When "environmental protection" becomes an unavoidable hard indicator in material selection, the competition between liquid silicone rubber and traditional rubber is no longer just about performance, but also a green battle throughout the entire life cycle from raw material extraction to waste disposal. It is not easy to give a clean and concise answer, because the word "environmental protection" has completely different weights in different dimensions - some people value whether the raw materials are renewable, some focus on whether the production process is low pollution, and some care about whether the waste can return to nature. Only by pulling this chain from beginning to end can we see who is the true green choice.

Starting from the source of raw materials, the two are taking completely different paths. The basic polymer of liquid silicone rubber is polydimethylsiloxane, which uses metal silicon and methanol as upstream raw materials and belongs to the inorganic polymer material system. Its molecular main chain is composed of silicon oxygen bonds, naturally possessing chemical and physiological inertness. Traditional rubber is divided into two major camps: natural rubber and synthetic rubber. Natural rubber originates from the milk of rubber trees and is a renewable biobased material that can absorb carbon dioxide during cultivation. In this regard, natural rubber does have inherent advantages. However, synthetic rubber, including styrene butadiene rubber, nitrile rubber, EPDM rubber, etc., almost entirely relies on petrochemical routes, with non renewable raw materials, high energy consumption and carbon emissions in the production process, and has already fallen behind from the source.

What is even more alarming is that synthetic rubber requires the addition of a large number of chemical additives during the manufacturing process, including vulcanizing agents, accelerators, anti-aging agents, fillers, and plasticizers, many of which contain toxic and harmful substances such as heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and specific aromatic amines. The EU REACH regulation and RoHS directive have strict restriction lists for this, and the environmental compliance cost of the additive process alone has already caused headaches for many enterprises.

Entering the production and processing stage, the gap is further widened. Liquid silicone rubber, especially additive liquid silicone rubber, adopts platinum catalyzed addition curing reaction. The A and B components are accurately proportioned in a static mixer and directly injected into the mold. Under heating conditions, curing can be completed in tens of seconds. The entire process is solvent-free and releases no volatile organic compounds. The curing reaction itself does not produce any small molecule by-products, with a shrinkage rate of less than 0.1% and a material utilization rate of over 95%. There are almost no burrs or burrs, which eliminates the need for subsequent trimming processes and waste generation. This means that from feeding to discharging, the production line of liquid silicone rubber can almost achieve "zero waste, zero emissions".

In contrast, traditional rubber processing involves multiple processes such as plasticizing, mixing, rolling, and vulcanization. During the vulcanization process, harmful gases such as hydrogen sulfide are released, and dust and VOCs emissions from the mixing process cannot be ignored. Even if green processes such as nitrogen vulcanization and water-based coatings are used for improvement, the overall pollution level is still much higher than that of the fully automatic injection molding route of liquid silicone rubber. According to data, the injection molding process of liquid silicone rubber is more energy-efficient, labor-saving, and material saving compared to traditional high-temperature vulcanized silicone rubber, with significantly reduced overall energy consumption and labor costs.

Regarding liquid silicone rubber, please refer to our website for details: IOTA Liquid Silicone Rubber