United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics
Washington, DC 20460
July-August 1995
EPA 742-95-002
oEPA
Interview
An interview with the new
Director ofEPA's Office of
Pollution Prevention and
Tbxics, William H. Sanders
if- Building Design
Here's how one small office
built pollution prevention into
their new digs; plus other news
in building design
Electronic Resources
A cooperative effort among
industry, academia, and
government is yielding a
significant new software tool
for building pollution
prevention into product design
1Q Solvents
Solvents are the bane of
many a company's existence.
Find out what different
companies are doing to get
ready for the future.
Pollution
Prevention
News
EPA LEADERSHIP PROGRAMS ANNOUNCED
A host of new environmental initia-
tives have been announced in recent
weeks as part of the Clinton Admin-
istration's reinvention of regulation to
achieve environmental results at least
cost. In April, EPA launched a one-year
pilot of the voluntary Environmental
Leadership Program. Fifteen facilities
were selected to participate in the pilot,
including 10 private companies and two
federal facilities. The project is aimed at
exploring ways that EPA and states might
encourage facilities to develop innovative
management, compliance, and pollution
prevention programs, and reduce the
burden of paperwork and inspections.
For example, for three of its facilities,
The Gillette Company will develop a
compliance audit and environmental
management system protocol using
independent third-party auditors, and will
provide EPA with a prototype verification
system for use by other companies. The
John Roberts Co., a small printing firm in
Minneapolis, will work on developing a
mentoring approach, whereby large
corporations or agencies can help small
ones understand and comply with environ-
mental regulations and new technologies.
Other participants include: Ocean State
Power, Burrillville, RI; Duke Power, Mount
Holly, NC; Ciba Geigy, St. Gabriel, LA;
Motorola, Austin, TX; AZ Public Service,
Phoenix, AZ; Salt River Project, Phoenix,
AZ; McClellan Air Force Base, Sacramento,
CA; Simpson Tacoma Kraft Co., Tacoma,
WA; Puget Sound Naval Shipyard,
CALIFORNIA AND EPA ACCELERATE
REGISTRATION OF SAFER PESTICIDES
The State of California and EPA
recently came together for the second
in a series of joint approvals of low-
toxicity pesticides. On May 25, EPA and
the California EPA simultaneously
announced the registration of the pesticide
tebufenozide (trade name CONFIRM). The
announcement culminates a shared staff
review of pesticide data, agreed upon a
year earlier as a first step in developing
common methods of doing risk assessment
and eventually arriving at standardized
review procedures for all studies. A
parallel review of tebufenozide was
coordinated with Canada's Pest Manage-
ment Regulatory Agency.
Tebufenozide, made by Rohm and Haas
Co. of Philadelphia, was given priority
treatment for registration because of its
low toxicity to mammals, birds, honey
bees, and moderate toxicity to freshwater
fish and invertebrates. EPA has been
accelerating the registration process for
safer pesticides, particularly for biological
pesticides that are derived from naturally-
occurring substances.
Earlier this year, EPA and California
announced the registration of the biologi-
cal pesticide Bio-Save™ for the control of
post-harvest diseases on apples, pears,
and citrus. Bio-Save™ products are based
on natural microbial agents isolated from
fruit surfaces, and were widely tested in
the U.S. and South America by their
manufacturer, EcoScience Corporation in
Worcester, MA.
-------
2 Pbllution Pre ’ ition NewB
July -August 1995
INTERVIEW
Dr William H. Sanders HI became the
Director of EPA’s Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) in May
1995, after serving as Director of EPA
Region 5’s Environmental Services Divi-
sion. He holds a Ph.D. in Public Health
from the University of Illinois at Chicago;
an M.S. in Management of Public Service
from DePaul University; and a B.S. in Civil
Engineering from the University of Illinois
at Chicago. PPN interviewed Dr Sanders in
August.
Q Do you see the “reinventing gov-
ernment” effort as changing our
approach to pollution prevention?
When you talk about reinvention, you hear
the words “cleaner, cheaper, smarter.”
Obviously these same words bring pollu-
tion prevention to mind as well. I think
our voluntary programs are very much
connected to the reinventing government
initiative. This Administration wants to
explore different ways of doing business,
with everybody at the table. As we succeed
in these voluntary pollution prevention
programs, I think you will see them
become a routine part of the way we do
business, with less of an emphasis on the
regulatory side (although that still needs
to be in place). Certainly we still have
some work to do, but pollution prevention
is key to this Administration, and I’m very
excited to be here.
I often use the analogy of doing busi-
ness upstream versus downstream. When
you try to work downstream, you’ve
already created a pollution mess. Pollution
prevention is about doing work upstream,
at the beginning, and as simply as pos-
sible. We’ve gone about some of our more
successful social programs this way.
Headstart is an example: if you can get
kids at an early enough age and feed them
and educate them, they can go a lot
further in life.
Q: Reflecting on your experience in
one of the EPA Regional Offices, what
o’
role do you think the Regions play in
promoting pollution prevention,
compared to Headquarters’ role?
While Headquarters sets national policy
and designs national programs, Regions
play a key role in implementing those
programs in the most advantageous way
for specific geographic areas. Let me give
you an example — I remember serving in
Region 5 when the 33/50 program started.
The Regional role in implementing this
program was very important. The idea for
the program was conceived at Headquar-
ters, but the implementation — in terms of
reaching industry, convincing industry to
sign up, doing the follow-up presentations
— all of that was done in the Regional
Offices. I should add that Regions play an
especially important role when it comes to
working directly with the States. We can
thank the Regions for making many of our
state grant programs — the Pollution
Prevention Incentives for States program
is one of them — so successful.
Q: Your office, OPPT, is responsible for
pollution prevention and environmen-
tal information, both of which are key
tools in protecting the environment.
How are they related?
Clearly they go hand in hand. One of our
tools in pollution prevention is informing
people of what is going on in terms of
pollution and toxic releases. Getting the
information out to the public is very
important. Right now you can go to the
TRI data. But if there happens to be a
release from an industry that does not fall
within the SIC codes covered, you’re out of
luck. Or if the chemical of concern is not
one of the 600 or so substances now listed,
you’re out of luck. You can come into the
agency and ask what is going on with air
or water permits, but I maintain that it is
very difficult to obtain this type of infor-
mation (even if you could find the right
person to ask!) and very difficult to
interpret the information.
-------
3 Fbllution Pre ntion News
July-August 1995
INTERVIEW, CONTINUED
My office is leading one of the
President’s reinvention initiatives de-
signed to make access to this information
much easier. This initiative to develop
“one-stop reporting” will be a tremendous
help to communities around this country,
particularly when the data comes in
electronically. Ultimately, it will also ease
the burden that some companies experi-
ence. Getting the information in faster will
mean that we can also get it out faster —
and industry, I’ve found, is very interested
in TRI information as well.
More broadly, we have a tremendous
amount of information here in OPPT on
chemical processes, chemical substitutes,
comparative risk. Companies continually
ask us what we can tell them about the
risks of different chemicals, or if a new
process is sanctioned by EPA. I think our
office has to have a leadership role in
developing and sharing this information,
which will give pollution prevention a real
push. An example is the Design for the
Environment’s dry cleaner project, which
is looking for alternatives to perchloroethyl-
ene used by most of the cleaners in this
country.
We are actively working to find alterna-
tives that will be cleaner, smarter, and
economically feasible. We need to harness
the information we have to the pollution
prevention engine.
Q: As we look forward to the next few
years, what special challenges do you
see for EPA and for OPPT in particular?
What’s happening on Capitol Hill right
now is certainly a challenge — to our
traditional regulatory and enforcement
programs. There does appear something of
a disconnect, if you look at the support for
the environment in the polls over a
number of years. The support is still there,
as a bipartisan issue. The extreme reduc-
tions that are proposed for EPA’s budget
are clearly inconsistent with that support.
There is no way that this agency can
adequately respond to protecting health
and the environment with that kind of cut.
I should add that I am greatly encour-
aged, in these times of Congressional
criticism, by the Clinton Administration’s
support for our work. Earlier this month,
the President visited a community in
South Baltimore where he praised the
Community Right-to-Know program and
issued an Executive Order guarding
against an effort in Congress which would
undermine that program. The new Execu-
tive Order requires federal contractors to
report to the TRI — so that, no matter
what the Congress does to the TRI pro-
gram, at least information about toxic
releases from federal contractors will be
available to the public. President Clinton
also lent his support to our efforts to
expand the types of facilities required to
report to the TRI and the type of informa-
tion we collect. That support is very
encouraging.
As for some of my own priorities, a
major challenge to this office is still the
difficulty of quantitatively measuring the
amount of pollution prevented as a result
of our efforts. We need to develop a
currency with which to value these
achievements. Some folks have been
telling me that we have grabbed all of the
“low-hanging fruit,” the easy answers, that
all the projects that save money have
already been done. I don’t believe it. As
one colleague from Tennessee recently told
me, “We haven’t caught all the fat rabbits
out there.” There are plenty of opportuni-
ties for pollution prevention, not just in
large industry, but in medium and small
businesses too. We need to assist trade
associations and large corporations in
taking on this task.
EPA’s new Pollution Preventionl
Environmental Justice grants program
combines two concerns that are “passions”
of mine, if you will. I’m optimistic that the
$4 million that we will award in Septem-
ber will empower citizens and local
agencies to do something about pollution
in their own communities. I’m looking
forward to seeing some really good work.
My bottom line is: When we walk away at
the end of the project, have we made the
environment safer?
-------
4 Fbllution Preventioui News
July -August 1995
BUILDING DESIGN
HOME GREEN HOME
B uilding pollution prevention and
energy conservation into the design
of residential and commercial
structures still seems far-enough away to
be a pipe dream. But it’s a little closer now,
thanks to the environmental watchdog
group INFORM. The organiza-
tion set out to show that even
a small office can be trans-
formed into a “green” space —
and at less than the compa-
rable costs of ordinary renovations. With
the help of Croxton Collaborative, an
architectural firm noted for environmental
architecture, and Silverstein Properties,
the owners of 120 Wall Street in New York
City where INFORM planned to lease a
9,127 square-foot space, INFORM’s build-
out costs averaged $38 a square foot, 27
GREEN FEATURES
Open office planllow-partition
workstations allows natural light into
all work areas, needs less electricity
Up/down pendant fixtures maximize
brightness, reduce number of light
bulbs needed by 66%.
Electronic ballasts more efficiently
transfer electricity to light
Motion sensors can save up to 30% of
energy bills
Linoleum flooring is durable, made
of natural ingredients
Solution-dyed carpet conserves water
in manufacturing process
Exterior-grade plywood reduced
formaldehyde emissions
High air filtration reduces particulates
40-80% rather than 20%
Multiple air changes: eight times an
hour, ratherthan the code- specified
three times per hour. Low velocity air
circulation decreases potential for
moisture/fungus build-up in duct work.
percent less than the standard $52 per
square foot cost for office construction in
the city. The design incorporated the latest
environmental thinking, including an open
design, energy efficient lighting, insulated
duct work, use of less toxic materials, and
cleaner air. Below is a partial checklist of
the green features in INFORM’s new home.
For more information,
contact INFORM at
212-361-2400 or by
fax: 212-361-2412.
Even a small office
can be transformed
into a “green” space.
I.hr. .
STANDARD FEATURES
Enclosed offices and/or high
partition workstations
Recessed fixtures
Magnetic ballasts
Light switches
Vinyl or vinyl
composition flooring
Vat-dyed carpet
Interior-grade plywood
Partial filtration
Few air changes/standard
velocityair circulation
sad Now
-------
5 lk llution Prevention News
July -August 1995
BUILDING DESIGN, CONTINUED
BUILDING NOTES
I n April, one of the nation’s largest home
improvement retailers, Home Depot,
awarded grants worth $287,100 to 33
non-profit environmental groups. The
recipients include the Center for Sustain-
able Building and Technology in Cam-
bridge, MA which promotes environmental
sound living habits and products in low
income, urban communities, and the
Southface Energy Institute which is
sponsoring the building of an “earthwise”
home by the Atlanta chapter of Habitat for
Humanity. Home Depot recently published
“Environmental GreenprintR” which
pinpoints 88 ways to bring about a
“greener” home in making home improve-
ments.
This August, 70,000 people walked by the
Planet Protection Center display at the
National Hardware Show in Chicago.
The Center is a joint effort by the National
Retail Hardware Association and the
Home Center Institute, geared at educat-
ing home improvement retailers about the
need for energy and water conservation
and suggests ways to accomplish it. The
Center encourages retailers to stock and
promote products that will help American
homeowners and businesses conserve
energy and water. Industry research pegs
the do-it-yourself consumer public at more
than 75 million households and increasing
every year; the Center is trying to reach
10% of the market, or 7.5 million U.S.
households.
Architects attending Ball State
University’s fourth conference on Edu-
cating Architects for a Sustainable
Environment (EASE) in May in Aspen,
Colorado heard suggestions for implement-
ing sustainable architecture principles
into schools of architecture. Ideas in-
cluded: creating multi-disciplinary
videoconference courses, generating a
collaborative database, developing a
network of sustainable development
educators, requiring courses in ecology
and environmental sciences, producing a
video involving case studies of exemplars
of sustainability, publishing guidelines for
educators, and developing a resource
network. Work products coming out of this
effort should be available within a year.
For information, contact: Holly Wirick,
312-353-6704.
Worried about your deck expanding and
contracting with the weather? Mobil
Chemical Co. has come out with a new
product, Trex, made up of wood fiber and
plastic — specifically, post-consumer andl
or post-industrial reclaimed plastic
grocery sacks and stretch film, combined
with waste wood fiber from furniture
manufacturers and used pallets. Trex’s
manufacturer claims that the product is as
easy to work with as wood, but has low
expansion and contraction.
The City of Austin’s Green Builder
Program is one of 12 finalists in the
United Nations’ Local Government Honors
Program. The Green Builder Program
rewards conservation efforts and offers
builders technical assistance in environ-
mentally sensitive construction. Using a
four-star ranking system, Austin rates
home energy use to emphasize conserva-
tion and sustainability in the both con-
struction and renovation.
A garage-sized mobile “GreenHouse,”
constructed entirely of recycled, reused,
non-toxic, and energy-efficient building
materials was developed by Pierce County,
Washington to demonstrate the feasibility
of environmentally friendly building
design. The county estimates that over
400,000 people have visited the display
since September 1993. For information,
contact Nancy Morrison, 206-593-4050.
RESOURCES:
New software to be released
later this year by the Na-
tional Research Energy
Laboratory (NREL) will
help architects, designers,
and builders get computer-
ized answers to building
design questions. Called
Energy-lO, the software
takes data on floor area,
building use, and type of
HVAC system, and produces
over 15 options for comparing
energy-saving designs, with
options ranging from passive
solar heating to insulation.
Energy-lO can also perform
hourly calculations of
thermal, HVAC, and lighting
behavior simulated through a
complete year of operations.
For information, contact
Doug Balcomb, 303-275-6028.
The Local Government
Sustainable Buildings
Guidebook: Environmentally
Responsible Building Design
and Management provides
an easy-to-read overview of
sustainable construction
and renovation strategies
for municipal buildings.
Produced by Public Technol-
ogy Inc. and the U.S. Green
Building Council. (1994,
$ 18/govt., $50/others.
Contact PTI at 301-490-
2 188, fax: 301-604-0158.)
-------
6 Fbllution Prevention News
July -August 1995
ENERGY
ENERGY STAR TAKES OFF
E PA’s Energy Star program has cloned
its winning formula into a number of
voluntary efforts. What they have in
common is a commitment to innovative,
energy—efficient technologies and profit-
able solutions.
Energy Star Buildings focuses on
profitable investment opportunities
for energy savings in existing commer-
cial buildings that already participate
in EPA’s Green Lights program.
Energy Star Office Equipment was
first launched in 1992 to encourage
manufacture of machines that will
power down and go to “sleep” when not
in use. Some 450 computer manufactur-
ers currently produce over 2000 models
that qualify. Energy Star copiers, fax
machines, and printers are the latest
addition to the program.
Energy Star Transformers assists
utilities in finding ways to cut costs and
improve services. Electric utilities agree
to purchase cost-effective, high-effi-
ciency transformers for their distribu-
tion systems.
Energy Star Furnaces are 90 percent
efficient or more, compared to 60
percent efficiency from existing fur-
naces in the U.S.
Manufacturers participating in the
Energy Star Heat Pump and Air
Conditioners program agree to
produce air source heat pumps and
central air conditioners with a Seasonal
Energy Performance Factor of at least
12 and a Heating Seasonal Performance
Factor of at least 7. Consumers will
save hundreds of dollars per year in
heating and air conditioning bills with
these products.
The Energy Star Geothermal Heat
Pump program is an attempt to make
this energy-efficient, environmentally-
friendly technology better known
among consumers.
And last but not least, boasting one
solitary brave charter partner (York
International), the Energy Star Gas-
Fired Heat Pump program is an effort
to promote this new breakthrough
technology that allows users to heat
and cool their homes using a single
natural gas-fired system.
TRAINING
The Association of Energy
Engineers is sponsoring a
two-day training program
for energy managers.
Energy Management in
Federal, State & Local
Government Buildings
will run September 14-15,
in Sacramento, CA. For
more information, call
916-922-8041.
Natural Gas Star Producers aims at
reducing methane emissions associated
with natural gas production, transmis-
sion, and distribution. Seven compa-
nies, representing almost 20% of U.S.
gas production, joined as Charter
Partner March.Uiis year.
4w
The LandfUj ! ‘iafle Qutreach
*dustr’ — am encOurages
the of environmentall?
For more information, contact the
Energy Star Hotline at 202-775-6650, or
fax: 202-775-6680. Information about
these programs is available on the
Internet’s World Wide Web via the EPA
k1 A r. All programs can be
A home pages through
http//www.epa.gov.
-------
7 Fbllution Prevention News
July -August 1995
ENERGY, CONTINUED
REVOLVING FUNDS HOLD THE
KEY TO STATE AND LOCAL
ENERGY DEMAND
R evolving funds are proving to be a
popular option for states and
localities hoping to trim energy
demand while helping households, busi-
nesses, and governments gain access to
the capital they need to make energy
efficiency improvements. The Results
Center, a project of IRT Environment
located in Basalt, Colorado, has been
studying revolving funds and other energy
efficiency programs. Here are summaries
of three of the funds they studied.
PHOENIX
The City of Phoenix’s Energy Management
Program is one of the best kept efficiency
secrets in the United States. The revolving
fund for municipal facilities was started
with virtually no capital and in a few years
was saving the city over $1 million annu-
ally. In the past 13 years, the fund has
provided the City’s departments with
valuable energy management services, $22.4
million in direct, accountable dollar savings,
and over $18 million in net repayments to
the City’s General Fund. Each year a portion
of documented energy savings are rein-
vested in further energy efficiency improve-
ments, providing a means for leveraging
greater and greater energy savings.
TEXAS’ LOANSTAR PROGRA.M
The State of Thxas’ LoanSTAR program is a
revolving fund that loans money at low-
interest rates to institutional facilities to
retrofit public buildings. After four years in
business, LoanSTAR has provided capital
for the retrofit of over 22 million square feet
of space in 225 buildings at 34 sites. The
average payback of the projects has been 3.5
years; over $20 million is estimated in cost
savings derived from reductions in the use of
electricity, natural gas, steam, and chilled
water. LoanSTAR emphasizes monitoring
and verification of energy savings.
With some $100 million dollars worth of
loan funds available from oil overcharge
funds, LoanSTAR has the potential to
leverage as much as $850 million over the
next 20 years. While oil overcharge funds
are drying up, the model that LoanSTAR
represents can be funded through utility
seed capital programs and from federal,
state, and municipal sources.
NEBRASKA’S DOLLAR
AND ENERGY SAVING LOAN
The Nebraska Energy Office has imple-
mented its Dollar and Energy Saving Loan
program since 1991 with remarkable
success and little fanfare. The program has
resulted in over $45 million dollars worth of
retrofit activity, 4,394 MWh of annual
electricity savings, and 137,107 MCF of
natural gas savings. To achieve these
results the Energy Office has effectively
leveraged significant private sector funds
from the program’s base funding of oil
overcharge monies. Nebraska uses the
interest income generated from oil over-
charge funds to administer the program,
while subsidizing low-interest energy
efficiency loans by working in close coopera-
tion with commercial lenders in the state.
Nebraska invested $24.5 million in the
loan program, which has been leveraged
170 percent through matching private-
sector funds. The total value of loans made
is $46 million. Over ten years, program
analysts expect that the total amount of
capital provided for retrofits will be 360
percent of the initial outlay.
Of 8,420 loans processed as a result of
the program through 1994. fully 92% have
been residential loans. These loans have
fostered both gas and electricity savings
with average home efficiency gains of
13.5’ and 5 ’? respectively.
The American Council for an Energy-
Efficient Economy (ACEEE) analyzed the
program’s macroeconomic impact using
input-output modelling. Over a ten-year
period of analysis, the program is expected
to induce 789 job-years of employment,
create $17.26 million in net income from
added wage and salary compensation, and
contribute $28.3 million to the Nebraska
Gross State Product.
REPORT ON
OHIO PROGRAMS
An audit of utility demand-
side management programs
in Ohio concludes that the
programs are succeeding,
but consumers could be
paying less for electricity if
utilities engaged in more
aggressive efforts.
Strengthening Demand
Side Management in Ohio
is available from the
Campaign for an Energy
Efficient Ohio, 400 Dublin
Ave. Suite 120, Columbus,
OH 43215, Tel: 614-224-
4900, Fax: 614-224-4914.
For more information on
revolving loan funds or 120
case studies of successful
energy service programs,
please contact The Results
Center, do IRT Environ-
ment, P0 Box 2239, Basalt,
Colorado 81621, tel: 970-
927-3155, fax: 970-927-9428,
or via e-mail irt@irt.com.
-------
$ IkIlutMm Pre ition News
July -August 1995
RESOURCES
MANUALS, VIDEOS
A Pollution Prevention
Manual for Localities” and
accompanying video,
“Pollution Prevention:
Virginia Localities Doing
Their Part,” are available
from Virginia Military
Institute Research Labora-
tories (VMIRL). They were
produced through a grant
provided by the Virginia
Environmental Endowment,
in conjunction with the
annual Environment
Virginia Symposium in April
1995. The video highlights
pollution prevention initia-
tives at various Virginia
localities, and the manual
give guidelines on how to
implement an effective
pollution prevention pro-
gram. A similar video and
manual set targeted to
small and medium size
businesses is also available.
The cost is $20 per video or
manual, or $35 for each set.
Send check (made out to
VMIRL) to: Conference
Office, Civil & Environmen-
tal Engineering, Virginia
Military Institute, Lexing-
ton, VA 24450; or call 703-
464-7743.
CPAS LENDS A POLLUTION
PREVENTION HAND
S uppose you’re a process designer who
has been given the task of optimizing
a methanol plant from an environmen-
tal standpoint. You know about reactor
design improvements, separation equipment
efficiencies, and measuring fugitive emis-
sions. But would you know to look into using
a membrane separator and an autothermal
reformer? Only in the last two years has this
technology been written about in the
literature, and if you didn’t know about it,
how would you find out about it?
A coalition of industry, academia, and
government offices is working to provide
an answer to such questions, by develop-
ing a computer-based suite of tools that
can help process designers build pollution
prevention information and technology in
at the earliest stages of conceptual design.
The Clean Process Advisory System TM
(CPAS) is the name of the software
framework, currently being developed
through the National Center for Clean
Industrial and Treatment Technologies
(CenCITT), the AIChE Center for Waste
Reduction Technologies, and the National
Center for Manufacturing Sciences, with
support from EPA, the Department of
Energy, the National Institute for Standards
and Technology, and other federal and state
agencies.
A key objective of CPAS is to offer
designers the opportunity to quickly
identify the range of pollution prevention
options available and have enough design
information on hand to feel comfortable
about the technical feasibility of unfamil-
iar options. The software developers note
that if designers are new to an option and
cannot get comfortable with it quickly,
they will nearly always discard it. CPAS
itself consists of a series of tools or mod-
ules aimed at helping designers consider
options and understand potential environ-
mental risks. For example, there are tools
being built for separation technologies and
treatment technologies, for technology
modeling and assessing environmental
fate and transport. There are pollution
prevention design options tools for gas-
eous, aqueous, organic, and solid streams.
Advisory tools will provide information on
material and solvent selection, while a
range of design comparison modules assist
with full-cost accounting, economics and
environmental analyses, and life-cycle
analysis.
A demonstration version of the software
is currently available, incorporating 10
tools; another 15 tools are in the planning
stages. The developers have sought
information from technology users and
vendors and are interested in the widest
possible involvement of all sectors in this
project. For more information, contact Pete
Radecki or Jim Baker, CenCITT, at 906-
487-3 143 or Internet: cpas@mtu.edu
P2P SOFTWARE QUANTIFIES
PREVENTION PROGRESS
EPA has developed a software program
called “P2P” — meaning “pollution preven-
tion progress” — to help firms assess the
results of their product redesign, reformu-
lation, or replacement. The software
program leads the user through a brief
protocol aimed at identifying the pollut-
ants generated before and after the
product change occurs. The program then
compares the before and after situations
and produces a variety of reports on media
affected — water, soillgroundwater, air —
and pollution impacts on human health,
environmental use, and disposal capacity.
Copies of P2P are available on written
request to the Pollution Prevention
Research Branch, Risk Reduction Engi-
neering Laboratory, U.S. EPA, Cincinnati,
OH 45268, or by fax: 513-569-7680.
-------
9 Fbllution Prewntion News
July -August 1995
EPA NEWS
ACID RAIN MARKET
TRADING PROGRAM
EXPANDED
EPA has extended the option of trading
pollution credits to all industrial fossil
fuel-burning sources, in an effort to
expand the market trading program
beyond electric power plants. Industrial
boilers and small utility units may now, on
a voluntary basis, enter the program and
receive their own acid rain allowances.
These allowances do not increase overall
emissions but merely shift emissions from
the industrial to the utility sector. Indus-
try and consumers currently save an
estimated $2 billion per year under the
pollution credit trading program, and the
inclusion of additional sources is expected
to increase the cost savings associated
with allowance trading.
In March, EPA and the Chicago Board
of Trade announced that the third annual
acid rain allowance auction had resulted
in proceeds totaling $22.8 million. The
money will be returned to the utilities
from which the allowances were drawn.
Overall, the Acid Rain Program is ex-
pected to result in a 10 million ton reduc-
tion in SO 2 emissions from 1980 levels, by
the year 2010.
MEASURING POLLUTION
PREVENTION
EPA, in cooperation with Research Tri-
angle Institute, is conducting research to
develop a framework for the design of
industrial pollution prevention measure-
ment systems. This research will identify
and define critical design factors such as
data and indexing. An initial framework is
being developed through a review of
relevant literature and will be tested and
revised through the light of an evaluation
of measurement systems currently in place
at 4-6 companies.
Facilities wishing to comment on or
participate in the research should contact
Melissa Malkin at Research Thangle
Institute (919-541-6154 or E-mail:
mjmalkin@rti.org).
o’
ENVIRO$ENSE UPDATE
EPA’s full-service environmental database,
Enviro$ense, is up and running. The
Internet address and hotline number were
incorrect as reported in the last issue of
PPN. The correct information is shown
below, along with access information via
modem (unchanged from previous report):
Via Internet: corrected)
The address is:
http://wastenot. mel .gov/envirosense
The World Wide Web hotline number is:
208-526-6956
Via Modem: (unchanged)
Set communications to 8, N, 1; Emulation:
ANSI or VT- 100. Telephone Number: 703-
908-2092. BBS hotline: 703-908-2007.
LEADERSHIP PROGRAMS
C. .tiss..d fro. p.,. 1
Bremerton, WA WMX Thchnologies, Arling-
ton, OR. For more information, contact Tai-
ming Chang, Tel: 202-564-5081.
Another new project underway is called
Project XL. Through this project, EPA
will offer a limited number of responsible
companies and other regulated entities the
opportunity to test alternative approaches
to traditional command and control
regulations. Project participants will be
given the flexibility to replace current
regulatory requirements with an alterna-
tive strategy that achieves better environ-
mental results. EPA will choose XL
projects on a rolling basis beginning this
summer. Projects will be evaluated based
on whether they:
Save costs and reduce paperwork
Demonstrate stakeholder support
Demonstrate an innovative process,
technology, or management approach
Develop a transferrable approach
Are technically and administratively
feasible
Contain monitoring, report, and evalua-
tion components
Avoid shifting the burden of environ-
mental risk.
For more information contact Jon Kessler,
202-250-3761.
The first ever National
Pollution Prevention
Week is a celebration of the
benefits of pollution preven-
tion and an opportunity for
state and local governments
to spread the pollution
prevention message. Activ-
ity guides, media guides,
model proclamations and
other materials are avail-
able through the Thny Eulo,
Western Center for Pollu-
tion Prevention, 1121 W.
25th St., Eugene, OR 97405,
Tel: 503-683-3054.
MARK YOUR CALENDAR:
N4 ’4 4
1 1I Id’
p 4 4 o*’
Weak
1 -24, 1 1’1s
-------
10 POllution Prewntion News
July -August 1995
THE CHALLENGE OF SOLVENTS
THE SEARCH IS ON
FOR ALTERNATIVES TO
CHLORINATED SOLVENTS
I ncreasing concern for public health and
environmental problems, such as the
greenhouse effect and ozone layer
depletion, has resulted in more stringent
regulations for industries using solvents.
As one writer noted:
‘Crunch’ time has come for most solvent
users. If the excise tax won’t do it,
accelerated phase-out of the chlorinated
ozone depleters and the Clean Air Act
will... There is no “drop-in” replacement
for chlorinated solvents in any cleaning
application. Switching to aqueous or
semi-aqueous cleaners and processes
generally requires additional equip-
ment, multiple cleaning and rinsing
steps, and drying...
Bob Carter, “Solvents: The
Alternatives,” in Pollution
Prevention in South Carolina,
Winter 1995.
cleaning of a part between two machine
steps. The oil-based lubricant is now
centrifuged off the parts, eliminating the
wash and rinse cycles formerly used.
For all other operations, Bosch decided
to bypass hydrochlorofluorocarbon so!-
vents and not to revert to hydrocarbon
cleaners of earlier years. These interim
solutions were seen not as “buying time
but wasting time.” For a more permanent
solution, Bosch decided on aqueous
cleaning for most of its needs. For better
performance, Bosch decided to use small
custom cleaners dedicated to one or a few
cleaning steps. The danger of corrosion
has been minimized by the company’s
move to “just-in-time” production and a
reduced inventory buffer between opera-
tions. Company engineers report that a
great deal of experimentation was neces-
sary, as well as fine-tuning, to get the
results they were seeking. But now, they,
claim, capital and operating costs have
decreased while their manufactured parts
are cleaner than ever.
Below, some indications of how compa-
nies are rising to the challenge.
ROBERT BOSCH CORP., CHARLESTON, SC
At Robert Bosch, Charleston, a manufac-
turing plant producing gasoline fuel
injectors, antilock brake systems, and
diesel fuel pumps, the solvents of choice
had been CFC-113 and trichloroethylene
(TCE for metal parts cleaning. CFC-113
use has been eliminated, and the company
made a decision to phase out the use of all
chlorinated solvents by the end
of 1995, including TCE.
Eliminating chlorinated
solvents required a large team
effort, beginning with the Vice
PresidentlPlant Manager. The
most desirable replacement
option was the “no-clean”
option. Each cleaning step was examined
to decide if it was absolutely necessary.
Although it is rare to eliminate a cleaning
step entirely, one example at Bosch —
suggested by the shop-floor personnel —
involved the replacement of solvent
These interim
solutions were
seen not as
“buying time but
wasting time.”
CAMBRIDGE, INC. IN MARYLAND
Maryland pollution prevention officials are
pleased with the alternatives to solvent
cleaning developed by a metal conveyor
belt manufacturer, Cambridge, Inc.,
located in Cambridge, Maryland. The
company’s original system consisted of a
1,1,1-trichioroethane solvent cleaning bath
contained in a tank. The system produced
hazardous vapors in the work area,
contributed to emissions in the adjacent
environment, and required periodic
cleansing by a distillation unit.
None of that is true of the aqueous
system that replaces the old system. The
process water is obtained from a city
source, then deionized and filtered prior
to entering the rinse and wash tanks.
Both tanks are equipped with electric
immersion heaters, oil skimmers, and
several turbochargers to agitate the
waters for the wash and rinse operations.
Each tank has sensors that automatically
monitor water level and conductivity to
ensure adequate detergent strength for
optimum cleaning efficiency.
o’
-------
11 Pbllution Prewntion News
July -August 1995
SOLVENTS, CONTINUED
The aqueous system produces no ozone-
depleting emissions, no hazardous waste
to be disposed of, no need for employees to
wear safety protective equipment, no fire
or spill hazards, and no federal reporting
requirements. While the annual electricity
costs are higher for the aqueous system,
overall operating costs are 58% less than
with solvents. The payback period for the
installation costs is estimated at less than
5 years. According to Robert Murphy and
Rita Bellini-Goetze in Maryland’s Hazard-
ous Waste Program, Cambridge Inc. “is a
model project that has overpowering
environmental gains for both the commu-
nity and the industry ” Cambridge, Inc.
won the Maryland Department of the
Environment award as the outstanding
Maryland company in 1993.
WHAT’S THE ALTERNATIVE?
Companies pursuing pollution prevention
goals and environmental compliance
sometimes find themselves between a rock
and a hard place — or more specifically, in
a world of less-than-ideal alternatives. A
case in point is the search for substitutes
for the ozone-depleting chemical TCA
(1,1, 1-Trichioroethane). A world-wide ban
on TCA production goes into effect on
January 1, 1996.
In anticipation of the upcoming outlaw-
ing of TCA, some Southern California firms
have switched their cleaning operations
from TCA to perchloroethylene (perc). In
essence, these firms went from the frying
pan into the fire, exchanging an ozone-
depleting substance (TCA) for a suspected
carcinogen (perc). According to Katy Wolf,
Director of the California-based Institute
for Research and Technical Assistance
(IRTA), firms may have made the switch
because perc can be used in the same
equipment as TCA, and because “many
firms are comfortable with solvents and are
reluctant to do the testing necessary to
convert to water cleaning formulations.”
Nevertheless, the handwriting is on the
wall: regulation of perc is increasing at both
the federal and state levels. Perc is already
listed as a Hazardous Air Pollutant under
the Clean Air Act and California permits
use of perc only if a firm is using the best
available control technology Says Wolf,
“The challenge is to keep firms
from converting from one ozone-
depleting solvent to other
solvents that pose health and
environmental problems. In
general, we try to put people
into a no-clean or water ap-
proach. The reason not to move
to another chemical is that
you’ll have to move again in a few years.
Forward-thinking firms will bite the bullet
now and test water cleaning formulations.”
Even odder is the situation of California
industries using adhesives. Some years
ago, the South Coast Air Quality Manage-
ment District encouraged them to replace
their VOC-based adhesives, which contrib-
ute to smog, with TCA-based adhesives.
While other regions can switch back to
VOC-based products, the 40,000 opera-
tions in the Los Angeles Basin that use
adhesives have to find an alternative to
satisfy both the local restrictions on VOCs
and the international ban on TCA.
IRTA’s Pollution Prevention Center
brought together adhesive users, vendors,
and regulators at an all-day adhesives
conference last year to discuss the state of
adhesives technology and new applications
under development. One panelist noted
that here, too, the best solution lies with
water-based alternatives: “Returning to
solvents is not an option. The regulations
have driven the technology, and water-
based adhesives are 10 years ahead of
where they would have been.” The confer-
ence saw demonstrations of hot-melt and
water-based formulations.
One helpful solution for companies is
IRTA’s Pollution Prevention Center, one of
the National Institute of Standards and
Technology’s manufacturing extension
centers. The Center works with hundreds
of small and medium-sized businesses in
the Los Angeles area identifying, testing,
and implementing low- and non-solvent
alternatives. For more information,
contact IRTA at 310-453-0450.
PUBLICATION
The Winter 1995 issue of
P 2 SC — Pollution Preven-
tion in South Carolina is
dedicated to the issue of
reducing solvents, with case
studies from the 3M Com-
pany (Greenville Site), the
Savannah River Site, and
Robert Bosch Corporation in
Charleston, SC. Available
from Institute of Public
Affairs, University of South
Carolina, Columbia, SC
29208, Tel: 803-777-8157.
r Editorial Staff:
Ruth Heikkinen, Editor
Gilah Langner
Free Hand Press Layout
To be added to our m i1ing
list, please write:
Polution Prevention News
U.S. EPA (MC7409)
401M Street NW
Washington, DC 20460
or fax to:
Ruth Heikkinen,
202-260-2219
Thinted with vegetable oil-based
Q inks on i x ’s recycled paper
< t J (50% post-consumer).
“The reason not to
move to another
(hemual is that
you’iI have to
move again in
a few years.”
o’
-------
12 Pollution Prevention News
July-August 1995
CALENDAR
TITLE DATE
National Recycling Coalition -
14th Annual Conference & Exposition
How to Manage Solvents
in the Workplace
Solar Home Design/Environmental
Building Technologies Workshop
Southern States Annual
Environmental Conference
33rd International Solid
Waste Exposition
1995 International CFC & Halon
Alternatives Conference
A Symposium on Life Cycle
Engineering - 1995 ASME
Winter Annual Meeting
Wastewater Pollution
Prevention Symposium
Waste Minimization Certification
Fall 1995 National Pollution
Prevention Roundtable Conference
Conference on Tailings
and Mine Waste ‘96
Technological Solutions for Pollution
Prevention in the Mining and Mineral
Processing Industries
RadTech 96: Zero VOC Coatings and Inks
Moving? Please enclose mailing label!
CONTACT
Prof. Hong-Chao Zhang,
Texas Tech University,
806-742-3400
Elizabeth Borowiec,
415-744-1948
Government Institutes
Inc. 301-921-2345
NPPR, Tel: 202-543-P2P2
Fax: 202-543-3844
Linda Hinshaw,
Colorado State University,
970-491-6081,
Engineering Foundation,
Fax: 212-705-7441
Nashville, TN Chris Dionne,
708-480-9576
United States Environmental
Protection Agency (MC 7409)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
Forwarding & Return Postage Guaranteed
Address Correction Requested
o rr’+o ee
C.EL ORES EEC(v’
LiBRARIAN
US A REGICtI B
C* PL STE 500 C’ç f iBTH ST.
cEN S CD 90202
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT NO. G-35
National Recycling Coalition,
202-625-6406
Jennifer Winch, Intertech
Corp., 207-781-9800
Solar Energy International,
303-963-8855
MS Solid Waste Reduction & Tech.
Asst. Programs, 601-325-8067
Solid Waste Assoc. of
North America, 301-585-2898
301-695-3762
LOCATION
Kansas City, MO
Chicago, IL
Carbondale, CO
Biloxi, MS
Baltimore, MD
Washington, DC
San Francisco, CA
San Francisco, CA
Williamsburg, VA
Miami Beach, FL
Fort Collins, CO
Palm Coast, FL
September 11-13
September 11-13
October 9-27
October 10-12
October 23-26
October 23-25
November 12-17
November 13-14
December 4
December 6-8
January 16-19,
1996
January 22-27
April 28-May 2
------- |