Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
If I understand it correctly, Eastman Kodak has a long history of chemical manufacturing - and much of that manufacturing had wider applicability than just to the photographic industries. They developed and manufactured many products - at one time they competed with the likes of Dupont in the depth and breadth of their product lines.

I wouldn't be surprised if much of their environmental exposure relates to that history.

If my knowledge of Forte is correct, they are unlikely to have that type of exposure.

Kodak has a history of responding well to environmental concerns, as they become apparent, but much of Kodak's pioneering work was done before anybody understood those concerns.

I suggest that modern manufacturing processes are much more likely to be environmentally "gentle" - thus I would be surprised if the Kodak/Lucky facilities were very problematic.

IMHO it is the historic facilities and resources that create the most concern for Kodak.


This is correct. Kodak Chemicals division, on Ridge Road in Rochester was one of the largest fine chemical manufacturers in the USA. They invented and pioneered the 'vacuum still' a method of making highly pure organic compounds and as a result became the worlds largest supplier of vitamins in the entire world. There specialties were vitamin E and vitamin A, and the work on vitamin E led directly to the original work on highly stable dyes in the 1960s, 20 years before Henry Wilhelm began his work. At that time, Kodak paper was far superior to any other paper on the market due to the use of antioxidants that were similar to Vitamin E.

Each year, they published a new huge catalog that contained many of the chemicals used in film making including developers, sensitizing dyes, and addenda.

This plant is now closed.

It was more properly called DPI or Distillation Products Industries.