&EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Washington, DC 20460 November-December 1993 EPA 742-N-93-004 Pollution Prevention News PREVENTION Inside: Multi-media Pulp and Paper Rule Announced.. FOCUS ON ENERGY: Utilities Qualify for Bonus SO2 Allowances 4 New EPA Program Targets Buildings .... 5 Hazel O'Leary on Energy Efficiency. 6 Solar Living 7 Erie County's Prevention Program 9 Calendar.. . 12 President Announces Global Climate Change Action Plan to Reduce Greenhouse Emissions The White House has announced a detailed strategy to combat global warming. President Clinton and Vice President Gore joined with industry and environmental leaders on October 19 to announce the Climate Change Action Plan, which will return greenhouse emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000, and in the process, expand markets for U.S. technologies and services, create jobs and reduce the deficit. This strategy is a critical step in ad- dressing climate change, the highest risk environmental problem. The plan consists of 50 new or expanded programs to reduce all types of greenhouse gases. It establishes groundbreaking public-private partnerships with key industries across all sectors of the economy. The announce- ment fulfills the President's Earth Day promise to return U.S. greenhouse emissions to 1990 levels by 2000 through American ingenuity and creativity, not bureaucracy and regulation. The United States emits about 20 percent of the global total of greenhouse emissions, more than any other country. The partnerships and programs result- ing from the Climate Change Action Plan will stimulate more than $60 billion over the next six years in private investment in on f>ii$? tit 33/50 Program Exceeds Interim Goal Data released by EPA show that the 33/50 Program met its 1992 reduction goal one year ahead of schedule. The 33/50 Program is a voluntary pollution prevention initiative which derives its name from its overall goals—a 33 percent reduction by 1992 and a 50 percent reduction by 1995 of emissions nationwide of 17 high-priority toxic chemicals. The latest Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reveals that releases and transfers of the 33/50 Program chemicals declined by 34 percent since the program began, falling from 1.474 billion pounds in 1988 to 973 million pounds in 1991. This reduction exceeds the 1992 goal by 15 million pounds, one year ahead of sched- ule. EPA's analysis of the facilities' projec- tions indicate that the 1995 goal of a 50 percent reduction is attainable. As of August 1993, 1172 companies have chosen to participate in the pro- gram, promising to eliminate nearly 355 million pounds of pollution by 1995. EPA sends all participants a Certificate of Appreciation and recogni/es the compa- nies when they achieve their reduction goals. More than 200 companies have t im ;w\'i' I") D Goal • Actual TRI Emissions 1988-1995 l 500 I ? 1 000 D 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Printed on Recycled Paper ------- Pollution Prevention News - 2 [ AgricUltUre ,\o ’e,nbt’r—Decc’p?lher 1993 ACE Grant Recipients Cut Pesticide Use on Cranberries G ood news for cranberry lovers this holiday season: A three-year study jointly funded b ’ EPA and USDA has been successful in substan- tially reducing the use of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers in cranberry bogs with no significant increases in pest damage or soil fertility problems. The study was awarded an ACE (Agriculture in Concert with the Environment) grant in 1988. Over the three years of the studs’, synthetic pesticide use was reduced 60 percent and fungicide use was reduced 28 percent relative to previous practices. Because there has been little research done on cranberry produc- tion compared to more widely grown crops such as corn and soybeans, the project is significant to the cranberry industry. According to the study coordinator, Prof. Anne Averiil of the University of Massachusetts, one of the goals of the study is to create demonstrably successful techniques for reducing synthetic inputs. Without a proven alternative, growers cannot afford to risk their crop by altering growing methods. Old Practices Revived Researchers achieved the pesticide reductions through the use of cultural practices and an integrated pest management strategy. A practice called “late water” was used to significantly reduce pesticide use. This technique, which was used widely in the past and abandoned with the advent of cheap chemicals, involves reflooding the hogs for one month in the spring. ‘The late water causes a tremendous decrease in the level of fruit rot and enhances the keeping quality of the fruit,” said Prof. Averill. Other benefits include drops in insect pressure and reduced weed problems. Late water is used every third season and may cause a decreased yield in ‘ ome bogs during that one year. The research team hopes to dt .’mon’ t rate that even when the yield does dip, the hogs rebound in the following ‘ear and that overall, the health of the plants and quality of the fruit is enhanced by the late water. Another aspect of the research is the develop- ment of strains of cranberries which show a natural resistance to fruit rot, rather than relying on synthetics. Water Issues Play Key Role Because cranberries are grown in wetlands and rely on redirected surface water, water issues are very important. A primary focus of the study is to reduce movement of fertilizer out of the hog. The research has shown that substances such as composted chicken manure and fish fertilizer can he effective alternatives to synthetic inputs. Because these natural fertilizers leach less read ii V. less total nitrogen phosphorous is used and runoff problems are avoided. Researchers noted that the nitrogen levels in mc hogs were lower at the outlet than the inlet, indicating that the hogs ma filter incoming an1p or pond water. Currently, cranberry production in \1as’ achuset ts, which aitounts R approxiniate1 42 percent of the world crop. typically involves nine appl ica— tions of pesticides per season. This results in approximately I () tons of insecticide and 17 tons of fungicide being applied to the regions 1 ,00() acres of bogs under cultivation. Over the three years of the project, the five test sites used by the researchers reduced by 66 percent the use of EDBC fungicides and chiorothalonil, which are toxic to aquatic organisms and implicated elsewhere in groundwater contamina- (ion. Instead, the researchers used more environmentally benign copper-based mineral fungicides. Broadcast herbicide use was reduced 46 percent and fertil- izer nitrogen 2 percent. The researchers noted that the study has provided Lritical data h demonstrating that pesticide inpu t ’ ca ii he reduced enormousl v with no reduction in yield. I lowever, the study also points to the need for long- term stud cs on key weed, ii &a &’ and insect pests for which no non- pest icidal control’ — exist For further in format ion about the cranberry research, contact . \nnc Avcrill at 41 - 4 - 1fi 4 I or intorma- iofl on the \( F program. contact I larry Wells at EPA at 202-2 )-44 2. V’Vorkt’rs liarz’est cranbt’rrie’ . ‘roivii a part of an ACE -I i i ich’d “1 itt/ i , f ) reduce flit’ syn tht’ti pt’ fzcidt’s aizd f t’rfili:e’rs. liSt’ ‘ ------- Noz’c’mbt’r- D&’ct’ni be’r 1 993 3 — Pollution Prt’z’t’ntion Nt’w Rules & Regs EPA Proposes Regulations for Pulp and Paper Industry E PA proposed regulations on November 1 which will reduce significantly air and water discharges of dioxin and other toxic pollutants from U.S. pulp and paper mills. This proposal is the first time EPA has taken a multi-media approach to protetting public health and the environment by regulating air and water emissions in the same regula- tion. The rule promotes installation of state-of-the-art pollution prevention technology to further reduce future risks. The rule, which could affect nearly 350 pulp and paper mills throughout the country, would eliminate nearly all P resident Clinton has signed an E\ecutive Order promoting recycling which will reduce solid waste, build markets for recycled products, and encourage new tech- nologies by requiring federal agencies to use recycled paper and other recycled products. All federal pur- chases of printing and writing paper must contain 20 percent post-con- ‘ umer material by the end of 1994 and 30 percent post-consumer material h ’ the end of 1998. In order to further reduce the burden on landfills, paper made from 50 percent recovered byproducts from the production of goods other than paper or textiles may E PA and the General Services Administration (GSA) will set new guidelines for the use of environmen- tall sound cleaning products in federal buildings under a memoran- dum of understanding signed by the two agencies. EPA will develop criteria for evaluating the effects of cleaning products on health and environmental safety. (,S.\ and other federal consum- ers will use the information along with data on product performance in making purchasing decisions. dioxin discharges to surface waters, and cut toxic air emissions by about 70 percent. This proposal is the result of a process in which EPA worked with industry and the environmental community to develop the rule. “This historic and precedent-setting rule serves as a guide for incorporating ecosystem protection and pollution prevention into the regulatory pro- cess,” said EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner. “It protects the public by fighting both air pollution and water pollution at once,” she added. Bob Perciasepe, EPA Assistant Administrator for Water said, “This is a milestone for using pollution be purchased, if the waste otherwise would end up in a landfill. EPA also will identify other tvpis of recycled and environmentally preferable products for the federal government to purchase. Paper accounts for 40 percent t all solid waste and 77 percent of govern- ment office waste. A number of local and state governments already purchase paper that contains 20 percent post-consumer material. Each year, the federal government uses a pproximatelv 300,000 tons of printing and writing paper, approxiniatelv two percent of the market. (Continued on pact’ 1W GSA manages buildings and buys materials for the federal government and is responsible for over 7700 government-owned or leased build- ings nationwide. EPA and GSA also will coordinate an effort to establish networks with other federal agencies, private organizations and industry groups to build support and to solicit feedback for future efforts to promote environmentally preferable products. For more information, contact Mar ’ Ryan at EPA at 202-260-3898. prevention as the basis for setting pollution discharge standards.” In addition to virtually eliminating the measurable discharge of dioxin, (Coii tin net! on ;;a t’ 4 Prevention Plans Form Part of Storm Water Proposal E PA announced on November 10 a proposal to require industrial facilities to prevent pollution caused by storm water run-off, a leading cause of water pollution in the U.S. EPA would require industries that discharge storm water run-off to plan and execute comprehensive pollution prevention measures and ongoing monitoring. The proposal would affect industries in 29 industrial sectors, such as primary metals, textile mills, and chemical and allied products. Run-off is a problem because it fr&.’cuentlv is contaminated with pollutants. The polluted water then is released directly into rivers and other surface waters, posing a threat to drinking water, aquatic life, and other uses of the waters. “Our nation’s best hope for protect- ing water resources is to prevent this type of pollution from occurring in the first place,” said EPA Administrator Carol \1. Browner. “EPA’s aim is to move forward quickly to reduce industrial pollution from storm water run-off, which is a major threat to the nation’s surface waters.” The most important feature of the (.iioii tin liii! on it) To be added to our mailing list, please write: Pollution Prevention News L. . EPA 4(0 \1 Street SW (MC 740 i) Washington, DC 204h() Editorial Staff: Foll Hunter, Editor Gilah Langner Joshua f. atz President Signs Order Promoting Recycling EPA and GSA Evaluate Cleaning Products ------- Pollution Prevention News - 4 .\ ‘ e??ll’t’r— LJi’ct’,nbcr 1 993 FOCUS ON ENERGY: ACID RAIN Helping Utilities Profit from Energy Efficiency and Renewables by Jennifer Selber O n November 17, 1993, representa- tives from utilities, public utility commissions, and the press gathered to hear EPA announce the first utili- ties to qualify for bonus sulfur dioxide (SO,) emission allowances for their use of energy efficiency or renewable energy. Rewarding utilities for using efficiency and renewable energy is the goal of an innovative provision of the Acid Rain Program called the Conser- vation and Renewable Energy Reserve. The Reserve is a pool of 300,000 allowances set aside to award to utilities that have jump-started pollu- tion prevention efforts by reducing emissions before Clean Air Act compli- ance deadlines begin. EPA began accepting applications for the Reserve on July 1, 1993, and will award the 300,000 allowances on a first come, first served basis. Reserve allowances can be used for compliance, or sold or banked for future use. The value of these allowances will better position efficiency and renewable energy as cost effective compliance strategies or energy resources. The benefits of the Reserve allow- ances are just the tip of the iceberg for efficiency and renewahics. The greatest benefit comes from the built-in incen- tive to reduce emissions in the Acid Rain Program. For each ton of SO, avoided through efficiency and renewable energy, one less allowance is used. Tradeable SO, emission allowances have put a dollar value on pollution prevention. This allows compliance planners to assess the financial benefit of reducing pollution through efficiency and renewables. Before a utility can earn bonus allowances, the company’s public utility commission must have policies in place that level the playing field between conventional electrii.itv generation and pollution prevention strategies. B ’ making this a require- ment for the Reserve, Congress recognized that traditional ratemaking and planning policies have been a harrier to aggressive utility energy efficiency and renew- able energy programs. The Depart- ment of Energy (DOE) was charged b Congress to certify to EPA that ratemaking policies are in place that eliminate this barrier for energy efficiency programs. Other require- ments to earn these special allow- ances include: • Energy efficiency measures or renewable generation must be installed between January 1, 1992 and the date the utility is affected by the Acid Rain Program. • The utility must own all or part of an electric unit affected by the Acid Rain Program. The awards conference was held in New York City, at the National Asso- ciation of Regulator Utility Comniis- sioners (NARL C) convention. EPA and DOE jointly presented the Reserve allowances. Among those receiving awards were the City of Austin Electric Utility (18 allowances), ES! Energy Inc. (109), Massachusetts Electric (97), Granite State Electric (6), Portland General Electric (57), and Puget Sound Power and Light (24 ). All told, 532 (Co,,ti,iued fro,,i j;a ,’e .3) the water standards would reduce discharges of other toxic pollutants b 3,000 metric tons, and conventional pollutants by 200,000 metric tons annually. Dioxin levels in sludge may he reduced, which could enable indust rv to save money b e’limina ting the need for EPA to list the sludge as hazardous material. The air standards vill cut toxic emissions by 1 20,00() metric tons annual lv. Emissions of chloroform, a probable human carcinogen, wou Id he reduced by approximately 80 percent. Air emissions ot volatile organic chemicals (VOCs), the prime ingred i- ent in ground .-le ’el ozone, or smog, SO 2 1O flC S The 1990 Clean Air Act created a market-based trading system in sul- fur dioxide (SO 2 ) allowances. Each allowance gives its holder the right to emit one ton of SO, per year. EPA allocates the allowances yearly to affected sources (mainly existing electric power plants) based on specified emission rates and historic fuel use. Utilities must reduce their SO 2 emissions to the level of allow- ancesthey hold, or obtain additional allowances to cover their emissions. If utilities emit less than the allow- ance they have, they may sell or trade the allowances, or bank them for future use. allowances were distnioutcu to the qualified applicants. Approximately twenty other utilities are in the process of applying for Reserve allowances. EP \ expects to award the next group of allowances early next ‘ear. For more information on the Re- serve program, contact Jennifer Selber, 202-233-9177 or the Acid Rain Hotline at 202-233- t 4b20. would he reduced by 715,000 metric tons annually. Also, the proposal would red iice total reduced sulfur (TRS) by 295,00() metric tons annual lv. The estimated costs of compliance for industry are $4 billion in capital e\penditures, and S ,00 million in annualized expenditures. EP;\ seeks broad comment on the proposal and is especia liv interested in comments on new pollution control technology that might further reduce toxic discharges. For further technical in format ion on the proposed water standard, contact Debra Nicoll at I PA at 202- t- 3 n; for information on the air ‘ tandard, contact Penny I assiter at FP \ at 91 ” - 41-53Y6. Regulations Proposed for Pulp and Paper ------- !‘Joz’t’nzber— Dect’ iibt’r 1 993 5 - Po!!ut ion Prt’z’t’iition News FOCUS ON ENERGY: NEW TECHNOLOGY EPA Program Seeks to Reduce Energy Use in Commercial Buildings E PA has created the Energy Star Buildings Program to promote profitable investments in energy efficient equipment and operations in commercial buildings. Increasing the efficiency of buildings not only can save money for the owners, hut helps the environment by reducing direct and indirect combustion-related pollution associated with energy use. The voluntary program will complement EPA’s successful Green Lights Program. “One of the funda- mental aspects of the Green Lights and Energy Star programs is getting a top-down commitment within an organization to energy efficiency, and evaluating energy efficiency on a level playing field with other capital improvements, said Chris O’Brien, Program \lanager for the Energy Star Buildings Program. Staging the Process The program recommends that participants upgrade their buildings through a staged implementation program. The stages are: Stage 1: (preen Lights. Stage 2: Building Tune-L p. EPA Resources EPA will publicize the participation and energy savings realized h organi- zations through the program. In addition, EPA will provide technical resources to facilitate the planning and implementation of building upgrades. These resources will include: • Building Upgrade Manual offering a step-by-step guide to comprehen- sive commercial building upgrade. • Software to calculate savings from upgrade systems. • Database of financing programs pertaining to building efficiency upgrades. • Case studies documenting savings for specific technologies. • Generic specifications for specific technologIes. • Information and guidance on indoor air quality issues. • Guidance on using the CFC phase- out as an opportunity to increase building efficiency and reduce the cost of transition to alternative ref rigcrants. EPA will work with a group of 20 to 30 buildings over the next two ‘ears to demonstrate that the Energy Star Program can maximize energy savings at a profit. These demonstra- tion projects also will give EPA the opportunity to field test and refine the technical support materials. To participate in the Energy Star Buildings Program, organizations must first join the EPA Green Lights Program, committing to identify and implement ‘-)0 of the profitable lighting upgrades in their commercial and industrial space within five ‘ears. Green Lights partners may then join the Energy Star Buildings Program, committing to survey all owned U.S. commercial and indus- trial space to identify profitable efficiency upgrades, and to complete 90 percent of all profitable upgrades within seven ‘ears. An improvement is considered profitable if it offers a rate of return greater than prime plus six percent. For more information on the Energy Star Buildings Program, contact Chris O’Brien at 202-233-914 (fax: Stage 3: Heating and Cooling Load Reductions. Stage 4: Improved Fans and i\ir Handling Systems. Stage : Improved Heating and Cooling Plant. focusing on load reduction in Stages I through 3, the size and cost of the equipment assot .iated with Stages 4 and ma he significantly reduced. This staged approach offers a frame- work lo u comprehensive efticiencv upgrades in a variety of commercial buildings. However, the strategy is deliberately flexible to allow tt r cases where it makes sense to design and implement all stages at once. Commercial buildings are directly or Indirectly responsible for 12% 22% 3% of NO 2 of SO 2 of CFCs 16% of CO 2 I _____ I Power Plant I Commercial buildings consume 15 percent of all U.S. energy. I 1*1 Percentages o total annual U S er” sslons ------- Pollution Prevention News — 6 ?‘Jo ‘epnber— Dcc ,’uz tier 1 993 FOCUS ON ENERGY: CONSERVATION FORUM Secretary O’Leary Addresses Energy Conservation Forum E nergy Secretary Hazel 0’ Lea rv trcssed the economic and environmental benefits of energy efficiency at the Fourth Annual Energy Conservation Forum held in Washington, D.C. on October 21, 1993. “Sophisticated users have already seen that the bottom line is positively impacted by energy efficiency,” said Secretary O’Leary at the conference sponsored by the Johnson Controls Company and the United States Energy Association. Over 250 people from government, industry, public interest groups and academia attended the conference which addressed domestic and international perspectives of energy efficiency. secretary O’Leary said that the Clinton administration is taking energy efficiency and ens’ ironmental issues more seriously than past administrations. “This is an adminis- tration focused on issues involving the environment,” said O’Leary. “We’ve looked to energy and the environment in a way that no other administration has.” In order to have the largest impact, Administration efforts focus on large industrial and (..o ?z! in ned Iron, pac ’ 1 technologies and services that allow for economic growth without harming the environment. These investments will not only yield energy and cost savings, the ’ also will expand global markets for American manufacturers of energy- et I icit. ’nt technologies. The plan should save the govern- ment an estimated 52.7 billion he- tween IYY4 and 2000. It vitI give private developers an opportunity to invest in efficiency upgrades at federal hydroelectric darns and market the additional power in exchange for lease pavment ’ . A reduction in transportation-related pollution will be created by allowing workers to take the cash value of commercial users. Secretary O’Leary noted that the best role of the federal government is to set priorities and allow business planners to respond to market economics. “We can meet our goals for the twenty-first century by letting industry do what it has to do (with government) quantifying the changes,” said Secretary O’Leary. American use of efficient technol- ogy and techniques has been spurred by tougher environmental standards and rising energy costs. However, Secretary O’Leary stressed that the potential for the economic benefits of energy efficiency technology goes beyond the energy savings and include jobs created by a growing global market for such American technology. She noted that “there are energy markets south of the border for energy efficiency (and) retrofit- ting. For applications in generation, the market is even broader,” Secre- tars’ O’Leary stated that potential new markets include not only Mexico, but all of South America, as well as the states of the former Sox’ iet Union. “If we don’t get those mar- kets, someone else will,” she said. John Hoffman, Director of the employer-paid parking as increased income instead an incentive to take public transportation or car-pool. A White House-led task force will prepare a long-term strategy to develop additional measures that continue the trend of reduced emis- sions beyond the ‘ear 2000. The task force will develop within one year a strategy to reduce significantly emissions from personal vehicles. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and other gases, all of which threaten to change the global climate system, raise sea levels and inundate coastal areas, destabilize agricultural prod uc- tion, and inflict irreversible damage to cc 5 stems Global Climate Change Division at EPA participated in the Forum and spoke of the importance of the new generation of EPA efforts such as the Green Lights. Energy Star and Golden Carrot programs. EP 1 \ has achieved greater results than with past efforts by becoming more customer oriented. “VVI spent a lot of time trying to understand the barriers people have (to participating in efficiency programs),” said Hoffman. “Our programs are all sales pro- grams, we are not preaching.” Hoffman also stressed the poten- tial that energy efficiency programs have. “The benefits of better and more innovative technology are going to be much greater than ever before,” he said. For more information about the Fourth Annual Energy Conservation Forum, contact John Bernaden at 414- 2 4-4546. EPA Awards $4.5 Million in State Grants EPA’s Office of Pollution Preven- tion and Toxics, in conjunction with the ten EPA Regional Offices, has awarded $4.5 million to 52 state and tribal organizations under EPA’s Pollution Prevention Incentives for States grant program. These grants and cooperative agreements sup- port state and tribal programs that address the reduction or elimina- lion of pollution in air, land and water. Since 1989, over $25 million has been awarded to support state and tribal efforts. The projects may last up to three years and recipients of the grants are required to match at least 50 percent of the federal funds through dollars, in-kind con- tributions, or third-party contribu- tions. For more information on the PPIS grants, contact Lena I-Iann at 202- 260-2237. Administration Addresses Global Warming ------- November-December 1993 7 — Pollution Prevention Nt ’w FOCUS ON ENERGY: SOLAR LIVING National Tour of Independent Homes Q wners of homes that use renew- able energy opened their doors to their neighbors on October 16, 1993, as part of the National Tour of Inde- pendent Homes. Real Goods Trading Corporation of Lki ih, California sponsored the tour, the first of its kind on a national scale, in order to educate the public about technologies avail- able to harness energy from the sun, wind and water. More than 150 homes across the country were open to visitors. The homes use both active and passive energy design features; some homes use a mix of renewable and non-renewable energy, while others are completely “off the grid,” that is, not connected to power lines. Less than a century ago, house- holds generated and managed their own power needs. Yet today’s energy efficient and energy independent homes have little in common with their ancestors. “People visiting an energy independent home often think the ’ will he stepping back into the nineteenth century. Instead, they step tor \ard into the twenty-first,” says Michael Potts, author of Tue Indepen- Stephen and Paula Alexander of Centenary, VA inoe’ed into fhe’ir solar powered home in February 799.3. dent Home: Living Well Wit/i Power From the Sun, Wind and Water (Chelsea Green Publishing). Potts traveled over 20,000 miles and interviewed people living in independent homes in order to write the book. He estimates that the number of independently powered homes in this country has increased from fewer than 1000 in the mid-seventies to more than 100,000 today Stephen and Paula Alexander of Centenary, Virginia were two of the participating homeowner’,. They allowed visitors to tour their 2500 square foot home and view its many energy saving and energy efficient features. The house, finished in February 1993, has 32 photovoltaic panels for electricity and S solar thermal panels for hot water for household use and heating. Without the solar panels on the roof, the Ale\anders’ home, with its dishwasher, washer and dryer, and central heating, would look like any other home. In fact, when Mr. Alexander designed the house, he assumed that it would be connected to the local utility. It wasn’t until the Alexander ’ got the estimate for hooking up their rural home that they began to look for other options. The Alexanders, who estimate an 8 to I t year pavhack for their investment, have had no problems adjusting to the new technology. In addition to the’ lack of utility bills the Alexanders have an added benefit—when a late winter storm last year caused widespread power outages. the :\lexanders didn’t know that power lines were down in their area until someone told them. Real Goo 1 l . sells renewable energy products iiiiil /ia helped to equip itiore than 20,00() homes. For more inforniation about the tour or rtil(’u’ahk’ energy, COil t(lLt Real Goods at 1-800-762- 732. . - _ - ‘i - . ‘ ii solar power provides all the electricity for the Scot! . .i’ille, VA home of l . .ot Rander and Bill Sanx . ------- Pollution Prevcntion News - 8 November-December 1993 T he January-February issue of PPN profiled the progress being made under four EPA technology evaluation and assessment programs. One of these programs, The University-Based Assessments Program, is unique in that it specifically targets small and medium- si:ed manufacturers that do not have in— house e’xpertise in waste miii imization. The program is implemented by three waste minimization assessmnent centers (WMACs) established by the Industrial Tech ii ology and Energy Management (ITEM) division of the Uniz’ersitt Cit i ’ Science Center (LICSC) (under agreement wit/i tile Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory of tile LI. S. Environmental Protection Agency). The goal of WMACS pilot effort is to conduct waste minimi:a- tion opportunitii asst’ssmiu’iitS at 100 facilities. Who Can Benefit The WMACs provide their services free-of-cost to qualifying facilities. To qualify, a facility must have an SIC Code between 20 and 39; have gross annual sales of not more than 5 () million; have no more than 500 employees; and lack in-house exper- tise in waste minimization. The’ benefits of the WMAC assessments can include reductions in the amount of waste generated, reductions in waste treatment and disposal costs, educational experience for participat- ing students, and a cleaner environ- ment without associated regulations or high costs. What is Involved A company selected for assessment will receive several site visits. The W MAC sta U characteriie the ‘Sources of hazardous waste, the treatment and disposal methods used, and their associated costs. The staff then identify and analyze ways to reduce or eliminate the waste. The staff recommend specitic measures to achieve the waste reduction goal and provide supporting technical and economic documentation. The \ MAC prepares a confidential report tor each client detailing anticipated cost savings, estimated implementation costs, and payback times. The WMAC later conducts follow-up interviews to determine actual costs and benefits of the recommendations, and prepares a research brief to transfer the technical information to others. Full reports of their research are available from the University City Science Center, Philadelphia, PA 19104. An example of a university-based assessment follows. Case Study: Dairy Plant A dairy plant produces 23.4 million gallons of milk and milk products and fruit juice drinks, as well as high density polyethylene jugs (from pellets). Raw milk is received and processed into cream, various mixtures of milk ranging from whole to skim, buttermilk, chocolate milk, and ice cream. Fruit drinks are pro- duced by mixing filtered cit water with liquid juice concentrate, preser- vative, and sucrose or fructose. Plastic jugs are produced by melting HDPE pellets and extruding them in molds for blow-molding gallon and half- gallon jugs. Waste Generation and Management The wastes generated by the dairy and the methods cifld costs for manag- ing them are a follows: • 000 gallons of milk solids are collected annually from the clarifier in the raw milk processing line. The solids are trucked oft site by a local farmer for Iertilizt .’r use, at a cost of SM,S00. • 65,000 gallons of .pills and leaks of contaminated and uncontaminated milk is collected annually in drip pans and used off site to teed hogs. at a cost to the plant of $790. • 394,000 gallons of uncontained spills and leaks of contaminated and uncontaminated milk is collected annually in the waste pit and sewered. • 37,299,660 gallons of wastewater from cleaning the containers and processing machinery, from clean- ing the plant, and from pasteuriza- tion and cooling processes are sewered annually at a cost of 5194,190. • 6,300 gallons of fruit juice spills are sewered annually. Waste Minimization Opportunities Since the dairy was already giving reusable products for local agricultural uses and diluting milk- contamina ted waste streams with other wastewaters prior to sewer ing, the research staff focussed on waste- water minimization opportunities. Recommendations included: • Conducting an employee awareness program about wastewater reduc- tion (e.g., proper placement of drip pans); • Using high-pressure and automatic shut-off hose nozzles to minimiie cleanup water; • Installing an activated sludge treatment system to treat the pit- collected wastewater before it is sewered to avoid disposal sur- charges. It was estimated that these recom- mendations would reduce the uncontained milk waste by 3 ” and the wastewater by nft” , for an annual savings of 532 ,81 0. The total imple- mentation cost of S ô I ,20() would he paid for in 2.1 years by the associated savings. Tiit’ EPA Project ()ffier f r this studii was Emma Lou George. T/it’ project sllPli??iary entitled: Waste Mni,mi:ition A 5 sessuzen t for a Dainj ‘‘. was prepared b tiit’ Liniz’ersif 1, of Ten ;iessee Waste Mm imi:a I ion Assess men! Ccii Icr i Marc/i, 1992. [ Case Studies University-Based Assessments Program: Big Gains from Small Operations ------- Noz’embt’r— December 1993 9 — Poilti iio r Prc’t’c’ if io n .\ In the States Small Dischargers Catch Erie County’s Attention E rie County, New York has demon- strated that a pollution preven- tion program directed at smaller businesses can yield large results. Although small businesses discharge pollutants, their small volume of waste means that they are not often the target of source reduction efforts. In order to reduce the amount of waste generated at Erie Count ‘s more than 4001) small and medium sized dischargers, the county in 1990 established the Erie County Office of Pollution Prevention (ECOPI ’), to assist industry, public institutions and local governments in finding ways of doing business that are less hazardous and produce less waste. ECOPP, which is managed by the Erie County Department of Environ- ment and Planning through a )0 ,000 grant from EPA, brings pollution prevention and regulator ’ information to waste generators overlooked by state and federal efforts. Although many of these small generators do not require permits, taken together they contribute significantly to the overall pollution pr oh 1cm. E(0l’P is attractive to small businesses because it is not an enforcement agency. Its confidential and free services include: on-site reviews of operating processes and equipment; site specific recommenda- tions for implementing pollution prevention concepts; industry and trade group workshops and presenta- tions; and publication of qua rterlv newsletters for specific industries. ECOPP has an advantage over state and federal programs because it is part of local government which is closer to the community and has established relationships with local industry. By educating businesses about their regulatory responsibilities arid the benefits and techniques of pollution prevention, ECOP1 facili- tates compliance with state and federal requirements, improving worker and community safety and helping local businesses succeed economical lv. ECOPP has demonstrated that a good outreach program and positive incentives can yield strong results and that small companies are as receptive to pollution prevention as large corporations. “We found that once we provide small businesses with pollution prevention informa- tion, there isn’t a riced for any new requirements or regulations,” said Thomas Hersev, Jr., ECOPP Coordi- nator. Approximately 80 percent of the 150 companies which ECOPP has assisted have implemented at least one of the pol lii hon prevention techniques recommended by the inspectors. Nearly 70 percent ot these companies perceived a reduction in the amount of waste generated, and 43 percent realized a reduction in waste management costs. ECOE P has demonstrated to many husine’ e - in Erie Counts’ that pollution prevention is not unIv a waste management technique, hut may eliminate waste altogether. In order to increase the eftective- ness of its pollution prevention efforts in a time of shrinking budgets, ECOPP now p1 a n to “look at other local government agencies that deal with local industries and train them to provide pollution prevention informa- tion,” said Hersev. Under this ap- proach, local government employees such as economic development per ’ onnel and P01W inspectors will he able to offer pollution prevention assistance and make pollution preven- tion part of daily business practices. ‘We have found, as we thought when started, that pollution prevention iiici kes good financial ‘ ense,” said llersey. “Now we need to get more people to recogn ic the value of pollution prevention programs. For more information regarding the Erie County Pollution Prevention Program, oiitact I urn Hersev at I t-- R -7h74. Rick Ru tko i’sk: (left) of ECOPP reeit’io tile operation of a ‘ol ‘i’ii t recyclt’r at an Erie Couutt, auto th’alership wit/i einplo t’t’ Al Killuin. ------- Pollution Prevention News - 10 I . ii!’c 1993 (Continued from pas. .’e 1) already achieved all or some of their 33/50 Program reduction goals. EPA also is planning a national 33/50 Program Conference in 1994 to showcase the accomplishments of the Program’s company, state and community partners. Twenty-six states had established toxics use reduction and pollution prevention programs prior to the 33/ 50 Program, and these contributed to its design. Others have used the 33/ 50 Program as a model. Some indus- try associations and many private companies include a 33/50 Program within their own reduction programs EPA views the 33/50 Program as an umbrella under which the federal government, states, industry and (Contin zied from pac e .3) multi—sector permit is a pollution prevention plan, which would require operators of facilities to develop and implement a site-specific plan to control storm water discharges. The pollution prevention plans will identify pollutant sources, then select and implement site-specific, best management practices to prevent or minimize storm water pollution. The plans will provide for regular inspections and site compliance evaluations and must include, among other measures: proper upkeep of areas exposed to storm water; preven- tive maintenance of storm water controls; spill prevention and re- sponse procedures; and pollution (Co ttiniit’d from pase .3.1 The Executive Order will create a strong market for the paper being collected by more than 5,500 commu- nit recycling programs and will spur investment in recycling technology and create jobs in the recycling industry. 1 o stimulate the market immediately, federal agencies will begin seeking bids for recycled paper now, in ad- vance of the actual purchasing require- communities work in partnership to achieve common goals. The success of the 33/50 Program reflects the efforts of all these partners. The 33/50 Program is being evalu- ated by Hampshire Research Institute under a grant from EPA. Preliminary results will be available in the Spring of 1994. Tell Us How You Did It! If your organization met its 33/50 goal, drop us a line and tell us how you did it. Send your success stories to: U.S. EPA/Pollution Prevention “Jews 401 M Street, SW (MC 7409) Washington, DC 2046() prevention training for employees. Facility operators also would have to stabilize areas vulnerable to erosion and use traditional storm water management controls (e.g. oil/water separators. retention ponds) where appropriate. The general permit, when final, would become a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under the Clean Water Act. EPA has proposed this permit for the states and territories that do not have authorized state NPDES programs. EPA also has issued the permit to NPDES authorized states to use as a model for their permitting. For information, contact the Stormwater Hotline at 703-821 -4 23. ments. The General Services Adminis- tration will revise paper specifications that currently prevent the purchase of paper made through the most environ- mentaII sound processes. The Order also requires federal agencies to replace motor oil with re- refined oil and to replace virgin tires with re-tread tires. All federal agencies must revise their specifications and standards so that recovered materials Two New Reports On Environmental Labeling from EPA The Use of Ltfe Cycle Assessment in Environmen- tal Labeling (EPA/742-R- 93-003, Sept. 93) addresses the extent to which life cycle assess- ment (LCA) methodologies are being used in environmental labeling programs worldwide. The report also describes the alternative methodologies that are being used or considered for environmental labeling. The key methodologies outlined in the report are: LCA, streamlined LCA, single use certification, product environmental informa- tion labeling (or report cards), and expert system evaluations. Status Report on the Use of Environmental Labels Worldwide (EPA/742-R-9- 93-001, Sept. 93) examines public policy issues relating to environ- mental labeling and the status of environmental certification programs (ECPs) around the world. The report gives an over- view of the status of environmen- tal marketing in the U.S., summa- rizes the existing ECPs in the U.S. and abroad, and discusses the existing research relevant to projecting the effectiveness of U.S.- based environmental labeling initiatives. In addition, the report provides details for each of the labeling programs included in the report and includes a selected bibliography covering a number of labeling initiatives and life cycle analysis issues. Copies of both reports are available from the Pollution Prevention Information Clearing- house, 202-260-1023. .an he used to produce the products they purchase. The Order also stream- lines the process by which EPA issues standards for recycled products and designates criteria for the purchase of environmentally preferable products. TRI Reductions Ahead of Schedule EPA Plan Reduces Pollution from Run-Off Government to Purchase Recycled Products ------- November- December 1993 11 — Pollution Prez ’entioii \i’a’’. From Our Readers Using Incentives to Meet WR Goals Steve Hillenbrand Tennessee Valley Authority An important tool to aid in reach- ing waste reduction (WR) goals is 1?lCt’flt1i’C . Some innovative incentives that are in use include: Reco ,zi:e WR ideas. Company hats, W R logo items (hats, coffee cups, etc.), gift certificates, money (always popular), recognition at company or departmental functions are proven ways to inspire employees (and managers) to contribute WR ideas. To he successful, each idea must he taken seriously and feedback given to the contributor. • Share WR saz’ings a’ztii empiotiees. Award of 30 ’ of the verifiable first year’s savings for a WR idea that saves the company S 1,000,000 may seem high. But it is $700,00() that the company would not have had the first \‘ear; future year’s savings will still accrue, and other employees will he highly motivated to partici- pate. A variant of this incentive is to promise to share with all of the employees a percent of the first ‘ear’s savings in form of a bonus from all submitted WR ideas. • Celebrate wit/i a tree much for uu:eetins WR c ’oals. Provide a free lunch for employees when a monthly goal is met. This may be done on a facility or departmental level. It is usually beneficial to post the current WR results in a conspicuous place for employees to keep track of their progress. A simple, easily measured goal works best, such as a gradual reduction of the waste generated in relation to total incoming raw ma te r i a Is. • Chzallen ’ e Mauia,’ ’en:e,i t a ‘it/i WR. Challenge managers to find three times their salary each year in W N savings. This causes managers to take W N seriously. In most depart- ments, this is a read iv attainable goal. Managers might trade WR savings (allowances) from their department to managers in other departments that find it more difficult to meet their goal. This can also e’nhance cooperation between d epa r t men t s. (Tiit’ a a thor ft/i is art ltlt’ a ‘vu Id like to express thanks for the iih’ti in f/us a,’t:cle to flit’ participants v/tilt’ First Annual South— eastern I \ Is te Reductzoui Ret lrt’t’ (_ ( ii fi’ri’iu’e) Empowering Grassroots Efforts Beverly Mosely, 33/50 Coordinator EPA Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia Administrator (..arol Browner has announced a pol ic ’ to facilitate a cultural change making pollution prevention the first environmental choice throughout EPA. I believe that within EPA, the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) program is a key vehicle to begin accomplishing this cultural change. The program operates with true grass-roots and volunteer efforts. The most important aspect of EPCRA is that it requires community involvement in the deci- sion-making process. Lee Thomas, former EPA Administrator, described the intent of EPCRA back in l98 : “The law establishes an ongoing forum 1t the local level for discussion and a focus for actioii — the Local Eriier— gencv Planning Committee (LEPC).” The role of the 1.FPC is even more important today. With the number of ha,ardous materials accidents and releases growing, the LEPC structure needs funds, equipment, training and resources more than ever. I pr pose’ that pollution prevention (P2) can he effectively implemented through environmental cii uca tion (12) at the LEPC grass-roots level. I eflVIsIOfl locals teaching locals. 1 echnologv exchange can be accom- p1 ished at this level with the coopera- tion of cititens, iuid ust rv, government, and academia. EP..\, through the Intergovernmental Personnel .\gree ’- ments program and detailing staff can help (1 55 1st the LEPCs on environmen- tal education. For e’\ample, the \\ ater ourcebook prolect, developed by the :\lahama Department of Environmental \lan- agement, EPA. and the Tennessee Valley .\uthoritv will soon he avail- able from Region l\’. The Water Sourcehook is designed to hegin in kindergarten and educate student’ through the twelfth grade about key wa fir management concepts i iid issues. .\ similar Air ‘-‘ourcehook is under development. I envision top F P.\ ma nagement becoming actively involved in the Governors’ .\ssociation \ le’etings encouraging support for the Sti te Emergency Response Commissions (SERCs) and the Local Emergency Response Committees. The National Association of SARA [ itle Ill Program officers, an association of individuals who have state and tribal level program responsibilities in emergency planning and community right-to—know issues, would serve as another I P \ partner for the’ promotion of P2 and E2. fhe newly established Richmond County, (. e’urgia I.EPC is ‘ ‘ orking with the Region IV EE CRA taft to initiate Administrator Browner’s policies Our goal is to work with the SF l (. s and L FPCs to provide theni with in toriiia - tion and support. and at the same time, allow the SERCs and I.EPCs to take’ the lead on promoting e’nvironiiiental eel ucation, poll iition prevention, and the 3 () program tt their communities. The’ F PCR 1 \ program cit tlii’ stcite level is working because of dedicated people’ willing to take this mission on a voluntary basis. Empowering the ERCs and LEI’Cs will bring the commun i tv into 1 valuable position to work with Fft\. industry, cind cicc ’ide’tyijci. (Oiiii11l .iI1iC it tOils ind outreach shoei Id he at the tOp of the FP.-\ agenda in all programs. I believe’ that keeping communities well informed of EPA programs is the best source reduction’’ tool F P. \ has. ------- Pollution Prevention News - 12 - - November-December 1993 Calendar ________ __________________ Title Sponsor Date/Location Contact Water: Our Next Crisis Academy of Natural Sciences Jan. 12-13, 1994 Rob Goldberg Philadelphia, PA 21 -29Y-1 108 Waste Tech 94 National Solid Waste Jan. 13-14, 1994 202-659-4613 Management Association Charleston, SC Pollution Prevention Conference American Electroplaters and Jan. 24-27, 1994 Anne Gaither for the Surface Finishing Industry Surface Finishers Society, EPA Kissimmee, FL 407-281-6441 Green Building Conference Nat’l Inst. of Standards and Tech. Feb. 16-17, 1994 Lori Philips and U.S. Green Building Council Gaithersburg, MD 301-948-2067 Environmental Management and Hazmat World Magazine Feb. 16-18: Orlando, FL 708-469-3373 Technology Conf. & Exhibition April 26-28: Long Beach, CA Fifth Annual International Solid Waste Association Feb. 22-24 301-585-2898 Recycling Symposium of North \merica Baltimore, MD 17th Annual Landfill Solid Waste Association March 22-24 301-585-2898 Gas Symposium of North America Long Beach, CA Global Climate Change: Science, Air & Waste Management April 5-8 412-232-3444 Policy and Mitigation Strategies Association Phoenix, AZ 5th Annual March for Parks National Parks and April 22-24 1-800-NAT-PARK Conservation Association Organized locally (ext. 222) IEEE International Symposium on IEEE May 2-4 908-562-3878 Electronics and the Environment San Francisco, CA First International Congress National Oil Recyclers Ma ’ 23-27 216-791-7316 on Liquid Waste Recycling Association San Francisco, CA SUR/FIN Surface Finishing American Electroplaters and June 20-23 407-281-6441 Industry Conference Surface Finishers Society Indianapolis, IN M ‘inç? Please enclose nailii:g label! United States Environmental Protection Agency (MC7409) Washington, DC 20460 Official Bu ine t’enaltv for Private L’,.c 3Ot) Forwarding & Return Postage Guaranteed Address Correction Requested ------- |