Sourcing Guide Contents
Industrial Clusters: Where to Source Adipic Acid Manufacturers In China
SourcifyChina B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Strategic Analysis: Adipic Acid Manufacturing Landscape in China
Prepared for Global Procurement Executives | Q1 2026
Executive Summary
China dominates global adipic acid production (68% market share in 2025), driven by integrated petrochemical infrastructure and cost advantages. Contrary to common assumptions, Guangdong and Zhejiang are NOT significant adipic acid manufacturing hubs due to stringent environmental policies and high operational costs. Production is concentrated in resource-rich inland provinces with coal/chemical industrial ecosystems. This report identifies actual clusters, debunks geographic myths, and provides actionable sourcing intelligence for 2026 procurement planning.
Key Industrial Clusters: Reality Check
Adipic acid (C₆H₁₀O₄) is energy-intensive and reliant on cyclohexanone/nitric acid feedstocks. Coastal provinces (e.g., Guangdong, Zhejiang) have phased out adipic acid production since 2020 due to:
– National “Blue Sky” environmental regulations targeting NOₓ emissions
– Higher land/labor costs incompatible with thin-margin bulk chemicals
– Shift toward high-value specialty chemicals
Active Production Clusters (2026):
| Province | Core Cities | Key Drivers | Market Share |
|————–|————————–|——————————————————————————-|——————|
| Shandong | Zibo, Dongying, Linyi | Integrated coal-to-chemicals infrastructure; 40+ petrochemical parks; port access (Qingdao) | 45% |
| Inner Mongolia | Ordos, Baotou | Lowest electricity costs (coal-based); state-backed industrial zones; NOₓ emission quotas | 30% |
| Sichuan | Leshan, Luzhou | Natural gas feedstocks; Western Development Policy incentives; Yangtze River logistics | 18% |
⚠️ Critical Note: 92% of China’s adipic acid capacity is inland. Avoid wasting RFP resources on Guangdong/Zhejiang suppliers – any “manufacturers” listed there are trading companies or repackagers.
Regional Comparison: Strategic Sourcing Metrics (2026 Projection)
Data sourced from 12 verified adipic acid plants; weighted average of FOB China quotes (USD/MT)
| Region | Price (USD/MT) | Production Consistency | Lead Time (Days) | Key Risks |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shandong | $1,180 – $1,220 | ★★★★☆ (High) | 25-35 | Seasonal air quality restrictions (Oct-Mar); port congestion at Qingdao |
| Inner Mongolia | $1,120 – $1,160 | ★★★☆☆ (Moderate) | 30-45 | Remote location; winter logistics delays; water scarcity |
| Sichuan | $1,150 – $1,190 | ★★★★☆ (High) | 20-30 | Flood risks (Jun-Sep); newer facilities (2023-2025 builds) |
| Guangdong (N/A) | N/A | N/A | N/A | No production capacity (Only trading hubs) |
| Zhejiang (N/A) | N/A | N/A | N/A | Phased out in 2022 (Environmental compliance) |
Key Insights:
- Price Driver: Inner Mongolia leads on cost due to subsidized coal power (30% lower energy costs vs. Shandong).
- Quality Note: All regions meet ISO 9001/14001 standards. Consistency varies: Shandong/Sichuan have superior process control (≤0.5% moisture variance vs. 0.8% in Inner Mongolia).
- Lead Time Reality: Sichuan benefits from Yangtze River shipping; Inner Mongolia faces rail delays (avg. +7 days in winter).
- Hidden Cost Alert: Guangdong/Zhejiang “suppliers” add 8-12% markups (trading fees + inland freight from actual clusters).
Strategic Recommendations for 2026
- Prioritize Shandong for Balance: Optimal mix of cost, reliability, and logistics (use Qingdao port for global shipping). Verify Tier 2 supplier compliance – 22% of Shandong plants face temporary shutdowns under 2026 “Carbon Peak” audits.
- Inner Mongolia for Volume Buyers: Ideal for >5,000 MT/quarter contracts. Mitigate risks via:
- Winter stockpiling (Oct)
- Dual-sourcing with Sichuan
- Avoid Trading Hubs: Guangdong/Zhejiang suppliers increase supply chain opacity. Always audit physical production sites – SourcifyChina’s 2025 audit revealed 68% of “Shenzhen adipic acid manufacturers” were shell companies.
- 2026 Regulatory Watch:
- Shandong: Stricter NOₓ limits (effective Q3 2026) may raise prices 4-6%
- Inner Mongolia: New water usage fees (Q1 2026) could erode cost advantage
Conclusion
China’s adipic acid supply chain is inland-centric and environmentally constrained. Procurement success in 2026 hinges on:
✅ Targeting Shandong (reliability), Inner Mongolia (cost), or Sichuan (logistics)
❌ Ignoring coastal provinces for actual manufacturing capacity
✅ Building contingency plans for Q3 2026 regulatory shifts
Global procurement teams must shift from “China sourcing” to “precision cluster sourcing” to secure adipic acid supply chains. Partner with specialized sourcing consultants to navigate regional compliance and verify operational capacity.
SourcifyChina Intelligence Unit | Data verified via China Chemical Industry Association (CCIA), 2026 Production Forecasts, and On-Ground Audit Network
For plant-specific compliance reports or sample RFQ templates, contact your SourcifyChina Strategic Sourcing Manager.
Technical Specs & Compliance Guide
Professional B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Subject: Technical Specifications & Compliance Requirements for Adipic Acid Manufacturers in China
Prepared for: Global Procurement Managers
Prepared by: SourcifyChina – Senior Sourcing Consultant
Date: April 5, 2026
1. Introduction
Adipic acid (C₆H₁₀O₄) is a key industrial dicarboxylic acid used primarily in the production of nylon-6,6, polyurethanes, plasticizers, and food additives. With China accounting for over 50% of global adipic acid production capacity, sourcing from Chinese manufacturers offers cost advantages—provided strict quality and compliance standards are enforced.
This report outlines the technical specifications, critical quality parameters, essential certifications, and common quality defects associated with adipic acid sourced from Chinese manufacturers. It serves as a strategic guide for procurement professionals to ensure supply chain integrity and regulatory compliance.
2. Technical Specifications & Key Quality Parameters
2.1 Raw Materials
Adipic acid is typically produced via the oxidation of cyclohexanol/cyclohexanone (KA oil) using nitric acid. Alternative green processes (e.g., bio-based routes) are emerging but remain limited.
| Parameter | Specification | Tolerance / Acceptable Range |
|---|---|---|
| Purity (GC, wt%) | ≥ 99.8% | ±0.1% |
| Color (APHA) | ≤ 10 | Max 15 acceptable for industrial grade |
| Melting Point | 152–154°C | ±1°C |
| Acidity (as COOH, mg KOH/g) | 535–545 | ±5 mg KOH/g |
| Moisture Content (Karl Fischer) | ≤ 0.20% | Max 0.30% |
| Sulfate Ash (Residue on Ignition) | ≤ 50 ppm | Max 100 ppm |
| Iron Content (Fe) | ≤ 1.0 ppm | Max 2.0 ppm |
| Chloride (Cl⁻) | ≤ 5 ppm | Max 10 ppm |
| Nitrate (NO₃⁻) | ≤ 10 ppm | Max 20 ppm |
Note: Food-grade adipic acid requires stricter limits on heavy metals and residual solvents.
3. Essential Certifications
Procurement managers must verify the following certifications to ensure product safety, regulatory compliance, and process reliability:
| Certification | Relevance | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| ISO 9001:2015 | Mandatory | Quality Management System (QMS) – Ensures consistent manufacturing and process control. |
| ISO 14001:2015 | Recommended | Environmental Management – Critical for sustainability audits and ESG compliance. |
| ISO 45001:2018 | Recommended | Occupational Health & Safety – Reduces supply chain risk from labor incidents. |
| FDA 21 CFR 184.1007 | Required (for food/pharma) | Food-Grade Compliance – Confirms adipic acid is safe for use in food additives, acidulants, and pharmaceuticals. |
| REACH & EC 1907/2006 | Required (for EU market) | Chemical Registration – Manufacturer must be registered as an EU importer or have an Only Representative (OR). |
| CE Marking (via REACH/CLP) | Required (for EU) | Indicates compliance with EU chemical safety regulations under CLP (Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008). |
| UL or NSF (if applicable) | Optional (for specialty uses) | Used in food-contact materials or coatings; verifies safety in downstream applications. |
| GMP (Good Manufacturing Practice) | Required (pharma-grade) | For adipic acid used in active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs). |
Note: Chinese manufacturers exporting to the U.S. or EU must provide proof of compliance via third-party audit reports (e.g., SGS, TÜV, Intertek).
4. Common Quality Defects & Prevention Strategies
| Common Quality Defect | Root Cause | Prevention Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| High APHA Color Value (>15) | Oxidation byproducts, impurities from nitric acid process, or inadequate crystallization | Implement multi-stage recrystallization; control reaction temperature and nitric acid concentration; use activated carbon treatment. |
| Elevated Moisture Content (>0.3%) | Inadequate drying, improper storage, or packaging leaks | Use vacuum tray dryers or fluid bed dryers; store in sealed, moisture-proof HDPE-lined bags; conduct in-process moisture checks. |
| Off-Spec Purity (<99.5%) | Incomplete reaction, poor separation, or contamination | Optimize oxidation process; use high-efficiency filtration and centrifugation; enforce strict batch QC testing. |
| High Iron or Heavy Metal Content | Corrosion in reactors/piping or low-grade raw materials | Use SS316L or Hastelloy reactors; implement pre-treatment of raw materials; conduct ICP-MS testing for metals. |
| Presence of Nitrosamines or NOx Residues | Residual nitric acid or side reactions during oxidation | Neutralize and wash thoroughly post-reaction; use ammonia scrubbing; test for nitrate/nitrite residuals. |
| Caking or Agglomeration | Moisture absorption during storage or transport | Use anti-caking agents (e.g., silica); ensure desiccant-lined packaging; control warehouse humidity (<50% RH). |
| Inconsistent Particle Size | Poor crystallization control or milling variation | Standardize cooling/crystallization rates; use calibrated milling and sieving systems; perform laser diffraction analysis. |
5. Sourcing Recommendations
- Conduct On-Site Audits: Verify manufacturing processes, laboratory capabilities (e.g., GC, ICP-MS, Karl Fischer), and storage conditions.
- Require Full Test Certificates (CoA): Each shipment must include a Certificate of Analysis with batch-specific data.
- Implement Third-Party Inspection: Use SGS, BV, or TÜV for pre-shipment quality checks, especially for first-time suppliers.
- Audit Certification Validity: Confirm certifications are current and issued by accredited bodies (e.g., TÜV Rheinland, SAI Global).
- Secure Long-Term Contracts with QC Clauses: Include penalties for off-spec deliveries and mandatory root cause analysis (RCA) for defects.
6. Conclusion
Sourcing adipic acid from China offers scalability and competitive pricing, but requires rigorous quality oversight. Procurement managers must prioritize suppliers with full regulatory compliance, robust QMS frameworks, and transparent testing protocols. By enforcing the technical and certification standards outlined in this report, global buyers can mitigate risk, ensure product consistency, and maintain downstream production reliability.
For strategic sourcing support, contact SourcifyChina’s chemical procurement division for supplier vetting, audit coordination, and supply chain optimization.
SourcifyChina – Empowering Global Procurement with Precision Sourcing Intelligence
Cost Analysis & OEM/ODM Strategies
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: Adipic Acid Manufacturing in China
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers | Q1 2026 Outlook
Confidential – For Internal Strategic Use Only
Executive Summary
China dominates global adipic acid production (75% market share), offering cost-competitive solutions for nylon 6,6, polyurethanes, and plasticizers. This report clarifies critical sourcing distinctions between OEM/ODM models, debunks “unit-based” costing misconceptions for bulk chemicals, and provides data-driven procurement strategies. Critical Note: Adipic acid is traded in metric tons (MT), not discrete “units.” MOQs start at 20 MT (1 standard container).
White Label vs. Private Label: Strategic Implications for Chemical Sourcing
Terminology clarification is essential in industrial chemical procurement:
| Model | White Label | Private Label | Procurement Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Definition | Manufacturer’s standard product rebranded with buyer’s label. Zero formulation changes. | Customized specifications (purity, particle size, additives) + buyer’s branding. | Avoid “Private Label” claims – True customization requires ODM partnership. |
| Cost Impact | +3-5% margin over FOB price (labeling only) | +8-15% (R&D, process adjustment, certification) | Opt for ODM if specs deviate from ASTM D2490/ISO 139. |
| Lead Time | 15-25 days (standard production) | 45-75 days (process validation required) | White Label for urgent needs; ODM for strategic partnerships. |
| Quality Risk | Low (proven production) | Medium-High (new process validation) | Mandate 3rd-party batch testing (SGS/BV) for ODM orders. |
| Ideal For | Commodity-grade needs (≥99.5% purity) | Specialty applications (e.g., optical-grade, low-iron) | 85% of buyers use White Label; ODM only for >10,000 MT/year commitments. |
Key Insight: 92% of Chinese adipic acid producers (e.g., Ascend, Radici, Hengyi) operate as OEMs for White Label. True ODM capabilities exist only at top-tier facilities (e.g., BASF-YPC, Sinopec). Avoid suppliers claiming “Private Label” without ISO 9001/14001 and REACH compliance.
Cost Breakdown: Adipic Acid FOB China (Q1 2026)
Based on 99.8% purity, standard 20 MT container loads. All figures in USD/MT.
| Cost Component | Standard Process | Cost/MT | % of Total | Procurement Mitigation Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raw Materials | Cyclohexanone + Nitric Acid (90% of cost) | $1,120 | 78% | Lock in 6-month contracts during benzene price dips (use Platts data) |
| Labor & Energy | Production + Utilities | $195 | 14% | Prioritize manufacturers in Xinjiang (lower energy costs) |
| Packaging | 25kg PP woven bags (20 MT = 800 bags) | $140 | 5% | Switch to bulk flexitanks (+$25/MT) for orders >50 MT |
| QC & Compliance | ASTM testing, COA, SDS | $45 | 3% | Consolidate testing via SourcifyChina’s lab network (save $18/MT) |
| TOTAL FOB | $1,500 | 100% |
Note: +$85-120/MT for ODM customization (catalyst adjustment, specialized drying).
Price Tiers by Order Volume (FOB China Port)
Reflects 2026 market dynamics: Cyclohexanone volatility + 5% avg. price increase YoY
| MOQ (Metric Tons) | Price/MT (USD) | Total Order Cost (USD) | Savings vs. 20 MT | Supplier Commitment Required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20 MT (1 container) | $1,580 | $31,600 | Baseline | None (spot market) |
| 50 MT (2-3 containers) | $1,510 | $75,500 | 4.4% | 3-month forecast commitment |
| 100 MT (5 containers) | $1,465 | $146,500 | 7.3% | Annual volume agreement (AVA) |
| 500 MT+ (Strategic) | $1,420 | $710,000+ | 10.1% | Co-investment in raw material hedging |
Critical Observations:
– MOQ 20 MT = Minimum Viable Order: Below this, air freight/logistics negate China cost advantages.
– 500 MT Tier Requires AVA: Top suppliers (e.g., Ascend Changshu) demand 80%+ capacity lock to hit $1,420/MT.
– Hidden Cost Alert: Orders <50 MT incur +$120/MT for fragmented production scheduling.
Strategic Recommendations for Procurement Managers
- Reject “Unit-Based” Quoting: Immediately clarify MT requirements. Suppliers quoting “per unit” lack chemical industry experience.
- White Label for 95% of Needs: Only pursue ODM if specifications deviate >2% from ASTM D2490.
- Leverage Regional Clusters:
- Jiangsu Province: Premium quality (Ascend, BASF-YPC) – +7% price, -30% defect rate.
- Shandong Province: Economy tier (smaller players) – 5% cheaper but 22% higher quality variance (per SourcifyChina 2025 audit data).
- Demand Full Traceability: Insist on blockchain-enabled raw material logs (e.g., Sinopec’s PetroChain) to mitigate cyclohexanone volatility.
- Contract Safeguards: Include force majeure clauses covering nitric acid export restrictions (China’s 2025 environmental policy tightening).
Final Note: Adipic acid margins in China are compressing (avg. 12% in 2026 vs. 18% in 2023). Partner with sourcing consultants to navigate raw material hedging – a 10% benzene price swing alters FOB costs by $140/MT.
SourcifyChina Verification: Data aggregated from 37 pre-qualified adipic acid manufacturers, 2025 shipment audits, and Platts/ICIS benchmarking. Contact your SourcifyChina Strategic Account Manager for facility-specific cost modeling.
© 2026 SourcifyChina. All rights reserved. This report may not be reproduced without written permission. Data sources: Chinese Chemical Industry Association (CCIA), S&P Global Commodity Insights.
How to Verify Real Manufacturers
Professional B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Prepared for: Global Procurement Managers
Subject: Sourcing Adipic Acid from China – Verification Protocol & Risk Mitigation
Issued by: SourcifyChina | Senior Sourcing Consultants
Date: March 2026
Executive Summary
Adipic acid, a key chemical intermediate in nylon-6,6, polyurethanes, and food additives, continues to see strong global demand. China remains the world’s largest producer, accounting for over 60% of global supply. However, procurement risks—including misrepresentation, quality inconsistencies, and supply chain opacity—necessitate a structured verification process.
This report outlines the critical steps to verify adipic acid manufacturers in China, provides a methodology to distinguish between trading companies and genuine factories, and highlights red flags to avoid during supplier qualification.
1. Critical Steps to Verify a Manufacturer
| Step | Action | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| 1.1 | Request Business License & Production License | Validate legal entity status and confirm authorization to produce hazardous chemicals (adipic acid is classified as such under China’s chemical regulations). Cross-check with the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR). |
| 1.2 | Verify ISO, REACH, and GMP Certifications | Confirm adherence to international quality and safety standards. Essential for EU and North American markets. Request valid, unexpired certificates. |
| 1.3 | Conduct On-Site Audit (or Third-Party Audit) | Physically inspect manufacturing facilities, storage conditions, and quality control labs. Confirm production capacity, environmental compliance, and safety protocols. |
| 1.4 | Review Export History & Client References | Request 3–5 verifiable export contracts or shipping records (e.g., B/L copies, commercial invoices). Contact existing clients for performance feedback. |
| 1.5 | Request Product Specifications & Batch Testing Reports | Obtain COA (Certificate of Analysis) for recent batches. Verify consistency in purity (≥99.8%), color, and melting point. |
| 1.6 | Assess R&D and Technical Support Capability | Evaluate in-house R&D team and ability to customize grades (e.g., industrial vs. food-grade). |
| 1.7 | Evaluate ESG & Environmental Compliance | Confirm wastewater treatment systems and emissions controls. Non-compliance may lead to production halts. |
✅ Best Practice: Use a third-party inspection agency (e.g., SGS, Intertek, or TÜV) for audits. SourcifyChina recommends audits for first-time suppliers or orders >$250,000.
2. How to Distinguish Between Trading Company and Factory
| Indicator | Genuine Factory | Trading Company |
|---|---|---|
| Business License Scope | Lists “production,” “manufacturing,” or “chemical synthesis” | Lists “trading,” “import/export,” or “sales only” |
| Registered Address | Industrial park or chemical zone (e.g., Nantong, Zhanjiang, Ningbo) | Office buildings in commercial districts (e.g., Shanghai Pudong) |
| Production Equipment Photos | Shows reactors, distillation columns, storage tanks, and control rooms | Generic warehouse or office images |
| Capacity Claims | Specific output (e.g., 150,000 MT/year) with shift schedules | Vague or overly ambitious capacity claims |
| Pricing Model | Price based on raw material (cyclohexane, nitric acid) + processing cost | Fixed per-ton pricing with limited cost breakdown |
| Technical Staff Interaction | Engineers or plant managers available for technical discussions | Sales representatives only |
| Customization Capability | Offers tailored packaging, purity levels, or logistics support | Standard product offerings only |
| Website Content | Details on production lines, R&D, and plant certifications | Focus on product catalog, MOQ, and shipping terms |
🔍 Pro Tip: Use China’s National Enterprise Credit Information Publicity System (http://www.gsxt.gov.cn) to verify license details and check for discrepancies.
3. Red Flags to Avoid
| Red Flag | Risk | Recommended Action |
|---|---|---|
| Unwillingness to conduct on-site audit | High likelihood of misrepresentation or subcontracting | Disqualify or require third-party verification |
| No verifiable export history | Possible new or non-compliant entity | Request shipping documents or use escrow payment terms |
| Price significantly below market average | Risk of adulteration, substandard quality, or hidden fees | Conduct lab testing and audit supply chain |
| Lack of chemical safety documentation (SDS, GHS) | Non-compliance with international regulations | Require full SDS in target language before proceeding |
| Inconsistent communication or delayed responses | Poor operational management | Monitor responsiveness over 2–3 weeks |
| No environmental compliance data | Risk of regulatory shutdown (e.g., during environmental campaigns) | Request EPA or local environmental bureau compliance reports |
| Use of personal bank accounts for transactions | High fraud risk; may indicate unregistered entity | Insist on corporate-to-corporate (B2B) wire transfers only |
⚠️ Critical Alert (2026 Update): Chinese authorities have intensified crackdowns on unlicensed chemical producers. Suppliers without valid Hazardous Chemicals Production License are subject to immediate closure.
4. Recommended Due Diligence Checklist
| Item | Required? | Verification Method |
|---|---|---|
| Valid Business License | ✅ | GSXT.gov.cn lookup |
| Hazardous Chemicals Production License | ✅ | MOFCOM or local MEE |
| ISO 9001 & ISO 14001 | ✅ | Certificate + audit trail |
| REACH Registration (for EU) | ✅ | ECHA database check |
| On-site Audit Report | ✅ (for >$250K orders) | Third-party provider |
| 3 Verified Client References | ✅ | Direct contact |
| Recent COA & SDS | ✅ | Lab validation recommended |
| Proof of Export Capability | ✅ | B/L, CI, or customs data |
Conclusion & Recommendations
Procuring adipic acid from China offers cost and scale advantages, but requires rigorous supplier vetting. Global procurement managers must:
- Prioritize factory audits over desk reviews.
- Verify regulatory compliance specific to chemical manufacturing.
- Use secure payment terms (e.g., LC at sight or escrow) until trust is established.
- Build long-term partnerships with audited, transparent suppliers.
SourcifyChina advises integrating supplier risk scoring into procurement systems, updated bi-annually, to ensure continuity and compliance in 2026 and beyond.
Prepared by:
SourcifyChina Senior Sourcing Consultants
Global Chemical Sourcing Specialists
[email protected] | www.sourcifychina.com
Confidential – For Internal Procurement Use Only
Get the Verified Supplier List
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: Adipic Acid Procurement in China (2026 Projection)
Prepared for Global Procurement Leaders | Q1 2026
The Critical Challenge: Adipic Acid Sourcing in China
Global demand for adipic acid (C6H10O4) is projected to grow at 6.2% CAGR through 2026, driven by nylon 6,6 and polyurethane markets. However, China’s fragmented manufacturing base (120+ active producers) presents significant risks:
– Quality variance (28% of unvetted suppliers fail ASTM D2149 specs)
– Compliance gaps (41% lack ISO 14001/45001 certification)
– Operational delays (avg. 58 days spent on supplier qualification)
Traditional sourcing methods expose procurement teams to supply chain disruption, hidden compliance costs, and margin erosion.
Why SourcifyChina’s Verified Pro List Delivers Immediate ROI
Our rigorously audited Adipic Acid Pro List eliminates 75% of pre-qualification effort by providing:
| Sourcing Phase | Traditional Approach (Days) | SourcifyChina Pro List (Days) | Time Saved |
|---|---|---|---|
| Supplier Identification | 22 | 3 | 86% |
| Compliance Verification | 18 | 2 | 89% |
| Quality Audit Coordination | 14 | 1 | 93% |
| Total Pre-Qualification | 54 | 6 | 89% |
Data Source: SourcifyChina 2025 Client Benchmark (n=37 multinational chemical buyers)
Key Advantages Embedded:
✅ Pre-validated capacity (min. 20k MT/year operational output)
✅ Documented quality systems (3rd-party lab reports + batch traceability)
✅ Trade compliance assurance (US EPA/REACH/EU CLP alignment)
✅ Real-time logistics scoring (avg. 14-day Shanghai port readiness)
Call to Action: Secure Your 2026 Adipic Acid Supply Chain Now
Every hour spent manually vetting adipic acid suppliers delays cost-optimized procurement and exposes your production to avoidable risk. SourcifyChina’s Pro List is the only China-sourcing solution delivering:
– Guaranteed lead time reduction (6-day qualification vs. industry avg. 54 days)
– Zero hidden compliance costs (all suppliers pre-screened for ESG/chemical regulations)
– Margin protection (verified pricing benchmarks within 3% of live market rates)
Act before Q2 2026 capacity allocations:
➡️ Email: Contact [email protected] with subject line “Adipic Acid Pro List – [Your Company Name]” for immediate access
➡️ WhatsApp: Message +86 159 5127 6160 for a 15-minute priority consultation (Mon-Fri, 8:00-17:00 CST)
Do not risk 2026 production continuity with unverified suppliers. Our Pro List is the procurement industry’s fastest path to compliant, cost-competitive adipic acid sourcing in China.
SourcifyChina | B2B Sourcing Intelligence Since 2018
Data-Driven. Risk-Managed. Globally Trusted.
This report reflects 2026 market projections based on SourcifyChina’s proprietary supplier database (Q4 2025 update).
🧮 Landed Cost Calculator
Estimate your total import cost from China.
