Fri, 18 Dec 1992 13:29:28 -0700 "Tony C. Tweedale" Re: cleaning products To: Multiple recipients of list BIOSPH-L On Thu, 17 Dec 1992, Rumen with a View wrote: > C. Hanlon has requested info on cleaning compounds. Perhaps someone out there > can enlighten me as well. There seems to be a common perception "out there" > that commercial detergents are less environmentally friendly than old fashioned > cleaners that grandma used, like borax. > > Most commercial soaps are primarily sodium lauryl sulfate or > similar fatty acid salts. Since medium chain fatty acids are easily metabolized > by microbes, the primary ingredients don't strike me as being particularly > threatening. > > Borax, on the other hand, is a reasonably toxic element for mammals. > Acceptable maximum tolerable levels for domestic animals: > > boron 150 ppm > selenium 2 ppm > mercury 2-3 ppm > strontium 2,000 ppm > chromium 1,000 ppm > cadmium 0.5 ppm > manganese 400 ppm (swine) > uranium 400 ppm (rats) > > These numbers are subject to other mineral interactions and species variation. > However, I don't know of anyone who would suggest washing clothes in uranium > salts even if it were an effective cleaner. > > Lyle Rode > Nutritionist > Agriculture Canada a reply: synthetic detergents were at one time composed largely of branched long chain "fatty acids". bugs could not eat their way around the side chains and so the detergents did not degrade (does that cause a nutrients problem--i guess not, that's due to inputs of phosphor in the cleaning agents?). and what about these new citrus oil solvents that are meant to be super effective, ie can be used to replace industrial strength solvents eg methylene chloride, cfc's, toluene, etc. (down w. chlorine!). i understand they are terpene molecular units that do the cleaning (ie are the reactive molecule in the formulation). take it they are similar to old fashioned turpentine. degradable? toxicity (chronic, acute)?