Product Finder

Month: June 2026

June 23, 2026

Low-No Salt Shampoos – Part Three

Blog
Personal Care

Salt‑Free Technologies, Low‑Salt Surfactants, and No‑Added‑Salt Strategies

Welcome to part 3 of our analysis of formulating cleansers to meet claims regarding “salt-free” or “no salt added”, especially for hair care. In part one we looked at the reason for these claims. In part two we examined some commercial products and how they’re navigating the claim. We learned that while the primary approach was toward surfactants that contained minimal or no sodium chloride by‑product, it’s worth noting that many of the surfactants were themselves salts, and may carry other salts as processing aids (chelants, preservatives) without disqualifying a well structured claim.

Since amphoteric and zwitterionic surfactants are the largest contributors of salt byproducts, they’re often the first product formulators are switching out. Some amphoteric/zwitterionic options that are free of salt byproducts exist:

  • Aminopropionates (e.g., sodium lauraminopropionate) and iminodipropionates (sodium lauriminodipropionate, Cola®Teric HLA) are true ampholytes with pH‑dependent charge, structurally related to β‑alanine derivatives.
  • Amphopropionates (sodium cocoamphopropionate, Cola®Teric CA-35, disodium cocoamphodipropionate, Cola®Teric 2CM-40CG) are already workhorses in mild shampoos; they bring low irritation, good foam, and no NaCl byproduct.
  • Amine oxides (lauramine oxide, Cola®Lux LO, cocamidopropylamine oxide, Cola®Lux CAO-35) contribute foam and thickening, and can behave as cationic at low pH, although they are often classified and used as nonionics in practice.

On the anionic side, straight sulfated alcohols (SLS/SLES, ammonium laureth sulfate) are typically avoided in salt‑free, keratin‑care contexts due to the negative perception of sulfate surfactants in general. Alternatives include:

  • Sulfonated olefins (sodium C14‑16 olefin sulfonate, Colonial AOS-40 UP): low‑cost, high‑foam sulfate replacements.
  • Isethionates (sodium cocoyl isethionate): very popular sulfate replacements with good foam and improved mildness; widely used in syndet bars and liquid systems.
  • Sulfosuccinates (disodium laureth sulfosuccinate, Cola®Mate DSLS-BA, disodium oleamido MIPA sulfosuccinate, Cola®Mate OPV): mild, but weaker viscosity builders, often requiring co‑surfactants or nonionic thickeners.
  • Phosphate esters (e.g., potassium lauryl/laureth phosphate): potentially attractive, but salt content is highly route‑dependent and must be confirmed with the supplier.

Nonionics are the primary viscosity and solubilization tools in no‑added‑salt systems:

  • Alcohol ethoxylates (laureth‑3, laureth‑4) act as dispersants and co‑thickeners
  • PEG‑150 distearate and PEG‑7 glyceryl cocoate provide emollience and rheology control
  • Polyglyceryl esters and polysorbates solubilize oils and fragrances
  • Alkanolamides like cocamide MIPA (Cocamide MIPA) or dimethyl lauramide boost viscosity and foam.

Properly balanced, these packages can deliver shampoo‑like viscosities without a NaCl addition, with good freeze–thaw behavior.

Some surfactant options can be considered “low salt”, not technically salt-free, but with minimal amount of sodium chloride:

  • Low‑salt surfactants such as ether carboxylates (trideceth‑7 carboxylic acid, laureth‑6 carboxylic acid) are supplied substantially anhydrous and neutralized in situ, with typical free NaCl specs below 1%.
  • Reduced‑salt CAPB is technically achievable via processes like reverse osmosis or solvent fractionation, but tends to be costly or involve flammable solvents, and there are few commercial examples. As a result, formulators usually lean on inherently low‑salt amphoterics and nonionics rather than demanding ultra‑low‑salt variants of standard betaines.

As we’ve explored in part two, most formulators trying to meet the “salt-free” claim simply take a no‑added‑NaCl route. There are several ways to build a formulation similar to existing salt-thickened systems. Strategies include:

  • Pushing total surfactant actives higher so that base viscosity is adequate without salt.
  • Increasing amphoteric content, exploiting their inherent thickening and synergistic effects with anionics.
  • Increasing nonionic content (PEG esters, alkanolamides, alcohol ethoxylates) to shift the salt curve upward and create structure at zero added NaCl.
  • Using pre-blended “no salt needed” concentrates like Cola®Det EQ‑18 (Decyl Glucoside, CAPHS, CAPB, Cocamide MIPA, disodium laureth/ lauryl sulfosuccinate), Cola®Det EQ‑19/EQ‑20 (olefin sulfonate or laurylglucosides hydroxypropylsulfonate with cocoamphoacetate and CAPHS), and Suga®Det Mild (laurylglucosides hydroxypropylsulfonate, sodium methyl cocoyl taurate, CAPHS, crosslinked glucoside polymer, sodium stearoyl lactylate).

To formulators tasked with creating a “salt-free” or “no added salt” shampoo to meet the associated market demands: Fear not: a wide variety of salt‑free and reduced‑salt options exist. It is technically possible to formulate truly salt‑free systems, but they sit further from “workhorse” architectures and are rarely necessary outside niche constraints. Thoughtful ground rules including pre-determining what counts as “salt,” which ions are excluded, and how strict the brand wants to be, are essential to effective product selection and credible claims.

June 11, 2026

Breaking Interfacial Tension – Part One

Blog
Vehicle Care

Replacing Mineral Seal Oil in Car Wash Drying Aids

Part One: The Traditional Petroleum Standard

In the specialized world of carwash chemistry, people may think that innovations in hydrophobic technologies have peaked, but the standard drying technology is due for an upgrade. Oil microemulsions have served as the unchallenged drying aid standard for carwash operators over the last half-century. The chief example is a microemulsion of mineral seal oil (MSO) and quaternary ammonium emulsifiers like dicocodimonium chloride. While historically effective at shedding water, MSO formulations carry a long list of familiar complications that drain the entire supply chain. To understand why a shift in surface chemistry is long overdue, we must look at the problem from two distinct angles: the hidden production and raw material penalties hitting chemical manufacturers, and the real-world performance headaches plaguing carwash operators in the tunnel.

Issues for the Manufacturer (Blenders)

Continuing to manufacture MSO drying aids requires a labor-intensive manufacturing process along with a list of other complications. A stable microemulsion must be formulated and if raw material consistency fluctuates rework increases batch times and cost. Relying on MSO ties raw material costs directly to highly unpredictable global oil markets as well, hurting long-term pricing stability for clients. Furthermore, many MSO-formulations carry low flashpoints, introducing heavy regulatory friction regarding flammable liquid classifications, plant safety compliance, shipping logistics, and insurance costs. These formulas also have numerous hidden formulation cost penalties for blenders. MSO formulas come with limited performance claims and expensive additives are required to achieve any further product benefits. Additionally, these formulas break water aggressively into tiny micro-droplets that are difficult to remove even with the assistance of blowers. These remaining droplets leave the car wet, can cause water spotting, and lead to customer complaints; remedies for this issue come with additional costs to the formulation. To make matters worse, these legacy formulas possess limited dilution stability, which heavily restricts operational flexibility and application options for carwash operators. 

Issues for the Operator

Downstream field performance failures lead directly to operator headaches and customer complaints. Oily MSO residue builds up on bay floors, while also coating vehicle glass causing dangerous nighttime glare and windshield wiper smearing. These traditional formulas also suffer from physical instability and severe viscosity spikes in cold weather, causing chemical line gelling that triggers unscheduled tunnel shutdowns. Mineral seal oil raises wastewater costs and hinders modern water reclamation loops resulting in increased utility costs that continue to rise in areas prone to drought. MSO formulas operate within a narrow performance window where over-dosing leads to immediate water-break failure, heavy oil films, and unhappy carwash customers. Finally, the short-lived protection of these formulas leaves vehicles vulnerable to stubborn soil deposits, UV damage, and a water-break that immediately fades after leaving the carwash. Because soils adhere more thoroughly to unprotected surfaces, basic package customers often return with difficult-to-clean cars, making customer complaints more likely.

The era of mineral seal oil could be positioned for change, and there are solutions through Colonial Chemical for MSO-free, advanced ceramic-based innovations to grab a competitive edge. Part II details how Colonial Chemical’s modern surface chemistries will eliminate manufacturing and operator headaches, improve performance, and lower costs for blenders and carwash operators alike.

Recap

Mineral seal oil drying aid technology comes with a host of issues that should be familiar to manufacturers and carwash operators alike:

Manufacturing Challenges

  • Labor intensive production related to microemulsion preparation
  • Formulation required
  • Limited performance claims
  • Requires additives and other formulation costs
  • Oil price volatility
  • Flammability and associated operations costs

Operation Challenges

  • Dilution-Performance failures
  • Micro-droplets and water spotting 
  • Oil residues 
  • Instability and gelling 
  • Wastewater costs and reclamation incompatibility 
  • Low durability leads to difficult soil removal for return customers 

Part II will detail Colonial Chemical’s innovative technologies to resolve these troubles.

June 2, 2026

Introduction to Ether Carboxylates – Part One

Blog
Industrial Lubricant Additives
Oil & Gas

Versatility, High Performance, Multifunctionality, and Environmental Friendliness

Colonial Chemical is a leading global manufacturer of ether carboxylates, offering a comprehensive product portfolio designed to meet ever-increasing industry performance needs. This 9-part series is intended to provide a better understanding of ether carboxylate chemistry, mechanisms of action, applications, and product selection.

Introduction

Ether carboxylates are a unique class of surfactants characterized by a three-part structure: a lipophilic alkyl chain (R¹), a hydrophilic alkoxylate chain, and a terminal carboxylic acid group, as shown in the scheme below. The hydrophilic alkoxylate portion may be composed entirely of ethylene oxide (EO), as in ethoxylates, or of both ethylene oxide and propylene oxide (EO-PO copolymers), where R² may be H or Me.

The General Structure for Ether Carboxylates

The structure and performance of ether carboxylates can be highly customized by varying the length and branching of the hydrophobic alkyl chain, as well as the degree of ethoxylation or alkoxylation, to achieve the desired performance profile. Not all ether carboxylates are created equal. In many cases, co-application of ether carboxylates with complementary performance attributes is required, leading to the development of a wide range of ether carboxylate blends tailored for optimal performance.

The ionic state of ether carboxylates is pH-dependent because they contain a weakly acidic terminal carboxylic acid group. As a result, ether carboxylates are often regarded as nonionic-anionic surfactants, or “crypto-anionic” surfactants, because they behave more like nonionic surfactants under acidic, low-pH conditions and more like anionic surfactants under alkaline conditions. Their degree of ionization depends on the pH of the application medium. Although ether carboxylates are used in both acidic and alkaline environments, they are most commonly applied under alkaline conditions.

Ether carboxylates are typically marketed in free acid, alkali metal salt, or alkanolamine salt form, with the free acid form dominating the market.

Ether carboxylates are known by several names, including ether carboxylates (ECs), ether carboxylic acids, polyoxyethylene alkyl ether carboxylic acids (AECs), and alkoxylate acetic acids. Regardless of the terminology, the underlying chemistry and mechanism of action remain the same.

As surfactants, ether carboxylates can deliver ultra-low interfacial tension (IFT) under high-temperature and high-salinity conditions. Ether carboxylates are generally low to medium foaming depending on the actual usage. And most of them are generally viewed biodegradable. Ether carboxylates generally offer emulsification, emulsion stabilization, lime soap dispersing, surface wetting, lubrication, and corrosion protection. Ether carboxylates are well known for their outstanding hardwater tolerance and lime-soap dispersing capabilities under harsh application environments.
Ether carboxylates had their prime time in personal care related applications. Although they are still being used in the personal care products, because of the regulatory campaign against 1,4-doxane in recent years, they are no longer as popular as before as emulsifiers and foaming agents in the personal care space. For industrial applications, they are extensively and increasingly used in industrial lubricants, i.e. metalworking fluids, hydraulic fluids, treatment fluids, etc., oilfield operations, i.e., water-based drilling muds, enhanced crude oil recovery, etc., industrial cleaning, construction (concrete admixtures as superplasticizers), textile industry, and other industrial applications,

The global market for ether carboxylate has been witnessing a significant increase on account of growth of its expanding industrial applications as bio-based, eco-friendly technology alternates.

In Part 2 we will explore more in depth the chemistry for Ether Carboxylates.