Curiosity and a push for gentler cleaning materials drove the first surfactant chemists to tinker with combining sugars and fatty alcohols. Traditional surfactants, often derived from petrochemicals, made waves for their cleaning power but left consumers and environmental advocates uneasy about toxicity and lingering residues. In the late 20th century, the search for greener alternatives brought alkyl polyglycosides to the surface. By the 1980s, laboratories in Europe and Asia saw momentum shift. Researchers realized that glycosides, which come from plants like corn and coconut, bond well with ethoxylated alcohols. Through persistent tweaking, they delivered something that could outperform soap, yet break down harmlessly in nature. Over a few decades, belief in AEG’s potential grew among both industry experts and environmentally conscious shoppers. Today, AEG production lines are dotted across Europe, Asia, and North America, all with roots seeded by those early experiments.
Alkyl Ethoxy Polyglycosides stand out as surface-active agents fashioned by joining fatty alcohols—think coconut or palm—together with glucose and a pinch of ethylene oxide. This hybrid molecule grabs both water and oil, lifting grime off everything from dirty floors to greasy dishes. Companies favor AEG for liquid detergents, shampoos, even textile processes. Unlike the harsher detergents, these glycosides rarely irritate hands or leave heavy residues on surfaces. End-users see clear liquids or pale syrups, easy to pump or mix. Manufacturing teams don’t chase after many forms—usually, a few key grades meet most cleaning and foaming needs. AEG travels under many commercial banners, but rooted in every product is a blend forged to strike a balance between mildness and cleansing strength.
Surfactants usually come with compromise—strong cleaning often means strong odor, or hard water deposits. AEG breaks that mold. It typically appears as a golden, slightly viscous liquid, effortless to pour in industrial vats. On the chemical side, AEG holds a strong grip on both water and oily residues, all while dissolving rapidly and rinsing away without sticking to surfaces. The pH can be either neutral or gently alkali. Chemists seem to agree on two things: stability in most cleaning and personal care formulas and a low tendency to react with additives or fragrance oils. AEG holds up in acidic or alkaline washes, keeps foaming capacity even in hard tap water, and plays nicely with enzymes and other active components. This flexibility stems from its dual nature—plant-based sugar and ethoxylated chain—giving it a versatility rare in green surfactants.
On technical sheets, producers will spell out the average degree of polymerization (often between 1.2 and 2 for typical products), fatty alcohol chain length (usually C8–C16), and ethoxylation level. Cloud point, active matter percentage, and viscosity get mentioned for industrial buyers, as these numbers drive blending into household and industrial cleaners. Regulatory tags matter: European labels require REACH registration, American ones demand TSCA compliance, and food-related applications chase GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) certification. When blended in detergents, AEG-based products often appear on ingredient declarations as “alkyl polyglucoside,” “decyl glucoside,” or under trade names. For those who check safety data sheets, flash point and biodegradability launch to the top of the list, not just for plant managers, but for warehouse staff and transporters.
Makers rely on batch or continuous reactors. The most common method starts with mixing a fatty alcohol—taken from coconut or palm kernel oil—with glucose, typically isolated from corn syrup. After dehydration, the two combine with acid catalysts, pushing them to react and form a glycosidic bond. The next step brings in ethylene oxide gas, usually metered in tightly controlled amounts. Temperature and vacuum keep reactions on track, and over several hours, the sticky intermediate material turns into the final product. Built-up pressure and energy demand a strong handle on process safety, so plant operators follow strict protocols. Finished AEG then cools down, and passes through filters to clear out any leftover catalyst or unreacted material. Producers test each batch for activity, color, and foaming before shipment. For those inside the chemical industry, these preparation steps tell a story of balancing safety, purity, and cost, with no room for cutting corners.
AEG’s structure opens a door to several tweaks. Some producers shorten or lengthen the alkyl chain for better performance in specific soaps or cleaners. Others dial the amount of ethylene oxide up or down, chasing a target cloud point or foam profile. Adding extra sugar units deepens mildness, but may slow rinsing. Strong bases can saponify leftover alcohol; acids can split off glucose if not handled carefully. In newer labs, researchers experiment with cross-linking or branching, trying to boost cleaning or improve biodegradation. Chemical engineers sometimes graft functional side groups to target oily soils or hard water spots. In discussions behind the scenes, these modifications spark debate—ramp up cleaning power, risk losing the environmental edge; boost mildness, sometimes sacrifice grease-cutting. No matter the approach, chemical flexibility becomes AEG’s most game-changing skill.
Across the glove box and shop floor, nobody wants confusion in naming. AEG surfaces in ingredient lists under “alkyl polyglucoside,” “APG,” “decyl glucoside,” “lauryl glucoside,” or “fatty alcohol glucoside.” Leading brands push catchy commercial names like Glucopon, Plantacare, or Oramix, but each label hides the heart of the chemistry. False synonyms do pop up—“sugar surfactant” leaves room for mix-ups with unrelated glycosides. Chemists look for fatty chain length, number of ethylene oxide units, and degree of polymerization on data sheets, not just branding. Naming clarity matters even more as global regulations tighten, demanding consistent declaration across markets in North America, Europe, and Asia. For manufacturers, the right label means fewer rejected shipments and smoother compliance checks.
Accident-free manufacturing comes from respecting both the product and process. Factory workers keep gloves, goggles, and ventilators close at hand while preparing AEG. Handling raw fatty alcohols and ethylene oxide brings risks—exposure can irritate, and ethylene oxide poses explosion hazards in a busy plant. Over the years, occupational safety standards have landed strong. Most plants in Europe and North America run under ISO 14001 for environmental systems and ISO 45001 for worker protection. Bulk drums and shipping containers meet strict UN transport codes. Fire marshals test flash points, while environmental officers track effluent—making sure AEG residues won’t toxify rivers or groundwater. Worker training takes center stage, with ongoing drills for spill response and emergency shutdowns. In my own experience, plant operations only ran smoothly when every operator, loader, and supervisor understood the chemical risks, not just the paperwork behind them.
Shoppers touch AEG daily—liquid hand soaps, dishwashing gels, laundry liquids, baby shampoos, and surface wipes regularly feature these glycosides for their gentle skin feel. Textile factories use AEG to scour fibers, letting dyes grab hold evenly. Food industry cleaners lean on these surfactants for safe, residue-free sanitizing. Gardeners look for “plant-based” or “green” leaf washes free from residues that could harm wildlife. Car washes, metal degreasers, and drilling fluids all tap into AEG for its stable, foamy wash that rinses cleanly. Across these uses, one common thread stands out: demand for reduced irritation, less chemical odor, and an environmental profile that satisfies both auditors and concerned parents.
R&D teams take AEG further than cleaning. Cosmetic formulators use modified forms for facial cleansers and even makeup removers, banking on the surfactant’s ability to grab sweat, dirt, and oil without leaving faces dry or red. In Asia and Europe, agriculture researchers add AEG as a wetting agent for pesticides, so droplets hit their mark and stay put on leaves. Some labs chase modified AEGs for drug delivery, where gentleness and fast dispersal rate can matter more than pure cleaning strength. Biotech outfits are reworking AEG for use in enzyme stabilization—helping probiotics, industrial enzymes, or sensitive proteins handle shipping and long storage. Future innovation, I believe, depends on deeper cooperation between raw material suppliers, academic labs, and product chemists, with transparency in sourcing and process data providing the spark for honest, steady breakthroughs.
AEG’s backbone—plant-based sugars and fatty alcohols—makes it less risky for both people and wildlife than many classic surfactants. Studies from North America and Germany repeatedly show low skin, eye, and lung irritation, even for concentrated blends. Human patch tests back up these claims, and hospital labs use AEG-based washes for both patient and staff hygiene, with low reports of rashes or allergic responses. Aquatic toxicity draws more scrutiny. Most AEG products degrade rapidly in wastewater, breaking down into alcohols and sugars. Chronic exposure studies on fish and invertebrates show lower toxicity profiles than non-ionic or anionic surfactants based on petrochemicals. Regulatory groups—ECHA, EPA, and REACH authorities—list most AEG variants as low-hazard. For anyone hesitant about chemicals near skin or food, these safety margins tip the balance.
The march toward green chemistry opens new doors. Consumer appetite for plant-based, non-toxic cleaners continues to rise, and retailers push for ingredient transparency that favors names like alkyl polyglycoside. I see plenty of space for making AEG even greener—shifting away from palm oil, improving energy efficiency, and using fully renewable power during processing. R&D teams can tune AEG structures for performance in low-water or cold-water washes, delivering energy savings for everyone. If governments keep tightening limits on residual toxins in water and products, more players will make the switch from traditional surfactants. For the next decade, collaboration between university labs, chemical plants, and regulatory agencies stands as the most effective way to grow the AEG field, protect health, and cut environmental risk. A surge in demand spells opportunity for honest suppliers and strict watchdogging of raw materials, waste streams, and worker conditions. AEG’s future, much like its chemical make-up, sits at the intersection of nature and hard science—engineered with care, and used in ways that benefit both people and planet.
Alkyl Ethoxy Polyglycosides, often abbreviated as AEG, hold a prominent place in cleaning and personal care products. Their mildness makes them popular in shampoos, facial cleansers, and liquid soaps, offering gentle yet effective cleaning. Unlike harsher surfactants, AEGs keep hands and skin from feeling stripped or dry. I spent years working in a factory that made personal care items, and each batch with AEG always brought fewer complaints about irritation. Kids and folks with allergies find these products easier to tolerate. Companies choose AEGs for “green” lines because these ingredients come from renewable resources like sugar and natural fats. Most consumers look for biodegradable claims and low skin reactivity on labels today, and AEG fits both.
Dish soaps and surface sprays need ingredients that lift grime but don’t linger with toxic aftertastes. AEGs clean efficiently and rinse off easily, which speeds up household chores. During a long stretch managing a janitorial crew, we always picked products with AEG because they left fewer streaks and seemed less harsh on hands after scrubbing all day. Stubborn grease in kitchens and gentle tasks like wiping a high chair both turn out well with the right blend. Large-scale cleaning suppliers often purchase AEG-based products since wastewater treatment facilities handle their runoff more easily. Current scientific reviews back up these practical experiences—one environmental chemistry journal pointed out how AEG breaks down faster than many mainstream alternatives.
Big farms and factories search for surfactants that mix well with fertilizers, herbicides, or lubricants. AEGs distribute other chemicals evenly across leaves or surfaces, which improves results in applications like pesticide sprays. I remember talking to a crop consultant who swore his orchard treatments went further with AEG-based surfactants mixed in; his apples showed less residue, and the tanks stayed free-flowing. Machinery wash stations also see benefits—grease and oil peel away faster from parts, so operators finish cleanup with less elbow grease. Regulatory bodies frequently recommend AEGs in food processing plants because they leave minimal residue. That’s the kind of detail food safety inspectors notice right away.
Paper mills and textile manufacturers need surfactants that are tough enough for thorough cleaning but gentle enough for delicate materials. AEG makes its way into the pre-treatment of fibers and yarns, helping remove dirt and natural waxes before dyeing. My father worked at a denim plant and always talked about smoother dye results after switching to AEG-based wash formulas. Bleaching processes for paper pulp also rely on these surfactants to spread chemicals evenly, pushing for brighter sheets with less environmental fallout. European authorities regularly publish guidance on reducing pollutants in pulp effluent, and more mills switch over to AEG to hit these benchmarks.
AEGs set a strong example for safer surfactants in many industries. Still, there’s plenty of room to improve cost and accessibility in lower-income regions. Efforts now focus on scaling up production from non-food raw materials, which should ease price pressure. More partnerships between makers and research organizations help address hurdles like long-distance transport and storage. As governments tighten rules around chemical safety and wastewater, AEG’s adoption continues at a steady pace. Open communication between suppliers and users remains the best way to solve gaps in technical training or unexpected side effects in finished products.
Alkyl Ethoxy Polyglycosides (AEG) grab attention in the ingredient lists of cleaners and personal care products. You hear a lot about “green surfactants” today, and manufacturers often point to AEG as the poster child for safer, more sustainable chemistry. As someone who tries to shop with an eye for environmental impact, these labels sometimes seem more confusing than reassuring. The big question: Are claims about AEG’s environmental friendliness and biodegradability backed by real evidence?
AEGs are made by reacting plant-based sugars with fatty alcohols, typically sourced from coconut or palm. This puts them in a different league than traditional petroleum-based surfactants. It’s easy to see why people want them if they’re made from renewable stuff. Renewability matters, since it breaks the cycle of fossil fuel dependency and lowers carbon footprints.
I’ve checked into OECD guidelines and several peer-reviewed studies. Most of them point out that AEGs can break down naturally thanks to their sugar backbone, which microbes in soil and water recognize and feed on. The European Chemicals Agency published data showing over 90% biodegradation within 28 days for several AEG types. That stat sounds promising, but biodegradation depends on more than lab conditions—it’s about what happens in actual rivers, soil, and wastewater plants.
From a boots-on-the-ground perspective, biodegradable doesn’t always mean environmentally harmless. Intermediate breakdown compounds sometimes hang around, or harm wildlife before breaking down further. Still, most field evidence suggests AEGs don’t build up in fish, plants, or water the way some older ingredients do. This is a strong positive, backed by real-world data rather than just a product claim.
Toxicity matters too. According to Environment Canada and multiple EU assessments, AEGs show low toxicity to aquatic life. The sugar-based head group seems to help here, letting bacteria and fungi chow down like it’s an all-you-can-eat buffet. I’ve followed clean-up crews and wastewater operators—most prefer handling products with AEGs over alternatives like SLES or SLS, because the effluent meets regulations more easily.
Not everything about AEGs ends up easy to applaud. Palm oil remains a common raw material, and its agriculture comes with habitat destruction and emissions, unless sourced sustainably. Renewable doesn’t guarantee responsible. Labeling alone never tells the story; supply chain audits and third-party certifications add another layer of trust.
I’ve found some European cleaning brands choosing to disclose their raw material sourcing, even naming their coconut or palm suppliers. Transparency like this shows an extra level of commitment. For people like me, it’s not enough for a product to just work—it also needs to fit within my values.
I weigh my purchase decisions against more than just the “green” slogan. AEGs leave a smaller environmental footprint according to available science, but supply chain transparency and sourcing still need attention. Companies could publish life-cycle impact assessments and certification details, rather than relying on vague green promises.
Switching to an ingredient like AEG doesn’t mean the end of environmental concerns, but it does mark a step forward compared to older chemical surfactants. Every ingredient has a story, and digging into those details helps all of us make more informed choices.
In most hands-on industry settings, AEG (Alcohol Ethoxylate Glycol) stands out as a solid surfactant. A few years back, I worked in a small-scale detergent formulation project for a local co-op. Teams compared several surfactants, from SLES to NP-9, but AEG kept coming up as the most straightforward solution thanks to how consistently it cut through grease and soil—without needing fancy modifiers or extra stabilizers.
The reason behind this strength traces straight to its structure. With AEG, you see fewer complaints about clouding or separation, even in hard water. Older surfactants, especially ones with nonylphenols, bring headaches due to environmental issues and residue after rinsing. Every janitor and laundry operator who’s scrubbed floors or washed work gear can confirm this with personal stories. They just reach for the product that delivers, and that’s often the AEG-based blend.
Environmental impact matters now more than ever. Regulators, especially in Europe and parts of Asia, keep their eyes glued to what goes down the drain. AEG breaks down faster and more thoroughly than many legacy non-ionic surfactants. That means fewer harsh leftovers in rivers and lakes. Folks who fish or drink from local water tables value any ingredient that clears out quickly and doesn’t form sticky residues on rocks and plants.
Safety in production and use shows up as another clear advantage. Manufacturing plants that shifted from older surfactants to AEG have shown fewer respiratory complaints from workers. I remember visiting a midwest plant turning out commercial sanitizers—a supervisor pointed right to the drum of AEG and credited it for reducing employee sick days.
Mixing up cleaners or cosmetics at scale brings storage, transport, and blending challenges. Some surfactants foam out of control or thicken too much at lower temperatures. AEG tends to play nicer here, flowing well without gumming up pipes or sprayers. In my home garden shed, I mixed a basic degreaser once using an SLES-based surfactant and it separated after a week. Swapping in AEG gave a stable, workable product that kept its punch, even through winter chills.
Manufacturers also appreciate AEG for being less reactive with additives like fragrances or colorants. I watched a soapmaker test batches trying to color their product deep blue or lavender. Surfactants with harsh chemical backgrounds would dull the color or even curdle the mix. With AEG, the batch held that appealing look, and finished bars felt gentler on the hand. Repeat results like this build reputation fast in small-batch shops and big factories alike.
For anyone running a tight ship, balancing performance and cost always matters. AEG isn’t always the cheapest up front—the dollar-per-kilo can run higher depending on global raw material cycles. But take waste, rework, or bad batches into account, and AEG’s reliability levels the playing field. End-users save on aftercare, re-cleaning, and complaints, which shows up fast on the bottom line.
From direct experience and talking with everyone from home cleaners to industry experts, AEG delivers clear benefits where it counts. People want speed, safety, and results, and that’s where this surfactant keeps proving itself as a dependable choice.
Alkyl Ethoxy Polyglycosides, or AEG, crop up on ingredient lists for things like shampoos, facial cleansers, and bubble bath. These ingredients work as surfactants, so they help lift grime and oil and let water wash it all away. They have a reputation for coming from plant-based sources, which appeals to folks who want products that seem safe for their skin and better for the planet.
Over the years experimenting with countless shampoos and face washes, I noticed that formulas using AEG tend to produce a gentle lather. That sets them apart from harsher cleansers loaded with sulfates, which can strip the skin dry. In practice, my scalp complained less when a product used AEG instead of sodium lauryl sulfate, which always left me itchy and flaky.
Researchers and regulatory agencies have kicked the tires on AEG for decades. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) panel, which reviews common personal care additives, gives AEG surfactants a green light for rinse-off and even some leave-on products. The European Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety followed a similar track. They checked for skin irritation, allergy risks, and what happens if you swallow a bit by accident.
Most lab results point to AEG being much milder than old-school surfactants, especially at the levels used in consumer goods. People with sensitive skin report fewer rashes and allergic reactions. AEG breaks down more easily in the environment than many synthetic surfactants, so there's less worry about it building up in water systems and harming wildlife.
Even ingredients with a good track record deserve a fresh look now and then, especially with new forms of AEG showing up in everything from "clean beauty" to baby wash. There's not much research on how using lots of different plant-derived surfactants together affects really sensitive skin, people with eczema, or chronic conditions.
AEG production relies on plant materials, but that doesn't make every step gentle or green. If manufacturers cut corners or source crops irresponsibly, the supply chain can introduce impurities. Public trust depends on not just the headline ingredient but what else tags along for the ride.
Regulators, companies, and consumers all have a part to play. Regular updates to safety standards, transparency about ingredient sources, and clearer labeling go a long way. Companies can share third-party test results and spell out exactly where their raw materials come from. Batch testing for contaminants needs to keep pace, especially as new supply routes open up.
Sensitive folks should patch-test new products, even those with a "green" label. Anyone managing allergies or chronic skin troubles should ask their dermatologist before trying a new brand or product line. Choosing products with a full breakdown of ingredients helps cut down on surprises.
Alkyl Ethoxy Polyglycosides have reshaped the way cleansers and shampoos feel on the skin—much gentler, and less residue. That said, their safety comes down to smart regulation, responsible production, and clear communication, not just plant-based buzzwords on a label.
AEG, better known as aminoethoxyvinylglycine, has carved out a spot in the toolbox of chemical and agricultural industries. It acts as a plant growth regulator and is valued for curbing ethylene production — that’s the gas fruits release as they ripen. Because of this knack, AEG helps slow ripening in produce and manages timing in agricultural settings. The point of contention: can this substance step from the farm field or chemical plant into food processing, where everything ends up destined for the plate?
Food has a much different rulebook than industrial applications. The stakes shoot way up, because what’s at play isn’t just efficiency but public health. Regulatory agencies like the FDA and EFSA keep watch over how chemicals meant for crops or machines end up in contact with anything for human consumption. Every additive or aid crossing into food prep faces toxicological tests, risk assessments, and a mountain of paperwork outlining how the substance behaves in living bodies.
Looking over AEG’s dossier, you’ll see the approval pages stamped almost exclusively for agricultural use. It works on apples to delay ripening before harvest, but there’s a hard line at post-harvest food processing stages. Years in the kitchen and working alongside food safety experts have taught me that what suits one point in the supply chain doesn’t always belong in another. If a chemical hasn’t cleared dietary safety checks, there’s no shortcut: it stays out of the processing plant.
Trust in the food industry floats on transparency. All the years spent fielding questions from both customers and regulators show me that safety trumps speed every time. Imagine for a moment: if AEG did slip into food lines without approval, the blowback would land hard. Loss of trust hurts, and once it's gone, it's tough to rebuild. Regulators require strict evidence that any substance, once inside food, won't break down into something harmful or stick around in a way that surprises anybody.
Practical decisions drive much of what factory managers and food scientists choose. Many folks working plant floors and food labs know that keeping the system clean and clear of unapproved chemicals means less risk of costly recalls or health scares. I've watched the fallout when short-cuts get taken; the clean-up always costs more than the safety steps would have. Nobody wants headlines about food contamination — they want a day where things run as planned, shipments get out the door, and families eat without worry.
Sometimes, people ask if there’s a chance for substances like AEG to get a second look. Science doesn’t stand still. If researchers track down more data, or technology uncovers new uses, regulators might look again. But that process calls for open studies, solid evidence, and patient lobbying. Any company openly hoping to bring AEG into food processing would need to build an airtight safety case, then stand ready for tough reviews.
Until something changes, most major and small processors will keep AEG on the ag side of the line — and customers can feel sure that their groceries avoid chemicals that haven't earned a green light. The rules aren't a burden, they’re a shield, and in my experience, people in the food industry work their best under those guardrails.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | Alkoxy(polyoxyethylene)alkyl β-D-glucopyranoside |
| Other names |
Alkyl Polyglycoside Ether Alkoxy Polyglycoside PEG Alkyl Polyglucoside Alkyl Ethoxylated Polyglycoside Alkyl Ether Polyglycoside |
| Pronunciation | /ˈæl.kɪl ɪˈθɒk.si ˌpɒl.iˈɡlaɪ.kəˌsaɪdz/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 68515-73-1 |
| Beilstein Reference | 1718734 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:537303 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL3989696 |
| DrugBank | DB11111 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 03a130af-c682-4ed2-b2d2-0734cc53b48e |
| Gmelin Reference | 90381 |
| KEGG | C15975 |
| MeSH | D27.720.544.650 |
| PubChem CID | 11177412 |
| RTECS number | **VG9050000** |
| UNII | Z6641YEM44 |
| UN number | UN3082 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID7033574 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C₄H₉(C₂H₄O)ₙ(C₆H₁₀O₅)ₘ |
| Molar mass | 548.68 g/mol |
| Appearance | Light yellow transparent liquid |
| Odor | Mild characteristic |
| Density | 1.08 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Soluble in water |
| log P | -1.3 |
| Vapor pressure | Negligible |
| Acidity (pKa) | 6.0 – 8.0 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 8.0 - 10.0 |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.4520 |
| Viscosity | 2000-5000 mPa.s |
| Dipole moment | 1.82 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 920.71 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of formation (ΔfH⦵298) | “-2206.7 kJ/mol” |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | -6217.4 kJ/mol |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | D08AJ54 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | May cause eye irritation. May cause skin irritation. |
| GHS labelling | GHS07, Warning, Causes serious eye irritation. |
| Pictograms | GHS05,GHS07 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | Hazard statements: Causes serious eye irritation. |
| Precautionary statements | Wash thoroughly after handling. Wear protective gloves/eye protection/face protection. IF ON SKIN: Wash with plenty of water. If skin irritation or rash occurs: Get medical advice/attention. Take off contaminated clothing and wash it before reuse. |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | NFPA 704: "1-0-0 |
| Flash point | >100°C |
| Autoignition temperature | 230 °C |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (median dose): > 2000 mg/kg (rat) |
| PEL (Permissible) | PEL (Permissible Exposure Limit) for Alkyl Ethoxy Polyglycosides (AEG) is not specifically established by OSHA or NIOSH. |
| REL (Recommended) | 2 mg/m³ |
| IDLH (Immediate danger) | Not established |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Alkyl Polyglycosides (APG) Fatty Alcohol Ethoxylates Fatty Alcohol Glycosides Alkyl Ether Sulfates Linear Alcohol Ethoxylates Alkyl Polyglucoside Sulfates Sugar-based Surfactants |
