbD principles, the industry can turn these challenges into opportunities for innovation and growth. This holistic framework not only reduces environmental impacts but also opens new markets for sustainable products, enhances the industry’s resilience, and fosters trust with consumers and society.

 

Ultimately, smarter chemistry is about embracing a vision of sustainability that goes beyond incremental improvements. It is a call for the chemical industry to lead the way in creating a world where chemistry is not just compatible with sustainability but is a driving force behind it. By championing this integrated approach, the industry can contribute to a future where the benefits of chemistry are not overshadowed by its costs, but instead help build a more resilient, sustainable, and thriving society.

 

Acknowledgements
This work was financially supported by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) by a VICI grant (VI.C.202.071).

 

References and notes

1. Anastas, P.T. and Warner, J.C. (eds) (1998). Green Chemistry: Theory and Practice (Oxford University Press). https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198506980.001.0001.
2. Krasnodębski, M. (2022). Lost green chemistries: history of forgotten environmental trajectories. Centaurus 64, 509–536. https://doi.org/10.1484/J.CNT.5.131246.
3. Keijer, T., Bakker, V. and Slootweg, J.C. (2019). Circular chemistry to enable a circular economy. Nat. Chem. 11, 190–195. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41557-019-0226-9.
4. Apel, C., Kümmerer, K., Sudheshwar, A., Nowack, B., Som, C., Colin, C., Walter, L., Breukelaar, J., Meeus, M., Ildefonso, B., Petrovykh, D., Elyahmadi, C., Huttunen-Saarivirta, E., Dierckx, A., Chloé Devic, A., Valsami-Jones, E., Brennan, M., Rocca, C., Scheper, J., Strömberg, E., Soeteman-Hernández, L.G. (2024). Safe-and-sustainable-by-design: State of the art approaches and lessons learned from value chain perspectives. Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry, 45, 100876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc.2023.100876.
5. Caldeira, C., Farcal, R., Moretti, C., Mancini, L., Rasmussen, K., Rauscher, H., Riego Sintes, J. and Sala S. (2022). Safe and Sustainable-by-Design chemicals and materials – Review of safety and sustainability dimensions, aspects, methods, indicators, and tools. EUR 30991 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, ISBN 978-92-76-47560-6, https://doi:10.2760/879069, JRC127109.
6. Cefic. (2024). Safe and Sustainable-by-Design: A guidance to unleash the transformative power of innovation. See: https://cefic.org/app/uploads/2024/03/Safe-and-Sustainable-by-Design-a-guidance-to-unleash-the-transformative-power-of-innovation.pdf
7. Flerlage, H. and Slootweg, J.C. (2023). Modern Chemistry is Rubbish. Nat. Rev. Chem. 7, 593–594. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-023-00523-9.
8. Persson, L., Carney Almroth, B.M., Collins, C.D., Cornell, S., de Wit, C.A., Diamond, M.L., Fantke, P., Hassellöv, M., MacLeod, M., Ryberg, M.W., Søgaard Jørgensen, P., Villarrubia-Gómez, P., Wang, Z. and Hauschild, M.Z. (2022). Outside the safe operating space of the planetary boundary for novel entities. Environ. Sci. Technol. 56, 1510−1521. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c04158.
9. Richardson, K., Steffen, W., Lucht, W., Bendtsen, J., Cornell, S.E., Donges, J.F., Drüke, M., Fetzer, I., Bala, G., von Bloh, W., Feulner, G., Fiedler, S., Gerten, D., Gleeson, T., Hofmann, M., Huiskamp, W., Kummu, M., Mohan, C., Nogués-Bravo, D., Petri, S., Porkka, M., Rahmstorf, S., Schaphoff, S., Thonicke, K., Tobian, A., Virkki, V., Wang-Erlandsson, L., Weber, L., Rockström, J. (2023). Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries. Sci. Adv. 9, eadh2458. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adh2458.
10. Zimmerman, J.B and Anastas, P.T. (2006) in Sustainability Science and Engineering: Defining Principles, Abraham, M.A. (ed), Chapter 10, 201–221.
11. Mahaffy, P.G., Matlin, S.A., Holme, T.A. and MacKellar J. (2019). Systems thinking for education about the molecular basis of sustainability. Nat Sustain 2, 362–370. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0285-3.
12. Matlin, S.A., Cornell, S.E., Krief, A., Hopf, H. and Mehta, G. (2022). Chemistry must respond to the crisis of transgression of planetary boundaries. Chem. Sci. 13, 11710−11720. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2SC03603G.
13. Galán-Martín, Á., Tulus, V., Díaz, I, Pozo, C., Pérez-Ramírez, J. and Guillén-Gosálbez, G. (2021). Sustainability footprints of a renewable carbon transition for the petrochemical sector within planetary boundaries. One Earth 4, 565–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2021.04.001.
14. Lange, J.-P. (2021). Managing Plastic Waste─Sorting, Recycling, Disposal, and Product Redesign. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 9 (47), 15722–15738. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.1c05013.
15. Kümmerer. K., Clark, J.H. and Zuin, V.G. (2020). Rethinking chemistry for a circular economy. Science 367, 369–370. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba4979.
16. Sudheshwar, A., Apel, C., Kümmerer, K., Wang, Z., Soeteman-Hernández, L.G., Valsami-Jones, E., Som, C., Nowack, B. (2024). Learning from Safe-by-Design for Safe-and-Sustainable-by-Design: Mapping the current landscape of Safe-by-Design reviews, case studies, and frameworks. Environment International, 183, 108305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2023.108305.
17. Lange, J.-P., Kersten, S. R. A., De Meester, S., van Eijk, M. C. P., Ragaert, K. (2024). Plastic recycling stripped naked – from circular product to circular industry with recycling cascade. ChemSusChem 17, e202301320. https://doi.org/10.1002/cssc.202301320.
18. Moser, F., Jakl, T. (2015). Chemical leasing—a review of implementation in the past decade. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 22, 6325–6348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3879-3.
19. van Gaalen, J. M., Slootweg, J. C. (2024). From Critical Raw Materials to Circular Raw Materials. ChemSusChem, e202401170. https://doi.org/10.1002/cssc.202401170.