EP4705423A1

EP4705423A1 - Cleaning and disinfecting compositions and methods of making and using the same

Info

Publication number: EP4705423A1
Application number: EP24723824.9A
Authority: EP
Inventors: Michael John BOYKAS; Aleksandra Kamila KRUSZEWSKA; Kwana Kinetra Patterson
Original assignee: Reckitt Benckiser LLC
Current assignee: Reckitt Benckiser LLC
Priority date: 2023-05-05
Filing date: 2024-05-02
Publication date: 2026-03-11
Also published as: WO2024231222A1; CN121532488A; GB2629635B; GB2629635A; GB202306640D0; AU2024267960A1

Abstract

Cleaning and disinfecting compositions that impart an antimicrobial benefit to inanimate surfaces are disclosed. The cleaning and disinfecting compositions utilize a blend of organic acids and a hydrotrope. The cleaning and disinfecting composition is substantially free of alcohol or glycol ether non-aqueous solvents.

Description

CLEANING AND DISINFECTING COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF MAKING AND USING THE SAME

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims priority to GB patent application number 2306640.0, filed 5 May 2023, the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.

TECHNICAL FIELD

BACKGROUND

Cleaning and disinfecting compositions that impart an antimicrobial benefit to inanimate surfaces are known in the art.

US Pat App Pub No 2023/025067 to Reckitt Benckiser LLC discloses solid low foaming and low pH all-purpose cleaning and disinfectant compositions.

US Pat App Pub No 2014/0275264 to Hercules Inc discloses a method of controlling bacterial contamination using synergistic interactions antimicrobials.

US Pat No 6,812,196 to S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. discloses a method of substantially reducing biofilm-associated microorganisms on a surface and a composition designed to substantially reduce biofilm-associated microorganisms.

US Pat No 5,143,720 to Microcide, Inc. discloses anhydrous sanitizing and disinfecting concentrate compositions having excellent shelf life and chemical stability.

A need remains for eco-friendly cleaning and disinfecting compositions that impart a fast antimicrobial benefit to inanimate surfaces without providing a sticky residue.

BRIEF SUMMARY

Cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprising benzoic acid, citric acid, lactic acid, and a hydrotrope are disclosed. The cleaning and disinfecting composition is substantially free of alcohol or glycol ether non-aqueous solvents. The cleaning and disinfecting compositions may comprise one or more of the following aspects:

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition further comprising water;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being a liquid;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition having a pH ranging from approximately 2 to approximately 3 as measured at room temperature and atmospheric pressure;

• the concentration of the hydrotrope in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.5% w/w to approximately 2.0% w/w;

• the concentration of the hydrotrope in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.75% w/w to approximately 1 .75% w/w;

• the concentration of the hydrotrope in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 1 % w/w to approximately 1 .5% w/w;

• the hydrotrope being an alkali C6-C10 alkyl sulfate;

• the hydrotrope being an alkali C7-C9 alkyl sulfate;

• the hydrotrope being an alkali C8 alkyl sulfate;

• wherein benzoic acid is added to the formulation;

• wherein the benzoic acid in the formulation is formed from dissolution of sodium benzoate;

• the concentration of sodium benzoate in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.029 % w/w to approximately 0.59 % w/w;

• the concentration of sodium benzoate in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.088 % w/w to approximately 0.47 % w/w;

• the concentration of sodium benzoate in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.12 % w/w to approximately 0.35 % w/w;

• the concentration of the benzoic acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.025% w/w to approximately 0.5% w/w;

• the concentration of the benzoic acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.075% w/w to approximately 0.4% w/w;

• the concentration of the benzoic acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.1 % w/w to approximately 0.3% w/w; • the concentration of the citric acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.1 % w/w to approximately 1.5% w/w;

• the concentration of the citric acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.25% w/w to approximately 1 % w/w;

• the concentration of the citric acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.6% w/w to approximately 1 % w/w;

• the concentration of the lactic acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.5% w/w to approximately 5% w/w;

• the concentration of the lactic acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.75% w/w to approximately 4% w/w;

• the concentration of the lactic acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 1 % w/w to approximately 3% w/w;

• the concentration of the lactic acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 1 .5% w/w to approximately 2.5% w/w;

• the weight ratio of benzoic acid to citric acid ranging from approximately 1 :4 to approximately 1 :7;

• the weight ratio of citric acid to lactic acid ranging from approximately 1 :2 to approximately 1 :3;

• the weight ratio of benzoic acid to lactic acid ranging from approximately 1 :12 to approximately 1 :15;

• the weight ratio of benzoic acid:citric acid:lactic acid ranging from approximately 1 :4:12 to approximately 1 :7:15;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition further comprising a chelant;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition further comprising a biodegradable chelant;

• the concentration of the chelant in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.0005% w/w to approximately 0.005% w/w;

• the concentration of the chelant in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.0006% w/w to approximately 0.004% w/w;

• the concentration of the chelant in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.0006% w/w to approximately 0.001 % w/w; • the chelant being L-glutamic acid-N,N’-di(acetic acid) tetrasodium salt (GLDA);

• the chelant being methylglycinediacetic acid, trisodium salt (MGDA);

• the chelant being nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA);

• the chelant being iminodisuccinic acid (IDS);

• the chelant being ethylenediamine-N,N’-disuccinic acid (EDDS);

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition further comprising sodium citrate;

• the concentration of sodium citrate in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.01 % w/w to approximately 1 % w/w;

• the concentration of sodium citrate in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.02% w/w to approximately 0.08% w/w;

• the concentration of sodium citrate in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranging from approximately 0.03% w/w to approximately 0.07% w/w;

• the sodium citrate being tri sodium citrate dihydrate, tri sodium citrate anhydrous, or combinations thereof;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition further comprising a fragrance;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition further comprising a dye;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition further comprising a glycol ether with a volatile organic content < 0.1 mm Hg @ 20°C;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition further comprising dipropylene glycol n- propyl ether, dipropylene glycol n-butyl ether, tripropylene glycol n-butyl ether, propylene glycol phenyl ether, dipropylene glycol phenyl ether, dipropylene glycol methyl ether acetate, tripropylene glycol methyl ether, ethylene glycol hexyl ether, diethylene glycol hexyl ether, diethylene glycol phenyl ether, ethylene glycol phenyl ether, poly(oxy-1 ,2-ethanediyl), alpha-phenyl-omega-hydroxy, diethylene glycol ethyl ether, diethylene glycol n-butyl ether, or combinations thereof;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of surfactants;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of cationic surfactants;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of cationic biocides; • the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of quaternary ammonium compounds;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of peroxide;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of hydrogen peroxide;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of bisguanide;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of guanide;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of nonionic surfactants;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of amphoteric surfactants;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of non-aqueous solvents;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of glycol ethers with a volatile organic content > 0.1 mm Hg @ 20°C;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of polymers;

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being substantially free of phosphates;

• the cleaning and disinfecting compositions being substantially free of ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) or salts thereof;

• the cleaning and disinfecting compositions being substantially free of diammonium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid or salts thereof;

• the cleaning and disinfecting compositions being substantially free of diethylenetriamine pentaacidic acid or salts thereof;

• the cleaning and disinfecting compositions being substantially free of N- (hydroxyethyl)-ethylenediaminetriacidic acid or salts thereof; and/or

• the cleaning and disinfecting compositions being substantially free of diethanolglycine or salts thereof.

Also disclosed are containers comprising any of the cleaning and disinfecting compositions disclosed above. The containers may include any one or more of the following aspects: • the container being a bottle;

• the container being a non-pressurized bottle;

• the non-pressurized bottle being a trigger sprayer;

• the container being a wipes container and the wipes container further comprising a nonwoven wipe;

• the wipes container comprising 75% wt to 85% wt of the cleaning and disinfecting composition and 15% wt to 25% wt of the nonwoven wipe;

• a load ratio of the cleaning and disinfecting composition to the nonwoven wipe ranging from 3:1 to 7:1 ;

• a load ratio of the cleaning and disinfecting composition to the nonwoven wipe ranging from 4:1 to 7:1 ;

• the wipes container being a canister;

• the wipes container being a flow wrap dispensing package;

• each nonwoven wipe having a thickness (wet) ranging from approximately 0.2 to 1 mm using a Thwing-Albert ProGage Thickness Test set at 0.2 psi pressure;

• each nonwoven wipe having a thickness (wet) ranging from approximately 0.2 mm to approximately 0.8 mm using a Thwing-Albert ProGage Thickness Test set at 0.2 psi pressure;

• each nonwoven wipe having a thickness (wet) ranging from approximately 0.3 mm to approximately 0.5 mm using a Thwing-Albert ProGage Thickness Test set at 0.2 psi pressure;

• each nonwoven wipe having a Machine Direction (MD) tensile strength (wet) above 2.6 N/cm (1.5 LBF/inch);

• each nonwoven wipe having a Cross Direction (CD) tensile strength (wet) above 1.0 N/cm (0.6 LBF/inch);

• each nonwoven wipe being a single layer;

• each nonwoven wipe having multiple layers;

• each nonwoven wipe having multiple layers of the same material;

• each nonwoven wipe having multiple layers of different materials;

• each nonwoven wipe having two layers; • each nonwoven wipe having two layers of the same material;

• each nonwoven wipe having two layers of different materials;

• each nonwoven wipe having three layers;

• each nonwoven wipe having three layers of the same material;

• each nonwoven wipe having three layers of different materials;

• each nonwoven wipe being a composite;

• each nonwoven wipe being a composite of two or more differing materials;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid, meltblown, wetlaid, airlaid, drylaid including carded, or combinations thereof;

• each nonwoven wipe being consolidated or bonded mechanically, including spunlacing, thermally, or chemically;

• each nonwoven wipe being a nonwoven formed by spunlaid, meltblown, wetlaid, airlaid, drylaid including carded, or combinations thereof, and bonded or consolidated thermally and/or chemically and/or mechanically;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by carding;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by wetlaid;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by meltblown;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by SMS;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by carded and wetlaid;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid and airlaid;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid, airlaid, spunlaid;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid and wetlaid;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid, airlaid, carded;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by carded, airlaid, carded;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by carded, wetlaid and airlaid;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by carded and then spunlaced;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by wetlaid and then spunlaced;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by carding and wetlaid and then spunlaced;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid and airlaid and then spunlaced; • each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid, airlaid, spunlaid, and then spunlaced;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid and wetlaid and then spunlaced;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid, airlaid, carded and then spunlaced;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by carded, airlaid, carded and then spunlaced;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by carded, wetlaid and airlaid and then spunlaced;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by meltblown/airlaid/meltblown;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by meltblown/wetlaid;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by SMS/wetlaid;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by SMS/airlaid;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by SMS/airlaid/SMS;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by SMS/wetlaid/SMS;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid/wetlaid/carded;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid/wetlaid/carded/meltblown;

• each nonwoven wipe being formed by spunlaid/airlaid/carded/meltblown;

• the carded material including strong and/or stiff fibers, such as lyocell fibers, polyester fibers, polypropylene fibers, and/or bicomponent fibers, or being laminated and/or bonded with a stronger layer;

• the nonwoven wipe comprising pulp;

• the nonwoven wipe comprising polypropylene;

• the nonwoven wipe comprising a mixture of pulp and polypropylene;

• the nonwoven wipe comprising a mixture of approximately 25% w/w to approximately 75% w/w pulp and approximately 25% w/w to approximately 75% w/w polypropylene;

• the nonwoven wipe comprising bast fibers;

• the nonwoven wipe comprising lyocell;

• the nonwoven wipe comprising viscose;

• the nonwoven wipe comprising cotton, in all of its forms;

• the nonwoven wipe comprising polyester; and/or

• the nonwoven wipe comprising cellulose.

Also disclosed are methods of providing a reduction in germs on a surface. The method comprises applying any of the cleaning and disinfecting compositions disclosed above to the surface. The disclosed methods include one or more of the following aspects:

• the cleaning and disinfecting composition being applied to the surface using a nonwoven wipe;

• the wipe being made of 80% wt viscose and 20% wt lyocell;

• wherein the reduction in germs on a surface is a 3 log 10 or greater reduction in poliovirus after 1 minute;

• wherein the reduction in germs on a surface is a 4 log 10 or greater reduction in feline calicivirus after 30 seconds;

• wherein the reduction in germs on a surface is a 4 log 10 or greater reduction in rhinovirus after 30 seconds;

• the method further comprising greasy soil cleaning.

TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

As used herein:

• the symbol and the terms “approximately” and “about” mean plus or minus 10% of the value stated;

• the term “a” or “an” means one or more;

• any and all ranges are inclusive of their endpoints, e.g. a ranging from 1 % w/w to 10 % w/w based on the total weight of the composition includes 1 % w/w and 10 % w/w and any concentration between 1 % w/w and 10 % w/w;

• when an ingredient does not contain close or equal to 100% w/w active material, two percentages may be provided: one for the weight of the raw material and one for the weight of the active in the raw material. For example, 3.13% w/w of sodium octyl sulfate raw material contains approximately 42% w/w sodium octyl sulfate in water, which equates to approximately 1 .3% w/w of sodium octyl sulfate in the composition. This is represented as 3.13% w/w (1 .3% w/w) of sodium octyl sulfate;

• the term “comprising” is inclusive or open-ended and does not exclude any additional elements; the term “consisting of” excludes any additional elements; and the term “consisting essentially of” is in-between, only permitting additional elements that do not materially affect characteristics of the product or process; • the phrase “substantially free” means a concentration of less than 0.3 w/w, preferably less than 0.2 w/w, more preferably less than 0.1 w/w, and most preferably less than 0.05 w/w;

• the terms “germ” and “microbe” or “microbial” means microorganisms which cause disease or undesirable effects, such as malodor, and encompasses both bacteria and viruses;

• the terms “sanitize” or “sanitization” mean providing equal to or greater than a 3 log reduction of microbes in 30 seconds according to ASTM 1153 for bacteria, including but not limited to Staphylococcus aureus and Klebsiella aerogenes, or ASTM 1053 for viruses, including but not limited to poliovirus type 1 ;

• the terms “disinfect” or “disinfection” mean 0 or 1 out of 60 carriers observed during the micro testing according to AOAC Germicidal Spray Test Method (961 .02) (Modified for Pre-Saturated Towelettes);

• the terms “biocide” or “biocidal” mean any product that can kill germs, including bacteria and viruses; biocides are substances approved to kill microorganisms and typically registered with a governing body (i.e. , the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA));

• the term “liquid” means a state of matter that conforms to the shape of the container in which it is held at room temperature (18-23°C) and which acquires a defined surface in the presence of gravity; the term “liquid” is readily distinguishable from the terms “solid” and “gas.” Liquids are not pastes, which behaves as a solid until a sufficiently large load or stress is applied, even though a paste is also known as a Bingham plastic fluid; and

• the term “loading ratio” means a ratio of the weight of the cleaning and disinfecting composition to the weight of the nonwoven wipe, for example, a 4.5: 1 loading ratio would contain 4.5 g of cleaning and disinfecting composition to 1 g of nonwoven wipe;

• as used herein, the term “inanimate” means non-living, particularly not human or animal. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprising benzoic acid, citric acid, lactic acid, and a hydrotrope are disclosed. The disclosed cleaning and disinfecting compositions are substantially free of alcohol or glycol ether non-aqueous solvents.

Citric acid is a known disinfectant. See, e.g., Dvorak, Disinfection 101 , Center for Food Security and Public Health, May 2008. Lemon juice is a frequently used ingredient for green cleaning. Lemon juice contains approximately 5-8% citric acid, amongst other potentially disinfecting ingredients like malic acid, ascorbic acid, and essential oils. However, it also leaves behind a sticky residue. As disclosed in co-pending US Pat App Pub No 2023/025067, R&D testing has demonstrated that aqueous solutions containing 2.5% w/v citric acid did not provide consistent or satisfactory germ kill results. Additionally, as shown in the examples that follow, 2.5% w/w citric acid also leaves behind a residue that consumers don’t like.

The disclosed cleaning and disinfecting compositions overcome these issues by combining benzoic acid, citric acid and lactic acid, preferably L-lactic acid. The combination provides both cleaning and germ kill without leaving behind a sticky residue.

The concentration of the citric acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranges from approximately 0.1 % w/w to approximately 1.5% w/w, preferably from approximately 0.25% w/w to approximately 1 % w/w, more preferably from approximately 0.6% w/w to approximately 1 % w/w.

The concentration of the lactic acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranges from approximately 0.5% w/w to approximately 5% w/w, preferably from approximately 0.75% w/w to approximately 4% w/w, more preferably from approximately 1 % w/w to approximately 3% w/w, and most preferably from approximately 1 .5% w/w to approximately 2.5% w/w.

Citric acid and lactic acid may be sourced from natural sources, such as citrus fruit for citric acid and milk for lactic acid. Sources of 100% w/w citric acid and lactic acid raw materials are available. However, due to the hygroscopic nature of these raw materials, solutions of the citric acid and lactic acid in water may be used during manufacturing to ensure repeatable quality control. Water-based solutions of citric acid are available from numerous commercial sources, including, but not limited to, Cargill Inc., Jungbunzlauer, Archer Daniels Midland, and Tate & Lyle. L-lactic acid is commercially available from Purac America Inc.

The disclosed cleaning and disinfecting compositions also comprise benzoic acid. Benzoic acid may also be sourced from plants. Benzoic acid may be added directly to the formulation. Alternatively, any benzoic acid in the formulation may be formed from dissolution of sodium benzoate. The pKa of benzoic acid is below the pH of the disclosed compositions. As a result, sodium benzoate will produce the protonated benzoate ion. 1 g of sodium benzoate is equivalent to 0.8475 g of benzoic acid. The concentration of sodium benzoate added to the cleaning and disinfecting composition may range from approximately 0.029 % w/w to approximately 0.59 % w/w, preferably from approximately 0.088 % w/w to approximately 0.47 % w/w, and most preferably from approximately 0.12 % w/w to approximately 0.35 % w/w. The concentration of benzoic acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranges from from approximately 0.025% w/w to approximately 0.5% w/w, more preferably from approximately 0.075% w/w to approximately 0.4% w/w, and most preferably from approximately 0.1 % w/w to approximately 0.3% w/w.

The weight ratio of benzoic acid to citric acid ranges from approximately 1 :3 to approximately 1 :7. The weight ratio of citric acid to lactic acid ranges from approximately 1 :2 to approximately 1 :3. The weight ratio of benzoic acid to lactic acid ranges from approximately 1 :12 to approximately 1 :15. The weight ratio of benzoic acid:citric acid:lactic acid ranges from approximately 1 :4:12 to approximately 1 :7:15.

The disclosed cleaning and disinfecting compositions further comprise a hydrotrope, rather than an anionic surfactant. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that hydrotropes differ from anionic surfactants. Specifically, while both hydrotropes and anionic surfactants contain a hydrophilic part and a hydrophobic part, the hydrophobic part of the hydrotrope is too small to cause spontaneous self-aggregation. As a result, hydrotropes are not as strong in terms of cleaning or membrane breaking as compared to anionic surfactants. Nonetheless, as shown in the examples that follow, the combination of the hydrotrope with the organic acids was surprisingly capable of providing cleaning and germ kill, without producing too much foam or leaving behind significant sticky residue. The concentration of the hydrotrope in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranges from approximately 0.5% w/w to approximately 2.0% w/w, preferably from approximately 0.75% w/w to approximately 1.75% w/w, and more preferably from approximately 1 % w/w to approximately 1.5% w/w. The hydrotrope comprises an alkali C6-C10 alkyl sulfate, preferably an alkali C7-C9 alkyl sulfate, and more preferably, an akali C8 alkyl sulfate. Alkali C8 alkyl sulfates may be sourced from plant-based origins, making them more eco-friendly. Applicant has also found that the C8 alkyl sulfates produce less foam and more shine than commonly used C12 alkyl sulfates. The C8 alkyl sulfates foam and dissipate faster than C12 alkyl sulfates, leading to the perception of less residue and less soapiness.

The cleaning and disinfecting compositions further comprise water and are liquid. The pH of the cleaning and disinfecting compositions range from approximately 2 to approximately 3 as measured at room temperature and atmospheric pressure.

The cleaning and disinfecting composition may further comprise sodium citrate. The concentration of sodium citrate in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranges from approximately 0.01 % w/w to approximately 1 % w/w, preferably from approximately 0.02% w/w to approximately 0.08% w/w, and more preferably from approximately 0.03% w/w to approximately 0.07% w/w. Sodium citrate may be tri sodium citrate dihydrate, tri sodium citrate anhydrous, or combinations thereof. Citric acid and sodium citrate form a buffer in the disclosed cleaning and disinfecting compositions. The buffer helps maintain a constant hydrogen ion concentration in the cleaning and disinfecting compositions.

The cleaning and disinfecting composition may further comprise a chelant, preferably a biodegradable chelant. The chelant is in addition to citric acid, which may also function as chelant. The concentration of the additional chelant in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranges from approximately 0.0005% w/w to approximately 0.005% w/w, preferably from approximately 0.0006% w/w to approximately 0.004% w/w, and more preferably from approximately 0.0006% w/w to approximately 0.001 % w/w.

The chelant may be L-glutamic acid-N,N’-di(acetic acid) tetrasodium salt (GLDA), methylglycinediacetic acid trisodium salt (MGDA), nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA), iminodisuccinic acid (IDS), ethylenediamine-N,N’-disuccinic acid (EDDS), or combinations thereof. The cleaning and disinfecting compositions are substantially free of non-biodegradable chelants, such as ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) or salts thereof, diammonium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid or salts thereof, diethylenetriamine pentaacidic acid or salts thereof, N-(hydroxyethyl)-ethylenediaminetriacidic acid or salts thereof, diethanolglycine or salts thereof, or combinations thereof.

The cleaning and disinfecting composition may further comprise a glycol ether with a volatile organic content < 0.1 mm Hg @ 20°C. Exemplary glycol ethers include dipropylene glycol n-propyl ether, dipropylene glycol n-butyl ether, tripropylene glycol n- butyl ether, propylene glycol phenyl ether, dipropylene glycol phenyl ether, dipropylene glycol methyl ether acetate, tripropylene glycol methyl ether, ethylene glycol hexyl ether, diethylene glycol hexyl ether, diethylene glycol phenyl ether, ethylene glycol phenyl ether, alpha-phenyl-omega-hydroxy poly(oxy-1 ,2-ethanediyl), diethylene glycol ethyl ether, diethylene glycol n-butyl ether, or combinations thereof. Alternatively, the cleaning and disinfecting compositions may be substantially free of glycol ethers.

The cleaning and disinfecting composition may further comprise a fragrance. Essential oils are a particularly preferred eco-friendly fragrance suitable for use in the disclosed compositions.

The cleaning and disinfecting composition may further comprise a dye.

The cleaning and disinfecting composition are substantially free of surfactants, such as cationic surfactants, nonionic surfactants, amphoteric surfactants, or combinations thereof. The cleaning and disinfecting composition are substantially free of germ kill agents, such as cationic biocides, quaternary ammonium compounds, peroxide, hydrogen peroxide, bisguanide, guanide, or combinations thereof. As shown in the examples that follow, additional surfactants and germ kill agents are not required to obtain cleaning and/or germ kill.

The cleaning and disinfecting composition may be substantially free of nonaqueous solvents, such as alcohol solvents and/or glycol ethers with a volatile organic content > 0.1 mm Hg @ 20°C.

The cleaning and disinfecting composition are substantially free of polymers.

The cleaning and disinfecting composition are substantially free of phosphates. The cleaning and disinfecting composition are substantially free of humectants, such as propylene glycol or glycerine.

The cleaning and disinfecting compositions disclosed above are merchandised in containers. For example, the disclosed cleaning and disinfecting compositions may be provided in a bottle, preferably a non-pressurized bottle. The non-pressurized bottle may include a trigger sprayer to spray the disclosed cleaning and disinfecting composition onto the inanimate surface. The disclosed cleaning and disinfecting composition is typically wiped from the inanimate surface after application using a cloth or paper towel. In this scenario, foaming and residue are less problematic because the wiping action helps to remove any foam or residue.

Alternatively, the disclosed cleaning and disinfecting compositions may be provided in a wipes container. The wipes container further comprises nonwoven wipes. The nonwoven wipes are saturated with the disclosed cleaning and disinfecting compositions. When the wipe is used on an inanimate surface, traces of the disclosed cleaning and disinfecting composition are left behind. Consumers typically do not follow the saturated wipe with a cloth or paper towel to remove the disclosed cleaning and disinfecting composition from the surface. Therefore, it is undesirable for the composition to leave behind too much foam or a sticky residue.

The wipes container may be a wipes canister, typically made of plastic with a dispensing orifice to help separate the wipes as they are dispensed. Research into paperbased wipes canisters is ongoing and a future alternative. In another alternative, the wipes container may be a flow wrap dispensing package, also known as a flat pack. The wipes container comprises 75% wt to 85% wt of the cleaning and disinfecting composition and 15% wt to 25% wt of the nonwoven wipe. A load ratio of the cleaning and disinfecting composition to the nonwoven wipe ranges from 4:1 to 7:1.

Wipes made of a fibrous and/or a filament material and moistened with a solution are known in the art and are referred to as moistened wipes or wet wipes. When considering a more sustainable and/or plastic-free wipe, there are some limitations with the material itself. For example, many US consumers are quite used to having wipes with some amount of plastic in them. Many medical, industrial, and retail wipes typically contain moderate to high levels of plastic. These wipes may be made by a variety of methods, including spunbond. The spunbond process produces relatively inexpensive wipes and are typically strong and mechanically stable under tension and handling.

More sustainable and/or plastic-free wipes tend to be produced by carded, airlaid, and/or wetlaid processes. These processes lend themselves to use a variety of nonplastic and/or cellulosic fibers. With these, the fiber laying process may be accompanied by a hydroentangling step (spunlacing) to add strength, patterning, and/or cloth-like attributes. Carded spunlace materials can be very strong. However, at times, they can also have higher tensile elongations and less mechanical stability and stiffness than desired, especially when the fibers and/or processing technology is not carefully selected or controlled. Wetlaid materials that are plastic-free and have a high pulp content typically result in a wipe that is weaker, although its tensile elongations may be more controlled (lower) when compared to typical parallel carded spunlace. Without careful design and processing, more sustainable, biodegradable, compostable, and/or plastic-free materials made from typical nonwoven technologies may create challenges for dispensing out of a canister. For example, the wipe may stretch too much and not dispense properly. The consumer may also not prefer these wipes for surface care applications due to hand feel and/or cleaning perception. The wipe may also be too weak and tear before exiting a canister. Therefore, a balance must be found to produce a wipe that is acceptable to consumers.

The wipes contained in the wipes containers use nonwovens comprising filaments and/or fibers, such as natural fibers, manufactured fibers derived from plant sources, synthetic fibers, and combinations thereof. Natural fibers and manufactured fibers derived from plant sources include cellulosic fibers, such as cotton, wood pulp, bast fibers, viscose, lyocell, or combinations thereof. Synthetic fibers include thermoplastic polymers, such as polyolefins, polyamides, polyesters, or combinations thereof. The wipe may comprise pulp, polypropylene, hemp, flax, lyocell, viscose, polyester, other cellulose or synthetic fibers, or combinations thereof. The wipe may be a single layer of a uniform material or a laminate comprising layers of the same or different materials. In another alternative, the wipe may have multiple layers of the same material. For example, the wipe may have 2 or 3 layers of the same material. Alternatively, the wipe may have 2 or 3 layers of differing materials. In another alternative, the wipe may be a composite of two or more different materials. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the number and types of layers may be selected based upon intended purpose. For example, recyclable and/or compostable wipes may be made from 1 , 2, or 3 layers of 100% viscose or viscose/lyocell composites. Alternatively, wipes intended for scrubbing applications may have a scrubbing plastic layer on one or two wood pulp layers. The weight of the wipes preferably ranges from approximately 30 g/m² (GSM) to approximately 70 GSM.

With respect to the material of the wipes, plastic free wipes may be a desired option. For example, the wipe may contain differing ratios of viscose, pulp, and lyocell. Specific examples of plastic free wipes may contain 80% viscose and 20% lyocell by weight, 80% pulp and 20% lyocell, 100% lyocell, or 100% viscose. Alternatively, the wipe may contain a small amount of plastic to improve some of the properties of the wipe (e.g., tensile strength). In another alternative, the wipe comprises a mixture of pulp and polypropylene, particularly, approximately 25% w/w to approximately 75% w/w pulp and approximately 25% w/w to approximately 75% polypropylene, preferably approximately 40% w/w to approximately 75% w/w pulp and approximately 25% w/w to approximately 60% polypropylene. The wipe may also comprise bicomponent fibers to improve strength and dimensional stability, such as polyethylene/polyester, polyethylene/polypropylene, or copolyester/polyester, and/or be made with cross-lapping technology or more crossoriented fibers or filaments to improve dimensional stability, decrease tensile elongations, increase bending stiffness and resistance to mechanical deformation, and/or lower the ratio of MD to CD tensile strength.

The wipe or layers in the wipe may be spunlaid, meltblown, wetlaid, airlaid, drylaid including carded, or combinations thereof. The wipe may be consolidated or mechanically bonded, including spunlacing, thermally, or chemically. The wipe or layers in the wipe may be spunlaid, meltblown, wetlaid, airlaid, drylaid including carded, or combinations thereof, and bonded or consolidated thermally, chemically, or mechanically. Dimensionally stable wipes or layers in the wipe may be formed from stronger and/or stiffer fibers or filaments, such as polypropylene, lyocell, bast fibers, wood pulp, higher modulus cellulosic fibers, polyesters, bicomponent fibers, or combinations thereof. Processing is also important, such that the strength is maintained in all directions of pull. Therefore, material composition, and processing technology such as the type and quality of fiber laying, consolidation, bonding, layering, and post-treatments are all important to produce a strong, dimensionally stable wipe.

Each wipe may be consolidated or bonded mechanically, including spunlacing, thermally, or chemically. Alternatively, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid, meltblown, wetlaid, airlaid, drylaid including carded, or combinations thereof, and bonded or consolidated thermally and/or chemically and/or mechanically. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by carding. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by wetlaid. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by meltblown. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by Spunbond Meltblown Spunbond, or SMS. SMS is a trilaminate nonwoven fabric having a top and bottom layer of spunbond polypropylene and a middle layer of meltblown polypropylene. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that different combinations may also be used without departing from the teachings herein, such as SM bilayer, SMMS tetralayer, SSMM tetralayer, etc.

In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by carded and wetlaid. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid and airlaid. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid, airlaid, spunlaid. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid and wetlaid. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid, airlaid, carded. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by carded, airlaid, carded. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by carded, wetlaid and airlaid. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by carded and then spunlaced to produce a more clothlike material. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by wetlaid and then spunlaced. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by carding and wetlaid and then spunlaced. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid and airlaid and then spunlaced. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid, airlaid, spunlaid, and then spunlaced. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid and wetlaid and then spunlaced. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid, airlaid, carded and then spunlaced. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by carded, airlaid, carded and then spunlaced. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by carded, wetlaid and airlaid and then spunlaced. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by meltblown/airlaid/meltblown. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by meltblown/wetlaid. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by SMS/wetlaid. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by SMS/airlaid. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by SMS/airlaid/SMS. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by SMS/wetlaid/SMS. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid/wetlaid/carded. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid/wetlaid/carded/meltblown. In another alternative, each wipe may be a nonwoven formed by spunlaid/airlaid/carded/meltblown.

The wipes should have sufficient tensile strength to withstand dispensing. The minimum recommended MD tensile strength (wet) is above 2.6 N/cm (1.5 Ibf/inch) as determined by NWSP test method 110.4, option A, preferably greater than 5.2 N/cm (3.0 Ibf/inch). The minimum recommended CD tensile strength (wet) is above 1.0 N/cm (0.6 Ibf/inch) as determined by NWSP test method 110.4, option A, preferably greater than 2.1 N/cm (1.2 Ibf/inch).

Whether in trigger or wipe format, the disclosed cleaning and disinfecting compositions reduce the number of microorganisms on a variety of hard surfaces, including but not limited to appliances, countertops, stovetops, floors, walls, sinks, toilets, toilet bowls, bathtubs, and the like. Exemplary hard surfaces include surfaces made of bricks, cement, ceramic, fiberglass, glass, laminate, latex, linoleum, marble, metal, metal alloys, pebble, porcelain, polymers, quarry tiles, stainless steel, natural stone, and mixtures thereof.

Exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise benzoic acid, citric acid, lactic acid, and a hydrotrope. The weight ratio of benzoic acid to citric acid ranges from approximately 1 :4 to approximately 1 :7. The weight ratio of citric acid to lactic acid ranges from approximately 1 :2 to approximately 1 :3. The weight ratio of benzoic acid to lactic acid ranges from approximately 1 :12 to approximately 1 :15. The weight ratio of benzoic acid, citric acid, and lactic acid ranges from approximately 1 :4:12 to approximately 1 :7:15.

For example, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise:

Alternatively, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise: In another example, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise:

Alternatively, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise:

In another alternative, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise benzoic acid, citric acid, lactic acid, a hydrotrope, and water. For example, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise:

Alternatively, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise:

In another alternative, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of benzoic acid, citric acid, lactic acid, a hydrotrope, sodium citrate, and water. For example, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of: Alternatively, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of:

In another example, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of:

Alternatively, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of:

In yet another alternative, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of benzoic acid, citric acid, lactic acid, a hydrotrope, a chelant, and water. For example, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of:

In another example, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of: Alternatively, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of:

In yet another example, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of:

Alternatively, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of: In yet another alternative, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of benzoic acid, citric acid, lactic acid, a hydrotrope, sodium citrate, a chelant, and water. For example, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of:

Alternatively, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of: Alternatively, the exemplary cleaning and disinfecting compositions comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of:

Any of the formulations disclosed above, even those consisting of the cited materials, may further comprise a fragrance and/or dye without departing from the teachings herein. The disclosed formulations may be made by mixing the ingredients together in any order.

The disclosed formulations reduce germs on inanimate surfaces. Application of any of the cleaning and disinfecting compositions disclosed above to the surface provides for the reduction in germs. Preferably, the disclosed formulations disinfect a surface in 3 minutes or less and sanitize a surface in 30 seconds or less.

The cleaning and disinfecting composition may be applied to the surface using a nonwoven wipe. The wipe may be made of 80% wt viscose and 20% wt lyocell. Wiping the inanimate surface with a wipe saturated with the disclosed cleaning and disinfecting compositions provides a 3 log 10 or greater reduction in poliovirus after 1 minute contact time between the cleaning and disinfecting composition and the surface. Wiping the inanimate surface with a wipe saturated with the disclosed cleaning and disinfecting compositions provides a 4 log 10 or greater reduction in feline calicivirus after 30 seconds contact time between the cleaning and disinfecting composition and the surface. Wiping the inanimate surface with a wipe saturated with the disclosed cleaning and disinfecting compositions provides a 4 log 10 or greater reduction in rhinovirus after 30 seconds contact time between the cleaning and disinfecting composition and the surface. The disclosed formulations also clean greasy soil. Alternatively, the cleaning and disinfecting composition be applied to the surface using a trigger sprayer and wiped with a cloth or towel after the stated time period. Examples

The following examples illustrate exemplary formulations as well as preferred embodiments of the invention. It is to be understood that these examples are provided by way of illustration only and that further useful formulations falling within the scope of the present invention and the claims may be readily produced by one skilled in the art without deviating from the scope and spirit of the invention.

The compositions in the following examples were prepared using the ingredients identified in Table A:

Table A:

Example 1

The compositions in Table 1 were formed by simple mixing of the measured amounts of the individual ingredients into water, optionally, but preferably using an automatic stirrer to ensure that the final composition was homogeneous.

Table 1: q.s. = quantum satis - the quantity required to bring the formulation to 100% w/w Example 2 - Viral Efficacy

The microbicidal efficacy of Formulation B from Table 1 on a wipe made up of 80% wt viscose and 20% wt lyocell was determined using ASTM E1053-20 entitled Standard Practice to Assess Virucidal Activity of Chemicals Intended for Disinfection of Inanimate, Nonporous Environmental Surfaces (ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 2020).

The stock virus was prepared and stored at -70°C until the day of use. Prior to testing, the appropriate cell line used to propagate the virus was seeded into multi-well cell culture plates. On the day of testing, the cells should be observed as having the proper cell integrity and level of confluency.

On the day of testing, the virus culture was supplemented with Fetal Bovine Serum, an organic soil, to yield a final concentration of 5% v/v FBS.

Films of virus were prepared by spreading 200 pL of the virus inoculum uniformly over a defined area, approximately 8 x 8 cm, on the bottoms of (3) separate 150 x 15 mm sterile glass petri dishes. One replicate is prepared for each virus I test substance batch combination. The virus films were dried at 20.0°C / 50% RH until visibly dry. Drying of the virus film typically takes approximately 20 to 30 minutes.

For each batch of test substance, one dried virus film was prepared as described above. Using sterile gloves, the dried virus film was wiped with a towelette and left for the contact time. At the contact time, a 2.0 mL aliquot of test media was added to each petri dish. The surface of the petri dishes were scraped with a sterile plastic cell scraper to resuspend the dried virus film, and to mix the contents of the petri dish. The mixtures were immediately passed through individual Sephadex™ columns. The use of Sephadex™ columns reduces the cytotoxic level of the virus I test substance mixture. The filtrates (10^-1 dilution) were tittered by 10-fold serial dilution and each dilution was assayed for infectivity and/or cytotoxicity.

A Dried Virus Control Film assay was performed to determine the level of virus that was challenged with the test substance. The level of virus dried on the test surfaces must be at least 4.80 Logw.

Cytotoxicity, Neutralization and Sterility control assays are performed in parallel with the efficacy assay.

A 3 Log-io or 99.9% reduction of virus (beyond the demonstrated toxicity level of the product itself) must be demonstrated at the contact time to claim that the test substance kills a particular virus.

The tests were performed in duplicate. The results of both tests are provided in Table 2a.

Table 2a:

*Observed results likely due to false positive. Retested. N/A = not analyzed

These results demonstrate that Formulation B quickly kills viruses, including poliovirus and human novovirus.

Similar testing was performed using Formulation G. The results are provided in

Table 2b

Table 2b:

These results demonstrate that Formulation G also quickly kills viruses, including poliovirus.

Example 3 - Stability

Formulation B underwent stability testing in a HDPE wipe canister containing 100% viscose wipes for 2 weeks at 54°C ± 2°C. The results are provided in Table 3a. Table 3a:

* Average of 6 canisters

** HPLC assay results averaged from 6 assays each from 3 separate canisters

These results demonstrate that Formulation B will exhibit a shelf life of at least 2 years at standard room temperature.

Formulation G underwent stability testing in a 100% post-consumer recycled HDPE canister containing 66% pulp/33% polypropylene wipes. The results are provided in Table 3b.

Table 3b:

These results demonstrate that Formulation G will exhibit a shelf life of at least 2 years at standard room temperature. These results further demonstrate that both sodium benzoate and benzoic acid formulations remain stable. These results further demonstrate that the wipe material does not impact stability.

Example 4 - Micro Efficacy

Additional micro testing was performed against Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 6538) on the formulations in Tables 4a and 4b using AOAC Germicidal Spray Test Method (961.02) (Modified for Pre-Saturated Towelettes).

S. aureus was recovered from a frozen stock cryovial. After an initial incubation of 24 +/- 2 hours, a subsequent subculture tube was inoculated, and the tube was incubated for 48 to 54 hours. At that time, the Test Culture was prepared by adding an organic soil (i.e., horse serum) to the test organism to yield a 5% v/v organic soil load (e.g., 9.5 ml_ test organism + 0.5 ml_ horse serum).

For each test organism I test substance batch tested, 60 glass microscope slides (carriers) were inoculated with 10 pL of the Test Culture. The inoculated slides were allowed to dry for 30 to 40 minutes at 36 ± 1 °C.

After the inoculated slides were dried, one towelette was used to wipe the contaminated section of each of 10 carriers. The area of the towelette used was rotated as to expose a maximum amount of the towelette surface during the wiping procedure. T reatment of the inoculated slides within a 10-camer set was staggered, and each treated carrier was allowed to sit for the specified contact time (± 5 seconds).

At the contact time, each treated carrier was aseptically subcultured into 20 mL of neutralizing media. The subculture tubes containing the treated carriers were incubated for 48 ± 2 hours at 36 ± 1 ,0°C.

After incubation, each subculture tube was visually examined for the presence or absence of growth of the test organism. The passing success criteria for this assay is 0/60 or 1/60 positive carriers. A positive subculture tube demonstrated growth of the test organism.

A Dried Recovery control assay, performed in parallel with the efficacy assay, must demonstrate that the average level of organism inoculated onto each slide was between 5.0 - 6.5 Log (1 .0 x 10⁵to 3.16 x 10⁶ organisms). Additionally, a neutralization control assay, as well as a media /reagent I test surface sterility assessment assay, were performed during efficacy testing.

The results are also provided in Tables 4a and 4b:

Table 4a (Invention):

* Sourced from alternative supplier, 88% activity level

** wipe made up of 80% wt viscose and 20% wt lyocell

***one R&D test had 14/30 carriers after 4 min 45 sec contact time, but the wipe was dry, meaning there was little to no solution remaining on the wipe to provide germ kill

Table 4b (Not Invention):

** wipe made up of 80% wt viscose and 20% wt yocell ****NR = Not recorded

These results demonstrate the synergy obtained from the benzoic, citric, and lactic acid combinations. Passing micro results were also, and not surprisingly, obtained from comparative formulations 0 and S. Formulations 0 and S both contain higher concentrations of citric acid and no lactic acid. Citric acid is a known biocide so higher germ kill would be expected from higher concentrations of citric acid. As will be discussed infra, the difficulty is the sticky residue that may be left behind from formulations containing higher concentrations of citric acid.

Testing against S. aureus was also performed using Formulation G and the results also passed.

Example 5 - Greasy Soil Cleaning (ASTM D4488 A2)

A comparison was made of the loose grease cleaning efficacy of formulations B from Example 1 to the commercially available formulation T in Table 5. The listing of ingredients was obtained from the supplier’s websites.

Table 5:

The method used is based on ASTM D4488 A2 - Standard Guide for Testing Cleaning Performance of Products Intended for Use on Resilient Flooring and Washable Walls

Fine porosity cellulose sponges are cut to 4.445 cm (1.75 inches) by 9.2075 cm (3.625 inches) by 3.81 cm (1.5 inches). The sponges are rinsed and spun three times using warm water only in a Maytag washing machine to ensure that the sponges are free of contaminants/preservatives and to establish uniform dampness for all sponges. The sponges are then placed in a tightly sealed bag in order to maintain dampness until ready for use.

0.3175 cm (0.125 inch) by 11.43 cm (4.5 inch) by 11.43 cm (4.5 inch) Masonite wallboard is double coated with a latex paint and allowed to set overnight. The reflectance of the white tile before soiling is measured and recorded as R3.

The soil to be cleaned is freshly prepared each day in a 600 mL Pyrex® beaker in a 55°C steam bath. 33% w/w vegetable shortening, 33% w/w vegetable oil, 33% w/w lard, and 1 % w/w carbon lampblack are mixed in the heated beaker.

Cheesecloth is folded in half several times to produce a 6.35 cm (2.5 inch) by 5.08 cm (2 inch) piece. A binder clip is placed along the 6.35 cm edge of the folded cheesecloth.

Using the clip as a handle, soak the cheesecloth in the hot soil and apply the soil to the white-painted Masonite wallboard tiles using six strokes. The soil temperature should be maintained, and the soil should be stirred throughout the application process. Allow the soiled substrate to dry overnight at room temperature. The reflectance of the soiled tile is measured by either a tri-gloss meter, e.g., from BYK Gardner, or digital imaging, e.g., a digital monochrome camera using suitable software, such as Image Pro Plus, and recorded as R2.

Each tile is divided in two equal halves using masking tape. The tiles are numbered and the treatment each side will receive is indicated.

The soiled tile is placed on the platform of the Gardner Abrasion Tester (without tray) in such a manner that the soiled part of the tile is perpendicular to the direction of the sponge motion, so that the sponge will scrub an area centered within one half of the tile.

The sponge is placed in the holder and 15 grams of test product is poured onto the sponge. One half of the tile is scrubbed x times and immediately rinsed with cold running tap water. The tile position is reversed to repeat the process on the other half of the tile with a new sponge and product sample. The reflectance of the cleaned tile is measured and recorded as R1.

The percent cleaning efficiency is measured as [(R1 -R2)/R3-R2)]x100. The test is repeated for each formulation 9 times. The results are provided in Table 6. Table 6:

The results show the percentage of soil removed from the tile. Higher percentages indicate better cleaning. As can be seen, Formulation B provided superior loose grease cleaning results to the commercially available Formula R.

Example 6 - Residue

A visual comparison was made of the residue left on mirrors by formulations B and C from Example 1 , formulation R from Example 5, and the commercially available formulations in Table 7. The listings of ingredients were obtained from the supplier’s websites.

Table 7:

Cellulose sponges were rinsed and spun three times using warm water only in a Maytag washing machine to ensure that the sponges are free of contaminants/preservatives and to establish uniform dampness for all sponges. The sponges were then placed in a tightly sealed bag in order to maintain dampness until ready for use.

30.58 cm (12 inch) by 30.58 cm (12 inch) mirrors were cleaned with a dish detergent, rinsed in water, air dried in a vertical tile rack, and cleaned with ethanol.

Solution A was prepared by mixing at high speed 0.24 g of an octyl alcohol ethoxylate having 2 ethoxy groups, 0.6 g of a propylene glycol phenyl ether, and 35 g deionized water for at least two minutes.

Solution B was prepared by mixing 10 g of Solution A with 40 g of deionized water. Solution C was prepared by mixing 20 g of Solution B with 20 g deionized water.

10 drops of ethanol (95% minimum) were applied to a mirror using a pipette. Cheesecloth was used to evenly spread the solution across the mirror. The ethanol was allowed to dry. This mirror served as reference Rating 0.

5 drops of Solution C were applied to a mirror using a pipette. Cheesecloth was used to evenly spread the solution across the mirror. Solution C was allowed to dry. This mirror served as reference Rating 3.

10 drops of Solution B were applied to a mirror using a pipette. Cheesecloth was used to evenly spread the solution across the mirror. Solution B was allowed to dry. This mirror served as reference Rating 7.

10 drops of Solution A were applied to a mirror using a pipette. Cheesecloth was used to evenly spread the solution across the mirror. 10 more drops of solution A were applied to the mirror. A clean cheesecloth was used to spread the solution across the mirror. Solution A was allowed to dry. This mirror served as reference Rating 10.

The damp sponge was wrapped with plastic wrap to prevent moisture exchange. The wipe was wrapped around the plastic wrapped sponge. The wipe wrapped sponge was placed in a Gardner sheen abrasion tester. The tester is set to three cycles at 37 cycles per minute for the mirror (no weight added). The mirror is placed in a tile rack to dry after treatment.

The mirrors were evaluated against the reference mirrors discussed above by a visual assessment panel of 21 people. In other words, a rating of 0 is no residue and a rating of 10 is high residue. The results are provided in Table 8:

Table 8: ratios and on different substrates than water and two commercially available wipes formulations W and T. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that water frequently leaves a visible residue on shiny surfaces depending on the hardness of the water.

While formulation U leaves the least amount of residue, the federal Environmental Protection Agency registration for this product lists a 10-minute contact time to kill poliovirus type 1 . In contrast, as shown in Example 2, Formula B provide greater than 3 Log-ioor 99.9% reduction of poliovirus in 1 minute. As is known in the art, non-enveloped viruses including poliovirus, are particularly difficult to control or eradicate. Demonstrated microbicidal efficacy against poliovirus is expected to be indicative of microbicidal efficacy against other non-enveloped viruses and microorganisms which are less difficult to control or eradicate.

Example 7 - Tackiness and Residue

A comparison was made of the tackiness and residue left by wet floor wipes on a ceramic tile. A sheen abrasion tester was used to apply the wipes to the tiles in a reproducible manner. The tiles were allowed to dry for 10 minutes. The amount of force (in g) needed to pull the probe of a texture analyzer from the surface of a ceramic tile was determined. Formulations B and C from Example 1 and T from Example 5 were compared. The floor wipes had a 6.5:1 loading ratio on a 110 GSM nonwoven substrate. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the larger floor wipes contain more liquid than wipes designed for counters and similar surfaces. 0.5 g of petroleum jelly was spread on a tile using a gloved finger and used as a positive control. An untreated tile was used as a negative control. The results are provided in Table 9:

Table 9:

A lower number indicates a lower level of stickiness. These results demonstrate that the disclosed formulations B leave a residue similar to those left by the commercially available quaternary containing formulation T. The increase in the concentration of citric acid from 0.75% wt in formula B versus 2.5% wt in formula C nearly doubles the amount of resulting stickiness.

Example 8 - Foam

The height of foam generated from 40 mL of 1 % w/w aqueous solutions of formulations C and F from Example 1 and formulation T from Example 5 were compared using a Kruss™ Dynamic Foam Analyzer, Model DFA100, with its proprietary Advance™ software. The analyzer injects air into the sample and measures the resulting foam height. The results are provided in Table 10. Table 10:

These results demonstrate that formulation F, which is substantially free of surfactants, produces less foam than formulation T, comprising an alkylglycoside nonionic surfactant, and formulation C, comprising 2 anionic surfactants. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that amount of foam generated from neat solutions would be higher than that produced from the diluted 1 % w/w solutions. The lower foam volume produced by formulation F leaves less residue and tackiness on the surface.

The foregoing description of various aspects of the invention has been presented for purposes of illustration and description. Embodiments and/or features therein may be freely combined with one another. It is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise form disclosed, and obviously, many modifications and variations are possible. Such modifications and variations that may be apparent to a person skilled in the art are intended to be included within the scope of the invention as defined by the accompanying claims.

Claims

CLAIMS We claim:

1. A cleaning and disinfecting composition comprising benzoic acid, citric acid, lactic acid, and a hydrotrope, wherein the cleaning and disinfecting composition is substantially free of alcohol or glycol ether non-aqueous solvents.

2. The cleaning and disinfecting composition of claim 1 , wherein a concentration of the hydrotrope in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranges from 0.5% w/w to 2.0% w/w.

3. The cleaning and disinfecting composition of claim 1 or 2, wherein the hydrotrope is an alkali C6-C10 alkyl sulfate.

4. The cleaning and disinfecting composition of anyone of claims 1 to 3, wherein a concentration of sodium benzoate added to the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranges from 0.029 % w/w to 0.59 % w/w.

5. The cleaning and disinfecting composition of anyone of claims 1 to 4, wherein a concentration of the benzoic acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranges from 0.025% w/w to 0.5% w/w.

6. The cleaning and disinfecting composition of anyone of claims 1 to 5, wherein a concentration of the citric acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranges from 0.1 % w/w to 1 .5% w/w.

7. The cleaning and disinfecting composition of anyone of claims 1 to 6, wherein a concentration of the lactic acid in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranges from 0.5% w/w to 5% w/w.

8. The cleaning and disinfecting composition of anyone of claims 1 to 7, further comprising 0.0005% w/w to 0.005% w/w of a chelant, preferably a biodegradable chelant selected from the group consisting of L-glutamic acid-N,N’-di(acetic acid) tetrasodium salt (GLDA), methylglycinediacetic acid trisodium salt (MGDA), nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA), iminodisuccinic acid (IDS), ethylenediamine-N,N’-disuccinic acid (EDDS), or combinations thereof.

9. The cleaning and disinfecting composition of anyone of claims 1 to 8, further comprising sodium citrate, wherein a concentration of sodium citrate in the cleaning and disinfecting composition ranges from 0.01 % w/w to 1 % w/w.

10. The cleaning and disinfecting composition of anyone of claims 1 to 9, wherein the cleaning and disinfecting composition is substantially free of surfactants, cationic biocides, quaternary ammonium compounds, peroxide, hydrogen peroxide, bisguanide, guanide, polymers, phosphates, or combinations thereof.

11 . A wipes container comprising a nonwoven wipe and the cleaning and disinfecting compositions of any one of claims 1 to 10.

12. The wipes container of claim 11 , wherein a load ratio of the cleaning and disinfecting composition to the nonwoven wipe ranges from 3:1 to 7:1.

13. A method of reducing germs on a surface, the method comprising applying the cleaning and disinfecting composition of any one of claims 1 to 10 to the surface.

14. The method of claim 13, wherein the cleaning and disinfecting composition is applied to the surface using a nonwoven wipe.

15. The method of claim 14, wherein the reduction in germs on the surface is a 3 log or greater reduction in poliovirus after 1 minute contact time between the cleaning and disinfecting composition and the surface.