BIOCIDES FOR FOOD

Work Continues on Antimicrobial Solutions for Food Safety By The National Provisioner | March 31, 2014

Antimicrobial solutions are used to reduce contaminants on raw foods such as meats, vegetables and fruits. This is analogous to washing food prior to using it in one’s own kitchen, although these compounds enhance the washing action, says Martha Ewing, director of technical services at Sanderson Farms Inc. of Laurel, MS.
Antimicrobial solutions have proven to be very good at treating certain contaminants on animal carcasses and on primal and subprimal cuts, says Jim Dickson, professor in the Department of Animal Science, Inter-Departmental Program in Microbiology at Iowa State University in Ames.
“It’s one of the more significant introductions … in meat and poultry in the last 25 years,” he says. The statistics support that fact as well: Antimicrobial solutions are working.
According to U.S. Department of Agriculture data for poultry, the Salmonella incidence rate has been reduced 26 percent from the beginning of 2013 and 55 percent compared to five years ago. Further, data indicate that the number expressed as a Most Probable Number of Salmonella is very low – fewer than 10 microorganisms when a positive result is enumerated, Ewing says.
One of the biggest challenges for processors of ready-to-eat (RTE) products that are exposed to the environment at packaging is the potential for Listeria monocytogenes contamination, explains Lynn Knipe, extension processed meats specialist and associate professor in Food Science and Technology, and Animal Sciences at Ohio State University in Columbus.
“For intact fresh cuts and for ready-to-eat products, surface contamination has been the greatest concern for processors, and I don’t see that changing in the near future,” Knipe says. “Since this is a surface contamination, sprays and dips can have the greatest impact on the surface contamination.”
Gaining ground
Newer compounds and application strategies are being developed for antimicrobial solutions. Lauric arginate, for example, was introduced in the United States a few years ago as an effective antimicrobial spray against Listeria.
“Lauric arginate may be sprayed directly on to RTE meat products prior to packaging, or sprayed inside the pouch before the meat product is inserted into the package,” Knipe says. “The latter option relies on the vacuum to distribute the lauric arginate uniformly around the packaged product. More recently, it has been shown to be effective as a surface treatment to eliminate Salmonella on chicken.”
Peroxyacetic acid is a new chemical that’s been widely used, especially in the beef industry, Dickson says. In the poultry industry, carcass washers apply sprays to both the inside and outside of the body cavity, as well as to the external surfaces, he says. One of the newest advancements in some poultry plants has been the use of a wash after the carcasses come out of the chiller.
“If you spray an organic acid on a poultry carcass and then you put it into a chiller, then it pretty much washes all of that off,” Dickson says. “There have been some that are using a wash or spray cabinet after carcasses come out of the chiller, and that seems to be pretty effective.”
The compounds commonly used today are considered processing aides and do not have a residual effect. If a residual effect was present, the compound would be considered an ingredient and would have to be included on the label.
Nevertheless, some clean-label products, which involve vinegar and lime juice, have been developed that are effective in eliminating surface contamination of both Listeria monocytogenes and Clostridium perfringens on RTE meat products, Knipe says.
“With the consumer pressure for clean labels, these products provide the product safety needed [for processors and consumers], without chemical names that concern consumers,” he says.
Additionally, much work is being done in spices, botanicals, phyto-antimicrobials and phyto-chemicals to see if compounds can be isolated from various plants and/or seeds to have great antimicrobial effects, says Robert Gravani, a professor of food science in the Department of Food Science at Cornell University in Ithaca, NY.
“Certainly one of the areas that is being actively researched is the synergies that may develop between antimicrobials that are used in concert with each other,” he says. Research also needs to continue on antimicrobials to make sure they are still effective against the organisms to which they are targeted, he adds.
“Clearly one of the things in people’s minds is, ‘Will there be new compounds coming in the future that will be even more efficacious than what we have now?’” Gravani says. “We’ve got to be constantly prospecting toward new compounds that will work that are as effective or more effective than the ones we have today.”
In addition, Ewing says, multiple points in each process are being evaluated for application effectiveness.
“The majority of these revolve around a water-based application, but other technologies are also being evaluated, such as UV light and high-pressure pasteurization,” she says. Antimicrobial solutions are being applied in more points during processing as well.
For example, when organic acids first came out for beef carcass washes, they were only applied at the end of the process after the final carcass wash, Dickson says. Then some companies started applying them pre-evisceration, which is now pretty standard in the industry, he says. Now, companies are spraying carcasses when they come out of the coolers.
“In some cases, they are getting treated as many as three times with some of these antimicrobial solutions,” Dickson says. “It’s all with the idea of reducing the potential of contamination on the surface of the animal.”
However, the cost of some of these antimicrobial products may be keeping some processors from using them on their products, Knipe adds. Still, the industry continues to look for new compounds and methods of antimicrobial wash application. As technology improves, so will the ability of these compounds to reduce microbial contamination.
However, Ewing reminds that, while antimicrobial compounds can help reduce the level of microbes to almost undetectable levels, the product is not sterile. Safe food-handling techniques must be employed at all times when handling raw food.
(“Work Continues on Antimicrobial Solutions” by Elizabeth Fuhrman first appeared in The National Provisioner on December 6, 2013.  Courtesy of The National Provisioner.)

DISINFECTION

Are there any misconceptions about cleaners and disinfectants?

Disinfecting is more important than cleaning – Ultimately, infection control comes down to efficient cleaning practices and not simply applying a disinfectant. The physical removal of a "germ" is much more important than the chemical destruction of it. A good example of this is: You are at a picnic...you drop part of a sandwich on the ground...before you know it you are being invaded by ants. Now, if you want to take the "disinfectant" approach you can simply spray insect spray on the ants. The ants will die, but you will find that more ants will return from another angle.
Now if you do the right thing by picking up the sandwich and placing it in the trash, or "cleaning” it from the area, you will have eliminated the food source and thus ultimately stopping and preventing the problem. 
•    Hospital Grade disinfectants require a TB claim – A “Hospital Grade” Disinfectant only requires 2 organisms to be tested: Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus.  
In fact, tuberculocidal disinfectants are not used to control the spread of TB; the TB claim is only used as an indicator of strength.  TB is transmitted only by the airborne route, meaning that the only way this disease is spread is by infected people coughing and sneezing tiny infected droplets into the air and others breathing those droplets into their lungs.  Therefore, surface cleaners and disinfectants will have no impact on the spread of this pathogen.  
•    Bleach is the ultimate disinfectant.  In order for bleach to function properly as a disinfectant or sanitizer the surface MUST be precleaned prior to the application of bleach.  (NO if, ands, or buts about it.) Disinfecting and sanitizing with bleach is a two-step process.  
Bleach's shelf life is unstable.  Depending on the age and storage conditions, the actual amount of active chlorine will vary. Sodium hypochlorite a.k.a. bleach will break down into salt and water. Never store bleach in warm areas.  Because of this the following are true:
o    A fresh solution of bleach must be made prior to disinfection or sanitation.  (Water ions or hardness and soil contaminants from a dirty container can adversely affect available chlorine ppms) 
o    Only an E.P.A. registered bleach product can be used for disinfection or sanitation.
•    Microorganisms are becoming resistant to disinfectants or disinfectants are promoting antibiotic resistance in microorganisms - The mode of action for a disinfectant is different than the mode of action of an antibiotic. For example – if antibiotics are like poison to a bacteria, then disinfectants would be like a shotgun. The same thing that protects you from poison would not protect you from a shotgun.    
This same scenario applies to antibiotic resistant bacteria (think MRSA or CRE).  Antibiotic resistant bacteria have developed a resistance to a type of antibiotic; the ability of a bacteria to be resistant to an antibiotic has no direct indication of the efficacy of a disinfectant for that same bacteria.

There are many misconceptions associated with cleaners and disinfectants in healthcare settings, some include:
•    Kill time is the same as wet time. This is untrue—the time it takes a product to eliminate microorganisms is not necessarily the same as the time it is able to keep a surface wet.
•    Fast “overall” kill times are best. While fast kill times are important, what the product kills is more important. Some manufacturers may leave off tough-to-kill organisms in order to achieve a fast overall kill time. For example, if it takes a certain product 5 minutes to kill Norovirus, but the manufacturer wants to keep the overall product kill time to 3 minutes, they may leave Norovirus off the label all together.
•    All products will react the same on surfaces. Different ingredients and different formulas will react differently with different surfaces. And just because two products may have the same active ingredient doesn’t mean they will necessarily have the same interactions with surfaces.  For example, some products contain special corrosion inhibitors in their formulas to provide enhanced surface compatibility.
•    Residue is bad. Usually residue left behind on a surface by a product is due to dissolved ingredients in the formula that dry on the surface as solids. These are often important ingredients, such as detergents for more powerful cleaning, corrosion inhibitors for protecting surfaces, or stabilizing agents to maintain product shelf life. To protect surfaces, avoid residue buildup by periodically removing it with a clean, damp cloth.
•    The more chemical, the better. Cleaning and disinfecting products are formulated for use in specific amounts and concentrations. When mixing or diluting products, it is important to closely follow the manufacturer’s instructions to avoid potentially hazardous situations.
•    Bleach contains chlorine gas. This is untrue. Sodium hypochlorite is the active ingredient in bleach disinfectants.
•    Bleach odor is harmful. Multiple studies have shown that when exposed to bleach, little or no concern about the odor of bleach was expressed by patients, families or staff. EPA-registered bleach disinfectants are formulated well below the levels recognized to cause potential respiratory irritation or overt health effects. Bleach is not a recognized asthmagen by any regulatory agency.
•    Bleach is bad for the Environment. Sodium hypochlorite breaks down rapidly into salt and water in the environment and has no negative impact on the environment. According to the EPA, “currently registered uses of the hypochlorites will not result in unreasonable adverse effects to the environment. –

See more at: http://www.cleanlink.com/hs/article/Misconceptions-Of-Cleaners-And-Disinfectants--16324#sthash.wYzfGpOx.dpuf

 

The Science Of Odor Control

The Science behind Odor Control.

Odor is a sensation, a cognitive response to a chemical stimulus of our olfactory sense.  The odor molecules arrive and land into specific receptor sites in our olfactory nerves and chemically react to produce a specific coded electrical signal that is transmitted to the brain. Our brain stores,  classifies  and  remembers thousands of different odors from different substances.

Since the beginning of times, men have been concerned with what we perceive as mal odors, bad odors foul or unpleasant and nasty odors.  Staring in Egyptian civilization, people used to cover themselves with fruit and flower extracts and waxes, and bathe in aromatic oils or solutions.

Bad odors are originated by many sources, but the fundamental bad odor molecules originate from bacteria, mold and mildew in humid environments, and from  aromatic molecules like mercaptans, terpenes, ammonia, sulfides, low amines, carboxylic acids and many other, present in rotten food, human and animal segregations, body fluids, spices, and also from burning tobacco, wood and other cellulosic material.

The true evolution of odor control started round 1880, when fragrant pastes and oils started to be used to disguise bad human body odors. These way, odors can be eliminated by using an overpowering fragrance to cover the bad odor; this method is still being used today, with the disadvantage that  the resulting odor is sometimes worst and wears out lo discover the bad odor behind.

The next generation of odor controlling solutions has been formulating with active molecules that chemically react with odor molecules to neutralize them. This requires a one to one match for the kill. Alternatively some molecules have been created with electrostatic forces, capable of neutralizing the odor molecules at one to one contact, and rendering them illegible by the olfactory sense.

At a next level we have some  odor controlling macro-molecules that in addition to be attracted electrically to bad odor molecules, are capable of trapping, encapsulating , bad odor molecules and pull them down to the surface before reaching our olfactory sense. Not all odor molecules can be disarmed with the same active ingredient.

Obviously  the bad odor, being originated by bacteria, mold and microorganism, can also be attacked by these mechanisms of odor control, however we need to assure that bacteria or mold are reduced to prevent the odor reappearing.

With more than 20 years of odor control research, science has  been able to combine most of the chemically active and thermodynamically enhanced odor counteractants and encapsulants, in a formula that also helps prevent the regrowth of microorganisms on surfaces. Additionally and, due to the volatility and vapor pressure of its nowadays components, they are  able to act in a multilevel mode, being able to attack bad odors with residual action, in the air, and on hard and soft surfaces.

THE SHIFT FROM MSDS TO SDS FOR GHS

Manufacturers Make The Switch To GHS Labels, SDS Sheets

• inShare

By Stephanie S. Beecher, Associate Editor 

SPONSOR LINKS:

Next Gen Floor Finish
New Durable iXT Technology. 
Third party certified.

Nyco Private Branding:
Let Us Help You 
Build A Better Brand!

Disinfectant wipes
Solution to your disinfecting needs
Effectively cleans and kills germs

Perhaps the party under the most pressure with the changes then is the chemical manufacturers, who are required to replace their existing product labels with ones that embrace the new format.

“Manufacturers have a lot of latitude in how they make [chemical label] descriptions but with the new standard it is much more prescriptive,” says Bill Balek, director of legislative affairs at the ISSA. “Before they re-label they have to reclassify their products. We’re using a different scheme of stratifying the products and they are very detailed.” 

Besides changing labels, the revised safety data sheets require information to be presented in a 16-section sequence. Before GHS, OSHA allowed either its eight-section format or ANSI’s 16-section format to be used. Now, the SDS will be similar to ANSI’s version with the requirement that the sections be presented in a strict order. Formerly, the document’s format was left up to manufacturers. 

The required order is as follows: Identification, Hazard’s identification, Composition/information on ingredients, First Aid measures, Fire-fighting measures, Handling and Storage, Exposure controls/personal protection, Physical and chemical properties, Stability and reactivity, Toxicological information, Ecological information, Disposal considerations, Transport information, Regulatory information, and Other information, including date of preparation or last revision. 

Casavant expects the changes to SDSs and chemical labels to present an ongoing challenge to employers, as they attempt to bring their inventory into compliance.

“I think it’s safe to say that folks are stressed,” he says. “People are quite concerned about the workload this new standard will bring. [Employers] suspect some chemical manufacturers will take their time in complying and that will create issues for end users downstream.” 

BACTERIA/ ENZYMES IN YOUR CLEANERS

Controlling Odors Using Enzyme Cleaners

 

By Kassandra Kania

Foul-smelling restrooms are a frequent source of complaints from building occupants — and a challenge for custodians charged with controlling odors and keeping restrooms clean and fragrant. Continual use makes controlling odors difficult, and masking malodors often intensifies the problem. To rid restrooms of offensive smells, custodial departments need to eliminate the cause of the odor — namely uric acid — and this is where traditional cleaners often fall short, say distributors, who instead stress the use of enzyme cleaners when controlling odors.

“Typically, in restrooms, the biggest issue is the smell of urine,” says Jim Flieler, vice president of sales at Swish Maintenance Ltd. in Peterborough, Ontario, Canada. “Often, urine splashes to floors and gets into the grout, causing a uric acid odor that’s offensive. Once it embeds itself in grout, traditional cleaners cannot get rid of that smell, and it doesn’t help that most restrooms have poor air filtration.”

While the majority of custodial departments still favor all-purpose cleaners for restrooms, some are beginning to introduce enzyme-based cleaners into their cleaning regimens to remove or control odor causing bacteria, particularly in hard-to-reach porous surfaces.

 Anthony Crisafulli, owner of Atra Janitorial Supply in Pompton Plains, N.J., has had tremendous success selling enzyme cleaners, specifically in K-12 school districts.

 “In any facility, not just schools, the chief complaint is the odor coming out of the bathrooms,” he says. “If you can control odors, people aren’t going to complain as much if the bathroom’s a bit dirty. It’s the odors that kick up those complaints so quickly.”

 

An Introduction to Enzyme Cleaners
To understand how enzyme cleaners — also known as bio-enzymatic cleaners — can be advantageous in restroom cleaning, custodial managers need to first understand what they are and how they work.

 In essence, enzymes are chemicals made by bacteria to digest waste. Enzyme-based cleaners contain enzyme systems that break up waste molecules, which are then digested by the bacteria and converted into carbon dioxide and water. The waste that generates foul odors in the restroom serves as food for the microorganisms.

 According to Eric Cadell, vice president of operations for Dutch Hollow Supplies, Belleville, Ill., there are two types of enzymatic cleaners: those that contain surfactants and those that don’t.

 “In both cases, the enzymes are kept dormant until they come into contact with the food source,” Cadell explains. “That food source is going to be body fats, oils and uric acids. Typically the enzymes are mixed with water, which awakens them, and they immediately start looking for that food source. If they can’t find that food source, the enzymes will die.”

Because the enzymes remain active as long as the food source is present, they are most often used on restroom floors, around and below toilets and urinals, in drains and in grout lines.

 “Most floors in restrooms are grouted ceramic tile,” says Crisafulli. “Many custodians are trained to mop and clean their floors with general purpose cleaner, but that doesn’t get into the grout lines and clean the subsurface. We know that urine penetrates into those grout lines, and general surface type cleaners just don’t clean that deeply.”

 When choosing an enzyme-based cleaner, custodial managers should keep in mind that not all enzymes are created equal. Manufacturers have developed different strains to target specific types of organic waste.

 “There are so many different kinds of enzymes, so managers want to make sure that the one they purchase is designed for what the staff is trying to clean,” cautions Cadell. “Enzymes designed for a drain line in a kitchen, for example, go after oils and fat, so that same product won’t work in a restroom because it doesn’t eat uric salt.”

Although enzymatic cleaners designed for restrooms are most commonly used on floors, they can also serve as general-purpose cleaners for high touch points, such as mirrors, faucets and door handles.

“Part of our goal is to help departments reduce the amount of different chemicals used when cleaning restrooms,” says Crisafulli. “By using microfiber technology and enzymatic cleaning products, the custodial staff can clean an entire restroom with just one product — although we still recommend disinfecting touch points.”

 Performance, Green Benefits Of Enzymatic Cleaners

Reducing the amount of chemical used in restroom cleaning can streamline purchasing and product storage. But will managers struggle to convince custodians to give up traditional cleaning products in favor of enzymatic cleaners? Distributors agree that once workers understand how enzymatic cleaners work, educating them on their performance benefits — as well as the differences between traditional and enzymatic cleaners — may persuade them to accept these products into their repertoire.

For example, custodial departments concerned with green cleaning will be pleased to know that enzyme-based cleaners are safe for the environment, as well as human health, according to distributors.

“They’re not harmful because they’re not caustic, and most are at neutral pH levels,” notes Cadell.

 In fact, in most instances, enzyme-based cleaners eliminate the need to use harsh chemicals. Additionally, the waste consumed by the enzymes is converted into carbon dioxide and water.

 “That in itself is a green philosophy,” says Cadell. “It’s not killing anything, and it’s not a surfactant that gets into streams or wastewater, so it’s not causing any harm.”

 One of the major differences between traditional cleaners and enzymatic cleaners is that enzyme-based cleaners perform residual cleaning; that is, they continue cleaning well after the product has been applied. This improved product performance contributes to improved productivity.

 “It’s cleaning after you’ve cleaned,” explains Cadell. “When you use the enzyme cleaners, they start to travel down the p-traps and grout lines, and after you’ve cleaned and left, they’re still working on the odor source.”

According to Crisafulli, some enzyme-based cleaners continue to destroy odor-causing organisms for up to 80 hours, as long as the surface remains wet and there is a food source present.

“A lot of people say, ‘When I mop my bathroom floor it’s dry in 15 minutes, so how does the product continue to work if the surface has to remain wet?’” he says. “The answer is, on a porous floor, like a grouted floor, the tile may dry but that grout line stays wet for hours, and that’s where we want a deeper clean.”

Distributors also stress that on non-porous surfaces, enzyme-based cleaners can penetrate into areas where traditional cleaners can’t reach.

“Even on something as simple as traditional floor finish on a vinyl tile floor, there are micro-abrasions and scratches due to normal foot traffic,” says Crisafulli. “Mopping with a bio-enzymatic cleaner will allow you to get into those hard-to-clean places and give you that deeper cleaning ability.”

Proper Handling And Use of Enzyme Cleaners

In order for enzyme-based cleaners to work correctly, custodial staffs need to be trained on the proper procedures for handling and using these products.

 “Enzymes have a very short life cycle,” notes Cadell. “They are kept dormant in a suspension agent until they are diluted with water, at which point they need to find a food source quickly, or they will die.”

Once the enzymes are activated, they need to be applied directly to the surface that needs cleaning.

“These are not the type of products you can toss into your mop water,” warns Cadell. “They’ll start to attack things inside the mop, because the first place the enzyme touches and finds its food source is the first place it’s going to attach and eat.”

Cadell recommends spraying the enzymatic cleaner close to the area being targeted — within a foot or less for grout lines.

If custodians are using enzymatic-based cleaners on touch points, distributors encourage managers to train staff to target those areas first, and then move on to urinals, toilets, and finally, floors.

“We suggest workers clean the entire restroom with the bio-enzymatic cleaner, and then the last thing they do is mop the floors with it,” says Crisafulli. “Workers should start with dry processes — always working from high to low — and then work their way from the farthest point in the restroom to the door.”

Because disinfectants will attack enzymes, distributors advise custodians to disinfect before using enzymatic cleaners.
“Some managers train their people to go in and spray enzymes to take care of odors and then use disinfectant on top of that,” says Cadell. “In these cases, they’ve killed the product before it’s even had a chance to work.”

 The last area to be cleaned with the enzymatic cleaner is the floor. In addition to training custodians on daily procedures, Crisafulli advises them to do a restorative-type cleaning on floors every three months using an enzymatic cleaner.

“If we have a lot of odor complaints, we’ll do an evaluation and find that it’s usually because of the floors,” he says. “We’ll encourage departments to do a deep cleaning or scrubbing with the enzymatic cleaner and then do a heavy wet mop with the enzymatic cleaner for three or four days in a row. That way we know the surface is going to stay wet for 24 to 36 hours, and the enzymatic cleaner will continue to break down the odor-causing bacteria.”

While the industry has been slow to adopt enzymatic cleaners, Flieler predicts that sales will pick up over the next year due to safer blends, wider availability and more general knowledge.

“It’s common sense,” he says. “Bio-enzymatic cleaners are safer to use, safer for the environment and safer for human health. They continue to clean well after the initial application, and you displace those potentially disease-causing bacteria. Once we introduce people to these products and explain what they are and how they work, they never go back.”

 

Scale Build Up in Water Pipes

Trans Pipeline buildup on the pipe walls with scale can result in reduced flow and cause problems in processes downline.

 

 

PE Buyers Guide U.S. industry spends billions of dollars annually to control and remove the limescale that builds up in industrial equipment such as heat exchangers, evaporative coolers, boilers, chillers or other water-fed equipment. Oil wells, for example, face significant scaling problems from the highly mineralized water extracted with the oil. Limescale not only increases downtime, maintenance costs and causes the early renewal of capital equipment but also increases energy usage. Scale prevention can benefit industrial water users by minimizing or eliminating unexpected production shutdowns and by offering substantial savings to end users through water conservation.

Types of fouling
Scale usually refers to an intimate mixture of sparingly soluble mineral salts. Mineral scale deposition occurs because of heat transfer or pressure changes. Calcium carbonate scaling from hard water, and calcium phosphate and oxalate formation in sugar refineries are examples. Other types of fouling include the growth of algae and bacteria (bio-fouling), the consolidation of loose particles (particulate fouling, i.e. corrosion by-products), and the accumulation of “coke” like deposits (e.g. chemical reaction fouling).
What can go wrong?
Calcium carbonate is the predominant component of the hard and tenacious scale deposit from water and is particularly apparent in processes involving heat transfer. A concentration of dissolved solids by repeated partial evaporation of the water is the main factor that causes calcium carbonate scale. Even soft water will eventually form scale when concentrated numerous times.

Process, maintenance and facility managers should be concerned about scale deposition. Deposits create an insulating layer on heat transfer surfaces. An estimated 40 percent more energy is needed to heat water in a system fouled with 1/4 inch of limescale. This leads to more power consumption or to the installation of heavier duty, more expensive heat exchangers to compensate. Scaled boiler tubes mechanically fail because of overheating and cooling tower plates can collapse due to the weight of scale deposits. Erosion damage can occur due to scale particles breaking loose and subsequently impinging upon other surfaces.

Pipework scale reduces the available cross-section area, and fluids are affected by increased pipe wall friction. A larger, more power-consuming pump will be required to maintain throughput volumes but this may allow only a temporary solution to the problem. A plant that needs to be shut down for cleaning loses money.
The formation of a thin uniform layer of scale or wax can temporarily reduce steel corrosion but eventually stagnant conditions develop under the deposit and electrochemical reactions will corrode the steel surfaces. The result can be fluid leaks and equipment failure, which are potentially very dangerous. In the food industry, the incorporation of even undesirable trace particulates can lead to off-flavors or off-colors, reducing shelf life, or even making the product unsalable.
Not only are plant and product integrity at risk but also personnel health and safety may be compromised. Fouled safety valves or emergency process sensors may not operate in an emergency. Overheated boilers have been known to explode. Failure to control bacterial growth in cooling water can create conditions hazardous to health (e.g. production of Legionella pneumophila) or, in anaerobic conditions, may allow the production of toxic hydrogen sulfide from sulfate reducing bacteria.
Recognizing fouling
Because scales and other deposits generally form inside closed systems, it is not always evident that deposition is occurring. Nevertheless, some clues can provide the necessary evidence. It is useful to try to answer the following questions:
Are energy/heating bills reduced immediately after cleaning the plant? 
Is it necessary to arrange significant planned and/or unplanned downtime? 
Are heat exchangers performing below design? 
Is corrosion a problem in the plant? 
Are there signs of unexpected deposit formation within the system?

The more times the answer is “yes,” the more likely it is that there is fouling. If fouling can be controlled, there is the potential to save energy, prevent equipment failure and reduce maintenance. Furthermore, a successful treatment strategy will maintain fluid flow, reduce corrosion effects and provide a safer environment – in addition to saving money.

Solving the problem
A process audit would identify the extent of the current problem, the point in the system corresponding to initial fouling, and most useful, why there is a problem. From the evidence collated, it may be possible to suggest a solution without the need for expensive external control measures. Minor changes in the process temperature, pressure, pH or fluids composition could significantly reduce the fouling potential at practically no cost.

Treatment options include inhibitor chemicals, descalers, ion exchange, physical cleaning such as pipeline pigging, or the installation of permanent magnets, or electronic devices such as the patented Scalewatcher computerized electronic water conditioner.

Chemical methods
Although it is usually possible to find a chemical solution to a fouling problem, ever increasing environmental and safety pressures demand that chemical consumption be reduced wherever possible. Increasingly, restrictions are being applied regarding the use of chemicals, due to their environmental impact. However it has proven to be the best solution to keep the systems clean. If the scale has develop, there is a need to descale with an acid solution; then it is usually neutralized, and the system replenished with water and a close loop additive incorporated, to maintain the pH in conditions as to prevent scale formation again, and to keep rust and oxidation out. As a rule of thumb, if scale build up is the problem, the pH of the solution should be kept lower than 7, if the problem is corrosion, then the pH of the solution should be above 8.
Physical methods
A range of physical methods can be used to remove fouling deposits. Water jetting, sand or plastic-bead blasting can be used in accessible locations. Such methods are expensive and can cause abrasion of surfaces.
Magnetic and electronic
Unlike other preventative techniques, electronic descaling devices do not stop precipitation but alter the shape of the crystals to reduce the adherence and build-up of deposits on the pipe wall.

Bacteria in Drinking Water

News | August 14, 2013
  Bacteria In Drinking Water Are Key To Keeping It Clean

Research at the University of Sheffield, published in the latest issue of Water Science and Technology: Water Supply, points the way to more sophisticated and targeted methods of ensuring our drinking water remains safe to drink, while still reducing the need for chemical treatments and identifying potential hazards more quickly. The research team, from the University of Sheffield's Faculty of Engineering, studied four bacteria found in the city's drinking water to see which combinations were more likely to produce a 'biofilm'. Biofilms are layers of bacteria which form on the inner surfaces of water pipes. "Biofilms can form on all water pipes and as these are usually non-harmful bacteria, they don't present a problem," explains lead researcher, Professor Catherine Biggs. "However, biofilms can also be a safe place for harmful bacteria such as Escherichia coli or Legionella to hide. If the bacterial growth is too heavy, it can break off into the water flow, which at best can make water discoloured or taste unpleasant and at worst can release more dangerous bacteria. Our research looks at what conditions enable biofilms to grow, so we can find ways to control the bacteria in our water supply more effectively." Funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, the research isolated four bacteria from water taken from a domestic tap: two were widely found in drinking water everywhere, one was less common and one was unique to Sheffield. The researchers mixed the bacteria in different combinations and found that, in isolation, none of them produced a biofilm. However, when any of the bacteria were combined with one of the common forms, called Methylobacterium, they formed a biofilm within 72 hours. "Our findings show that this bacterium is acting as a bridge, enabling other bacteria to attach to surfaces and produce a biofilm and it's likely that it's not the only one that plays this role," says Professor Biggs. "This means it should be possible to control or even prevent the creation of biofilms in the water supply by targeting these particular bacteria, potentially reducing the need for high dosage chemical treatments." Domestic water supplies in the UK are regularly tested for levels of bacteria and, if these are too high, water is treated with greater concentrations of chlorine or pipe networks are flushed through to clear the problem. However, the standard tests look for indicator organisms rather than the individual types which are present. Testing methods being developed by the Sheffield team – as used in this research – involve DNA analysis to identify the specific types of bacteria present. "The way we currently maintain clean water supplies is a little like using antibiotics without knowing what infection we're treating," says Professor Biggs. "Although it's effective, it requires extensive use of chemicals or can put water supplies out of use to consumers for a period of time. Current testing methods also take time to produce results, while the bacteria are cultured from the samples taken. "The DNA testing we're developing will provide a fast and more sophisticated alternative, allowing water companies to fine tune their responses to the exact bacteria they find in the water system."
 SOURCE: University of Sheffield

SICK BUILDING SYNDROME

Indoor Air Quality: Clearing The Air By Ronnie Garrett Ever gotten complaints from building occupants that they felt better before they arrived at work and again after they left? And it wasn't because they disliked the job but because the building was making them sick? There's a name for it — it's called sick building syndrome. In this condition, building occupants complain of symptoms such as sensory irritation of the eyes, nose and throat; neuro-toxic or general health problems; skin irritation; nonspecific hypersensitivity reactions; and odor and taste sensations. These symptoms are often pinned to flaws in the heating, ventilation and air-conditioning systems. Other factors include contaminants produced by the off gassing of building materials, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), molds, byproducts of office machinery, light industrial chemicals and more. While the long-term affects of exposure remains an emerging science, there is much custodial workers can do to reduce their exposure, and that of others, by improving indoor air quality (IAQ). There are three primary means of exposure: Inhalation, ingestion and skin contact. When custodial managers consider all three routes, they expand their thinking to all factors that might impact IAQ. "Many times people think indoor air quality is only about chemicals and VOCs. But when you think of it more broadly in terms of what people can inhale, ingest or touch, it's also particles, dust and other contaminants," says Steve Ashkin, president of The Ashkin Group, Bloomington, Ind. "There are three basic things people have to be worried about: Chemicals, VOCs and dust particles, especially the really small ones which are tiny enough to inhale deeply into the lungs." Stop It At The Source According to Allen Rathey, president of The Healthy Facilities Institute (HFI), Boise, Idaho, there are three main ways to improve IAQ: (1) Stopping contamination at the source, (2) Better ventilation, and (3) Cleaning the air itself. The best approach, he says, is to stop contamination at the source. He likens airborne contamination to an oil spill. Once oil gets into the environment, it quickly dissipates and spreads. "It's better to stop an oil spill before it starts, and it's the same with air contamination," he says. "By the time you get to step two or three, you're at the tail end of contamination." Stopping contaminants at the source requires a solid understanding of what the sources of contamination are. For example, consider the contaminants walked in on a person's shoes. These particles include dust generated by industrial facilities, pesticides and more, which is present in soil and on city streets and sidewalks. "If you keep that dust from coming into the building, you stop one source of contaminants," says Rathey. How might this be accomplished? By washing sidewalks and parking lots near building entrances, then putting large walk-off mats inside and outside every doorway. This matting must allow a sufficient number of steps to occur in order to ensure dust falls off shoes and onto the mats. "We can keep a lot of nasties out of the air just by making sure our cleaning program has a sidewalk maintenance component and great entrance matting," Rathey stresses. Suck It Up Next is to make sure equipment actually removes, rather than redistributes dust and other contaminants. Vacuum cleaners deserve primary consideration, says Carpet and Rug Institute (CRI) President Werner Braun. "There are vacuums out there that blow stuff back into the air because their housing is poorly designed," he explains. CRI simplifies vacuum selection through its Seal of Approval Program. This program rates vacuums on soil removal, dust containment and safety to carpet surfaces. "The Seal of Approval is the only quantifiable testing program for vacuums in the world," says Bethany Richmond, CRI communications manager. "We test vacuum cleaners to see if they work, are low emitting and don't destroy the carpet." When targeting IAQ concerns, Braun recommends cleaning operations choose vacuums with CRI Seal of Approval Gold certification. This certification ensures a vacuum removes and holds particles as small as 35 micrograms. And that's a good thing, says Ashkin, who points out that it's the fine particles (smaller than 0.3 microns) that humans inhale deeply into their lungs. "If you select a vacuum that has been evaluated in this way, you know that you are keeping the dust you pick up inside the vacuum," Rathey says. "You need a vacuum that's going to remove more and release less." Ian Grieg, CEO of Daniels Associates, in Phoenix, also recommends walk-behind vacuums or walk-behind sweepers for hard surfaces, as well as carpets. "Other countries have been vacuuming their hard-surface floors since the 1980s," he says. "We still don't vacuum hard-surface floors and that's one of the largest causes of poor IAQ because dust mops just throw particles into the air." But if this equipment — be it high-quality walk-behind, upright or backpack vacuums — is improperly maintained, it can contribute to IAQ concerns rather than address them. Vacuums use airflow to suck up particles but if clogged filters and nearly full bags reduce airflow, then fewer particles are picked up. "The beater brush is no longer driving dust into the vacuum as much as it is pushing it into the air," Rathey adds. Grieg says proper vacuum maintenance is a common problem across the custodial industry. Cleaners need to be taught to use high-filtration bags and change them regularly, he says. "The rule of thumb is to empty bags when they are half full, but manufacturers may recommend changing them when they are half, two-thirds or three-quarters full," Ashkin says. "It's never when they are so full they cannot hold anymore." A comprehensive carpet care program also improves indoor air quality. Carpets should be vacuumed daily and shampooed one to four times a year, says Grieg. When shampooing the carpet, make sure carpets dry out within 24 hours to keep mold issues at bay. "Mold and other organic materials require moisture to grow," Ashkin explains. Wipe It Up When dusting with cloths or mops, it's best to go the microfiber route. "Cleaning operations need microfiber wipes for all dusting, damp wiping and damp mopping," says Grieg. But heed this warning: Not all microfiber is created equal, Ashkin advises. No standards exist to ensure microfiber products meet exacting specifications. Cleaning operations need high-quality microfiber products that capture fine particles as opposed to cheap ones that do little more than flick dust into the air. "Look at the product's weight," says Ashkin. "There is a correlation between the weight of the cloth and the quality." And pick the right microfiber for the job. Differing microfiber blends exist and some do a better job with specific tasks than others. "The product will vary whether they are doing dry dusting or wet cleaning," Ashkin says. "They need to use the right microfiber for the application." Chemical Selection Using the wrong cleaning chemicals also can adversely impact air quality. It's important for cleaning operations to carefully weigh their chemical options and select environmentally preferable products, Ashkin says. "We should make an effort to minimize the VOCs in our cleaning products; we should not be contributing to the problem," he adds. Go with fragrance-free products and weigh disinfectant choices carefully, advises Rathey. "These products use petrochemicals and they are very suspect in contributing to IAQ problems," he says. "Quats, for example, have been associated with asthma." Sanitizers and disinfectants also contribute to healthier environments so they do have their place in cleaning, but their harmful affects can be mitigated by how they are used. For example, an aerosol disinfectant adds chemical to the air, but a squeeze bottle solution, where cleaners squeeze a stream directly onto a cloth, can alleviate this problem. Apply these products with a microfiber cloth or mop and IAQ improves again because custodians use less chemistry to clean. "Microfiber allows the use of less corrosive chemistries because it physically removes contaminants," says Grieg. Training And Teamwork "Training is the key to improving IAQ," adds Ashkin. Cleaners need to be taught to select the right product and equipment for the job and to use it correctly. At Daniels Associates, every spec includes a task number, the name of the task, the types of chemicals and equipment needed to perform the task and the results to be expected. "Cleaners need to be taught how to use chemicals and how to use equipment; equipment is a lot more technical than it used to be," Grieg emphasizes. "In the old days the equipment custodians used on the job were the same tools they used to clean at home. It's different now." Teaming with facility managers to ensure heating and cooling systems work with cleaning operations, rather than against them, also improves IAQ. "Why aren't cleaning folks talking with the people who take care of the heating and cooling systems?" Rathey asks. "If we're going to have a seat at the table of healthy indoor environments, we have to understand what's going on in the buildings regarding air flow and heating and cooling systems."

ODOR CONTROL

 

How To Remove Odors From Facilities

 

By CleanLink Editorial Staff

 

 

SPONSOR LINKS:

Complete Room Deodorizing

 

Do fresheners actually kill odors and/or bacteria in the air? Can you explain the science of how this works?

McGuire: Most fresheners do not “kill” anything unless they are part disinfectant. They are simply a cover-up for the foul odor. A registered disinfectant with the proper claims is needed to kill bacteria and generally needs to be applied at the odor source to be effective. The odor itself is caused by molecules that have the ability to emit a vapor. These molecules are generally created by the bacteria. As these molecules become airborne they emit a vapor that hits the olfactory system, allowing people to then identify it as a pleasant or foul odor. To eliminate the odor, you need to choose a product that attacks the odor molecule.

 

Malik: It depends on the product formulation and its claims. An air freshener is a product designed to mask or remove unpleasant room odors.  If it is designed to mask odors only, it will overcome a malodor by overwhelming it with a stronger odor for a period of time, but it will not break the malodor down.

If an air freshener is designed to break down malodors, it will contain odor counteractants in addition to fragrance. The odor conteractants neutralize the malodor by breaking down its molecules into the air. An air freshener with odor counteracts is the best solution for a facility with offensive malodors such as smoke and rotting food that should be removed from the air.

An air sanitizer can reduce airborne bacteria making the air you breathe healthier and cleaner. The simplest definition of how it works is a molecule from the air sanitizer attaches to a bacteria molecule and causes it to become inert.

 

Ferris: Let’s take urine odors – one of the toughest cleaning professionals face. Urine odor comes from naturally occurring bacteria and uric acid crystals (crystalized urine residue). Porous damp surfaces like grout host the bacteria, which feed on urine. Uric acid crystals often stay trapped in these porous surfaces and release strong odors as the bacteria consume the urine. Humid conditions or rewetting the surface can reactivate odors. The only real way to completely eliminate odors – not just mask them – is to eliminate those naturally occurring sources of odor.

Daluga: Ideally, "clean" smells like nothing at all, and thusly, custodial executives should seek odor solutions that don't employ phony fragrances that simply cover up odors.

 

Can you over freshen when it comes to odor control? Is there such a thing as too much of a good scent?

McGuire: Of course. The best policy is to use a technology that eliminates not masks the odor. Masking is the blending of two different odors that can become just as offensive as the odor itself. Once the odor is eliminated you can use a scent to freshen the air.

 

Malik: Air fresheners formulated with odor counteracts are the optimal solution to both break down and neutralize malodors and leave a fresh scent behind. Without the odor counteractant, an air freshener masks the malodor by overwhelming it with a stronger odor, but does not neutralize the malodor.  When using multiple cleaning or odor control products, it’s ideal to ensure the fragrances complement other scents in the area to create uniformity. Competing fragrances contradict each other and can become unpleasant.

Malik: It’s important to understand the size of the area that needs odor control coverage, and match this to your system of choice, along with the supplier’s cubic foot recommendation. When continuous and consistent odor control is desired, the optimal delivery solution is a wall-mounted dispenser. Typically metered aerosols cover larger cubic feet and deliver higher doses of continuous fragrance vs. passive air systems or fan systems and gel cups. Passive air and fan dispensers disperse neutral and low fragrant oils and typically have a lower coverage area than a metered aerosol. These examples of wall mount dispensers that deliver continuous odor control coverage are great solutions for common areas such as lobbies, break rooms, restrooms, hallways and conference rooms.

Liquid and hand held sprays are good solutions for spot treatments to supplement a wall-mounted dispenser program that offers continuous odor control and/or air sanitizer benefits.

 

Daluga: A sound odor management strategy employs a number of different delivery methods for odor control products. Use of a passive solution, such as a gel that works using ambient airflow, will address odors 24/7, while sprays will address odors immediately on an at-need basis. Other products, such as air and surface liquids or laundry additives, are designed to address specific odor issues at their source (mop buckets, wash loads, etc.). Indeed, each delivery method has a place in a sound odor management strategy.

 

 

 

Some facilities are actively working towards promoting green and sustainable initiatives. Where do air fresheners fit into that type of program?

Daluga: There are myriad odor control products on the market, but very few that use natural ingredients and fit under a "green" or "eco-friendly" heading.

 

Malik: While some cleaning product categories are rated green by third-party certifiers, there are no green certification standards for air fresheners. Even without third party certification, air fresheners can fit into green and sustainable initiatives. The optimal system will depend on the facilities odor control needs and goals of the sustainable initiative. For example, passive air care systems that offer low VOC continuous air freshening without the use of batteries or any power source, or metered air care systems that offer extended battery and odor control refill life.

How do odors (good or bad) impact the perception of a facility and it’s custodial crew?

McGuire: Foul odors give the impression that the facility is dirty. Thus, a process that is designed to “eliminate” not “mask” odors is essential to provide an optimal environment. Masking a foul odor can be tricky. Facility managers need to be careful on which fragrance they choose. Not all occupants like the same fragrance and in some cases masking can make matters worse.

 

Malik: A building occupant’s first impression of cleanliness is not necessary what they see, it can be what they smell.

Fragrance has a powerful effect on human behavior. Our sense of smell can evoke strong emotional reaction and influence behavior. Facility odors, good or bad, can shape the perception of how a facility is run, and how much the facility management cares about its customers. 

Pleasant fragrances can make us feel at home, brighten our moods, deliver a sense of calm and wellbeing, or increase alertness. Foul odors, even when isolated, can leave a negative perception of the entire facility, from the custodial crew to general management.

Customers or building occupants can associate foul odors with unsanitary and unsafe conditions. Similar to odors such as smoke or gas, foul odors typically trigger us to take an immediate corrective action, such as leave the establishment.

 

Daluga: When it comes to cleanliness, perception really is reality and a foul odor immediately raises eyebrows. Likewise, when a facility smells strongly of fragrances and perfumes, there's a perception that something is being covered up — there are odors being masked by other odors.

 

Ferris: Restrooms can certainly impact consumers’ perceptions of businesses, and as a result, also impact their bottom lines. According to a survey, three in four American consumers are disgusted by urine odors and urine stains in public restrooms. Of those surveyed, two-thirds would refuse to patronize business establishments such as restaurants or hotels with unclean restrooms and more than half would likely review a business more negatively (online or offline) based on whether the restroom was clean. Research from Harvard Business School found that Yelp reviews can have a five to nine percent effect on business revenues, meaning bad reviews can translate to lower profits. Additionally, the majority of parents surveyed (70%) say a school’s restroom reflects the quality of the school, its staff and its teachers.

 

 

Restroom odors are common, but what other areas of the facility should custodial managers focus on odor control?

McGuire: It is wise not to overlook kitchen areas, lunch rooms, break rooms, smoking areas, laundry, hallways and the always present dumpster. These are all areas that can cause problems.

 

Malik: Common areas such as lobbies, break rooms, conference rooms, hallways, and locker rooms are examples of additional areas where odor control solutions such as air fresheners and air sanitizers can improve facility image, customer experience, and protect customers/employees from the spread of germs. 

 

Daluga: A good odor management strategy addresses every aspect of a facility: certainly the restrooms, but also lobbies and common areas, offices and meeting rooms. Anywhere there's people, food, etc., there's likely to be smells that someone will find unpleasant, and it's crucial to have a strategy in place that addresses odors before they become an issue.

 

 

 

 

 

Contributors:

Michael McGuire

President

Thornell Corporation

Smithville, Mo.

 

Beth Malik

Director of Marketing

Amrep, Inc.

Marietta, Ga.

 

Amanda Daluga

National Sales Manager

OMI Industries/Fresh Wave IAQ

Long Grove, Ill.

 

Brad Ferris

Senior Public Relations Manager

Clorox Professional Products Company

Oakland, Calif.

 

posted on: 8/2/2013

HAND SANITIZER USAGE

Cleanlink News 7/10/2013

Study Reveals Hand Sanitizer Efficacy

• inShare

 

With some alcohol-based hand rubs a volume of 1.1 mL is recommended per application. But researchers say it is unknown whether such a small volume is sufficient to cover both hands or whether it fulfills current efficacy standards.

To address this question of efficacy, a study was done to determine hand coverage of three hand rubs — one gel based on 70 percent ethanol, one gel based on 85 percent ethanol, and one foam based on 70 percent ethanol. Each was applied with various volumes — all products: 1.1 mL, 2 mL, 2.4 mL, 1 push and 2 pushes; only foam product: 1.1 mL foam, 2 mL foam, 2.4 mL foam. 

Fifteen subjects applied each product, which were supplemented with a fluorescent dye, after which researchers used a UV light to determine the quality of coverage. The hands of 12 subjects per experiment were artificially contaminated with Serratia marcescens and the products applied as recommended (1.1 mL for the products based on 70 percent v/v ethanol; 2 mL for the product based on 85 percent w/w ethanol). 

Researchers presented their findings in a presentation titled "Lesser and lesser — the impact of small volumes in hand disinfection on quality of hand coverage and antimicrobial efficacy" at the International Conference on Prevention and Infection Control (ICPIC 2013). The results were:
"A volume < 2 mL yielded a high rate of incomplete coverage (76% - 87%), a volume ≥ 2 mL revealed better results (18% - 40%). There was a significant difference between the five volumes used with all hand rubs (p < 0.001; analysis of variance) but not between the three hand rubs themselves (p = 0.442). Application of 1.1 mL of the hand rubs based on 70% ethanol yielded a log10-reduction of 1.85 or 1.60 log10 (ASTM E 1174-06) and failed the US FDA efficacy requirement. Application of 2 mL of the hand rub based on 85% ethanol reduced the contamination by 2.06 log10 (ASTM E 1174-06) and fulfilled the US FDA efficacy requirement. Similar results were obtained according to ASTM E 2755-10."

In conclusion, the researches found that hand rubs based on 70 percent ethanol and recommended with a volume of 1.1 mL per application are not suitable to ensure complete coverage of both hands and do not fulfill the current ASTM efficacy standard requirements.