Contact Us
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
© 2025 Jeifer Pharmaceutical, All Right
Reserved.
In the world of surfactants, few compounds have shaped pharmaceutical manufacturing like Nonylphenol Polyoxyethylene Ether 40, better known as Np-40. The 1950s and 1960s saw a rush to develop new, reliable agents capable of dissolving complex chemical structures and enhancing solubility in both pharma and industrial processes. Scientists explored phenolic ethers and discovered that attaching long polyoxyethylene chains to nonylphenol created a product with unique surface activity. By the 1970s, chemical producers in Europe and North America were blending Np-40 into formulas for medical device cleaning and vaccine stabilizers. Over time, with the introduction of pharmacopoeial grading (such as BP, EP, USP), the compound gained broader acceptance in regulated production lines, offering manufacturers better control over purity and performance, especially for injected and oral dosage forms.
The main draw of Np-40 rests in its ability to act as a powerful nonionic surfactant. Through personal experience in pharmaceutical preparation labs, using Np-40 often meant avoiding the unpredictable foaming issues common with ionic alternatives. The product acts as a stabilizer, emulsifier, and solubilizer, supporting drug ingredients that normally refuse to dissolve. In liquid drug formulations or ointments, just a small addition of this compound brings clarity and homogeneity to the mix. It also pops up in protein isolation, especially in biochemical research, where gentle cellular lysis preserves valuable proteins for analysis. The fact that pharmaceutical grades exist, conforming to BP, EP, and USP, reflects years of demand from companies wanting high-purity materials without interference from contaminating byproducts.
Standing face to face with Np-40 in the lab, you get a sense of why it’s relied upon: the substance appears as a pale, slightly viscous liquid, sometimes leaning toward a waxy paste depending on storage temperature. Its faint, phenolic odor gives away part of its origin. Chemically, it behaves as a nonionic surfactant, with a hydrophobic tail provided by the nonylphenol base and a hydrophilic head from roughly 40 ethylene oxide units. This structure gives it the ability to interface with both water and oily substances, bringing them together in stable emulsions. It doesn’t ionize in water, keeping formulation pH steady, and resists degradation under typical process temperatures or mechanical mixing. That stability proves essential for pharma makers who don’t want drifting pH or breakdown byproducts interfering in sensitive drug blends.
Manufacturers supply Np-40 with a set of technical specifics that focus on its purity, chain length, and degree of ethoxylation. Pharma grade means average molecular weight hovers around 2000–2200, with percent water usually below one. Labels must declare polyoxyethylene content by molarity, identify any nonylphenol residuals, and note trace metals—crucial for end users working in oncology or paediatrics, where contaminants can spell trouble. The product often ships in sealed drums or IBCs with full regulatory documentation, including batch testing and Risk Assessment Certificates. During audits, regulatory inspectors routinely check for clear, traceable documentation tying the Np-40 in use to approved pharmacopoeial specs.
Synthesizing Np-40 takes both precision and control, honed over decades in plant environments. The chemical backbone—nonylphenol—derives from alkylation of phenol with nonenes (mainly branched C9 olefins). With phenol and nonene reacting in the presence of solid acid catalysts, the result is nonylphenol, which, after neutralization and washing, moves on to the ethoxylation phase. Here, operators bubble ethylene oxide gas into a reactor containing nonylphenol, usually under controlled heat and pressure, using base catalysts. The process continues until analytic checks confirm about 40 moles of ethylene oxide have added to each nonylphenol molecule. Afterward, further purification removes residual reactants, excess ethylene oxide, and metal traces courtesy of chelation and filtration.
Chemical engineers have tinkered with the backbone of Np-40 to address growing regulatory scrutiny and expand its compatibility. By adjusting the degree of ethoxylation, they can tailor HLB (hydrophilic-lipophilic balance) to favor thicker creams or clearer solutions. Some formulations receive end-capping modifications—adding methyl or other moieties—to increase shelf-life stability and reduce the chance of forming toxic degradation products. In some labs, researchers split off the nonylphenol entirely and swap in linear alkyl chains, in response to environmental restrictions that target branched alkylphenols for their persistence. In protein research settings, mild reduction agents combine with Np-40 in buffer formulas during membrane extraction, highlighting the compound’s adaptability to multiple applications.
Chemical catalogs show just how many aliases Np-40 collects across markets. Beyond “Nonylphenol Polyoxyethylene Ether 40,” one finds “Poly(oxyethylene) nonylphenyl ether,” “Ethoxylated Nonylphenol 40EO,” and under various branded names from different multinational suppliers. In North American protocols, names like “NP-40 Substitute” appeared out of necessity, since lots of biotech suppliers introduced altered versions to sidestep environmental bans targeting nonylphenol ingredients. Walking through the storerooms of contract manufacturing sites, you’ll spot NP-40, Tergitol NP-40, and Igepal CA-630 sharing shelf space, with only paperwork attesting to each product’s regulatory compliance and purity grade.
Handling Np-40 safely brings certain challenges. Its nonionic nature doesn’t eliminate all risk: concentrated solutions irritate skin and eyes, so labs enforce gloves and safety goggles. Some old exposure reports in the chemical industry pointed to acute effects on workers handling high-load batches—mostly due to inhalation of aerosolized mists, rather than mere contact. Pharma-grade Np-40 finds itself caught between application potential and environmental fears, especially since nonylphenols break down slowly and show toxicity to aquatic life. Europe responded early with REACH regulations—tight controls on use and mandatory environmental testing. Over the years, routine audits in GMP facilities catch improper storage or mixing, urging staff to treat Np-40 as a controlled chemical: cool, dry storage, with spill containment, regular training, and sharp attention during weighing and transfer operations.
Where the real value of Np-40 emerges is in its daily usage by scientists and production managers. Pharmaceutical companies choose this surfactant to blend water- and oil-based ingredients in topical creams and ophthalmic solutions. Biotech labs thrive on its protein solubilizing powers—essential for western blotting, cell lysis, and DNA purification. In diagnostic manufacturing, assay developers count on standardized Np-40 to dissolve membrane proteins gently, preserving enzyme function for downstream detection steps. Beyond pharma, but still relevant, detergent makers and cleaners adopted Np-40 for its efficient degreasing strength. Each application forces buyers to weigh efficacy against environmental stewardship, a constant tradeoff in regulated manufacturing.
R&D teams continue to probe Np-40’s capacity to solve new solubilization puzzles, especially as drugs move toward biological macromolecules and complex compounds. A few years ago, I joined a team searching for alternatives in bioprocessing buffers—few available candidates matched Np-40’s combination of power and gentleness. Researchers run trials, tweaking pH and ionic strength, aiming to reduce the dose needed or pair Np-40 with biodegradable partners. In universities, chemists study how surfactant mixtures with polysorbates or poloxamers boost release rates from nanoformulations, targeting cancer therapy or gene delivery. Journals regularly publish comparative toxicity and process efficiency data, creating a cycle of incremental improvement: each finding nudging producers to optimize, slash waste, and demonstrate safety for both staff and the wider environment.
Concerns about toxicity surround Np-40, and rightfully so. Scientists decades ago flagged the compound’s parent molecule, nonylphenol, as an endocrine disruptor in animal models, leading to careful tracking of any possible residuals in pharmaceutical applications. Long-term aquatic impact reports pushed environmental agencies to restrict usage of standard nonylphenol surfactants, driving some manufacturers toward “green” variants. Toxicologists in pharma labs test for chronic effects, tracking liver enzymes and hormonal markers in rodent models after administration. Interestingly, finished pharma products using high-grade Np-40 rarely show detectable free nonylphenol, but manufacturers remain vigilant, routinely conducting risk assessments. Some pilot studies in humans tracked possible allergic or irritant reactions; numbers remain low, but vigilance stays high—especially for injectables, where surfactant exposure goes systemic. Balancing production with risk requires transparent testing, both for finished preparations and for raw chemical inputs.
Np-40 stands at a crossroads. The pharma and research sectors crave its performance: ease of use, impact on solubility, and cost effciency keep it relevant, even as regulators scrutinize ingredients for their environmental legacy. New synthesis routes focus on greener production, including bio-based feedstocks sourced from plant oils instead of petrochemicals. Some chemical engineers experiment with enzymatic ethoxylation, hoping for lower energy costs and waste output. Universities and multinationals now explore next-generation surfactants hoping to preserve what’s great about Np-40—broad compatibility and strong surface activity—without burdening the environment or regulatory teams. The push to recycle or reclaim spent surfactants grows, especially for large-volume users in generic drug manufacturing. Looking ahead, those who rely on Np-40 need to prepare for the shifting sands of compliance and demand: upgrading technical know-how, investing in alternatives testing, and advocating for sustainable sourcing wherever possible.
NP-40, known in longer chemical terms as Nonylphenol Polyoxyethylene Ether 40, stands out as a nonionic surfactant that gets a lot more attention than its name suggests. In a lab or production setting, not every scientist or technician cares about the full tongue-twister, just that their NP-40 keeps acting as the silent partner in many processes. It’s oily and clear, but unlike harsh solvents, it manages both water and greasy substances with ease, mixing them together like a bartender who never spills a drop.
Growing up watching home remedies and commercial pills do their thing, I noticed that the smoothness and consistency of medical creams or the way a cough syrup doesn’t separate owe a debt to compounds like NP-40. Many pills, syrups, ointments, and creams can’t achieve that texture on their own. NP-40 steps in to stop clumping and separates ingredients evenly throughout the product. Drug-makers use it as an emulsifier, meaning it helps mix substances that don’t usually get along—oil and water, for example, which rarely want to shake hands without help.
In some specialty tests, like certain immune lab assays, NP-40 helps lyse (or break open) cell membranes without busting everything wide open. Researchers can get what they want from inside cells in a gentle way. From vaccine production lines to diagnostic kits, NP-40 quietly keeps things moving, letting big pharma and indie labs alike get consistent results batch after batch. Folk might never read NP-40 on a pharmacy label, but it works behind the scenes to give patients the reliable dose they count on.
NP-40 gains trust from pharmaceutical teams because its performance is repeatable and costs stay in check. But here comes a twist—its chemical cousins have grabbed headlines due to pollution. Nonylphenol compounds can slip through wastewater treatments and mix with rivers and lakes. Some scientific studies show that these chemicals mess with aquatic life, acting as hormone disruptors even at tiny levels. As a result, European regulators already set strict limits, asking the industry to look at safer options.
Folks may feel uneasy about such facts. I get it—nobody wants to imagine their medicines leaving an unwanted legacy. The truth is, pharmaceutical companies now have to consider ways to keep their labs running without adding to environmental trouble. Some turn to “greener” surfactants or invest in cleanup equipment, and research teams search for formulas that break down cleanly after use. It takes extra time and investment, but responsible companies put those resources to work. Humans benefit from reliable pharmaceuticals, but we also share the waterways. These conversations rarely make evening news, but they shape sustainability decisions in any drug company with future vision.
Drug formulation often requires trade-offs between performance, price, and environmental responsibility. Chemists and product managers search for safer, plant-based alternatives to classic surfactants like NP-40, including those made from sugar or starch chemistry. Progress takes tough choices and honest communication. Regulatory agencies give pressure, yes, but public attention helps, too. People who ask questions about production steps, packaging, and ingredients nudge the industry toward safer, smarter mixtures. Every time a drug company develops a cleaner, kinder ingredient, both patients and the planet win a small, important victory.
Tough standards keep medicines safe on the shelf and in the bloodstream. You don’t just want any laboratory surfactant going into the tablet your grandmother takes for her heart. That’s the everyday worry behind pharmaceutical grades like BP, EP, and USP. Each one spells out the precise definition and testing necessary to avoid hidden risks—from toxins, impurities, and contamination—often invisible to the eye.
NP-40 looks simple on paper, but this non-ionic detergent must clear high bars for pharmaceutical use. The BP (British Pharmacopoeia), EP (European Pharmacopoeia), and USP (United States Pharmacopeia) offer public documentation for what counts as safe, pure, and consistent. In my years reporting for science and pharma, I’ve seen entire shipments scrapped over one out-of-range reading in a certificate of analysis. Excess aldehydes or contamination with ethylene oxide spell trouble immediately.
Regulatory agencies demand rigorous documentation: not just how a product is made, but also how it’s tested for contaminants, heavy metals, organic solvents, and residual reactants. NP-40 must step through these hoops with no skipped steps. One missed impurity, and the entire batch falls short for the next stage of manufacturing.
Every NP-40 lot submitted for pharma use faces precise identification and purity assays, heavy metal screenings, moisture analysis, and checks for microbial contamination. Pharmacopeia standards specify exact tolerances. If paperwork doesn’t match reality, regulators notice. Third-party audits and quality assurance teams scour each metric before factories even get a chance to order bulk shipments.
The clean manufacturing environment can’t fix shortcuts back at the chemical source. What reaches the capsule press or injection vial must already surpass baseline requirements, with batch numbers tracked from origin to shipping container. Think of it like traceability on steroids. Questions about solvent residues or unknown byproducts aren’t academic—these can trigger recalls and patient harm.
Every pharmacist and manufacturer wants consistency. Real-world stories prove that reliance on one regulatory grade doesn’t always work everywhere. I’ve seen pharmaceutical buyers in Europe and the US debate over batch documentation—BP compliance doesn’t always map perfectly onto EP or USP. Each regulatory body updates standards at its own rhythm. NP-40 graded for USP might not check every box if your plant exports to Germany or the UK.
Misaligned grades or missing certificates can bring production lines to a halt. The real winners are sources that maintain multi-grade certifications, with robust batch testing and transparency. Customers and regulators expect direct answers. “Is this compliant?” matters more than a promising price or quick shipment. If a factory can’t produce paperwork that squares with BP, EP, and USP for every step, the risk shoots up.
What works is routine, randomized batch testing, investing in up-to-date analytical tech, and working with suppliers deeply familiar with the difference between BP, EP, and USP. I recommend seeking out sources with open-door policies for audits and a culture of documentation. If issues do arise, fast recall systems and batch tracebacks stop harm before it happens. This builds trust on both sides of the supply chain.
Medicine always rides on quiet, uncelebrated compliance. NP-40’s pharma grade matters because it underpins the reliability of every dose, every batch, and every single patient outcome. Cutting corners on these standards isn’t just a regulatory gamble; it’s a risk to real-world health. That’s something I take personally—and so should everyone in pharma.
NP-40, a classic nonionic surfactant, shows up in many pharma labs. Suppliers and researchers often bring it up when talking about cell lysis and protein extraction, because it’s reliable. I’ve handled this stuff on and off over the years, and spot-on quality matters. A bottle labeled “Pharma Grade” means you're dealing with a detergent that’s been made to higher standards than your average industrial product. Nobody wants to cut corners when a medicine, a vaccine, or a new diagnostic depends on the purity of the chemicals moving through each stage.
The main thing everybody watches with NP-40 is purity—usually, you’ll see it offered at 98% or better. Sometimes the spec sheet hits 99%. Below that, residues and byproducts creep in, and those can mess with sensitive assays or contaminate a final drug product. Water content usually keeps tight—often less than 1%—because extra moisture throws off concentration and long-term stability.
Endotoxin level stands out, especially for drug makers. Reputable brands put their pharma grade NP-40 through grilling tests, showing less than 0.25 EU/mg. That way, you aren’t introducing nasty immune triggers into formulations meant for fragile or sick patients. I’ve seen researchers scramble after discovering “unexpected” inflammation in animal experiments, only to trace it back to a lazy surfactant supplier.
Another big check: heavy metals. Common specs demand under 5 parts per million (ppm) total, and arsenic less than 1 ppm. This might sound nit-picky for people used to chemical supply shops, but these “trace” amounts build up if you don’t pay attention—nobody wants reminders of toxic metal recalls from poorly sourced ingredients.
Appearance gives clues, too. Pharma grade NP-40 rolls out as a clear to slightly yellow, viscous liquid. If the bottle looks cloudy or smells sour, something went wrong. I’ve tossed out shipments for giving off the wrong odor; batch consistency tells you a lot about supplier discipline.
Any serious outfit will back up its material with a Certificate of Analysis. That’s not just marketing fluff. Pharmacopeial standards like those in the US Pharmacopeia and the European Pharmacopeia set reference points for each batch—if a chemical supplier can’t match or exceed those specifications, it’s a warning sign. Reputable suppliers also stick to cGMP (current Good Manufacturing Practice) processes and offer data on residual solvents, microbiological testing, and shelf-life studies.
Another factor worth paying for is traceability. Top-tier pharma grade surfactants always trace back through every step of manufacture—feedstock, process water, even the barrels they’re stored in. This guards against contamination and allows a quick recall if any issue shows up after shipping.
Pushing for higher purity sometimes drives up cost, so it’s tempting for labs or buyers to go for something labeled “biotech” or “analytical” grade. From my experience, that rarely pays off if you’re working toward clinical trials or regulatory approvals. Serious business partners—contract manufacturers, CROs, even final clients—ask for pharma-grade certificates every time.
Regulations grow stricter each year, which is good news for patients but tougher for small suppliers. Standardizing specs and giving clearer data on each batch helps avoid confusion, wasted batches, and late-stage surprises. Access to reliable, transparent quality control serves everyone along the chain. Hard-earned trust and lives can hang on details as small as the purity of NP-40 in a solution tube.
NP-40 turns up in a lot of life science labs as a non-ionic detergent, breaking up cells for research or assisting with protein purification. Unlike many harsh chemicals, it stands out for being a trusted go-to for decades. Even so, this detergent comes with risks—especially if you underestimate its physical effects or take shortcuts storing it.
You may not expect a clear liquid with a mild smell to cause trouble, but NP-40 can leave behind burned skin, eye redness, and respiratory discomfort. A splash in the wrong spot often means a trip to the eyewash station or even urgent care. As someone who has worked near open NP-40 bottles, having PPE nearby makes sense. Think substantial nitrile gloves, goggles—not cheap reading glasses—and if there’s any sloppy pipetting or splatter, lab coats stop skin contact.
The risk goes beyond quick stinging or redness. NP-40 can aggravate existing allergies and sometimes trigger coughing fits if a drop lands on a benchtop and dries up, releasing vapors. Working in a tight, windowless space heightens trouble. So a well-maintained fume hood isn’t just a formality; it stops headaches and more serious respiratory effects.
NP-40 clings to gloves and sticks to surfaces, so clean-up takes patience. If a small spill happens, someone untrained might rush for paper towels. That only smears the problem. Absorbent pads or sand keep spread in check. Only after soaking up can you use plenty of water and soap to neutralize the area, followed by a rinse. Waste gets disposed of as hazardous material—never just tossed into the regular trash. This is not the time to ignore the Material Safety Data Sheet.
Anyone leaving NP-40 containers loosely capped risks chemical odors seeping into the whole room or, worse, evaporation that turbo-charges its concentration. I’ve seen labels fall off bottles from careless handling; the wrong person mixes up solutions, which means lost time and ruined samples. Keeping the bottle tightly sealed is the baseline. Proper labeling (including date of opening), and storing it in a cool, dry cabinet away from heat sources and acids keeps everyone safer.
Temperature swings break down detergents like NP-40. If you let it freeze or bake under a benchtop lamp, don’t expect consistent results or a healthy work environment. Flammable cabinets or chemical storage shelves shield NP-40 from heat, stray sunlight, and prying hands. This stuff isn’t as volatile as gasoline, but it deserves the same respect.
Labs get busy, but there’s never an excuse to slack off with safety training. Supervisors and techs share responsibility—nobody benefits from “shortcut culture.” Eyewash stations and chemical showers must be checked each week. Encourage quick reporting when someone is exposed, and keep the SDS within arm’s reach. Make PPE easily available, not hidden in some forgotten cupboard.
For groups using NP-40 frequently, consider alternatives with lower toxicity if experiments allow. Some labs now trial plant-based detergents or non-ionic surfactants that offer similar results but give staff and the environment a break.
No lab chemical should ever get overlooked for safety, especially one as common as NP-40. A solid safety routine, careful labeling, dedicated spill kits, and regular training sessions protect workers, equipment, and results. After years around these substances, confidence always boils down to steady habits—not just the rules posted on a wall.
NP-40 comes up often in labs, especially for those who have spent time preparing buffers or working with cell lysis. It’s a nonionic surfactant, usually shipped as a clear liquid, and often pops up in protocols for breaking apart biological membranes. I remember my first stint in a molecular biology lab: we would open a bottle of NP-40 and mix it into lysis buffers, knowing it would do a reliable job on cell membranes. The stuff works well in a laboratory, but its reputation stops there — for good reason.
Anyone who cooks knows some substances work in the kitchen but not in chemistry and vice versa. Food emulsifiers like lecithin have a spot in a baker’s pantry. NP-40 sits in another camp, designed for research or industrial uses. The chemical structure of NP-40 (nonyl phenoxypolyethoxylethanol) makes it good at breaking apart fats and proteins in cell membranes. You might find it in cleaning agents or laboratory settings, but there’s a big wall between those uses and food.
Food safety standards set strict criteria for ingredients in food. Agencies like the FDA and EFSA keep a close watch on what goes in our meals. NP-40 never made their lists of approved food additives. There are solid reasons for that. Toxicology studies suggest that NP-40 and similar nonylphenol ethoxylates may bring health risks. Persistent exposure can mess with hormone systems in animals and could have similar effects in humans. Nobody wants their breakfast cereal to leave them with more than energy for the day.
People want to trust food labels. I know I do. Trust depends on strict oversight — chemicals like NP-40 haven’t gone through food-grade safety testing, and animal studies raise red flags. Reports highlight that NP-40 can stay in the environment. Water systems often can’t remove it fully, so residues can end up downstream, creeping into food crops or fish. Even cleaning products with NP-40 face restrictions in some countries because of environmental concerns.
Scientists and regulators don’t just look at whether something works in a recipe. They look at how it behaves in the body, where it goes, how it breaks down (if at all), and what happens if someone eats a little bit every day over decades. Lack of approval doesn’t mean there’s a short-term crisis — it means nobody has proven that NP-40 is safe. In my experience, that’s enough reason to steer clear.
If a product needs an emulsifier or surfactant, plenty of safer and approved alternatives fill that role. Lecithin, for example, keeps chocolate creamy and bread dough soft. Mono- and diglycerides keep baked goods consistent. These ingredients hold places on the Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) lists. People have been eating them for decades without the side effects that shadow untested chemicals.
Formulators owe it to the public to keep foods free from lab-grade surfactants. Regulations exist for a reason — to guard against long-term effects nobody wants to discover by accident. Talking with food scientists or consulting the databases of regulatory agencies brings peace of mind without risking the unknown. The line between food-safe and not isn’t blurry. In the case of NP-40, it’s drawn in bold.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | 2-(2-(2-(2-(2-(2-(2-(2-(2-nonylphenoxy)ethoxy)ethoxy)ethoxy)ethoxy)ethoxy)ethoxy)ethoxy)ethanol |
| Other names |
Polyethylene Glycol Nonylphenyl Ether Nonylphenol Ethoxylate PEG-40 Nonylphenol Ether Nonylphenol Polyethoxylate Nonoxynol-40 |
| Pronunciation | /nɒˈnɪlfiˈnɒl pɒliˌɒksiˈɛθiːn ˈiːθər ˈfɔːti/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 68412-54-4 |
| Beilstein Reference | 2526578 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:53727 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL3989861 |
| ChemSpider | 26083 |
| DrugBank | DB11362 |
| ECHA InfoCard | ECHA InfoCard: 35-211-111-379-46 |
| EC Number | 9036-19-5 |
| Gmelin Reference | Gmelin Reference 198133 |
| KEGG | C18681 |
| MeSH | D009639 |
| PubChem CID | 24894159 |
| RTECS number | RN 9016-45-9 |
| UNII | 97J994927L |
| UN number | UN3082 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | C00529020 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C33H72O11 |
| Molar mass | 1762.5 g/mol |
| Appearance | Clear to light yellow viscous liquid |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 1.066 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Soluble in water |
| log P | 3.8 |
| Vapor pressure | <0.01 mm Hg (20°C) |
| Acidity (pKa) | ~10.2 |
| Basicity (pKb) | ~1.0 |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.450 - 1.460 |
| Viscosity | 80-120 mPa.s (25°C) |
| Dipole moment | 1.45 D |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | D08AE13 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | Harmful if swallowed, causes serious eye irritation, causes skin irritation, toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects |
| GHS labelling | GHS02, GHS07, GHS08, GHS09 |
| Pictograms | ⚗️🟡🧪🌊🚫👨🔬📦 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | H302, H315, H318, H411 |
| Precautionary statements | P260, P262, P273, P280, P305+P351+P338, P310, P501 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 2-1-0 |
| Flash point | >180°C (Closed cup) |
| Autoignition temperature | Autoignition temperature: 300°C |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 Oral Rat 4,120 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (median dose): Oral rat LD50 = 1,310 mg/kg |
| PEL (Permissible) | PEL (Permissible Exposure Limit) for Nonylphenol Polyoxyethylene Ether 40 (NP-40): Not specifically established by OSHA. |
| REL (Recommended) | REL (Recommended): 0.5 mg/m³ |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Nonylphenol Nonylphenol ethoxylates Nonylphenol Polyoxyethylene Ether 10 (NP-10) Polyethylene glycol (PEG) Triton X-100 Octylphenol ethoxylate Nonoxynol-9 Polysorbate 20 (Tween 20) Polysorbate 80 (Tween 80) |
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
