Biodegradability and Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Alcohol 

Propoxy Sulfates. 

Research Report R&D ENV-07-024 01-07

Part 1 of 2

Geoff Russell

Ricky Stackhouse

Wayne Sorensen

November 2007

Research & Development

Lake Charles, Louisiana
Interoffice Correspondence 

To Dave Penney

From Geoff Russell, Ricky Stackhouse, Wayne Sorensen

Date November 30, 2007

Subject R&D ENV: Biodegradability and Acute Aquatic Toxicity Alcohol Propoxy Sulfates.

Key Words: ALFOTERRA, Alcohol propoxylates, Alcohol propoxy sulfates, Biodegradation, Aquatic 

Toxicity, Oil recovery, Emulsification

This report documents Sasol North America Inc.’s biodegradation and aquatic toxicity studies on the 

new products, ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfate surfactants.

This work shows that the ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfates, based on either C12-C13, C14-

C15, or C16-C17 branched / linear primary alcohol, pose little risk to the environment. The 

ALFOTERRA surfactants are not intended or expected to be released into the environment when 

used in the recovery of hydrocarbon materials. 

Further conclusions drawn from this work include:

1) The rate and extent of biodegradation of the ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfates were 

dependent on the amount of propoxylation and branching in the starting alcohol. 

ALFOTERRA® surfactants with a low proportion (< 4 moles or < 60%) of propoxylation 

displayed extensive primary biodegradation and, in some cases, ultimate biodegradation. The 

surfactants with a higher amount of propoxylation had limited biodegradation.

2) Acute aquatic toxicities to fish, invertebrates and algae were determined using standard US 

EPA methods. Based on the toxicity results, the aquatic toxicity of the ALFOTERRA® alcohol 

propoxy sulfates is similar to that of equivalent alcohol ethoxy sulfates.

3) Using ALFOTERRA® surfactants for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery (EHR) will not result in 

the discharge any material into surface or ground water. 

Distribution: K. McWilliams, K. Youngblood, T. Grumbles, V. Stolarski, J. Stokes,

D. Plummer, R. Stackhouse, D. Schär, J. McGrail, Library, LiveLink.
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 3 of 50

Table of Contents

I. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................7

II. OBJECTIVES....................................................................................................................................8

III. CONCLUSIONS...............................................................................................................................8

IV. DEFINITION OF MATERIALS.......................................................................................................10

4.1 ALFOTERRA® Composition .....................................................................................................10

V. BIODEGRADATION STUDY .................................................................................................................. 11

5.1 Biodegradation Test Method .....................................................................................................11

5.2 Toxicity and Chemical Oxidation Controls.................................................................................12

5.3 Determination of Organic Carbon by COD values.....................................................................13

5.4 Test Materials............................................................................................................................13

5.5 Validity of Biodegradation tests .................................................................................................13

5.6 Results of the Biodegradation Test (OECD 301 F)....................................................................14

VI. AQUATIC ACUTE TOXICITY STUDIES........................................................................................16

6.1 Aquatic Acute Toxicity Test Methods and Results.....................................................................16

VII. HISTORICAL BIODEGRADATION AND TOXICITY RESULTS WITH ALFOTERRA® 

SURFACTANTS .................................................................................................................................17

7.1 Biodegradation Results from First-Generation Propoxy-Sulfate Samples .................................17

7.2 Aquatic Toxicity Results from First-Generation Propoxy Sulfate Samples ................................19

VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF ALFOTERRA® ALCOHOL PROPOXY SULFATES .....20

8.1 Discussion of Biodegradation Results .......................................................................................20

8.2 Discussion of Aquatic Toxicity Results ......................................................................................21

8.3 Discussion of Fate in Use Application .......................................................................................22

IX. SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................23

X. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...............................................................................................................23

XI. REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................24
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 4 of 50

Table of Tables

Table 1. Alcohol feed stocks that could be employed to produce the ALFOTERRA® 123-XS alcohol 

propoxy sulfate. The asterisks (*) denotes the alcohol used to produce the samples employed in the 

following environmental testing...........................................................................................................10

Table 2. Alcohol feed stocks that could be employed to produce the ALFOTERRA® 145-X alcohol 

propoxy sulfate. The asterisks (*) denotes the alcohol used to produce the samples employed in the 

following environmental testing...........................................................................................................11

Table 3. Alcohol feed stocks that could be employed to produce the ALFOTERRA® 167-XS alcohol 

propoxy sulfate. The asterisks (*) denotes the alcohol used to produce the samples employed in the 

following environmental testing...........................................................................................................11

Table 4. ALFOTERRA® propoxy sulfate samples included in biodegradation and aquatic testing.....11

Table 5. Amount of ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfates in Biodegradation Study and the...............13

Table 6. Ultimate Biodegradation of ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfates. (Mean of % ThOD and 

Standard Deviation of the mean) in the OECD 301 F Biodegradation Test ........................................14

Table 7. Original Aquatic Toxicity Reports. ........................................................................................16

Table 8. Aquatic toxicity results for the ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfates.....................................17

Table 9. Summary of primary and ultimate biodegradation of early-versions of the ALFOTERRA® 

propoxy sulfate surfactants in OECD 301A test..................................................................................18

Table 10. Summary of ultimate biodegradation of ALFOTERRA® surfactants in OECD 301F Test...19

Table 11. Acute Aquatic Toxicity of first-generation ALFOTERRA® surfactants ...............................19

Table 12. Combined biodegradation results for ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfates.................20

Table 13. Combined aquatic toxicity results for ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfates .................21
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 5 of 50

Table of Figures

Figure 1. Toxicity control as it relates to biodegradation profile of benzoate % THOD in the presence 

of ALFOTERRA® Sulfates..................................................................................................................14

Figure 2. Biodegradation of the ALFOTERRA® sulfates tested.........................................................16
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 6 of 50

Table of Appendices

Appendix A. Biomonitoring Report; Daphnia pulex & Pimephales promelas. Prepared for Sasol by 

EE USA. Lab Report # Q-506-07. Sample ID: ALFOTERRA® 145-8S. October 31, 2007

Appendix B. An Evaluation of the Chronic Toxicity of the ALFOTERRA® Samples to Freshwater 

Alga Selenastrum capricornutum. Prepared for Sasol by Pacific EcoRisk. October, 2007

Appendix C. Biomonitoring Report; Daphnia pulex & Pimephales promelas. Prepared for Sasol by 

EE USA. Lab Report # Q-6561-07. Sample ID: ALFOTERRA® L167-4S. October 31, 2007

Appendix D. Biomonitoring Report; Daphnia pulex & Pimephales promelas. Prepared for Sasol by 

EE USA. Lab Report # Q-562-07. Sample ID: ALFOTERRA® L167-7S. October 31, 2007

Appendix E. Biodegradation of Early Versions of ALFOTERRA® Propoxy Sulfate Surfactants 

Appendix F. Toxicity Reports on Earlier Versions of ALFOTERRA® Propoxy Sulfate Surfactants; 

Daphnia magna and Pimephales promelas. Prepared for Condea Vista Company by ENSR. Lab 

Report #8503-111-006 (015 thru 020). Lab Report #8503-106-006 (001 thru 008). August 1999
I. INTRODUCTION

"Tertiary" or "enhanced" recovery techniques are well known in the petroleum industry. 

These methods are used to increase production in reservoirs where the formation 

pressure is no longer high enough to push the oil out of the well. One of the most 

widely used enhanced recovery techniques in the petroleum industry is "waterflooding." 

In the waterflooding method, an aqueous-based fluid is pushed through an injection well 

into the oil-rich region to force the oil out of the formation. Typically surface-active 

agents or surfactants are employed as part of the aqueous fluid to lower the interfacial 

tension between the water and the formation oil. This permits oil droplets to deform, 

coalesce, and flow with the flood water toward the producing wells. 

Studies conducted at several major universities suggest that alcohol propoxy sulfates 

are exceptionally good surfactants for the emulsification of crude oils. Thus, these 

surfactants are being sought by oil companies pursuing waterflooding methods for 

inclusion in the aqueous-based flood fluid. 

Similarly, alcohol propoxy sulfates have also been shown to be useful for the removal of 

crude oil and organic drilling fluids from drill cuttings. When the drill cuttings are 

washed in an aqueous fluid containing the alcohol propoxy sulfate surfactant, the 

residual organic content in the cutting can be reduced to <1%. In some regions of the 

world, this residual organic content on the cuttings is low enough to allow the cuttings to 

be discarded at the drilling site instead of having to be land-filled or otherwise handled 

as hazardous waste. This is especially advantageous when the drilling site is off-shore.

For these and other similar applications, Sasol North America Inc. is interested in 

commercializing alcohol propoxy sulfates under the trade name ALFOTERRA®. 

The alcohol propoxy sulfate is manufactured in three steps. First, primary alcohol (1) is 

reacted with propylene oxide and catalyst under moderate temperature and pressure to 

yield the alcohol propoxylate (2). 

O

O O + OH

n

(1) (2)

ROH R

Secondly, the alcohol propoxylate (2) is reacted with SO3 or another appropriate 

reagent to form the sulfonic acid of the alcohol propoxylate (3). 

SO3 O O O

(3)

S

O

O

O OH O OH

n

(2)

R + R

n
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 8 of 50

Finally, the sulfonic acid (3) is neutralized with sodium hydroxide to yield the sodium salt 

of the alcohol propoxy sulfate (4).

+ NaOH O O O

n

(4)

S

O

O

O- Na

+ O O O

(3)

S

O

O

R OH

n

R

The sodium salt of the alcohol propoxy sulfates have not been previously marketed in 

the US, so a Pre-Manufacturing Notification (PMN) from the US EPA is required. The 

PMN will be submitted for a number of alcohol propoxy sulfates with the trade name 

pattern of ALFOTERRA® 1XX-YS. The “XX” will be 23, 45, or 67 and represents the 

carbon number of the starting alcohol (C12-C13, C14-C15, or C16-C17, respectively). 

The “Y” will represent the average number of propylene oxides moles and will range 

between 1 and 10. The “S” denotes the product is the sodium-sulfate derivative. Since 

the US EPA will estimate the environmental safety of these new products before 

accepting the PMN, it is prudent to provide in the PMN the biodegradability and aquatic 

toxicity profiles of these new surfactants. During 1999 and 2005 initial toxicity and 

biodegradation studies were conducted on early versions of the ALFOTERRA® 

surfactants.1

 The current tests were carried out to confirm the earlier results and to 

provide information on additional versions of the alcohol propoxy sulfates. 

II. OBJECTIVES

• Determine the biodegradability of alcohol propoxy sulfates in the OECD 301F 

Manometric Respirometry ”Ready” Biodegradability Test.

• Determine the acute aquatic toxicity of alcohol propoxy sulfates to fish 

(Pimephales promelas – fathead minnows), invertebrates (Daphnia pulex – water 

fleas) and algae (Selenastrum capricornutum) using US EPA approved 

methodologies (EPA-821-R-03-012,013).

III. CONCLUSIONS

• The rate and extent of biodegradation of the ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy 

sulfates were dependent on the amount of propoxylation and branching in the 

starting alcohol. ALFOTERRA® surfactants with a low proportion (< 4 moles or < 

60%) of propoxylation displayed extensive primary biodegradation and, in some 

cases, ultimate biodegradation. The surfactants with a higher amount of 

propoxylation had limited biodegradation.

• Acute aquatic toxicities to fish, invertebrates and algae were determined using 

standard US EPA methods. Based on the toxicity results, the aquatic toxicity of 

the ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfates is similar to that of equivalent 

alcohol ethoxy sulfates.
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 9 of 50

• Using ALFOTERRA® surfactants for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery (EHR) will 

not result in the discharge any material into surface or ground water. 
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 10 of 50

IV. DEFINITION OF MATERIALS

4.1 ALFOTERRA® Composition

Sasol will initially offer six ALFOTERRA® sulfate (structure 4 from Introduction) 

products to the market. Second or third generation products may include other 

propoxymers from 1-10. The products in the initial offering are as follows:

1. ALFOTERRA® 123-4S - Four mole propoxy sulfate based on a C12-13 branched 

primary alcohol.

2. ALFOTERRA® 123-8S - Eight mole propoxy sulfate based on a C12-13 branched 

primary alcohol

3. ALFOTERRA® 145-4S - Four mole propoxy sulfate based on a C14-15 branched 

primary alcohol

4. ALFOTERRA® 145-8S - Eight mole propoxy sulfate based on a C14-15 branched 

primary alcohol

5. ALFOTERRA® 167-4S - Four mole propoxy sulfate based on a C16-17 branched 

primary alcohol

6. ALFOTERRA® 167-7S - Seven mole propoxy sulfate based on C16-17 branched 

primary alcohol

There are several alcohols that can be used either alone or blended as starting 

materials. It is important for the proposed end-use application that a certain amount of 

branching be present in the alcohol portion of the molecule, however the specific type 

and degree of branching does not appear to be critical. This flexibility allows for the use 

of several alternative alcohol feed stocks (or blends thereof) in the propoxylate 

manufacture, based on pricing or availability. Table 1 through 3 lists some possible 

alcohol feed stocks that may be considered for each propoxylate. An asterisk is used to 

denote the alcohols employed to make the samples in the testing to follow. 

Table 1. Alcohol feed stocks that could be employed to produce the ALFOTERRA® 123-XS alcohol 

propoxy sulfate. The asterisks (*) denotes the alcohol used to produce the samples employed in 

the following environmental testing.

123 Feedstock C11 C12 C13 C14 C15 C16 C17 Branched

Alcohol 1 0.5 42 56 1.5 54%

Alcohol 2* 1.5 41 55 1.5 1 94%

Alcohol 3 <1 53 46 <2 50%
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 11 of 50

Table 2. Alcohol feed stocks that could be employed to produce the ALFOTERRA® 145-X alcohol 

propoxy sulfate. The asterisks (*) denotes the alcohol used to produce the samples employed in 

the following environmental testing.

145 Feedstock C11 C12 C13 C14 C15 C16 C17 Branched

Alcohol 1 1 62 36 1 57%

Alcohol 2* 1.5 59 39 0.5 95%

Table 3. Alcohol feed stocks that could be employed to produce the ALFOTERRA® 167-XS

alcohol propoxy sulfate. The asterisks (*) denotes the alcohol used to produce the samples 

employed in the following environmental testing.

167 Feedstock C13 C14 C15 C16 C17 C18 C19 Branched

Alcohol 1* 4 62 33 1 63%

Alcohol 2 5 57 38 ~95%

In order to limit testing cost, aquatic testing was conducted on a subset of the six 

ALFOTERRA® sulfates. The samples that were tested are given in Table 4. It is 

believed that the aquatic performance of the three products not tested (ALFOTERRA 

123-4S, 123-8S, and 145-4S) or other future generation propoxy sulfates can be 

extrapolated from the data gathered on the included samples or from literature 

references. 

Table 4. ALFOTERRA® propoxy sulfate samples included in biodegradation and aquatic testing.

Product Biodegradation Aquatic Testing

ALFOTERRA® 123-4S Yes No

ALFOTERRA® 123-8S Yes No

ALFOTERRA® 145-4S Yes No

ALFOTERRA® 145-8S Yes Yes

ALFOTERRA® 167-4S Yes Yes

ALFOTERRA® 167-7S Yes Yes

V. BIODEGRADATION STUDY

5.1 Biodegradation Test Method

The biodegradation test was performed on the alcohol propoxylates ALFOTERRA® 

123-4S, ALFOTERRA® 123-8S, ALFOTERRA® 145-4S, ALFOTERRA® 145-8S, 

ALFOTERRA® 167-4S and ALFOTERRA® 167-7S in triplicate. Two 20-channel 

Coordinated Environmental Services (CES) Ltd (Cornwell, UK) aerobic electrolytic 

respirometer units were used following the OECD 301F guidelines2 with slight 

modifications that will be discussed later. Each CES electrolytic respirometer unit 

consists of 20 one-liter vessels fitted with heads/lids containing O2 and CO2 sensors. 
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 12 of 50

The system measures the amount of CO2 generated by means of a cuvette filled with 

2% sodium hydroxide and a conductivity probe that determines the change in 

conductivity of the sodium hydroxide as CO2 is absorbed from the headspace gases of 

the test vessel. A differential pressure sensor head is designed to measure the amount 

of O2 used by respiring microorganisms. It achieves this by detecting the difference in 

pressure during the uptake of oxygen and then supplying an equal amount of O2 back to 

the headspace using an electrolytic cell.

The electrolytic cell contains a chamber filled with copper sulfate solution. Oxygen is 

generated in this chamber by passing an electrical charge (initiated by the test vessel 

head pressure change sensor) between electrodes. It is connected to the headspace of 

the sample vessel by a vent. Valves are used to balance the pressure and return 

generated O2 to the headspace of the test vessel. The data is handled by a PC which 

continuously records the amounts of CO2 (mg) absorbed and O2 (mg) generated.

The inoculum for these tests was derived from the recycled sludge of the City of Lake 

Charles, Louisiana Domestic Waste Water Plant A. The sludge was aerated for 7-days 

prior to use. The inoculum in the test medium was adjusted to a final concentration of 

10 mg/L of total suspended solids (TSS) which meets the guideline specification of < 30 

mg/L TSS. Sodium benzoate (J.T Baker – 99% purity) was used as the positive 

reference test material.

The 1-liter test vessels containing 900 mL of inoculated medium was mixed prior to 

receiving the sample solutions. Each flask contained a stir bar which was positioned 

over a magnetic stirrer to provide vigorous mixing during the test. Stock solutions of 1.0 

% (10,000 mg/L) of each test material were made using distilled water. Target 

concentration of 100 mg test material was achieved by adding 10 mL from each 

ALFOTERRA® stock solution to the inoculated medium. The 1-liter vessels were then 

placed in the water bath (22±1°C) of the electrolytic respirometer units. The instrument 

underwent a 60 minute initialization/equalization before data collection began. CO2

generation and O2 uptake data were recorded by the instrument every six hours during 

the 28 day test. Blanks were also included in the study for validity purposes. These 

blanks were prepared identical to the samples except that they did not contain the test 

materials (i.e. blanks contained inoculum only). 

5.2 Toxicity and Chemical Oxidation Controls

During the definitive test, two types of controls were included to determine the potential 

of microbiological toxicity and chemical oxidation. The first control type was run on 

each of the six ALFOTERRA® sulfate samples. This control, a test for toxicity of the 

sample material on the inoculum, was done with a concentration of 50 mg of J.T. Baker, 

sodium benzoate and 100 mg of the ALFOTERRA® sulfate. The second control type 

was run using only one of the ALFOTERRA® sulfates. In this second control, a sterility 

test with 1.0 % sodium azide and 100 mg of ALFOTERRA® 167-7S, was included to 

evaluate the chemical oxidation influence. The reference chemical was sodium 

benzoate. The two control types demonstrated that the test materials were not toxic to 

the microbial population and that chemical oxidation was irrelevant. 
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 13 of 50

5.3 Determination of Organic Carbon by COD values

The organic carbon for the ALFOTERRA® samples was determined by the HACH 

DR2000 spectrophotometer chemical oxygen demand (COD) Low Range Method. The 

COD values will be used in the calculation of the theoretical maximum amount of 

oxygen uptake from complete oxidation of the test materials (ThOD).

5.4 Test Materials

Table 5 shows the amount of test materials added to the each test vessel and the 

calculated ThOD which could be produced from the given amount of test material upon 

complete oxidation. 

Table 5. Amount of ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfates in Biodegradation Study and the 

calculated theoretical oxygen demand (ThOD).

Product mg product COD ThOD 

(mg)

AF 123-4S 100 201.3

AF 123-8S 100 203.3

AF-145-4S 100 228.6

AF 145-8S 100 224.6

AF 167-4S 100 227.3

AF 167-7S 100 232.0

5.5 Validity of Biodegradation tests

The validity of the biodegradation test was confirmed by meeting the following criteria as 

specified in the OECD 301 F Test Guidelines2

. 

• The delta of the max./min. of replicate %ThOD values at the plateau of the data, 

at the end of the test and/or at the end of the 10-day window, as appropriate, 

must be less than 20%. The actual range of differences was < 4%.

• The extent of biodegradation of the reference compound must reach the pass 

level of 60% ThOD on or before day 14. The reference compound reached 60% 

ThOD by day 5.

• The total oxygen uptake in the inoculum blank must not exceed 60 mg/L. The 

maximum oxygen uptake was < 20 mg/L.

• The test material must show no inhibition of the biodegradation of the reference 

compound. By day 14 the ALFOTERRA’s + Reference benzoate was >25% 

ThOD. The criterion is that the combined ThOD value be >25% in 14 days. 

Figure 1 shows another way to express inhibition to the biodegradation of the 

reference standard alone as compared to the effects from the presence of the 

test material. The lines for the test compounds plus benzoate track above the 

benzoate indicating the bacterium was capable of degrading benzoate in the 

presence of the test samples. 
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 14 of 50

• The sterility control for ALFOTERRA® 167-7S demonstrated that biodegradation 

and not chemical oxidation was occurring and due to their similar chemical 

make-up, it is assumed the same is true for the other ALFOTERRA® products.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Days

% Theoretical Oxygen

Benzoate

Benzoate + 123-4S

Benzoate + 123-8S

Benzoate + 145-4S

Benzoate + 145-8S

Benzoate + 167-4S

Benzoate + 167-7S

Figure 1. Toxicity control as it relates to biodegradation profile of benzoate % THOD in the 

presence of ALFOTERRA® Sulfates

5.6 Results of the Biodegradation Test (OECD 301 F)

Table 6 displays the results of the biodegradation tests by showing the three-replicate 

mean of the percent of the theoretical oxygen demand (%ThOD) produced on each day 

as well as the standard deviation of the mean. Figure 2 displays this data graphically 

using the mean values. Though the ALFOTERRA samples did show some degradation, 

none of the samples reached the 60% target by the end of the test at day 28.

Table 6. Ultimate Biodegradation of ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfates. (Mean of % ThOD and 

Standard Deviation of the mean) in the OECD 301 F Biodegradation Test

ALFOTERRA®

Product 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

123-4S 0.25±0.03 1.07±0.10 2.86±0.19 8.39±0.35 16.50±0.56 18.39±1.38 21.47±1.52

123-8S 0.32±0.05 0.70±0.11 0.93±0.20 1.66±0.13 3.31±0.07 5.10±0.12 8.02±0.10

145-4S 0.25±0.06 0.71±0.11 1.81±0.42 5.34±0.83 13.96±0.81 17.02±0.92 19.94±1.20

145-8S 0.62±0.08 1.30±0.13 1.62±0.12 1.83±0.11 2.65±0.13 4.43±0.11 6.43±0.14

167-4S 0.74±0.04 3.04±0.07 6.20±0.05 10.13±0.07 14.83±0.03 18.08±0.06 20.1±0.14

167-7S 0.55±0.01 1.64±0.17 2.28±0.19 3.10±0.16 4.26±0.07 6.26±0.03 9.20±0.20
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 15 of 50

ALFOTERRA®

Product 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

123-4S 22.79±1.27 23.51±1.22 23.97±1.26 24.42±1.29 24.99±1.18 25.76±0.79 26.73±0.63

123-8S 9.75±0.11 11.06±0.14 11.91±0.15 12.57±0.16 13.08±0.15 13.43±0.16 13.81±0.17

145-4S 21.70±0.71 22.78±0.58 23.45±0.48 24.02±0.38 24.74±0.35 25.68±0.43 26.74±0.43

145-8S 8.67±0.14 10.39±0.16 12.00±0.79 13.32±0.24 14.41±0.28 15.20±0.34 16.16±0.36

167-4S 22.16±0.13 23.85±0.01 25.62±0.09 27.23±0.24 28.98±0.37 30.64±0.46 32.31±0.49

167-7S 13.31±0.42 17.16±0.57 19.97±0.26 21.70±0.15 23.00±0.27 24.20±0.66 25.42±0.83

ALFOTERRA®

Product 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

123-4S 27.76±0.87 28.81±1.31 29.67±1.71 30.32±1.98 30.76±2.15 31.10±2.26 31.41±2.36

123-8S 14.20±0.16 14.56±0.14 14.98±0.12 15.44±0.12 15.86±0.12 16.31±0.15 16.73±0.18

145-4S 27.52±0.33 28.21±0.21 28.83±0.15 29.44±0.16 30.07±0.23 30.71±0.14 31.07±0.22

145-8S 17.03±0.37 17.85±0.41 18.66±0.51 19.50±0.74 20.35±0.88 20.98±0.94 21.63±0.97

167-4S 33.75±0.46 34.83±0.45 35.68±0.48 36.39±0.51 37.07±0.52 37.62±0.50 38.32±0.47

167-7S 26.56±0.99 27.58±1.11 28.49±1.27 29.36±1.45 30.22±1.59 30.90±1.70 31.63±1.87

ALFOTERRA®

Product 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

123-4S 31.68±2.45 31.98±2.55 32.30±2.66 32.78±2.81 33.26±2.93 33.82±3.07 34.40±3.25

123-8S 17.07±0.21 17.40±0.21 17.67±0.19 17.93±0.17 18.18±0.14 18.47±0.10 18.87±0.13

145-4S 31.44±0.12 31.84±0.03 32.18±0.18 32.54±0.28 32.88±0.34 33.24±.038 33.59±0.41

145-8S 22.13±0.98 22.66±0.97 23.13±0.91 23.64±0.83 24.19±0.71 24.59±0.61 25.23±0.53

167-4S 38.93±0.47 39.56±0.48 40.05±0.49 40.51±0.54 40.97±0.61 41.28±0.70 41.87±0.82

167-7S 32.19±2.00 32.83±2.08 33.40±2.13 33.97±2.21 34.54±2.29 34.96±2.35 35.64±2.41
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 16 of 50

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Days

% Theoretical Oxygen

123-4S

123-8S

145-4S

145-8S

167-4S

167-7S

Figure 2. Biodegradation of the ALFOTERRA® sulfates tested

VI. AQUATIC ACUTE TOXICITY STUDIES

6.1 Aquatic Acute Toxicity Test Methods and Results

Aquatic toxicity studies were conducted on three freshwater species; Pimephales 

promelas (fathead minnow), Daphnia pulex (water flea), and Selenastrum

capricornutum (algae). The minnow and water flea tests were conducted by 

Environmental Enterprises USA, Inc. (Slidell, LA). The algae tests were performed by 

Pacific EcoRisk (Martinez, CA). The fathead minnow and Daphnia are, respectively, 96 

and 48-hr acute tests, while the 96-hr algae test is considered to be a short-term chronic 

test. The acute effect endpoint for fish and Daphnia is the lethal concentration which 

kills 50% (LC50) of the test organisms. The chronic effect endpoint for S. 

capricornutum is the concentration that inhibits 50% of algal cell growth (IC50) during 

the 96-hr test period. Table 7 lists the Appendix Reference number where the original 

laboratory reports are given, the product, the laboratory that conducted the testing, the 

laboratory report ID code and the USEPA method followed. 

Table 7. Original Aquatic Toxicity Reports.

Appendix ALFOTERRA® Lab / ID code Species USEPA Test

A 145-8S EE USA Q-560l-07 Fish EPA / 821 / R-02-012

A 145-8S EE USA Q-560-07 Daphnia EPA / 821 / R-02-012

B 145-8S Pacific EcoRisk Algae EPA / 821 / R-02-013

C 167-4S EE USA Q-561l-07 Fish EPA / 821 / R-02-012

C 167-4S EE USA Q-561-07 Daphnia EPA / 821 / R-02-012
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 17 of 50

B 167-4S Pacific EcoRisk Algae EPA / 821 / R-02-013

D 167-7S EE USA Q-562l-07 Fish EPA / 821 / R-02-012

D 167-7S EE USA Q-562-07 Daphnia EPA / 821 / R-02-012

B 167-7S Pacific EcoRisk Algae EPA / 821 / R-02-013

Since the ALFOTERRA® sulfate samples evaluated in this study are water soluble they 

were able to be used as received. That is, it was not necessary to prepared the Water 

Accommodation Fraction (WAF) solutions that were used in the ALFOTERRA®

propoxylate study. Table 8 gives the aquatic toxicity LC/IC50 results for the 

ALFOTERRA® propoxy sulfates.

Table 8. Aquatic toxicity results for the ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfates.

ALFOTERRA® Fish 96-hr

LC50 (mg/L)

Daphnia 48-hr 

LC50 (mg/L)

Algae 96-hr

IC50 (mg/L)

145-8S 1.31 2.89 1.70

167-4S 0.49 7.56 0.49

167-7S 1.40 15.8 0.89

VII. HISTORICAL BIODEGRADATION AND TOXICITY RESULTS WITH 

ALFOTERRA® SURFACTANTS

Sasol has been working on the development of alcohol propoxy sulfate surfactants for 

almost 10 years. The end-use markets (enhanced oil recovery, soil and drill cutting 

cleaning,) are finally now at the point where commercialization of the surfactants is 

economically feasible. As a result, Sasol has generated biodegradation and aquatic 

toxicity data on earlier versions of the ALFOTERRA sulfate surfactants that are relevant 

to the six-target materials being discussed in this report. This earlier data is presented 

below.

7.1 Biodegradation Results from First-Generation Propoxy-Sulfate Samples

In 1999, in-house Ready Biodegradation studies were conducted on a two sets of 

earlier generation ALFOTERRA® type surfactants. 1 OECD 301A methodology was 

used. The following surfactants were tested:

12-3S – ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfate surfactant produced from a C12 

Guerbet alcohol with 3 moles of propylene oxide

123-2S – ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfate surfactant produced from a 

branched C12-13 alcohol with 2 moles of propylene oxide

123-4S – ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfate surfactant produced from a 

branched C12-13 alcohol with 4 moles of propylene oxide

123-8S – ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfate surfactant produced from a 

branched C12-13 alcohol with 8 moles of propylene oxide

145-2S – ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfate surfactant produced from a 

branched C14-15 alcohol with 2 moles of propylene oxide
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 18 of 50

145-4S – ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfate surfactant produced from a 

branched C14-15 alcohol with 4 moles of propylene oxide

The OECD 301A: DOC die-away test was done as described in the OECD Guideline for 

Testing of Chemicals adopted July 17,1992. This is a 28-day aerobic biodegradation 

die-away test on 10-30 mg/L water soluble organic compounds (measured as dissolved 

organic carbon – DOC) done in mineral salts medium inoculated with ≤ 30 mg/L total 

suspended solids (TSS) from natural sewage/soils or surface waters. Ultimate 

biodegradation was determined by measuring the DOC concentrations in the test flasks 

during the test, while Primary biodegradation was measured by using methylene blue 

active substance (MBAS). The inoculum was derived from activated sludge obtained 

from the Anderson Mill Municipal Water Reclamation Facility (Austin, TX) and the 

supernatant from a suspension of 100 g soil in 500 mL of the mineral salts medium. 

The test was done at a starting concentration of 20 mg DOC/L for the test materials. 

The summarized results from the study can be found in Table 9, while the expanded 

data can be found in Appendix E.

Table 9. Summary of primary and ultimate biodegradation of early-versions of the ALFOTERRA® 

propoxy sulfate surfactants in OECD 301A test.

ALFOTERRA® Surfactant

OECD 301A

% MBAS Loss % DOC Loss

Pass 10-

day 

Window

28-Day 

End 

Point

Pass 10-

day 

Window

28-Day 

End 

Point

 12-3S Yes 96,3 No 46.4

123-2S Yes 98.2 No 52.1

123-4S Yes 91.1 No 28.7

123-8S No 46.1 No 10.9

145-2S Yes 96.4 No 54.5

145-4S Yes 88.9 No 33.9

In 2005, additional ALFOTERRA® surfactants were tested used the OECD 301F 

method.2 The surfactants studied was as follows:

S23-3S – ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfate surfactant produced from a linear 

and mono-methyl branched C12-13 alcohol with 3 moles of propylene oxide

S23-4S – ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfate surfactant produced from a linear 

and mono-methyl branched C12-13 alcohol with 4 moles of propylene oxide

S23-5S – ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfate surfactant produced from a linear 

and mono-methyl branched C12-13 alcohol with 5 moles of propylene oxide

S23-8S – ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfate surfactant produced from a linear 

and mono-methyl branched C12-13 alcohol with 8 moles of propylene oxide

S45-2S – ALFOTERRA® propoxylate sulfate surfactant produced from a linear 

and mono-methyl branched C14-15 alcohol with 2 moles of propylene oxide
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 19 of 50

The OECD 301F Manometric Respirometry Test was done as described in the OECD 

Guideline for Testing Chemicals adopted July 17, 1992 with the following minor 

modifications: (1) reduction in test material concentration from 100 mg to 20 mg to 

reduce possible toxicity to the inoculum, (2) reduction in the pH from 7.4 to 7.0 to 

improve the efficiency of CO2 removal, and (3) reporting of % ThCO2 (theoretical 

maximum production of carbon dioxide) instead of % ThO2 (theoretical maximum uptake 

of oxygen) to improve the accuracy of detecting ultimate biodegradation.

The biodegradation test was done on the ALFOTERRA® surfactants in quadruplicate 

using two 20 channel Coordinated Environmental Services (CES) Ltd (Cornwell, UK) 

aerobic electrolytic respirometer units following the OECD 301 F guideline with slight 

modifications (as noted above).

The inoculum for these tests was derived from the recycled sludge from the City of Lake 

Charles, Louisiana Domestic Waste Water Plant A. The sludge was aerated ~ 7 days 

prior to use. The inoculum in the test medium was adjusted to a final concentration of < 

30 mg TSS/L. Sodium benzoate (J.T. Baker – 99% purity was used as the positive 

reference material).

The summarized results from the study can be found in Table 10, while the expanded 

data can be found in Appendix E.

Table 10. Summary of ultimate biodegradation of ALFOTERRA® surfactants in OECD 301F Test

ALFOTERRA® Surfactant

OECD 301A

% ThCO2

Pass 10-

day 

Window

28-Day 

End 

Point

S23-3S No 60.1

S23-4S No 55.5a

S23-5S No 42.4

S23-8S No 43.3

S45-2S No 64.2b

 a mean of 3 samples b mean of 2 samples

7.2 Aquatic Toxicity Results from First-Generation Propoxy Sulfate Samples

Definitive Acute Aquatic Toxicity Tests on Daphnia magna and Pimephales promelas

were done on several first-generation ALFOTERRA® propoxy sulfate surfactants by 

ENSR (Ft. Collins, CO) in 1999 (sample description given in section 7.1). The methods 

used for doing these tests were detailed in US EPA Method EPA/600/4-90/02/027F –

1993 and ASTM Method E729-96 – 1998. ENSR reports can be found in Appendix F. 

The results of acute aquatic toxicity tests are summarized in Table 11.

Table 11. Acute Aquatic Toxicity of first-generation ALFOTERRA® surfactants
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 20 of 50

ALFOTERRA® Surfactant Daphnia magna

48-hr. LC50

mg/L (95% CL)

Pimephales promelas

96-hr. LC50

mg/L (95% CL)

 12-3S 8.88 (6.51 – 9.85) 10.99 (10.23 – 11.80)

123-2S 2.06 (1.76 – 2.29) 4.65 (4.27 – 5.08)

123-8S 2.65 (2.12 – 3.20) 1.68 (1.56 – 1.81)

145-2S 2.19 (1.86 – 2.49) 2.31 (2.14 – 2.48)

145-4S 2.34 (2.01 – 2.73) 1.62 (1.51 – 1.74)

VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF ALFOTERRA® ALCOHOL PROPOXY 

SULFATES

The environmental fate and effects of alcohol ethoxy sulfates have been thoroughly 

studied and have been the subject of a number of risk assessments including 

Environmental and Human Safety of Major Surfactants – Alcohol Ethoxy Sulfates3 and 

Human and Environmental Risk Assessment (HERA) – Alcohol Ethoxysulphates 

(AES).4 While there is a significant amount of literature data describing the 

environmental fate and effects of alcohol ethoxy sulfates, no literature data was found 

for alcohol propoxy sulfates. This makes comparisons of the current ALFOTERRA® 

alcohol propoxy sulfate results difficult.

8.1 Discussion of Biodegradation Results

Table 12 shows the combined biodegradation results of the ALFOTERRA® surfactants 

from both current and historical testing. The table has the ALFOTERRA® alcohol 

propoxy sulfates listed by increasing percentage of propoxylation. The percent 

branching of the starting alcohol is also listed for each surfactant.

Table 12. Combined biodegradation results for ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfates

ALFOTERRA® 

Surfactant

Approx. 

Percent 

Propoxylation1

Approx. Percent

Branched 

Starting Alcohol

OECD 301A

(Primary Biodeg –

MBAS loss)

OECD 301A

(Ultimate 

Biodeg –

DOC loss)

OECD 301F

(Ultimate Biodeg 

–

ThCO2 or ThOD)

145-2S 33% 95% 96.4% 54.5%

S45-2S 34% 50% 64.2%

123-2S 39% 94% 98.2% 52.1%

S23-3S 47% 50% 60.1%

167-4S 48% 63% 41.9%

145-4S 49% 95% 88.9% 33.9%

 12-3S 50% 100% 96.3% 46.4%

S23-4S 54% 50% 55.5%

123-4S 54% 94% 91.1% 28.7% 34.4%

S23-5S 61% 50% 42.4%

167-7S 62% 63% 35.6%

145-8S 68% 95% 25.2%

S23-8S 78% 50% 43.3%

123-8S 87% 95% 46.1% 10.9% 18.9%

1 Percentage of PO in propoxylated alcohol
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 21 of 50

Five of the ALFOTERRA® surfactants (12-3S, 123-2S, 123-4S, 145-2S and 145-4S)

with lower amounts of propoxylation (< 4 moles or < 60%) exceeded 86% primary 

biodegradation as measured by MBAS loss within 10 days. This would indicate these 

substances have lost their anionic surfactant properties and, therefore, have decreased 

aquatic toxicity.

For ultimate biodegradation, two low-mole propoxylate surfactants (S23-3S and S45-

2S) met the ready biodegradability criteria of > 60% in the OECD 301F assay, but did 

not meet the 10 day window. An additional third surfactant, (S23-4S) was close to 

meeting the criteria with degradation of 55.5%.

The remaining compounds displayed slower and more limited biodegradation.

The data indicates that the biodegradation profile of the ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy 

sulfates is influenced by both the amount of propoxylation and the amount of branching 

within the starting alcohol. As the percentage of propoxylation increases, the extent of 

biodegradation decreases. This is consistent with literature published on alkoxylated 

alcohols. Specifically, Naylor et al.5 determined that biodegradation of alkoxylated 

alcohols was inversely proportional to the amount of propylene oxide incorporated into 

the surfactant. In addition, as the amount of branching within the starting alcohol 

increases, the extent of biodegradation decreases. This effect has been observed 

before in both the biodegradation of alcohol ethoxylates and alcohol ethoxy sulfates.3,6

From the data, it appears that 4 moles (or < 60%) of propoxylation appears to be the 

defining point between extensive primary and ultimate biodegradation and slower 

limited biodegradation. 

8.2 Discussion of Aquatic Toxicity Results

Table 13 shows the combined aquatic toxicity results on the ALFOTERRA® surfactants 

from both current and historical testing. The table has the ALFOTERRA® alcohol 

propoxy sulfates listed by increasing percentage of propoxylation. The percent 

branching of the starting alcohol is also listed for each surfactant.

Table 13. Combined aquatic toxicity results for ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfates

ALFOTERRA® 

Surfactant

Approx. 

Percent 

Propoxylation1

Approx. 

Percent

Branched 

Starting 

Alcohol

Algae IC50

mg/L 

(95%CL)

Daphnia

LC50

mg/L 

(95%CL)

Fathead 

Minnow LC50

mg/L 

(95%CL)

145-2S 33% 95% 2.19

(1.86 – 2.49)

2.31

(2.14 – 2.48)

123-2S 39% 94% 2.06

(1.76 – 2.29)

4.65

(4.27 – 5.08)

167-4S 48% 63% 0.49

(0.35 – 1.34)

7.56

(6.03 – 9.04)

0.49

(0.44 – 0.56)

145-4S 49% 95% 2.34

(2.01 – 2.73)

1.62

(1.51 – 1.74)

 12-3S 50% 100% 8.88 10.99
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 22 of 50

(6.51 – 9.85) (10.23 –

11.80)

167-7S 62% 63% 0.89

(0.72 – NA)

15.8

(10.7 – 25.6)

1.40

(1.21 – 1.59)

145-8S 68% 95% 1.70

(1.51 – 2.10)

2.89

(2.42 – 3.40)

1.31

(1.23 – 1.39)

123-8S 87% 95% 2.65

(2.12 – 3.20)

1.68

(1.56 – 1.81)

1 Percentage of PO in propoxylated alcohol

Unlike with the biodegradation data, there is no consistent trend with the combined 

aquatic toxicity of the ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfates. There does not appear 

to be any environmentally relevant correlation between aquatic toxicity and amount of 

propoxylation, amount of branching in the starting alcohol or alkyl chain length. These 

results obtained for the ALFOTERRA® surfactants are similar to those for equivalent 

alcohol ethoxy sulfates.

8.3 Discussion of Fate in Use Application

As mentioned previously, the intended use of ALFOTERRA® surfactants is in enhanced 

hydrocarbon recovery (EHR) operations. ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfates may 

be used in various aspects of improving recovery of hydrocarbon materials (oil, natural 

gas, etc.) from underground reservoirs. Many factors may influence the flow of 

hydrocarbons from a well. Conditions such as permeability, hydrocarbon concentration, 

porosity, temperature, presence of water, pressure of the hydrocarbon containing 

formation, and formation damage due to well treatment and drilling operations can all 

have an impact on the production and economic potential of a hydrocarbon reservoir.

Before use, ALFOTERRA® surfactants will be blended with other chemicals, such 

as polymers, salts, other surfactants, alcohols and water (predominate ingredient) to 

produce a water-flood or carrier fluid that will be injected into the hydrocarbon reservoir. 

The role of the alcohol propoxy sulfate surfactant is to reduce the interfacial surface 

tension between the oil and the carrier fluid in order to increase the amount of 

hydrocarbon that can be flushed/pulled out of the reservoir. Typically, only low 

concentrations (0.1 - 1.0% as active) of ALFOTERRA® surfactants are required in these 

operations. 

Ultimately, both the hydrocarbon material and the carrier fluid are pumped from the 

reservoir as a mixture. It is then necessary to separate the water from the other organic 

materials (hydrocarbon material and other organics from original carrier fluid 

formulation). The water is normally separated using either chemical or physical 

methods. It is estimated the separated water will only contain trace levels (< 10 mg/L) 

of ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfate. This low level of surfactant is a result of two 

processes. First, after the initial injection of the ALFOTERRA® containing water flood, 

additional water may be injected to improve hydrocarbon recovery. This will result in a 

dilution of the ALFOTERRA concentration in the recovered hydrocarbon/water mixture. 

Second, a significant portion of the surfactant is expected to bind to the subsurface 

formation. The amount of adsorption will be dependant on the composition of the 

formation. Adsorption losses are predicted to range from 50% for shale formations to 
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 23 of 50

100% for dolomite formations. The separated water is then normally reused to make 

additional carrier fluid, or injected into a disposal well if reuse is not possible.

As a result, ALFOTERRA® surfactants will not be released into surface or ground water 

and the predicted exposure concentration (PEC) will be zero.

IX. SUMMARY

The rate and extent of biodegradation of the ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfates 

were dependent on the amount of propoxylation and branching in the starting alcohol. 

ALFOTERRA® surfactants with a low proportion (< 4 moles or < 60%) of propoxylation 

displayed extensive primary biodegradation and, in some cases, ultimate 

biodegradation. The surfactants with a higher amount of propoxylation had limited 

biodegradation. The aquatic toxicity of the ALFOTERRA® alcohol propoxy sulfates is 

similar to that of equivalent alcohol ethoxy sulfates.

During Enhanced Hydrocarbon Recovery, no level of ALFOTERRA® surfactants will be 

discharge into surface or ground water and the application will, therefore, not produce 

any adverse effects to the environment.

X. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors acknowledge Rebekah Cohen for skillful assistance with the 

biodegradation test, and Rocco Di Modugno and the staff at Sasol Italy for producing 

the samples. 
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 24 of 50

XI. REFERENCES

1. Nielsen, A.M. and G. Russell. 2006. Biodegradability and Aquatic Toxicity of 

ALFOTERRA® Surfactants. Internal Sasol North America Research Report (attached to 

PMN as supporting document).

2. OECD. 1993. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals – OECD 301F 

Manometric Respirometry Test. Organization of Economic Cooperation and 

Development. Paris

3. Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1991. Environmental and Human Safety of Major Surfactants. 

Volume 1. Anionic Surfactants. Part 2. Alcohol Ethoxy Sulfates. Final report to the Soap 

and Detergent Association

4. HERA. 2004. Human & Environmental Risk Assessment on Ingredients of European 

Household Cleaning Products - Alcohol Ethoxysulphates (AES)

5. Naylor, C.G., F.J. Castaldi and B.J. Hayes. 1988. Biodegradation of nonionic 

surfactants containing propylene oxide. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 65:1669-1676 as 

reported in Talmage, S.S. 1994. Environmental and Human Safety of Major Surfactants: 

Alcohol Ethoxylates and Alkylphenol Ethoxylates. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL

6. Talmage, S.S. 1994. Environmental and Human Safety of Major Surfactants: 

Alcohol Ethoxylates and Alkylphenol Ethoxylates. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 25 of 50

Biodegradability and Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Alcohol 

Propoxy Sulfates. 

Research Report R&D ENV-07-024 01-07

Part 2 of 2 Appendices

Geoff Russell

Ricky Stackhouse

Wayne Sorensen

November 2007

Research & Development

Lake Charles, Louisiana
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 26 of 50

Appendix A.

Biomonitoring Report

Daphnia pulex & Pimephales promelas.

Prepared for Sasol by EE USA

Lab Report # Q-506-07

Sample ID: ALFOTERRA® 145-8S

October 31, 2007
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 27 of 50

Appendix B.

An Evaluation of the Chronic Toxicity of the ALFOTERRA® Samples to Freshwater Alga 

Selenastrum capricornutum. 

Prepared for Sasol by Pacific EcoRisk.

 October, 2007
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 28 of 50

Appendix C.

Biomonitoring Report. 

Daphnia pulex & Pimephales promelas.

Prepared for Sasol by EE USA

Lab Report # Q-6561-07

Sample ID: ALFOTERRA® L167-4S

October 31, 2007
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 29 of 50

Appendix D.

Biomonitoring Report. 

Daphnia pulex & Pimephales promelas.

Prepared for Sasol by EE USA

Lab Report # Q-562-07

Sample ID: ALFOTERRA® L167-7S

October 31, 2007
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 30 of 50

Appendix E.

Biodegradation of Early Versions of ALFOTERRA® Propoxy Sulfate Surfactants 

Primary Biodegradation of ALFOTERRA® Surfactants in the OECD 301A Test

ALFOTERRA®

Surfactant

% MBAS Loss

1 6 9 10 13 15 17 22 28

 12-3S

 ± Std. Dev.

4.7

± 1.4

86.3

± 0.7

87.9

± 0.2

88.9

± 1.9

88.8

± 0.1

89.1

± 2.8

95.2

± 0.3

--

--

96.3

± 0.4

123-2S

 ± Std. Dev.

5.1

± 0.5

95.8

± 0.2

97.4

± 0.2

97.6

± 0.3

97.2

± 1.5

98.4

± 0.1

97.5

± 0.2

98.3

± 0.1

98.2

± 0.2

123-4S

 ± Std. Dev.

10.1

± 5.5

87.6

± 2.2

86.9

± 0.4

86.8

± 0.3

88.6

± 0.2

91.5

± 0.6

89.0

± 0.6

--

--

91.1

± 0.6

123-8S

 ± Std. Dev.

5.3

± 1.7

35.8

± 4.2

46.0

± 3.2

39.9

± 5.6

45.5

± 0.9

51.6

± 2.5

45.3

± 1.3

--

--

46.1

± 0.3

145-2S

 ± Std. Dev.

8.3

± 1.8

97.2

± 0.2

96.7

± 0.1

97.6

± 0.1

97.8

± 0.3

98.6

± 0.2

--

--

--

--

96.4

± 0.1

145-4S

 ± Std. Dev.

4.7

± 1.41

86.4

± 0.7

87.9

± 0.2

88.9

± 1.9

88.8

± 0.1

88.8

± 2.5

88.1

± 2.5

--

--

88.9

± 2.3

Ultimate Biodegradation of ALFOTERRA® Surfactants in the OECD 301A Test

ALFOTERRA® 

Surfactant

% DOC Loss

1 3 6 9 10 13 15 17 22 28

 12-3S

 ± Std. Dev.

13.8

± 7.7

1.7

± 2.4

5.8

± 0.5

13.8

± 2.2

24.4

± 1.2

25.5

± 2.5

35.4

± 2.7

40.0

± 0.1

45.7

± 2.5

46.4

± 4.9

123-2S

 ± Std. Dev.

8.4

± 11.9

20.8

± 1.6

29.2

± 0.1

38.3

± 1.0

39.6

± 3.5

43.0

± 0.6

47.3

± 2.8

53.7

± 2.1

56.7

± 1.34

52.1

± 1.41

123-4S

 ± Std. Dev.

3.9

± 1.3

1.4

± 1.6

8.8

± 2.8

16.1

± 0.4

17.4

± 1.1

17.1

± 0.2

21.5

± 2.1

28.0

± 0.6

29.9

± 3.3

28.7

± 2.5

123-8S

 ± Std. Dev.

0

± 0

0

± 0

1.3

± 1.8

0

± 0

10.9

± 4.2

5.7

± 1.3

4.7

± 0.8

14.0

± 0.8

15.1

± 2.3

10.9

± 1.6

145-2S

 ± Std. Dev.

2.4

± 0.2

21.6

± 0.5

28.8

± 0.5

37.8

± 2.2

42.8

± 0.2

43.3

± 0.8

45.2

± 2.9

51.5

± 0.8

54.6

± 3.1

54.5

± 3.5

145-4S

 ± Std. Dev.

2.7

± 0.9

2.9

± 1.3

13.3

± 3.5

18.2

± 0.8

24.8

± 0.1

26.3

± 2.1

28.1

± 4.2

34.7

± 0.6

36.2

± 1.2

33.9

± 1.3

Acetate

 ± Std. Dev.

88.9

± 9.5

97.4

± 0.8

96.5

± 0.5

98.5

± 1.5

96.5

± 0.3

99.2

± 1.3

97.6

± 0.9

98.3

± 2.5

96.5

± 1.1

100

± 0
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 31 of 50

Ultimate Biodegradation of ALFOTERRA® Surfactants in the OECD 301F Test

ALFOTERRA® 

Surfactants

%ThCO2

1 2 3 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

S45-2S (sample 1)

 ± Std. Dev.

0.1

± 0.4

4.8

± 0.3

16.3

± 0.2

23.8

± 0.2

36.8

± 0.4

47.4

± 0.3

52.0

± 0.2

54.5

± 0.3

56.1

± 0.5

56.4

± 0.1

57.7

± 0.2

58.3

± 0.9

59.2

± 1.0

60.0

± 0.8

61.6

± 0.6

62.3

± 0.5

S45-2S (sample 2)

 ± Std. Dev.

0

± 0

5.3

± 0.7

16.5

± 1.2

24.5

± 1.2

37.7

± 0.6

47.8

± 0.4

52.5

± 0.4

55.5

± 0.6

57.3

± 0.7

58.8

± 0.3

60.5

± 0.3

61.2

± 0.6

62.5

± 0.8

63.8

± 1.3

65.3

± 1.6

66.1

± 1.8

S23-3S

 ± Std. Dev.

0

± 0

3.4

± 0.1

11.3

± 0.3

19.6

± 0.5

33.4

± 0.2

41.1

± 2.3

45.1

± 2.6

49.2

± 2.0

51.2

± 1.7

53.1

± 1.5

54.7

± 0.8

56.0

± 1.1

56.8

± 1.0

58.0

± 1.0

59.6

± 1.0

60.1

± 0.8

S23-4S (sample 1) 0 2.2 8.7 14.5 24.4 29.7 33.3 35.6 36.4 37.7 41.6 43.9 43.7 45.0 46.2 46.5

S23-4S (sample 2)

 ± Std. Dev.

0.1

± 0.4

2.3

± 0.7

8.3

± 0.4

14.8

± 1.3

26.9

± 2.6

33.8

± 0.1

37.9

± 1.3

41.4

± 2.0

43.2

± 2.7

43.8

± 3.5

45.6

± 3.1

46.6

± 2.9

46.9

± 3.2

47.7

± 3.4

49.6

± 2.9

50.0

± 2.9

S23-4S (sample 3)

 ± Std. Dev.

0.2

± 0.8

2.3

± 0.5

8.6

± 0.3

15.5

± 1.1

31.6

± 4.2

43.3

± 4.5

49.7

± 5.9

52.6

± 6.4

55.0

± 5.6

56.8

± 5.1

57.6

± 3.9

60.8

± 3.7

61.4

± 3.5

64.3

± 8.2

66.6

± 8.7

69.9

± 10.3

S23-5S 0.7 1.0 2.8 4.4 12.1 19.4 23.9 28.3 30.9 31.7 34.3 34.8 36.3 38.6 41.7 42.4

S23-8S

 ± Std. Dev.

0

± 0

1.3

± 0.7

4.1

± 0.3

8.3

± 0.1

20.8

± 2.0

26.8

± 2.2

30.3

± 2.4

33.7

± 2.6

35.6

± 2.4

36.6

± 2.7

38.2

± 2.4

39.2

± 2.5

40.3

± 3.0

41.3

± 3.1

42.9

± 3.2

43.3

± 3.3

Sodium Benzoate

 ± Std. Dev.

2.6

± 2.7

39.2

± 2.3

50.9

± 3.6

62.6

± 4.9

78.1

± 5.9

83.9

± 5.4

89.6

± 4.8

91.0

± 4.3

93.2

± 4.0

95.4

± 3.8

97.0

± 3.4

97.9

± 3.2

98.4

± 3.3

98.8

± 3.3

99.0

± 3.4

99.1

± 3.4
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 32 of 50

Appendix F. 

Toxicity Reports on Earlier Versions of ALFOTERRA® Propoxy Sulfate Surfactants.

Daphnia magna and Pimephales promelas.

Prepared for Condea Vista Company by ENSR

Lab Report #8503-111-006 (015 thru 020)

Lab Report #8503-106-006 (001 thru 008)

August 1999
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 33 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 34 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 35 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 36 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 37 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 38 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 39 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 40 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 41 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 42 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 43 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 44 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 45 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 46 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 47 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 48 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 49 of 50
ALFOTERRA® Sulfate Report

Page 50 of 50