United States
Environmental Protection
Office of Pollution Prevention
Washington, DC 20460
May 1990
O Reports from
^ EPA Offices
** Technologies
4	Ughting
5	Utilities
O Energy
7 TRI Data
3 Calendar
To be added to our mailing
list, please write:
Pollution Prevention News
401M Street SW(PM-219>
Washington, DC 20460
Editorial Staff:
Prisdlia Flattery, Editor
Herman Phillips
Gilah Langner
Editor's Corner
by Alex Cristofaro, Director
Air and Energy Division
Office of Policy, Planning & Evaluation
The interrelationship between energy and the
environment is increasingly a complex one. The
ways in which energy is produced, transported,
and consumed help determine our quality of life.
Yet we are beginning to learn that energy con-
sumption brings its own problems, sometimes
undercutting the quality of life that it has made
Interestingly, the attention now being given
to reexamining our society's energy profile is
being driven not by oil price fluctuations, such as
occurred in 1973 and 1979, but primarily by
environmental concerns. Energy prod uction a nd
use are responsible for the bulk of air pollutants
that comprise or cause urban air pollution, acid
deposition, air toxins, and "greenhouse gases."
Two energy-related environmental problems that
have recently become the focus of much concern
— stratospheric ozone depletion and global cli-
mate change — may have worldwide effects that
will persist for decades or centuries.
What is now becoming apparent is that ample
opportunities exist to cut energy use and en-
hance the energy security of this country while
allowing consumers to enjoy the same or an
improved level of amenities. A combination of
new technologies and new ways of thinking
about energy can save vast amounts of energy in
the coming years, without driving up consum-
ers' utility bills or requiring new power plants.
Institutional mechanisms, such as an emphasis
on "demand side management" and decoupling
the profits of utilities from the amount of energy
they sell to consumers, are changing the way
energy is produced and consumed. Over the
coming years, here are some of the initiatives
you can expect to see federal, state, and local
governments encouraging:
•	reform of rate-making structures for certain
•	competitive bidding schemes that will allow
demand side options to compete with supply
•	least-cost utility planning (also known as inte-
grated resource planning);
•	modified appliance and transportation stan-
dards that reflect technological improvements
in efficiency;
•	a greater emphasis on research and develop-
ment projects for renewable technologies; and
•	increased consumer and corporate education
to help realize the potential implied by new
Here at EPA, we are developing a national
energy modeling system to examine the costs
and impacts of a variety of energy-related poli-
cies and to make informed decisions in promot-
ing a preventive approach to energy issues. We
will be working with the Department of Energy
to incorporate pollution prevention and resource
conservation concerns into the National Energy
Strategy. And, since most utility regulation and
many other important energy and environmen-
tal decisions occur at the state level, we hope to
develop a working partnership with regional,
state, and local program officials.
In the short run, the Agency's pollution pre-
vention approach to energy will be to seek in-
creased energy conservation and massive im-
provements in energy efficiency in buildings,
industry, and automobile fuel economy. For the
longer term, research into renewable energy
sources will provide us with alternative means of
generating and supplying energy that are cost-
effective, clean, and consistent with sustainable
growth for generations to come.
Printed on Recycled Paper

Pollution Prevention News - 2	
Reports from
State Grants
EPA's Pollution Prevention Division re-
cently announced awards of grants totalling
S7 million to fund 25 state-based initiatives
to further pollution prevention across the
country. Projects are being funded in all 10
EPA regions, in the following locations: Cali-
fornia, Colorado, District of Columbia, Dela-
ware, Georgia, Iowa (2), Illinois, Indiana,
Massachusetts, Maine, Michigan (2), Min-
nesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey,
New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Ten-
nessee, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia,
and American Samoa.
EPA's awards range from $125,000 to
S300,000 for projects lasting up to three years.
States are required to contribute at least 10
percent of the total cost of each project in
their jurisdiction. Funded projects include
the establishment of state-wide integrated
pollution prevention programs, educational
programs, expanded technical assistance
and auditing, training of state inspectors
and interns, and demonstration projects that
test different pollution prevention methods
and technologies at the state level.
EPA received 112 proposals for this sec-
ond round of funding. In March 1989, EPA
awarded approximately S4 million in pollu-
tion prevention grants to 13 states and one
regional organization. For further informa-
tion on the multi-media grants program,
contact Jackie Krieger in EPA's Pollution
Prevention Division, 202-245-4164.
EPA Plastics Report
A new EPA report to Congress, Methods
to Manage and Control Plastic Wastes (Febru-
ary 1990) analyzes the role of plastics in mu-
nicipal solid waste and the management
methods available for disposing of these
wastes. While plastic wastes represent only
7% by weight of municipal solid waste
(MSW), plastics make up an estimated 15 to
21 percent of MSW volume. The report
notes that the added burden of plastics on
landfill capacity is due to the large and
growing amount of plastic waste now being
produced, not to differences in the speed of
degradation of wastes.
The report examines some of the major
A	g*g~%
:PA Offices
management options — source reduction,
recycling, and making plastics degradable
—and discusses key actions by EPA in each
ofthese areas. Also included in the report is
a discussion of the disposal of plastics pel-
lets, which are the raw materials used in
processing and manufacture of plastic prod-
ucts; they have been found in high concen-
trations in the marine environment and pose
risks of ingestion to marine life.
For technical information on the report,
contact Susan Mooney at EPA, 202-382-5649.
To obtain a free copy of the Executive Sum-
mary, call the RCRA/Superfund Hotline,
800-424-9346. The full report is available
only from NTIS (Order No. PB90-163106,
S39.00), 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield,
VA 22161, 703-487-4650.
Pollution Prevention
Materials Available:
Training Resources
Guide, Booklet
EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention has
developed a resource guide entitled, Pollu-
tion Prevention Training Opportunities in 1990.
The guide describes the types of training
courses, workshops, and seminars being
offered in each state and provides contact
names and addresses. Other sections of the
guide list available instruction manuals,
opportunity assessment materials, fact
sheets, videos, and state and EPA contacts
on pollution prevention. Copies of the guide
may be obtained through the RCRA/ Su-
perfund Hotline, 800-424-9346, or the Pollu-
tion Prevention Information Clearinghouse,
202-382-3000 (mailing address: SAIC, 8400
Westpark Drive, McLean, VA 22102).
EPA'sOfficeof Solid Waste has prepared
a free booklet providing detailed informa-
tion on how consumers can alleviate the
garbage glut. The booklet, Be An Environ-
mentally Alert Consumer, emphasizes the
four basic principles o f Red uce - Reuse - Re-
cycle - Respond. It also includes lists of safer
substitutes for hazardous household prod-
ucts. The booklet can be ordered from the
RCRA/Superfund Hotline or through the
Pollution Prevention Information Clearing-
May 1990
EPA's Terry Davies with Walter R. Quanstrom,
V-P at Amoco for Environmental Affairs
and Safety, and John Stanhope, Manager of
Amoco's Yorktown refinery
EPA & Amoco Launch
Prevention Project at
Yorktown Refinery
On March 28, EPA and Amoco Oil Co.
launched a joint research project to assess
pollution prevention opportunities at
Amoco's oil refinery in Yorktown, Va. The
project will develop plant-wide strategies
and options for reducing pollution and will
help EPA assess the feasibility of coordi-
nated cross-media permits. EPA hopes this
will be the first of several studies that dem-
onstrate the feasibility of integrated ap-
proaches to pollution reduction.
Calling this a "landmark occasion," EPA
Assistant Administrator Terry Davies ex-
pressed EPA's hopes that the project would
yield useful information about the effects of
using a more integrated approach, and pro-
vide a basis for implementing pollution pre-
vention opportunities at other industrial
facilities. Howard Klee, director of the proj-
ect at Amoco, discussed the need for a better
understanding between regulators and in-
dustry, and expressed the hope that this
project would enable both EPA and Amoco
to understand each other's organization and
processes better.
The Yorktown refinery was built in the
1950s and currently processes about 55,000
barrels per day of crude oil. The SI .6 million
project will proceed in two phases; data col-
lection is scheduled to be completed by Janu-
ary 1991, and the analysis of alternative pol-
lution reduction options will be completed
by October 1991. For more information, con-
tact Mahesh Podar at EPA, 202-382-2756.

May 1990
3 - Pollution Prevention News
Highlights of new technologies and approaches in
energy efficiency and renewable sources.
The good news is that if we simply
pursue the narrowest of economic in-
terests, the energy problem has alread y
been solved by new technologies.... In
the United States, for example,
•	full practical use, in existing build-
ings and equipment, of the best elec-
tricity-saving technologies already
on the market would save about
three-fourths of all electricity now
used, at an average cost certainly
below 1 cent per kilowatt-hour and
probably around 0.6«/kW-h.
•	full practical use of the best demon-
strated oil- and gas-saving technolo-
gies (many already on the market
and the rest ready for production
within 4-5 years) would save about
four-fifths of all oil now used, at an
average cost below $3/bbl.
Efficiency technologies have already
begun to sweep the market despite the
many obstacles placed in their way...
Since 1979, the U.S. has gotten more
than seven times as much new energy
from savings as from all net increases in
energy supply....
Because of the reductions in energy
intensity achieved since 1973, the an-
nual U.S. energy bill has recently been
$430 billion instead of $580 billion.
However, if the U.S. were now as effi-
cient as its competitors in Europe and
Japan, it would be saving an additional
$200billionperyear. And simply choos-
ing the best energy buys for the rest of
this century could yield a cumulative
net saving of several trillion of today's
dollars — enough to pay off the entire
National Debt.
— Amory B. Lovins, Director of Research,
Rocky Mountain Institute.
(Excerpted and updated from
"Energy, People, and
Industrialization," January 1989).
"Superwindows" Offer Super Insulation
Until the advent of improved window
technology, windows made of single panes
of clear, untreated glass could account for up
to 25% of a home's heat loss in winter as well
as unwanted heat gain in the summer. En-
ergy efficient approaches are dramatically
reducing these figures. Lo w-emissivity (low-
e) glazing for windows was first used in the
U.S. in 1981. Since then, low-e windows have
become widely available commercially; by
1991, more than half of all double-paned
sealed insulating windows made in the U.S.
are expected to incorporate low-e glazing.
Low-e technology uses a special coating
(on the panes of glass or on a suspended
polyester film) to reduce radiant heat trans-
fer through the window. Heat loss can be cut
further by injecting low conductivity gas into
the space between the panes of glass. While
single paned windows usually have an R-
value (a measureof insulation ability) around
1 and conventional double-glazed windows
have about an R-2 rating, most low-e win-
dows have R-values between 3 and 5, and
new models are moving into the "superwin-
dow" range of R-6 to R-10*. Other technology
advances in windows can help decrease the
fading of furniture and drapes exposed to
direct sunlight and can eliminate condensa-
tion problems.
A variety of window technologies are still
in the laboratory stage. They include prod-
ucts and ideas such as:
/ Mirror'films

i J \
Museum of Flight in Seattle, WA uses 55,000
square feet of Heat Mirror™ insulating glass,
cutting estimated energy loads by 35 percent
Superglass* system introduced by Southwall
Technologies in 1990 boasts an R-8 rating
•	filling the space between window panes
with new types of insulators such as aero-
gel (a thick, extremely lightweight silica
material), or creating a vacuum between
the panes (evacuated-glass windows).
•	switchable glazings, such as Cloud Gel —
a material that is transparent when the in-
door temperature is cool, but turns white
when warm or hot, blockingout unwanted
heat gain. A similar result can be achieved
with commercially available electro-
chromic film, which works by electric cur-
rent and primarily offers privacy for inte-
rior windows.
•	holograph ic optical fil m —when mounted
on ordinary windows, makes it possible
to bounce sunlight to any desired spot in
a room, such as dark areas, regardless of
the sun's position.
The R-values of emerging technologies
are expected to go still higher; one type of
evacuated-glass window, for example, will
probably offer an R-16 rating. As R-values of
windows approach those of walls, windows
may shed their reputations as thermal weak
spots — yielding the possibility of still more
energy savings and still more windows.
Sources: RMI Newsletter (Rocky Mountain Insti-
tute, 1739Snowmass Creek Rd., Snowmass, CO 81654-
9199), February 1989; Window Innovations,
CAREIRS (P.O. Box 8900, Silver Spring.MD 20907),
February 1990; Todd Sitrin, Southwall Technologies,
Palo Alto, CA. Photos on this page copyright South-
wall Technologies.

Pollution Prevention News - 4	
Lighting the Way to
by David Warm
EPA Region 8
America's billions of electrical fixtures
offer a harvest of opportunities for prevent-
ingpollution. Many of the country's utilities
and corporations are discovering a space-
age source of electrical power — high effi-
Attacking the demand side of the power
equation can prevent environmentally un-
acceptable emissions of carbon dioxide —
the major greenhouse gas — as well as the
primary causes of acid rain, sulfur dioxide,
and nitrogen oxides.
Innovative research at Rocky Mountain
Institute (RMI), Lawrence Berkeley Labora-
tory, and elsewhere has demonstrated that
upgrades in bulbs, fixtures, and electronic
controls, along with the creative use of day-
light can reduce electrical demand for light-
ing by at least three-fourths, eliminating the
need for at least one hundred 1,000 mega-
watt power plants, according to RMI.
While the typical incandescent light bulb
consumes 75 watts, state-of-the-art compact
fluorescents (which screw into standard
sockets) produce higher quality light with
only 18 watts, and last 9 to 13 times longer.
By the end of 1989, Southern California
Edison had given away more than 800,000
compact fluorescent light bulbs free to low-
income households, avoiding both costs and
pollution by doing so.
At the corporate level, executives are
Photo courtesy of Philips Lighting Company
tapping into cost savings from higher effi-
ciency by retrofitting "task lighting,"and by
using natural daylighting and smart elec-
tronic controls in their buildings. At Com-
paq Computer, for example, lights are auto-
matically turned off by photocells when
window light is sufficiently bright.
The same strategy is used in the stairwells
at the new headquarters of the Natural Re-
sources Defense Council (NRDC), specifi-
cally designed to reduce lighting from a
typical 2.03 watts per square foot to 0.3 - 0.5,
without any sacrifice in "seeability." As a
bonus, air conditioning loads were also re-
duced by a third. NRDC's Rob Watson
maintains that the new headquarters is liv-
ing proof that energy efficiency "doesn't
mean you have to wear miner's hats," since
the majority of the lighting shines precisely
where it's needed—in workspaces and other
high use areas. (NRDC's upgrade of this
31,000 square foot office space will save
enough energy that New York's utility Con
Ed gave the group a SI 00,000 rebate as an in-
The systematic displacement of the obso-
lete light bulb is lighting the way toward
pollution-preventing improvements in mo-
tors, window glazings, building heating and
cooling needs, and appliances. Awareness
of these opportunities is the first step in
getting them into building codes, efficiency
standards, and architectural plans. Cumula-
tively, this revolution can and will signifi-
cantly cool the fires of global warming.
A singlel8-watt compact fluorescent, costing
between $18 and $20, over its lifetime will slow
global warming and reduceacid rain by avoiding
emissions from a typical U.S. coal plant of one ton
of COj and about 20 pounds ofSOr It will also
save the cost of buying and installing a dozen
ordinary bulbs (about $20); the cost of generating
570 kW-h of electricity (about $20 worth offuel);
and, during its lifetime, approximately $200-
$300 worth of generating and grid capacity.
Richard Nelson, rooms manager of the Lewiston
Maine, Ramada Inn, displays new 15-watt Dulux
EI electronic bulbs that last lOflOO hours and use
75% less energy than standard incandescents
Lighting accounts directly or indirectly
for 25% of all electricity used in the U.S., rep-
resenting the output of about 130 large power
plants. Improvements in technology have
changed the face of energy-efficient light
•	New fluorescent bulbs eliminate unnatu-
ral and harsh color. Made with rare-earth
phosphors, they have improved color ren-
dition, yielding "warm" light moreclosely
resembling natural sunlight.
•	New electronic ballasts for fluorescent
tubes make it possible to dim the light
and eliminate the annoying hum and
flicker of older fluorescents.
•	Lining the inside of a fluorescent fixture
with a silver or aluminum mirror reflec-
tor can deliver about the same amount of
light to a work space with only half as
many lamps, increasing the efficiency of
the lighting system by 25 to 40* percent.
The Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.
replaced the fluorescent bulbs and bal-
lasts in its55-story Security Pacific Plaza
Building in Los Angeles with more ef-
ficient models. After the retrofit, an-
nual savings in combined electric and
air conditioning costs amounted to
$504,000. After a rebate from the local
utility, these savings produced a 6-
month payback.
Sources: RMI Newsletter, November 1988; Trends in En-
ergy-Efficient Lighting, CAREIRS, March 1990.

Energy Economics
How can one harness the business in-
centive to save a resource more cheaply
than it can be produced? The electric
utility industry provides an illuminating
Since the mid-1970s, many U.S. pro-
viders of electricity or natural gas have
realized that a saved watt (which we may
call a "negawatt") is just like a generated
watt, only cheaper, cleaner, safer, and
faster to produce. Such utilities havethere-
fore helped their customers to save elec-
tricity (or gas) through information, tech-
nical design support, concessionary loans,
leases, gifts, and rebates for buying effi-
ciency equipment.
Today, a complementary set of more
market-oriented approaches is emerging
from work at Rocky Mountain Institute
and elsewhere. In essence, these techniques
make saved electricity (or other saved
resources) into a commodity subject to all
the features of modern markets in wheat,
copper, and sowbellies. Applied to sav-
ing electricity, for example, this can mean:
•	Local fungibility. Saved electricity can
be traded between customers with the
utility acting as a negawatt broker.
•	National fungibility. Saved electricity
can be traded between utilities.
•	Derivative instruments. Markets in
saved electricity can be not only spot
markets but also futures and options
• Auctions. Saved electricity can be
bought by competitive bid to mini-
mize its cost. A utility (or an inde-
pendent broker) wanting a certain
number of megawatts can simply so-
licit bids for that much electricity, or
less, to be made or saved or displaced by
anyone, by any means, at a series of in-
creasing prices, until the target is
reached; or the auctioneer can simply
ask for bids and choose the lowest
ones. Such "all-source bidding" is
now required in eight of the United
States and is spreading rapidly. Effi-
ciency bids generally undercut power
plants, beating even industrial cogen-
eration and otherwise competitive
renewable energy sources....
Peopledon't want kilowatt-hours; they
want energy services such as comfort,
light, mobility, and torque. But if the only
way they know to get the services is by
buying electricity, then a choice to use
lesselectricityand more efficiency cannot
be expressed in the market; utilities will
therefore have an effective monopoly in
providing the final services; and price
elasticity of demand for electricity will
appear to be very small. The solution is to
articulate, makeavailable, and make mar-
kets in the efficient use of electricity, so
that electricity must openly compete with
electrical productivity.
— Amory B. Lovins, Director of Research,
Rocky Mountain Institute. Excerpted from
"Making Markets in Resource Efficiency,"
June 1989.
May 1990
Managing the Demand
Side: A Case Study
by Alan F. Destribats
Vice President, Demand
and Least Cost Planning
New England Power Service Company
New England Electric is implementing an
aggressive program to promote Demand Side
Management (DSM) throughout its service
territory. In our current long-range plan,
demand-side projects account for almost one-
third of theequivalent new resources over the
next 20 years.
DSM is forecasted to grow rapidly from
129 megawatts (MW) of contracted savings
and actual reductions in 1988 to almost 1000
MW of peak load reduction by 2008. This is
equivalent to 1149 MW of supply-side re-
sources in 2008 when credits for reserve mar-
gin and transmission line losses are consid-
New England Electric agrees with the
National Association of Regulatory Utility
Commissioners (NARUC) and several state
commissions that a utility's least cost plan
should also be its most profitable plan. Issues
of program cost recovery, lost revenue, and
some form of incentive need to be addressed
to promote the maximum efficient utility
implementation of DSM programs.
New England Electric has recently devel-
oped a DSM incentive concept in conjunction
with the Conservation Law Foundation and
hasfiled incentive proposalsinthethree states
in which we operate (Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, and Rhode Island). The premise
behind these proposals is that if a NEES (New
England Electric System) retail com pany, Mas-
sachusetts Electric for example, can deliver a
demand-side program at a cost lower than
what it pays its wholesale provider, value is
created for our customers.
Total value of program savings is calcu-
lated including avoided generation, trans-
mission and distribution costs. The value is
then compared to the program cost. The net
savings would be shared between customers
and shareholders, with more than 80 percent
returned to customers.
The incentive formula is proposed with
two factors. The first, the maximizing factor,
is calculated as 5 percent of the total value of
the programs. The second, the efficiency
factor, is calculated as 10 percent of the differ-
ence between total value and cost.
The maximizing incentive is designed to
encourage the maximum amount of conser-
vation as it establishes a reward for the com-
pany regardless of variable costs. In addition,
it provides an incentive to pursueall available
conservation and avoids cream skimming.
The efficiency incentiveisdesigned to give
the customers a significant share of the value
created by conservation investments. In
addition, it provides the company with the
incentive to implement conservation at the
lowest possible cost and to pursue all avail-
able cost-effective opportunities.
Using Massachusetts Electric's 1990 pro-
gram asan example, we expect $100 million of
5 - Pollution Prevention Nervs
total value to be created with a program cost
of $37 million. More than 80 percent, or $53
million, of the net value would be returned to
our customers with $10 million as the utility
Our incentive proposal also guarantees
that value is produced or the customer does
not pay. If the value created is less than
expected, the incentive to the utility would be
less. In the extreme case, if the valuecreated is
less than the program cost, we would recover
only an amount equal to the value created.
•Reflects minor adjustments to the incentive formula.
Excerpted from a paper presen ted at the Electric Cou ncil
of New England, Demand Side Management National
Conference, Boston, November 17,1989.

Pollution Prevention News-6	May 1990
Renewable Energy
California is Test
Bed for Technology
Seeded with state funds, a growing
number of projects to develop and commer-
cialize renewable energy technologies are
flourishing in California.
Over 16,600 megawatts (M W) of depend-
able electric generating capacity — about
one-third of the state's total capacity — have
been developed using hydroelectric and
pumped storage, biomass, solar, wind, geo-
thermal, and cogeneration resources. Alter-
native energy resources expanded rapidly in
the late 1970s and early 1980s, when govern-
ment, utilities, and private industry under-
took aggressive R&D programs. These pro-
grams stimulated growth among non-utility
companies selling electric power to utilities.
Federal legislation authorized these sales in
Today, California advertises itself as a
world center for alternative energy hard-
ware and practical experience. The Califor-
nia Energy Commission reports that 1,500
firms are active in renewables throughout
the state.
Much of California's progress in renew-
able energy technologies originated with help
from the state. Through the Energy Tech-
nologies Advancement Program (ETAP),
created by the state legislature five years
ago, the California Energy Commission has
awarded $10.8 million for 35 advanced en-
ergy technology research and development
projects. Public and private partners have
added another $64 million.
ETAP-funded projects include:
•	Development of layered, thin film pho-
tovoltaic (PV) modules. PV modules are
solid state devices that produce electric-
ity directly from the sun.
•	A biogas-fueled engine that will generate
electricity from methane produced from
fermentation of animal manure.
•	A biomass gasification system that uses
fiber residue and black liquor, a waste
product of paper mills.
The Energy Commission administers four
additional programs to develop advanced
or renewable energy technologies: (1) a
geothermal-related grant and loan program
to assist local governments; (2) a demonstra-
tion program to explore gasoline substitutes;
Luz International's solar collector focuses sunlight
onto pipes that transfer heat to a steam turbine
electric generator.
(3) a small business technical assistance and
loan program; and (4) an energy technology
export program.
California's incentives to promote renew-
able energy sources include a rapidly grow-
ing population and continued reliance on
vehicular transportation.
The population boom has taken its toll on
the environment. The Energy Commission
estimates that 80 percent of Califomians
breathe air that falls short of state or federal
pollution standards. Growing concern over
global warming and stratospheric ozone
depletion, as well as concern over possible
oil supply disruptions, make California a
natural test bed for advanced technologies.
Due largely to federal and state funded
programs, California today has more geo-
thermal, wind, and solar energy power plants
than the rest of the world combined. The
Mojave Desert in California is the site of the
world's largest solar plants. Operated by
LUZ International, the plants create more
than 90 percent of all solar thermal power.
While the Energy Commission recognizes
that California's dependence on fossil fuels
will last well into the next century, the
Commission regards change as inevitable.
The Commission intends to continue what it
calls the "tireless pursuit" of non-fossil fuel
based technologies.
"Stricter environmental controls are forc-
ing significant changes in the way we pro-
duce and consume energy," notes Charles R.
Imbrecht, Chairman of the Energy Commis-
sion. "In order to maintain our standard of
living and compete for emerging foreign
markets, we must continue to be the world
leader in developing clean, reliable, and cost-
efficient energy technologies."
Fuels of the Future	1988 Electric Generating
Capacity in California
Geothermal: Uses the earth's heat to produce electricity and provide 2,055 MW
industrial, commercial and residential thermal energy.
Cogeneration: Makes more efficient use of power generation equip- 2,300 MW
ment by using them for both electricity and thermal energy at the
same time.
Hydroelectric: Produces electricity from water-driven generators. 11,000 MW
Wind: Uses wind turbines to produce electric or mechanical energy.	170 MW
Biomass: Uses wood byproducts and agricultural, animal, and 675 MW
municipal solid waste to produce electricity and process heat.	(estimate)
Solar Photovoltaics (PV): PV technologies have been used in space to	10 MW
power satellites and manned vehicles. PV can be installed on
rooftops or used by utilities in central station applications.
Solar Thermal: Collects the sun's energy to supply steam to run	455 MW
electric fuel generators.
Source: California Energy Commission. Figures reflect "dependable capacity" available to utilities.

7 - Pollution Prevention News
TRI Data
Toxic Release
Inventory, Round 2
Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) data for
1988 were issued in April by EPA's Office of
Toxic Substances. The data show a total re-
ported release of 4.57 billion pounds of toxic
chemicals into the nation's environmental
media in 1988. This represents roughly a 9
percent drop from levels reported in 1987,
despite an increase in the number of facilities
reporting (from 18,846 in 1987 to 19,762 in
1988), and a decrease in the reporting thresh-
old (from 75,000 pounds in 1987 to 50,000
pounds in 1988).
Under section313 of the Emergency Plan-
ning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA), certain manufacturing facilities are
required to report their annual emissions of
listed chemicals to air, water, and land.
Section 313 contains a list of 332 toxic chemi-
cals and chemical categories which may pose
potentially significant hazards to human
health and the environment. However, the
TRI data by themselves do not provide an
indication of human or environmental expo-
sure to these chemicals.
The distribution of releases across air,
water, and land reported in 1988 is shown in
the accompanying chart; it has remained
virtually unchanged from 1987. Louisiana
and Texas reported the highest levels of toxic
releases (716 and 596 million pounds, re-
spectively). Four other states (Ohio, Florida,
Indiana, and Tennessee) reported over 200
million pounds of releases.
Although total 1987 TRI releases were
initially reported at 18 billion pounds, the
figure was adjusted down to 5.01 billion
pounds when EPA delisted four high-vol-
ume, low-risk chemicals which had ac-
counted for the majority of the 1987 releases.
The four chemicals — sodium sulfate, mela-
mine, aluminum oxide, and sodium hydrox-
ide— weredelistedbasedonan EPA finding
that they do not cause, nor could reasonably
be anticipated to cause, significant adverse
human health or environmental effects under
normal industrial conditions.
EPA believes it is premature to draw
conclusions about trends in toxic chemical
release based solely on two years' worth of
data. Further analyses are being conducted
to determine to what degree the 1988 figures
represent a real reduction in pollution as
1988 TRI Releases
to the Environment
(percent distribution)
Air 39%
Treatment Works 9%
opposed to a variety of other factors (such as
improved emission estimates by industry,
changes in production levels, or shipping
more chemicals off-site for recycling or en-
ergy recovery).
TRI's Impacts on Public Action
In the year since the first TRI data became
available, they have had a rapid and positive
impact on pollution prevention and control
initiatives across the country. In a number of
states, TRI has become the foundation for
legislative efforts aimed at curbing toxic re-
leases. Other states have also levied TRI-re-
lated fees, intended to finance some of the
costs of the TRI program as well as to serve as
an incentive to companies to minimize use
and release of toxic chemicals.
Environmental organizations and citizen
groups have been using TRI data to initiate
and support pollution prevention efforts at
the local level. For example, a public associa-
tion in California's Silicon Valley organized
a campaign to push companies to lower
emissions of ozone-destroying chemicals as
identified through TRI. Based on TRI data
for their region, citizens in Lima, Ohio, were
able to convince state officials of the need for
additional air-toxics monitoring. In Texas,
citizens used TRI data to support a petition
for toxic "hot spot" status for the Houston
Ship Channel and Galveston Bay under the
Clean Water Act. And in Chicago, Citizens
for a Better Environment and the Chicago
Lung Association have taught community
groups how to use TRI to address toxic pol-
lution in the city. These groups are planning
to negotiate with plant managers to reduce
their TRI emissions by four million pounds.
Regional News
Voluntary Ozone
Agreement for
Kansas City Region
All major oil and pipeline companies sup-
plying gasoline to the Kansas City, Missouri
region have voluntarily agreed to a plan to
reduce the amount of ozone created this
summer as a result of emissions from gaso-
line and tailpipes. The plan, prepared by the
Air Quality Forum of the Mid-America
Regional Council (MARC) and the Chamber
of Commerce of Greater Kansas City, is to
reduce the volatility of the gasoline as low as
possible, with a goal of 9.0 during the sum-
mer months of 1990.
Less volatile fuel releases fewer emis-
sions into the atmosphere and thereby re-
duces ozone formation. If all refiners meet
the 1990 goal, total emissions will be reduced
by nearly 5.7 million pounds this summer.
The Kansas City region is in attainment with
all federal health standards for air pollutants
except ozone; by implementing this plan, the
Air Quality Forum hopes to make Kansas
City the only metropolitan area with more
than one million population to be desig-
nated as a "Clean Air Region" by EPA. For
more information, contact Cindy Kemper at
MARC, 816-474-4240.
EPA is considering a number of actions to
strengthen the impact of TRI and its ability to
prompt pollution prevention initiatives.
Possible actions include requiring facilities
to report their pollution prevention meas-
ures, expanding the number of industries
that must report to TRI, and collecting infor-
mation on "peak releases" of TRI chemicals.
TRI Database and Report
Like last year, EPA is entering the TRI
reports into a national computerized data-
base that will be accessible by modem next
month through the National Library of
Medicine (301-496-6531), and on microfiche
at over4,000 libraries within several months.
EPA will also release a summary of the TRI
national report in book form this summer.
More information can be obtained from the
Emergency Planningand Community Right-
to-Know Hotline, 800-535-0202.

Pollution Prevention News - 8		Mayl990
Calendar of Events
14th Biennial National Waste Processing
American Society of Mechanical
June 3-6
Long Beach, CA
Leslie Friedman
Pollution Prevention and Waste
Center for Hazardous Materials
June 6-7
Philadelphia, PA
Lawrence Bonino
Int'l Conference on Pollution Prevention:
Clean Technologies & Clean Products
EPA, International Association for
Clean Technology
June 10-13
Washington, DC
Mary Bourassa
1st U.S. Conference on Municipal Solid
Waste Management
June 13-16
Washington, DC
9th Annual New England Resource
Recovery Conf/Expo
New Hampshire Resource Recovery
Assn., Assn. of Vermont Recyclers
June 13-15
Burlington, VT
Hazwaste '90 Expo
National Association of Hazardous
Waste Generators
June 18-21
San Diego, CA
Ken Sellinger
3rd Annual Hazardous Waste Reduction
N.Y. State Dept. of Environmental
Conservation, The Business Council
of N.Y. State, Inc.
June 19-20
Albany, NY
Mark Moroukian
83rd Annual Air and Waste Management
Association Meeting and Exhibition
June 24-29
Pittsburgh, PA
Sharon Andrea
1st National Symposium on Recycled
June 26-27
Atlanta, GA
Ellen Kopelman
World Recycling Conference and Expo
Recycling Today Magazine
June 27-29
Baltimore, MD
Hazardous and Solid Waste Minimization
Government Institutes, Inc.
June 28-29
Hilton Head, SC
Terri Summers
Pollution Prevention News is interested in receiving information on events that address pollution prevention, waste
minimization, and / or recycling. Information must be received two months before the month of the event (e.g., by June
1 for an August event). See mailing address on page 1. Space limitations may preclude listing all events.
United States Environmental
Protection Agency (PM-219)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300