SOURCE REDUCTION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE SEMINAR RUTGERS UNIVERSITY - DOUGLASS COLLEGE AUGUST 22, 1985 Produced and Presented by: The Hazardous Waste Advisement Program New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Robert E. Hughey, Commissioner New Jersey Division of Waste Management Dr. Marwan M. Sadat, P.E., Director
..
WASTE MINIMIZATION THROUGH RECYCLING AND SOURCE REDUCTION Background The handling of hazardous wastes is one of New Jersey's most critical environmental issues. Legislators, realizing public concern or the environment and the need for a comprehensive environmental protection and management strategy have, since 1970, enacted over a dozen laws or major revisions to laws governing the protection of the environment and its resources. Three of these federal laws, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), and the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liabilities Act (CERCLA). managing the disposal of hazardous wastes. provide specific regulations for Although past environmental damage will still need to be repaired, efficient industrial environmental management requires the adoption of waste minimization strategies to prevent future problems. One method of preventing environmental damage attacks the problem at the industrial source before the waste is created. If the waste is not generated in the first place then the problems of waste handling, treatment, disposal and liability can be avoided. This pollution prevention approach to hazardous waste management is most often referred to as "Source Reduction". For our purposes, waste minimization refers not only to source reduction, but also to reuse and recycling practices. 2
The idea of waste minimization is not a new one. For some time, source reduction and recycling have been accepted as responsible and environmentally sound methods of hazardous waste management. Industry's response to these proposals used to be that it cost more to recover wastes and reuse them than to buy virgin materials. Similarly, it was cheaper to dispose of the waste in landfills or through a treatment, storage and disposal (TSD) facility than to implement waste reduction measures. Historically, land disposal has been the least expensive alternative for hazardous waste management. However, the low cost of land disposal did not adequately reflect the long term costs to society of cleanup, potential adverse health effects, irreversible environmental degradation, and various other consequences. The laws mentioned above (TSCA, RCRA and CERCLA) have made land disposal of hazardous waste more costly for industry by accounting for these hidden costs. Under these protective regulations, source reduction and recycling methods are becoming attractive alternatives to disposal and are growing in popularity in all phases of industry. Federal Requirements The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) confirm that it is national policy to minimize the generation of hazardous wastes. Effective September 1, 1985 hazardous waste generators must certify on all manifests that they have a program in place to "reduce the volume or quantity and toxicity of such waste to the degree determined by the generator to be economically practicable... and the proposed method of treatment, storage and 3
4 disposal which serves to minimize the present and future threat to humans and the environment". Biannual (every two years) reports by generators to EPA must identify the efforts undertaken to reduce the volume and toxicity of the waste generated. These requirements will be in effect in New Jersey beginning in September 1985. New Jersey On-Site Recycling Provision In New Jersey, persons or companies may recycle or'reclaim hazardous waste for their own use at the site where such wastes are generated, provided they comply with the annual reporting requirements found in N.J.A.C. 7:26-7.4(g) (Reclaimed waste is considered to be generated first, and therefore must be included in the report). Where the reclaimed or recycled hazardous waste is used as a fuel, the generator must comply with the requirements of N.J.A.C. 7:26-9.1(~)10i. Waste Minimization Techniques Below are some of the ways industry can reduce the generation of hazardous wastes through changes in the industrial production process, by segregation of waste streams or through reuse and recycling: 1. Improved Operation and Maintenance of Production Equipment - This involves modifying existing equipment and/or methods for using that equipment in order to reduce waste generation. This can be accomplished through good housekeeping practices or addition of process control equipment. Finding
and controlling leaks, improving storage methods and employing efficient handling procedures can be instituted in-house with minimum expense and without disrupting production. 2. Waste Stream Segregation - Simply explained, this technique minimizes hazardous waste generation by separating hazardous wastes from non-hazardous wastes at the point of generation. For example, a pesticide manufacturer modified his dust collection system in order to segregate and recover hazardous wastes. By collecting the pesticide waste dust produced from each production area separately rather than in a single bag house for all sources, the collected material remained unmixed and was reused for product processing. The system had a pay back period of 10 months, and currently saves the company $11,000 per year on waste disposal costs and reduced raw material costs. 3. Recycling and Reuse (onsite) - This entails reusing a waste following recovery or treatment of that waste. An example of this is a newspaper publisher who developed an in-house ink recycling system in 1973. By 1979 the printer was saving more than $40,000 a year by recovering 54,000 gallons of waste ink per year. 4. Material Substitution - This involves replacing a hazardous substance used in a production process with a non-hazardous or less hazardous substance. Substitution of solvent based inks and paints with water based coatings is an example. An engine manufacturer successfully accomplished this substitution. The new coating reduces the level of air pollution which 5
allows the hot air in the drying ovens to be recirculated for heating. Other additional benefits include reduced fire hazards and insurance costs. 5. Production Process Redesign and Modernization - This is defined as developing and using production processes which are of a fundamentally different design and generate less waste than those currently used. Examples of this are modifications which allow the use of recycled wastewater in a production process, or segregation of hazardous waste from non-hazardous waste streams at the point of generation so as to minimize the volume of hazardous waste generated. An electroplater introduced a number of production process modifications to reduce wastes and improve production efficiency. New plating machine designs reduced drag out, minimized rinse water flows, and enabled chrome recovery. Degteasing modifications resulted in decreased solvent usage of almost 80%. Additionally, installation of a drag out recovery system and redesign of plating racks saved the company over $4,200 a year in chemicals and reduced disposal costs. See Appendix A for more examples of ongoing waste minimization projects. Benefits to Industry Waste minimization provides many economic advantages which reduce waste treatment or disposal costs. These benefits are mainly in the form of savings realized from: -reduced need for investment in pollution control equipment; 6
-reduced pollution control operating and maintenance costs; -energy savings through increased efficiency; -savings in transport, storage and disposal costs; -savings in waste analyses, personnel training and recordkeeping. Benefits to the Environment and Society -efficient use and consenration of resources and energy; -less need for land disposal space; -lower health and environmental risk from diminished exposure to hazardous wastes. Starting a Waste Minimization Program Any company planning to implement a waste minimization program should start by performing an environmental audit. Among other areas of concern specific to a particular site, the audit should focus on plant efficiency and waste generation. From the results, plant managers can determine how much waste is produced, which components of the waste are hazardous, at what step in the process the wastes are generated, what costs of disposal are associated with each waste stream, and whether there are any leaks or unaccounted for material losses. This information, in addition to other customized questions which may be asked in the audit, can expose inefficient and wasteful practices in a manufacturing process. Once discovered, waste minimization techniques may be applied to help increase efficiency and reduce costs. Waste minimization should 7
be integrated into every phase of the production process to enhance productivity and reduce costs. Source reduction and recycling will prove superior to conventional "end-of- pipe" pollution abatement because industry can conserve resources and money by minimizing the volume of waste requiring ultimate disposal. 8
APPENDIX A The following table lists examples of ongoing waste minimization projects. It should be understood that every company is unique and the processes it uses are different. This table may be useful in providing ideas, but each firm will need to develop waste minimization practices that suit its own process requirements and organizational objectives. COMPANY 3M Company St Paul, hn St. Petersburg Times St. Petersburg, FL IBM Sealed Power Corp. Muskegon, MI Spinners Processing Co. Spindale, NC PROCESS CHANGE Redesigned a spray booth to eliminate excessive resin overspray and to recycle the overspray back into the project. Started a waste reduction program for newsprint. IBM has implemented a computer assisted solvent control system to meter solvents as they are piped into the manufacturing site. Installed a second set of condensing coils. also known as chillers, which create a cold blanket above the vapor zone in the degreaser and prevents the escape of solvent vapors. Installed low-liquor jet dyeing system. This system increases dye efficiency, more dye gets onto the material and less goes out with the wastewater, and reduces overall water consumption. BENEFIT With a capital investment of $45.000. the company turned its finances around to net annual savings of $125,000. The percentage of waste from the total newsprint used decreased from 4.4% to 2.4% in 18 months and resulted in a total savings of $168.000. This system eliminates the use of storage tanks which were causing emissions of hydrocarbons into the atmosphere. Projected savings in solvent costs for two units was $17,688 in the first year. The company is enjoying weekly cost savings of 73% per 22,000 pounds of fabric produced. 9
COMPANY Uni Rent Ltd (Industrial Launder and Dry Cleaner) Whitby, Ontario Cal. Electroplating Los Angeles, CA Dow Corning Dow Corning Pioneer Metal Finishing Inc. Franklinville, NJ PROCESS CHANGE Installed a Dry-to-Dry machine which combines washing and drying in a single unit. In addition, routine inspection of gaskets, seals. ducting and hosing help prevent loss of solvents. Company installed four counter flow rinsers after each plating stage on the line. Installed online process analyzers which reduced the need for wastewater treatment and eliminated a major salt discharge to the environment. Restructuring a single process at one plant reduced by 33% the plant's total oxygen demand from the waste stream. Started weekly batch treatments of plating waste (destruction of cyanides) that involved a sludge concentrator and a total solids removal system. BENEFIT Efficient equipment and good housekeeping are producing cost savings of $50,000 per year. The rinse modifications have dramatically reduced nickel and chromium use and almost eliminated the need to add sulfate and chloride to the nickel bath. Reduced the amount of acid required in a major processing unit by nearly 1 million pounds annually, resulting in annual savings of $250,000. Created savings in excess of $300,000 annually by avoiding treatment costs. 80% reduction in generation of hazardous wastes; savings of 11.500 gpd of water; all process water is reused. Three year payback period with an annual savings of $52,000. Waste minimization techniques have been incorporated production processes: into the following fertilizer production Better control of the process condition limits the contact between ammonia, nitric vapors and water. This resulted in the elimination of ammoniac and nitric acid pollution of the water. 10 An investment of $100,000 reduced running costs by $200.000.
Manufacture of hydrazine Oxidation of amonia with hydrate hydrogen peroxide instead of chlorine, and use methyl ethyl ketone. Eliminated all zinc pollution and reduced running costs by 40%. sodium chlorate mfg. A new process replaces graphite electrodes with titanium electrodes, resulting in less pollution, lower energy consumption and less cost. An investment of $1.8 million reduced annual operating costs by $1 million. Payback period 1.8 years. Sources: Campbell, M.E. and Glenn, W.M. Profit from Pollution Prevention, Pollution Probe Foundation, 1982. Huisingh, D. and Bailey, V. Making Pollution Prevention Pay, Pergamon Press, 1982. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management, Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Source Reduction Conference Proceedings, 1984. 11
BIBLIOGRAPHY Berndt, J.H. and Marlin, J.A.T. (1984) The Economics of Substitution in Production, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Campbell, M.E. and Glenn, W. (1982) Profit from Pollution Prevention: A Guide to Industrial Waste Reduction and Recycling, Pollution Probe Foundation, Toronto. DEM (1983 and 1984) Proceedings, Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Source Reduction Conference, Bureau of Solid Waste Disposal, Department of Environmental Management, Boston, Massachusetts. Economic Commission for Europe (1981) Compendium of Low- and Non- Waste Technology. Publication No. ECE/ENV/36. 6 Vol. Geneva: United Nations. Hall, R.M. Jr. (1983) "The Problem of Unending Liability of Hazardous Waste Management." The Business Lawyer: Vol. 38. February pp 83. Huisingh, D. and Bailey, V. Eds. (1982) Making Pollution Prevention Pay: Ecology with Economy as Policy. New York: Pergamon Press. 156 pp. Maugh, T.H. "Burial is Last Resort for Hazardous Wastes", Science, Vol. 204. June 22, 1979. Royston, M.G. 197. (1979) Pollution Prevention Pays. New York: Pergamon Press. pp Sarokin, D. (1983) "Source Reduction of Hazardous and Toxic Wastes: Obstacles and Incentives". Paper presented at Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Source Reduction Conference, October 13, 1983. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management. The United Nations Environment Program (1982) Low-or-Non-Pollution Technology Through Pollution Prevention. UN Office of Industry and the Environment. Prepared by Environmental Engineering and Pollution Control/3M Company. 12
...