Spray it again, Sam

A cursory glance at the area of cleaning and disinfection of the food and drink processing environment might leave some thinking that little has changed in years.

Many of the principles boil down to common sense and remain constant. But at the same time, some issues still trip businesses up. In addition, the science of cleaning has not stood still. Breakthroughs in cleaning materials and equipment are occurring all the time.

Take contract cleaner Hygiene Group. Neil Brown, technical and business development manager for the company, says it has recently been investigating the use of Byotrol to combat mould and has become a registered UK agent for the substance. "It's remarkable for stopping mould regrowing," he says.

Originally it was developed for use in anti-fouling paint for boats to prevent growth on their hulls. Now it's being used by hospitals to tackle MRSA and control infection.

Brown cites atomised disinfectant as another formidable weapon in the fight against viruses. It's an area in which successive breakthroughs are being made, he says. "High pressure carbon dioxide atomises disinfectant and throws it eight to 10 feet. The cloud expands to cover the insides of equipment and irregular spaces." Hence, it's particularly good at disinfecting hard to reach areas.

Hygiene Group is interested in one particular substance combining three different biocides. "Kellogg is using it in the US and Veterans Association Hospitals are finding it is achieving in excess of 50% reduction in MRSA," says Brown. "We're looking at using it in the food industry and hospitals."

The action is not just taking place in the field of disinfectants, but also in the area of cleaning equipment. Here, the environmental agenda is having a heavy influence.

There's the CT40 ECS Eco Cost Cleaning Solution from IPC Gansow, for example, which claims that its Micro Scrub system saves more than 80% of the water used by traditional scrubber-dryers. That's equivalent to 45,000l annually. Plus IPC Gansow says its battery recharging system cuts energy consumption by 30% compared to most chargers. And its Chem Dose application system boasts that it saves more than 90% of the chemicals used by previous models.

This is only the beginning says UK and Ireland manager Richard Slater. "ECS represents the first phase of a far wider IPC Gansow project, which aims to develop new cleaning solutions with lower running costs and improved environmental protection."

While the drive towards more eco-friendly practices is affecting factory cleaning as much as any other area of processing, some are more sceptical than others. Brown says most environmentally friendly chemicals have to be sourced from outside the UK and many have an oxidising effect, creating carbon dioxide or methane as a byproduct - hardly eco-friendly.

Of course, one of the most environmentally friendly cleaning practises is cleaning less often. Brown says some firms over-clean and often unnecessarily over-use disinfectant where thorough cleaning can remove microbiological contamination anyway.

This leads on to the necessity of a proper understanding of the role of different types of detergents and disinfectants and various application methods in the context of individual factories. Errors in the field include "commonly not using the right chemical for the right job", says Darren Carmichael, director, Environmental Health Support Services. "Another is that people haven't been properly trained to use a particular chemical - they either use a chemical on the wrong surface or the wrong chemical for any surface."

Different types of chemical react differently to different types of dirt, he says, adding: "Certain chemicals are just degreasing agents, removing surface debris - you still have to apply disinfectant to kill off the bacteria."

In addition, cheaper solutions may make less financial sense than expensive, concentrated chemicals, which can be used in much smaller quantities to achieve the same effect.

"If you buy something at three times concentrate, you can get it to go three times as far," says Brown. "But cheap and cheerful might be better if you don't have [precise] control over dosage."

Then there's the way chemicals are applied. Atomisers and fine sprays restrict the amount of chemical being applied and can coat hard to reach areas. But consultant John Rigarlsford says: "The aerosol effect can spread bugs through the air and you should never use high pressure cleaning near where product lines are still running."

Another mistake is exhausting hot water for cleaning early on. "For every 10 degrees centigrade you warm something up you double the rate of chemical reaction," says Brown. Consequently, you clean more effectively.

Of course, even with the best efforts and the right tools for the job, there are still instances that call for lateral thinking. One job Brown recalls concerns a pie factory that was cleaning the pipes it used to convey one of its glazes to its products. "They had a terrible smell of bad eggs," recalls Brown.

Eventually, the mystery was solved. The glaze used contained egg, but when egg reacts with acid it forms extremely pungent hydrogen sulphide gas. "We substituted a chlorinated alkaline chemical, which worked more quickly, and the smell went overnight." FM

Ensure you stay squeaky clean under current legislation​

While legislative changes cause headaches for processors in some areas, there have been few recent changes to laws directly affecting cleaning. That said, implications from changes introduced a few years ago are still being worked out.

One major issue is EU Biocidal Product Directive 98/8/EC, covering 23 different categories of biocides. It aims to establish a harmonised list of environmentally friendly, acceptable disinfectants for use in various industries across all EU Member States.

"It was passed 10 years ago, but it's really starting to have an impact now," says John Rigarlsford, consultant at John Rigarlsford and Associates. "Biocides not covered by EU pesticide regulations must be registered, which means they must undergo new tests to prove their effectiveness. Every active used as a disinfectant should be listed."

The upshot of all this, says Rigarlsford, is the cost of biocides will soar, because their manufacturers have to pass the cost of these tests on to their customers.

This could encourage processors to use cleaning and disinfecting agents less wastefully and would also guarantee their effectiveness. But some biocide manufacturers claim testing could cost up to £4M, which could hamper the development of new biocides. That would give bugs time to develop resistance to existing disinfectants, affecting food safety.

Aside from the Biocidal Product Directive, the ramifications the European rules for the Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH), which came into force on June 1 2008, continue to be felt. Processors must ensure firms supplying them with chemicals are REACH registered, says Dr Dave Gordon, head of Eversheds' environment group. "They can use a substance provided the importer or manufacturer has pre-registered by the end of November 2008."

Another relevant legal development is the EU Environmental Liability Directive, enforced in England on March 1 and Wales on May 1 this year. It has yet to be implemented in Northern Ireland and Scotland. Where processors have polluted water or damaged local wildlife or habitats, for example, when cleaning effluent leaks into landscape around a factory, they could be required to repair the damage. They could also be called on to compensate society for making the damaged habitat inaccessible.

Environmental Health Support Services 08000 431127 ​

Eversheds 0845 497 9797 ​

Hygiene Group 0121 451 3211 ​

IPC Gansow 01827 288850 ​

John Rigarlsford & Associates 01629 55719​