&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
EPA600/S-92/014 April 1992
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH BRIEF
Waste Minimization Assessment for a Manufacturer of
Can-Manufacturing Equipment
F. William Kirsch and Gwen P. Looby*
Abstract
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has funded
a pilot project to assist small- and medium-size manufacturers
who want to minimize their generation of hazardous waste but
who lack the expertise to do so. Waste Minimization Assess-
ment Centers (WMACs) were established at selected universi-
ties and procedures were adapted from the EPA Waste Minimi-
zation Opportunity Assessment Manual (EPA/625/7-88/003, July
1988). The WMAC team at Colorado State University per-
formed an assessment for a plant that produces equipment for
manufacturing and decorating aluminum beverage cans. Each
component manufactured undergoes a unique series of opera-
tions including cutting, machining, welding, and painting. The
team's report, detailing findings and recommendations, indi-
cated that spent cutting fluid and contaminated hydraulic fluid
are the largest wastes generated by the plant and that signifi-
cant savings could result from instituting a recycling program
for the waste cutting fluid.
This Research Brief was developed by the principal investiga-
tors and EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Cincin-
nati, OH, to announce key findings of an ongoing research
project that is fully documented in a separate report of the
same title available from the authors.
Introduction
The amount of hazardous waste generated by industrial plants
has become an increasingly costly problem for manufacturers
and an additional stress on the environment. One solution to
the problem of hazardous waste is to reduce or eliminate the
waste at its source.
' University City Science Center, Philadelphia, PA 19104
University City Science Center (Philadelphia, PA) has begun a
pilot project to assist small- and medium-size manufacturers
who want to minimize their formation of hazardous waste but
who lack the in-house expertise to do so. Under agreement
with EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, the Sci-
ence Center has established three WMACs. This assessment
was done by engineering faculty and students at Colorado
State University's (Fort Collins) WMAC. The assessment teams
have considerable direct experience with process operations in
manufacturing plants and also have the knowledge and skills
needed to minimize hazardous waste generation.
The waste minimization assessments are done for small- and
medium-size manufacturers at no out-of-pocket cost to the
client. To qualify for the assessment, each client must fall
within Standard Industrial Classification Code 20-39, have gross
annual sales not exceeding $50 million, employ no more than
500 persons, and lack in-house expertise in waste minimiza-
tion.
The potential benefits of the pilot project include minimization
of the amount of waste generated by manufacturers, reduced
waste treatment and disposal costs for participating plants,
valuable experience for. graduate and undergraduate students
who participate in the program, and a cleaner environment
without more regulations and higher costs for manufacturers.
Methodology of Assessments
The waste minimization assessments require several site visits
to each client served. In general, the WMACs follow the
procedures outlined in the EPA Waste Minimization Opportu-
nity Assessment Manual (EPA/625/7-88/003, July 1988). The
OĢ9 Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
WMAC staff locates the sources of hazardous waste in the
plant and identifies the current disposal or treatment methods
and their associated costs. They then identify and analyze a
variety of ways to reduce or eliminate the waste. Specific
measures to achieve that goal are recommended and the
essential supporting technological and economic information is
developed. Finally, a confidential report that details the WMAC's
findings and recommendations (including cost savings, imple-
mentation costs, and payback times) is prepared for each
client.
Plant Background
This plant produces equipment for the manufacture and deco-
ration of aluminum beverage containers. Over 60 units of
equipment are produced each year by the plant's 225 employ-
ees.
Manufacturing Process
Large main frames and a variety of small internal components
are manufactured by the plant and assembled into the final
product.
Each Internal component manufactured undergoes a unique
series of operations; the general production sequence is de-
scribed below:
* Bar stock, sheet steel, and aluminum castings are cut
to the appropriate size.
The cut metal undergoes milling, drilling, grinding, and
boring operations as needed to form the components.
* Some components are welded and then shipped offsite
for stress-relief treatment.
* Residual cutting fluid is removed from the parts using
petroleum naphtha.
* Components are painted and then sent either to the
assembly area or directly to customers for use as
spare parts.
Tha large frames undergo the following operations:
* Bar stock, sheet steel, and aluminum castings are cut
to size and milled, drilled, ground, and bored.
The metal is welded to form the frames.
The frames are sent offsite for abrasive cleaning and
stress-relief treatment.
Frames are painted and sent to the assembly area.
The manufacturing and decorating machines are assembled,
inspected, tested, and shipped to customers.
Existing Waste Management Practices
Spent solvent resulting from component cleaning is removed
by a vendor and recycled. The plant plans to switch to paints
that will reduce the emission of volatile organic compounds.
Waste Minimization Opportunities
The type of waste currently generated by the plant, the source
of the waste, the current management method, the quantity of
the waste, and the annual waste management costs are given
in Table 1.
Table 2 shows the opportunities for waste minimization and
cost savings that the WMAC recommended to the plant; The
type of waste, the minimization opportunity, the possible waste
reduction and associated savings, and the implementation cost
along with the payback time are given in the table. The
quantities of waste currently generated by the plant and pos-
sible waste reduction depend on the production level of the
plant. All values should be considered in that context.
It should be noted that the economic savings of the minimiza-
tion opportunity, in most cases, results from the need for less
raw material and from reduced present and future costs asso-
ciated with waste treatment and disposal. Other savings not
quantifiable by this study include possible future costs related
to changing emissions standards, liability, and employee health.
It should also be noted that the savings given for each opportu-
nity reflect the savings achievable when implementing each
waste minimization opportunity independently and do not re-
flect duplication of savings that would result when the opportu-
nities are implemented in a package.
This research brief summarizes a part of the work.done under
Cooperative Agreement No. CR-814903 by the University City
Science Center under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmen-
tal Protection Agency. The EPA Project Officer was Emma
Lou George.
Tablo 1. Summary of Currant Waste Generation
Waste Generated
Spent water-based
cutting fluid and
wastomter
Contaminated
hydraulic fluid
Spent petroleum
naphtha
Spent point and thinner
Paint ovorspmy
Source of Waste
Machining and grinding
operations
Machining operations
Cleaning of internal
components
Painting operation
Painting operation
Annual Quantity
Management Method Generated, gal
Blended into cement at a
nonhazardous waste
disposal facility
Shipped offsite for incineration
Removed by vendor and recycled
offsite
Shipped offsite for incineration
Conventional disposal
6,160
1,465
519
1,350
1,672
Annual Waste
Management Cost
13,570'
13,860'
2,020
23,430'
28,950'
' Includes savings on purchased materials
&U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1992 - 648-080/40254
-------
-------
Table 2, Summary of Recommended Waste Minimization Opportunities
Waste Generated
Minimization Opportunity
Annual Waste Reduction
Quantity Percent
Net Annual Implementation Payback
Savings Cost Years
Paint overspray
Waste cutting fluid
Spent thinner
Replace the conventional spray gun 1,048 gal
with a High Volume Low Pressure
(HVLP) spray gun to reduce
overspray waste.
Institute a program to recycle cutting 2,075 gal
fluid. Remove metal chips and
paniculate matter from the sump
using a portable filtration unit.
Provide continuous filtration of the
cutting fluid when the proposed unit
is not being used in conjunction with
the sump. In addition, treat spent
cutting fluid with acid and neutralize
the resulting aqueous phase prior
to sewering. The organic phase
(a smaller volume) can continue to
be shipped offsite for disposal.
Install a solvent recovery unit to distill 510
solvent waste to generate reusable solvent.
63
18,140'
6.1401
590
11,750
0.03
1.9
5,400'
4,360
0.8
Hydraulic fluid
Ship waste hydraulic oil to an oil recycler
rather than to a disposal facility for
incineration.
Spent petroleum naphtha Replace the petroleum naphtha used for
cleaning with an aqueous cleaner.
470
3,520
1,140
2,050
1.8
' Includes savings on purchased materials.
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental
Research Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA PERMIT NO. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
EPA/600/S-92/014
------- |