POLLUTION PREVENTION
FOR THE
WOOD FINISHING
INDUSTRY
   DEVELOPED BY:

   U.S. EPA/SEDESOL
   POLLUTION PREVENTION
   WORKGROUP
   OCTOBER 1994

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

-------
&&&*

                               TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section                                                                          Page

LIMITATIONS OF THIS MANUAL 	  iv

INTRODUCTION	  v

SECTION I    GOALS AND BENEFITS OF POLLUTION PREVENTION

      Pollution Prevention Goals  	I-1
      Benefits of a Pollution Prevention Program  	I-1
      What is Pollution Prevention?	1-4

SECTION II   POLLUTION PREVENTION IN THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY

      Chapter 1     The Wood Finishing Industry	 II-l
      Chapter 2     Pollution Prevention Options for the Wood Finishing Industry	 II-5
      Bibliography	  11-30

SECTION III   CASE STUDIES

      CASE STUDYNO. 1—Conversion to HVLP	III-l
      CASE STUDYNO. 2—Solvent Recycling	III-3
      CASE STUDYNO. 3—Wood Waste to Energy 	III-5
      CASE STUDYNO. 4—Switching to Water-Based Inks	III-6
      CASE STUDYNO. 5—Conversion to HVLP	III-7
      CASE STUDYNO. 6—Reusing Overspray	III-8

Appendix

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Attachments

A     INFORMATION ON ACCESSING POLLUTION PREVENTION INFORMATION
      CLEARINGHOUSES

B     SURVEY
                                                          Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

                              LIST OF TABLES

Table                                                                   Page

1-1    SOURCE REDUCTION: PROCESS CHANGES  	1-6

1-2    WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES THAT ARE NOT POLLUTION
      PREVENTION  	1-7

II-1    REDUCTIONS IN VOC EMISSIONS POSSIBLE FOR EACH STEP WHEN
      NITROCELLULOSE IS REPLACED WITH AN ALTERNATIVE COATING	 11-13

11-2    COATINGS	 11-14

II-3    SAVINGS PER $1,000 SPENT ON COATING MATERIALS WITH
      IMPROVED TRANSFER EFFICIENCIES	 11-16

II-4    APPLICATION METHODS	 11-20


                              LIST OF FIGURES

Figure                                                                  Page

1-1    METHODS OF SOURCE REDUCTION  	1-5

1-2    WASTE MANAGEMENT HIERARCHY	1-9

II-l    TYPICAL WOOD FINISHING SEQUENCE 	 II-2

II-2    TYPICAL FURNITURE SPRAY BOOTH  	 II-4

II-3    TYPICAL TRANSFER EFFICIENCIES 	 11-21

II-4    OPTIONS FOR MANAGING SOLVENT	 11-27
TABLE OF CONTENTS                           111

-------
&&&*
               LIMITATIONS OF THIS MANUAL

                       This manual provides an overview of the pollution prevention and recycling alternatives
                       that are available in the wood finishing industry. This report is intended only to assist
                       the  user in his or her preliminary research and development of pollution prevention
                       options. Each company is responsible for identifying, evaluating, and implementing
                       pollution prevention practices that  are  appropriate  to  its  specific situation.  By
                       compiling and distributing this manual, EPA and SEDESOL are not recommending the
                       use of any particular processes, raw materials, products, or techniques in any particular
                       industrial  setting.   Compliance  with  U.S.  and Mexican  environmental laws,
                       occupational health and safety laws, and all applicable federal, state, and local laws and
                       regulations is the responsibility of each individual business.  It is not the focus of this
                       document.

                       The information in this manual is intended to be a relatively comprehensive overview
                       of the documented information on pollution prevention and recycling practices for the
                       wood finishing industry. However, the collection, organization, and dissemination of
                       pollution prevention information is a relatively new undertaking, as well as an ongoing
                       and evolutionary process. In addition, there are limits to any manual, including this
                       one.  Therefore, this summary may not contain every relevant piece of information on
                       pollution prevention and recycling for wood finishing companies.  EPA encourages all
                       users who discover, in the literature or in the field, pollution prevention options that are
                       not cited in this report  to  share this information with EPA.  Please  submit any
                       corrections, updates, or comments on this report to the following:

                                      Robert D. Lawrence (6M-PP)
                                      Pollution Prevention Coordinator
                                      U.S. EPA Region 6
                                      1445 Ross Avenue
                                      Dallas, TX 75202
                                      (214)665-6580

                       This manual is an assimilation of existing research  and case studies  of waste
                       minimization and pollution prevention principles. Because of the voluminous amount
                       of such information, referencing sources in the text as and when they are used would
                       make the manual cumbersome to the reader. Therefore, the authors  of this manual wish
                       to acknowledge the authors of all of the articles  referenced throughout the text and
                       listed in the bibliography section.
                                                 IV                  Pollution Prevention for the IVood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&


INTRODUCTION

       The production of economically competitive products is the driving force behind any
       successful business. Manufacturing frequently requires the use of various chemicals.
       The purchase and storage of these chemicals, their use in the process, and the ultimate
       disposal of the waste generated by the manufacturing process can present many
       problems. These problems include financial concerns, environmental management, and
       worker health and safety.

       Pollution prevention (also referred to as waste minimization or source reduction)
       is the use of materials, processes, or practices that reduce or eliminate the
       generation of pollutants or wastes at the source.  It includes practices that reduce the
       use of hazardous and nonhazardous materials, energy, water, and other resources, in
       addition to practices that protect natural resources through conservation or more
       efficient use.

       Because of the enormous potential for pollution prevention along the U.S.-Mexico
       border, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Secretaria de Desarrollo
       Social (SEDESOL) established the Pollution Prevention Workgroup in February 1992.
       EPA and SEDESOL also began promoting and coordinating the reduction of pollution
       through a broad range of approaches: technical assistance, training, public and private
       sector programs in pollution prevention awareness, assessment of pollution prevention
       opportunities, policy  development  and  institutional support,  and technology
       development and investment activities.

       The purpose of this manual is to provide pollution prevention information for the
       wood finishing industry.   This manual builds on the effort of the first manual
       —"Waste Minimization for the Metal Finishing Industry." That manual was the first
       in this series of bilingual pollution prevention manuals prepared jointly by EPA and
       SEDESOL. Future manuals will include other industries that are typical in the border
       area.  The manual contains the following sections:

               Section I            Goals   and  Benefits   of  Pollution
                                     Prevention

               In this general introduction, the term "pollution prevention" is clarified. This
               section also includes an overview of the benefits of applying pollution
               prevention techniques.

               Section II           Pollution  Prevention in the  Wood
                                     Finishing Industry

               This technical section describes various processes associated with the wood
               finishing industry and pollution prevention options for that industry.
INTRODUCTION

-------
&&&*
                            Section III         Case Studies

                            This section includes specific examples of companies that have used pollution
                            prevention techniques. These case studies describe the benefits, particularly
                            cost savings, that these companies have achieved.

                            Appendix           Additional Information

                            This section lists additional  technical documents pertaining to pollution
                            prevention  opportunities  for the wood finishing  industry,  and other
                            information. These documents are currently available only in English.

                            Attachment A     Information  on  Accessing Pollution
                                                 Prevention       Information
                                                 Clearinghouses

                            This section describes how to access the International Cleaner Production
                            Information Clearinghouse (ICPIC) database, which is an international
                            clearinghouse  for pollution prevention information.  Information is also
                            included on how to access the Pollution Prevention Information Exchange
                            System (PIES).

                            Attachment B     Survey

                            PLEASE COMPLETE THE  SURVEY INCLUDED IN THIS SECTION.
                            Your response provides valuable information for evaluating the usefulness of
                            this manual. Additionally, when your survey is returned, your name will be
                            placed on a mailing list for updates to the manual and other documents as they
                            become available.
                                             VI                 Pollution Prevention for the IVood Finishing Industry

-------
       Section I

  Goals and Benefits
of Pollution Prevention

-------
&&&*

GOALS AND BENEFITS OF POLLUTION PREVENTION


POLLUTION PREVENTION GOALS

       The goal of a pollution prevention program is to improve the quality of the environment
       through eliminating, preventing, and/or reducing all waste generation.  Pollution
       prevention includes any action by a company to reduce the amount of waste generated
       by a manufacturing process prior to off-site recycling, treatment, or disposal of the
       waste.  To effectively  accomplish this, the program must include an ongoing,
       comprehensive assessment of the operations at a facility.

BENEFITS OF A POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM

       Businesses and governments have strong incentives to reduce the toxicity and volume
       of the waste that they generate. As pollution prevention activities lower operating
       costs, production costs will decrease. Therefore, companies with an effective,
       ongoing pollution prevention plan will have a significant competitive edge.

       As discussed in detail below, a pollution prevention program can achieve the following
       benefits:

              !      Protect human health and environmental quality.

              !      Reduce operating costs.

              !      Improve employee morale and participation.

              !      Enhance the company's image in the community.

              !      Assist in compliance with environmental laws.

       Protect Human Health and Environmental Quality

       Reducing the waste released to air, land, and water will enhance the environment and
       protect human health. Typical harmful pollutants that can be reduced significantly by
       pollution prevention techniques include the following:

              !      Air emissions, including solvent fumes, fine particulates, and carbon
                    monoxide
GOALS AND BENEFITS OF A POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM
                                                                                    1-1

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
                               !       Land disposal, including ash from incineration, waste solvents, and
                                      debris

                               !       Water disposal, including wastewater contaminated with solvents and
                                      other toxic materials

                       Volatile organic compounds (VOC) typically comprise a significant amount of the
                       solvents used in wood finishing.  VOCs are central nervous system depressants.  High
                       exposures (hundreds to thousands parts per million in the air) may result in giddiness,
                       confusion, unconsciousness, paralysis, and death from respiratory or cardiovascular
                       arrest.  Long-term exposure may result  in  behavioral effects. Some VOCs are
                       suspected carcinogens.

                       The health and safety of employees can be affected by poor ventilation, mishandling
                       of chemicals, and a lack of proper safety equipment. An informative employee training
                       program is an important way to reduce accidents. Reducing the amount of chemical
                       materials and wastes at a facility is also beneficial, because it reduces the amount of
                       space required  for storage and the potential for  accidental  spills.  Furthermore,
                       hazardous waste transportation requirements may be reduced if the volume of pollution
                       is minimized.

                       Reduce Operating Costs

                       An effective pollution prevention program  can yield cost savings that will more
                       than offset program development and implementation costs.  Cost reductions may
                       be immediate savings that appear directly  on the balance sheet or anticipated
                       savings based on avoiding potential future costs. Cost savings are particularly
                       noticeable when the costs resulting from the treatment, storage, or disposal of wastes
                       are allocated to the production unit, product, or service that produces the waste.

                       Materials costs, or the costs of purchasing materials, can be  reduced by adopting
                       production and packaging procedures that consume fewer resources.  This approach
                       uses resources more  efficiently and  reduces the quantity and toxicity of waste
                       generated. As wastes are reduced, the percentage of raw materials converted to finished
                       products increases. This results in a proportional decrease in materials costs.

                       Waste management and disposal costs may be reduced when less waste is produced.
                       Required procedures for proper handling of the waste at the facility —in addition to
                       specific treatment, disposal, and transportation methods - are typically labor—intensive
                       and very costly.  These requirements and their associated costs are expected to increase.
1-2
                                                                     Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
       Production costs can be reduced through a pollution prevention assessment. When
       people examine production processes from a fresh perspective, they find opportunities
       for increasing efficiency that might not, otherwise, have been noticed.  Production
       scheduling, material handling, inventory control, and equipment maintenance are all
       areas in which facilities can work to reduce the production of waste of all types, thereby
       controlling the costs of production.

       Energy costs will decrease as the facility implements pollution prevention measures in
       various production lines. In addition, by thoroughly assessing how operations interact,
       companies can reduce the energy used to operate the overall facility.

       Improve Employee Morale and Participation

       Employees are likely  to feel better about their company when they believe that
       management is committed to providing a safe work environment and is acting as a
       responsible member of the community. By participating in  pollution prevention
       activities, employees have an opportunity to be part of a "team," and interact positively
       with coworkers and management.  Helping to implement and maintain a pollution
       prevention program will normally increase each employee's sense of commitment to
       company goals. This positive atmosphere helps to retain  a competitive work force and
       to attract high-quality new employees.

       Enhance the Company's Image in the Community

       The quality of the environment has become an issue of critical importance to society.
       Your company's policy and practices for controlling waste increasingly influence the
       attitudes of the local community at large.

       Community attitudes are  more positive toward companies that operate and publicize
       a thorough pollution prevention program.  If a company creates  environmentally
       compatible products and avoids excessive use of material and energy resources, the
       company's image will be enhanced both in the community and with potential customers
       and consumers.

       Assist In Compliance With Environmental Laws

       Mexico's environmental laws include  administrative penalties that  entitle
       government inspectors to require temporary or permanent closure of businesses
       that are not in environmental compliance.  A pollution prevention plan that includes
       standard operating procedures that comply with environmental laws and regulations is
       very helpful.  By following the plan, a company increases its chances of avoiding
       violations and associated penalties.
GOALS AND BENEFITS OF A POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM
                                                                                             1-3

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

               WHAT IS POLLUTION PREVENTION?
               1-4
                      Pollution prevention (also known as source reduction and waste minimization) is any
                      action that reduces the production of wastes (at their source) that may be released to the
                      air, land, or water. Two general methods of pollution prevention are (1) process
                      changes, and (2) product changes.  Various source reduction changes are presented
                      on Figure 1-1.

                      Process changes allow resources to be used more efficiently during the manufacturing
                      process. Process changes include the following:

                              !       Prudent purchasing,  in which  the  company  buys  the  most
                                     appropriately sized container of new material rather than buying too
                                     much and disposing of the unused portion

                              !       Operational  changes,  such  as  reusing  input materials during
                                     production and reducing water consumption in the process lines

                              !       Technology changes, such as using a safer process material

                              !       Increased energy efficiency

                      Table 1-1 summarizes specific examples of process changes.

                      Product changes reduce the volume of pollution by reducing the impact of the finished
                      product on the environment.  Product changes include the following:

                              !       Development of a less chemical-intensive product

                              !       Development of a higher-quality product that lasts longer

                              !       Incorporation of a life-cycle analysis including the use and disposal
                                     options for the product

                      Other Environmental Management Strategies

                      There are a numerous pollution control measures that are applied only after wastes are
                      generated. They are, therefore, not correctly categorized as pollution prevention. Table
                      1-2 provides some examples of procedures that are waste management measures but are
                      not pollution prevention.

                      Companies  should recognize  that transferring hazardous wastes to  another
                      environmental medium is not pollution prevention. Many waste management practices
                      to date have merely collected pollutants and moved them from  one  environmental
                      medium to another. For example, solvents can be removed from
                                                                  Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
GOALS AND BENEFITS OF A POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM
                                                                                                                 1-5

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
1-6
                                                                                 Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&****************

                                                 TABLE 1-1

                              SOURCE REDUCTION: PROCESS CHANGES
  The process changes presented here are pollution prevention measures, because they reduce the amount of waste
  generated during production.

  Examples of input material changes

         !        Switch to nonsolvent-based coatings and finishes.

         !        Use a less hazardous or toxic solvent for cleaning, coating, or finishing.

         !        Purchase raw materials that are free of trace quantities of hazardous or toxic impurities.

  Examples of technology changes

         !        Redesign equipment and piping to reduce the volume of material contained, thereby reducing losses
                 during batch or color changes or when equipment is drained for maintenance or cleaning.

         !        Change to mechanical stripping and cleaning devices to avoid solvent use.

         !        Use spray systems with higher transfer effectiveness.

         !        Install a hard-piped vapor recover system to capture and return emissions.

         !        Use more efficient equipment.

  Examples of improved operating practices

         !        Train operators.

         !        Cover solvent tanks when not in use.

         !        Segregate waste streams to avoid cross-contaminating hazardous and nonhazardous materials.

         !        Increase control of operating conditions (including flow rate, temperature, pressure, residence time,
                 and stoichiometry) and change maintenance scheduling, recordkeeping, or procedures to increase
                 efficiency.

         !        Optimize purchasing and inventory maintenance methods for input materials.  Purchasing in
                 quantity can reduce costs and packaging material if care is taken to ensure that materials do not
                 exceed their shelf life. Reevaluate shelf life characteristics to avoid unnecessary disposal of stable
                 items.

         !        Prevent leaks, drips, and spills and use drip pans and splash guards.

         !        Turn off electrical equipment such as lights and copiers, when not in use.

         !        Place equipment in a manner that will minimize spills and losses during transport of parts or
                 materials.
GOALS AND BENEFITS OF A POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM
                                                                                                         1-7

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

                                                 TABLE 1-2

         WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES THAT ARE NOT POLLUTION PREVENTION
  Off-site recycling
         !        Off-site recycling (for example, solvent recovery at a central distillation facility) is an excellent
                 waste management option.  However, because it does not reduce the actual amount of pollution
                 generated, it is not a pollution prevention measure.

  Waste treatment

         !        Waste treatment involves changing the form or composition of a waste stream, through controlled
                 reactions, to reduce or eliminate the amount of pollutant.  Examples include pretreatment,
                 detoxification, incineration, decomposition, stabilization,  and solidification or encapsulation.

  Concentration of hazardous or toxic constituents to reduce volume

         !        Volume reduction operations, such as dewatering, are useful treatment approaches, but they do not
                 eliminate or reduce the amount of pollutants being generated.  For example, pressure filtration and
                 drying of a heavy metal waste sludge before disposal decreases the sludge water content and waste
                 volume, but it does not decrease the number of heavy metal molecules in the sludge.

  Diluting of constituents to reduce hazard or toxicity

         !        Dilution is applied to a waste stream after it is generated.  Dilution does not reduce the absolute
                 amount of hazardous constituents entering the environment.

  Other control technologies

         !        Control technologies are generally "end-of-pipe" approaches to pollution.  Many control
                 technologies that have been used have only collected pollutants and moved them from one
                 environmental medium (air, water,  or land) to another. For example, filters that collect paint
 	overspray may prevent air pollution, but they create a solid waste problem.	
1-8
                                                                           Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
                       wastewater using activated carbon.  However, regenerating the  activated carbon
                       requires using another solvent or heating, which transfers the contaminants to the air.
                       In some cases, this type of waste management strategy is a valid treatment option.
                       However, too often the purpose has been to shift a pollutant to a medium that is
                       regulated less stringently.

                       For example, waste treatment prior to disposal reduces the toxicity and/or disposal-site
                       space requirements but does not eliminate all pollutant materials.  Frequently, the effect
                       is to transfer pollution from air or water to land.  Conventional waste treatments
                       include processes such as volume reduction, dilution, detoxification, incineration, and
                       stabilization.

                       Off-site recycling, which is another waste management strategy, is vastly preferable to
                       other forms of off-site waste handling, because it helps to preserve raw materials and
                       reduce the amount of material that will require disposal. However, compared with
                       closed-loop recycling (reuse) performed at the production site, off-site recycling is
                       likely to have  more residual waste that  requires disposal.   Furthermore, waste
                       transportation and the recycling process carry the risk of worker exposure and release
                       to the environment.

                       The pollution prevention hierarchy, represented  on Figure 1-2, prioritizes waste
                       management options from those that are most environmentally beneficial to those that
                       are  least environmentally beneficial.   Specific technical information on pollution
                       prevention options for the wood finishing industry is in Section II of this manual.
GOALS AND BENEFITS OF A POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM
                                                                                                   1-9

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
1-10
                                                                                  Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
        Section II

Pollution Prevention in the
 Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
Chapter 1
THE WOOD FINISHING  INDUSTRY

       This manual is targeted mainly toward wood finishing as it applies to the following
       industries: (1) wood household furniture, (2) wood office furniture, (3) wood kitchen
       cabinets, (4) wood office and store fixtures, partitions, shelving, and lockers, and
       (5) any industries closely related to these. Wood finishing companies range in size.
       Most  employ fewer  than  50  people.   The  wood  finishing process  is  often
       labor-intensive.  It usually includes sanding and staining, followed by coating (used
       interchangeably with "finishing" in this manual), drying, and resanding in  repeated
       steps until the desired finish is obtained. The function of the finishing is to provide the
       end product with  the  final appearance  and resiliency that satisfies the customer.
       Facilities vary greatly in product type and quality.

       The three grades of furniture—the main product of the wood finishing industry —are
       often described by the  industry as high-end, medium-end, and low-end. Generally,
       high-end furniture is constructed of solid wood and wood veneers, with the wood grain
       showing through the finish.  A high-end piece might require 30 to 35 finishing
       operations. Low-end furniture is often made of medium-density fiberboard with some
       plastic components and some natural wood.  The piece often has a colored or printed
       wood grain finish and might require only six to 12  finishing operations. Figure II-1
       shows a typical wood finishing sequence.

       In small facilities, wood  stock is often moved manually between stations.  However, in
       larger facilities, the wood is moved mechanically along the finishing line.  In some
       cases, pallets—with the wood product on them—are pulled by cables or chains. In
       other cases, various types of conveyor belts are used.   Many facilities use  a
       combination of these methods. Generally, furniture is  assembled first; the finish is then
       applied.  Cabinets, on the other hand, are frequently  finished  before being assembled.

       The processes generally involved in manufacturing a value-added wood product -for
       example, apiece of furniture—include (1)  shaping raw stock, (2) assembling parts, (3)
       applying a finish, and (4) packaging and shipping. Of these processes, application of
       a finish is the major source of pollution in the wood products industry.  This manual
       focuses  on the means of economically minimizing this pollution.  Wastes from the
       remaining operations are mainly nonhazardous. For the purposes of this manual, the
       wood finishing process is defined to comprise (1)  sanding, (2) coating, and (3) the
       ancillary operations of equipment cleaning and coating preparation.
The wood finishing
industry
manufactures a
THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                               II-1

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
11-2
                                                                                   Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
        Because finishing materials have traditionally been solvent-based, the issue of pollution
        prevention in the  wood finishing industry is closely tied to the issue of reducing
        emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC).

        The emission of VOCs—including methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone
        methylene chloride, toluene, andxylenes—into the atmosphere is the most serious
        hazardous waste issue currently confronting the industry. Solvents with high VOC
        content are commonly used in stains, paints, finishes, and glues, in addition to stripping
        and cleaning operations.  The U.S. wood finishing industry is dominated by the use of
        nitrocellulose lacquers, which—apart from their high VOC content—are hazardous
        also because of their high flammability.

        Most VOC emissions generated by the wood finishing process are from (1) the spray
        booths, where the coatings are applied; (2) the flashoff areas and ovens, where the
        finish hardens; and (3) cleanup operations.

        Depending on the line of products being manufactured, different sizes and types of
        spray booths are used. A typical  spray booth for a facility manufacturing residential
        furniture is shown on Figure II-2. Most spray booths of this type are open.  Other types
        of booths are mainly enclosed.

        Flashoff areas are either between spray booths or between a spray booth and an oven.
        Some flashoff areas use forced air circulation to increase solvent evaporation.  When
        fast-drying finishes are used, pieces may be completely cured in these areas.  Other
        finishes may require ovens. Depending on the type of finish used, the ovens are heated
        to between 38°C and 121 °C (100°F to 250°F) or may use infrared or ultraviolet
        energy sources.

        Solvents are often used to clean application equipment, piping, and spray booths, and
        to strip cured  coating from wood parts or equipment.  Emissions can be reduced
        economically in each of these segments of the wood finishing  process.  Chapter 2
        covers various options for pollution prevention. Some options may reduce emissions
        from several segments of the wood finishing process.  For example, changing to a
        coating material with a lower VOC content will reduce emissions from the spray booth,
        flashoff areas, ovens, and cleanup activities.
VOC emissions is the
most serious
pollution problems.
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS IN THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                                II-3

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
II-4
                                                                                   Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
Chapter 2

POLLUTION  PREVENTION  OPTIONS  FOR  THE
WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
       The list of pollution prevention options presented in this chapter is extensive but not
       exhaustive.  Research is ongoing in the areas of coating composition and application
       methods. Also, the best solutions to problems are often original, discovered by
       creative employees and resourceful management.  Additionally, this manual was
       prepared as  an overview of pollution prevention in the wood finishing industry. The
       manufacturers within the industry vary widely in size and product; consequently, not
       every option presented will be appropriate for every company.  Each company should
       implement the options that reduce pollution the most while maintaining or improving
       product quality goals and the company's bottom line. Pollution prevention presents not
       only an opportunity to improve worker health and safety, and the quality of your
       environment, but also many opportunities for increased profitability. A manufacturing
       company's finances may be approximated by the following simple equations:

                        Product = Raw Material — Waste
                                     and
                            Income = Product x Price

       Any waste produced by a company is potential product wasted. For example, any
       finish that ends up on the floor instead of on the wood is a raw material that was
       purchased and could have been part of a finished product; instead, it is merely
       waste material   Not only is the wasted finish material never sold as part of the
       product, but it now costs money to clean up and dispose of. Additionally, whether you
       are in the U.S. or Mexico, this disposal cost will only increase.

       As mentioned in Section I, there is a hierarchy of options that deal with waste.  The
       most preferable is source reduction—decreasing the amount of hazardous material
       used, then recycling or reusing the material, followed by treating the waste and finally
       disposing of it. Although recycling is not necessarily a method of pollution prevention,
       some aspects of recycling are covered in this chapter. Source reduction and recycling
       involve many alternatives.  Throughout this chapter, options are given in a roughly
       descending order of desirability.
Pollution prevention
improves worker
health and safety,
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                         II-5

-------
     &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

                    SANDING
Dust collection
systems extend
equipment life.
Wood waste can be
used for decorative
landscaping or
Source Reduction

As the cost of raw materials increases, manufacturers must seek more effective uses of
timber and veneer.  Because thinner veneers are often being used, sanding with minimal
stock removal is becoming more important. This has resulted in the use of segmented
polishing platens.  Platens may be controlled electronically or pneumatically.  The
electronic sanding platen is more sensitive, but the pneumatic sanding platen is much
cheaper.  Sanding with air pressure helps to dissipate heat, allowing a more uniform
finish at a higher  grit without varnishing the panel.  Dust collection is important for
worker health and for extending equipment life. Without a dust collection system, dust
becomes embedded in the sanding belt, thereby shortening belt life and reducing the
quality of the finish. Wood dust also tends to work its way into machinery, increasing
maintenance costs.

Proper Technique

Paper belts, rather than cloth belts, should be used on hardwoods.  Paper belts cost
about one-half as  much as cloth belts and give a better finish, because the abrasive
is more uniform on paper belts than on cloth belts.  Another simple tip for sanding
efficiency is to never skip more than one belt. If grit is changed by too much, removing
the scratches left by the larger grit will be difficult.

Recycling—Wood Waste to Energy

Traditionally, wood waste has merely been dumped into landfills. Because the cost of
disposal will only increase, businesses need to seek more productive alternatives than
throwing away so much of their raw materials. Wood waste recycling options include
(1) grinding to reduce volume of waste stored; (2) shredding to form animal bedding,
mulch, or decorative landscaping; and (3) burning for energy production. Wood by-
products are a cheap fuel  Consequently, using wood waste as fuel potentially
solves two problems:  (1) it eliminates problems associated with disposal, and (2) it
saves money as an inexpensive fuel source.  Wood waste, especially waste from
unfinished wood, may be used in a wood boiler, typically operating at around  1,600°K,
to convert the wood into energy with minimal hydrocarbon emissions.  However,
burning  wood with plastic laminate, containing  chlorides, is a problem because of
concern over possible formation of chlorinated hydrocarbon.  The operator should be
familiar with all applicable regulations before a wood boiler is used.

To take full advantage of wood waste as an energy source, a company should automate
its  feed  system to the greatest extent possible. Controlled feeding
     II-6
                                                                         Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
        yields more efficient combustion, and labor costs for hand feeding will only increase.
        In many cases, there are enough waste and scrap to not only produce enough power for
        the whole facility, but also to heat or cool the facility.  If there are a few small wood
        finishing operations in one area, it would be possible for these companies to combine
        wood waste so that they could have sufficient quantities to generate power or to sell or
        distribute for other purposes.
FINISHING
        Variations in the finishing procedure are too numerous to list exhaustively, but wood
        finishing usually consists of some combination of the following materials being applied
        in the following order:

                1.      Size, coat and/or bleach to prepare the wood and ensure uniform color

               2.      Stain to achieve the desired color

               3.      A washcoat to smooth the wood

               4.      Filler, fill-glaze, or oil sealer

               5.      Wood sealers

               6.      Glaze and/or shading stains

               7.      Topcoats

        Each of these materials  is available in various general formulations. For example,
        stains,  sealers,  and topcoats are available  in water-based and nitrocellulose-based
        formulations.  This section will discuss these general types of formulations, rather than
        individual materials (such as stains, sealers, and fillers).

        The most significant source of pollution in the wood finishing industry is the VOC
        content of the finishes used to provide the product's final appearance. Two main
        areas to consider when developing your pollution prevention plan are the materials of
        which your coatings are made and the application methods used.  The type of coating
        is important, because available materials vary widely in their VOC content—the lower
        the VOC content, the less pollution will be  generated. Application methods are also
        very important—the better a process transfers the coating to the wood, the more  money
        a company will  save and the less pollution it will generate.
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                                 II-7

-------
      &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Choosing the best
finish is important
for environmental
 Source Reduction

 Alternative Coatings

 Switching to  a different coating material can reduce or even possibly eliminate
 hazardous waste. It requires a strong organizational commitment to change finishing
 materials.  Such a change, however, can eliminate many health and environmental
 problems and result in a comparable or even superior finish.  Of course, not every
 alternative finish is right for every product. Time must be spent to find the acceptable
 alternative.  This section first discusses the properties of traditional nitrocellulose-
 based coatings and then presents several types of alternative coatings.

 Nitrocellulose-Based

 Nitrocellulose-based coatings are by far the most frequently used type of finish in the
 U.S.  wood finishing  industry.  The properties of nitrocellulose-based coatings are
 presented here to establish a standard against which the alternative coatings may be
 judged.

 Nitrocellulose is a resin that acts as a binder in the coating material. Different types of
 organic solvents must be mixed with nitrocellulose.  Some solvents are added because
 of their evaporative properties, and some are added because of their ability to dissolve
 the nitrocellulose.  This blend causes the coatings to dry quickly and gives them a
 desired viscosity.  Nitrocellulose coatings are nonconvertible coatings, meaning that
 film formation occurs via solvent evaporation—no chemical reaction, or curing, takes
 place. The resulting finish has low resistance to heat and solvents. Because of this, the
 finishes are easy to damage and relatively easy to repair.  Nitrocellulose-based coatings
 are classified as fast-drying.  They contain about 6 pounds of VOCs per gallon of
 coating, not including water.  The solids content of the nitrocellulose-based lacquers
 is about 16 percent by volume.  This  relatively low solids content is necessary to
 achieve the needed viscosity.

 Finishing with nitrocellulose-based coatings is a familiar, well-developed procedure.
 Nitrocellulose coatings are (1) easy to apply, (2) dry quickly at ambient temperature,
 and (3) perhaps most important—produce the final appearance that manufacturers
 believe customers want.  However, these coatings have several major drawbacks.
 First, nitrocellulose  is highly flammable.  Second, it requires the use of organic
 solvents that are expensive, toxic, and quick to volatilize.  Finally, the resulting
finish is not very durable,  and it yellows  in sunlight. Switching to alternative
 coatings has many benefits. However, when considering a switch, an organization must
 remember to adapt its equipment;  perhaps even  more important,  it must adapt its
 personnel training to the new finishing material.
      II-8
                                                                           Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
        Waterborne

        Waterborne coatings are widely considered the future of the wood finishing industry.
        There are many types of water-based coatings. What all of these coatings have in
        common is that water is the major solvent or  carrying liquid for  the film-forming
        polymers. Within waterborne coatings are three types of polymer systems:  (1) water
        emulsions,  (2)  water-reducible resins (solutions), and (3) colloidal dispersions.
        Coatings formulated with water-emulsion polymers contain water-insoluble spherical
        particles of high molecular weight uniformly dispersed in water. Water-reducible resins
        are completely  soluble in water or water-solvent mixtures.  Colloidal dispersions
        contain medium molecular weight polymers that combine the properties of the water-
        emulsion polymers and the water-reducible polymers.

        Depending on the type of polymer in their formulation, each type of waterborne coating
        exhibits different film properties. Understanding the advantages and disadvantages of
        each type makes coating  selection easier. Water-emulsion formulations produce
        finishes that are durable and stain-resistant.

        Water-reducible formulations offer high gloss, clarity, and good application properties.
        However, the film is not as durable as the water emulsions. Viscosity depends on
        molecular weight, making the water emulsion formulations the most viscous.  Colloidal
        dispersion formulations offer high gloss, good application properties, durability, and
        resistance to chemicals and staining. Different waterborne coatings require a different
        drying method; some require air or forced air, and others require elevated temperature.

        The VOC content of water-based coatings varies substantially. Cosolvents are usually
        added  to allow  adequate  coalescence and film formation, and aid penetration of
        pigmented materials. Most waterborne  coatings have a VOC content of from  1.3 to 2.3
        pounds per gallon, less water.  The coatings range from 26 to 30 percent solids by
        volume. These waterborne finishes represent a 90 to 95 percent reduction in VOC
        emissions per volume of solids applied.  The total emission reduction for a facility
        depends on how many steps, formerly using nitrocellulose coatings,  can be converted
        to using water based finishes. The major disadvantage of water is that it evaporates at
        a slower rate than solvents.

        Each type of coating material is associated with a different set of concerns.   The
        following factors that should be considered when using waterborne  coatings:

                !       Waterborne coatings should generally be stored at temperatures above
                       freezing.

                !       Equipment must be cleaned immediately after use, because the dry
                       coatings are no longer water-soluble.
Waterborne coatings
may be the future of
the industry.
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                                 II-9

-------
     &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Today,  Waterborne
formulations give
finishes comparable
Equipment can be
cleaned with soap
and water.
        \       Sagging and  grain raising are  potential  problems that must be
               addressed.

        !       Equipment pumps, containers, and application equipment should be
               corrosion-resistant.

        !       Humidity has a large effect on the drying rate and must be accounted
               for.

        !       Current water-based finishes are  available and satisfactory for most
               applications,  but there are often  subtle differences  in the final
               appearance.

        !       Waterborne  coatings  are  generally  more  susceptible  to  air
               entrainment; consequently, aeration should be minimized by returning
               coating material to the tank below the fluid level and minimizing the
               splash caused  by agitators.

        !       For the coating to adhere well, surfaces must be free of oil films.

Waterborne finishing  materials  are used by  a growing  number of companies.
Water-based coatings are generally 25 to 50 percent more expensive than traditional
materials, but—because they have twice the solids  content—they are at least as cheap
to use.  In the past, the water-based coatings were suitable only for low-end products.
The first water-based finishes had problems with grain raising and with clarity, but
these problems are diminishing as new formulations are  generated.   Waterborne
lacquers are now durable and offer good clarity and sandability.  Water-based finishes
currently offer many benefits over conventional nitrocellulose lacquers, including
(1) greater resistance to moisture, chemicals,  impact and reverse impact,  and
abrasion, (2) adaptability to a wide range of application methods, (3) low toxicity,
(4) low VOC content, and (5) cleaning of equipment with soap  and water.
Waterborne coating  can usually be applied with the same methods as traditional
solvent-based finishes.  The main cost of conversion is for installing corrosion
resistant equipment. An added incentive is the decrease in insurance costs that
results from switching to a water-based system. Insurance for facilities that use
only water-based coatings averages  50 percent less than for shops that use
solvent-based formulations.

Polyester

Nitrocellulose lacquers dominate the U.S. wood finishing industry.  However, this is
not the case in all countries.   In other  parts of the world, polyester-based and
polyurethane-based coatings predominate.
     11-10
                                                                          Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
        Two types of polyester coatings are available.  The first type is a styrene-derived
        polyester. Here, styrene is used as a solvent and reactant for unsaturated alkyd resins
        contained in the coatings.  The formulations also contain a drying agent, usually a
        heavy metal, and may be cured through a catalytic reaction or by ultraviolet (UV)
        radiation.  Acrylic polyesters comprise the second type of polyester coatings. These
        contain organic solvents and cross-linking acrylics. They are cured either by catalytic
        reaction or exposure to UV radiation.

        Both types of polyester coatings are fast-drying with films that are durable and resistant
        to heat, chemicals, and impact.  Because the polyester films are so durable, they are
        also very difficult to repair after curing. Styrene-based polyesters are usually 100
        percent solids VOC emissions of near zero.  The acrylic polyesters have a VOC
        content of about 3 pounds per gallon, less water, with a solids content of 30 to 50
        percent by volume.  Each step converted from nitrocellulose-based coatings to
        polyester coatings would result in an 85 to 100 percent reduction in VOC emissions.
        However, polyester finishes are chemically incompatible with nitrocellulose; mixing
        these compounds is a potential explosive hazard.  Polyesters and nitrocellulose finishes
        should never be used on the same piece.  The aesthetic and chemical compatibilities of
        different coatings  should always be considered before coating types are mixed on the
        same piece.

        Polyurethane

        As with polyester coatings, polyurethane finishes are used infrequently in the U.S. but
        are common in other countries. Polyurethane coatings are formed through the reaction
        of a polyhydric alcohol with an isocyanate cross-linking resin.   Classification of
        polyurethane finishes depends on the formulation or cure process, as follows: (1) one-
        component products, (2) two-component products, and (3) moisture-cured materials.
        The two-component products are convertible  coatings; film formation occurs through
        polymerization.  Moisture-cured coatings are not fully cured through polymerization;
        rather,  the final curing occurs when moisture in the environment reacts with the
        material to form a dry film.  Moisture-cured coatings can take up to several months to
        cure. Once cured, all polyurethane coatings are very durable and are characterized as
        good for polishing, providing a high-gloss finish. As with polyester finishes, the high
        durability of polyurethane coating means that it is very difficult to repair after curing.

        Within the last few years, a two-component waterborne polyurethane resin has been
        developed.  It combines  the finish properties  of the  traditional solvent-based
        polyurethanes with  the advantage of a  zero  VOC  content.    The traditional
        polyurethanes have a VOC content of about  3.4 pounds per gallon, less water.  They
        are between 40 and 60 percent solids by volume.  Overall, traditional polyurethanes
        would represent about an 80percent reduction in VOC emissions
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                               11-11

-------
     &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

                           from those of nitrocellulose-based finishes.  As with all coating types, the overall
                            pollution reduction depends on how many steps could be converted to the alternative
                            coating.

                            Carbon Dioxide rCO.VBased

                            Union  Carbide has developed the Unicarb™ coating system for minimizing VOCs.
                            This system uses supercritical COy instead of organic solvents or water, to dissolve
                            the coatings.  The Unicarb™ coatings contain polymers and coalescing solvents,
                            whereas the cutting solvents are omitted. In most formulations, cutting solvents are
                            used to  decrease viscosity and enhance atomization.  The Unicarb™ system uses CO2
                            to decrease viscosity and enhance atomization.  The viscous coating and supercritical
                            carbon  dioxide are blended in a mixing chamber.  Generally, compared to traditional
                            coatings, 1 pound of carbon dioxide "replaces"  1 pound of cutting solvents.  The
                            mixture is released as an atomized paint  through an airless spray gun.   The CO2
                            evaporates from the atomized coating.  The deposited paint, still containing the
                            coalescing solvents, cures conventionally, either by air drying or baking. The quality
                            of the atomized coating is considered superior to conventional airless atomization and
                            similar to that obtained by conventional air atomization.

                            The Unicarb™ coatings contain about 4.7 pounds per gallon, less water, of VOCs and
                            they are about 34 percent solids by volume.  Overall, VOCs are reduced by about 50
                           percent.  The exact properties depend on the type of coating used in the system.  A
                            company using the Unicarb™ system has the  advantage of not having to completely
                            reformulate its finishes, while it is still reducing VOC emissions. A nitrocellulose
                            Unicarb™ coating, for example, will produce a film with the same advantages and
                            disadvantages as the traditional film but will have lower VOC emissions.  The main
                            disadvantages   of Unicarb™  are the lack of  demonstrated performance by
                            manufacturers and the royalties that must be paid.

                            Ultraviolet OJVVCurable

                            The main components of UV-curable coatings are polymers, diluent monomers, and
                            photoinitiators.    UV curing  uses high-intensity UV light to  react  with  the
                            photosensitizers, thereby creating free radicals that initiate crosslinking to form the
                            solid film. Consequently, UV-curable coatings are convertible. Much of the diluent
UV curin? is 
-------
&&&*
       emissions is from 80 to nearly 100 percent  Curing three-dimensional pieces remains
       difficult, because all of the finish must be exposed to the UV radiation. Some UV
       ovens have been designed  to accommodate three-dimensional pieces. However,
       because the UV lamps need to be arranged for each type of furniture, these ovens would
       be practical only for a product line that manufactured the same design for a reasonable
       length of time. Currently, UV curing is still used mainly for flat products. However,
       the curing is rapid, and the product is heated little during curing, resulting in higher
       productivity and lower space requirements. Curing also uses less energy than thermal
       curing. UV curing will  typically use one-fifth of the energy used by a comparable
       thermal curing line. Energy is absorbed only by the coating and is not wasted by
       heating the air or workpiece. All UV coating materials are, basically, single-component
       systems that do not require the addition of catalyst. UV curing is one form of radiation
       curing; radiation curing is also accomplished by using infrared radiation and electron
       beams.  The cost of a UV curing system varies from $4,200 to $200,000.

       Table II-1  shows overall reductions in VOC emissions possible for each step where
       nitrocellulose-based coatings are replaced by an alternate  coating.  The total VOC
       reduction depends on how many steps can be converted to using an alternate coating
       material.
                                   TABLE II-l
               REDUCTIONS IN VOC EMISSIONS POSSIBLE FOR
                  EACH STEP WHERE NITROCELLULOSE IS
                REPLACED WITH AN ALTERNATIVE COATING
Coating Material
Nitrocellulose
Water-based
Polyester
Polyurethane
CO2-based
UV-Curable
Percent Reduction in VOCs
0%
90 - 95%
85 - 100%
80 - 100%
~ 50%
80 - 100%
        Table II-2 summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of each type of coating.
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                            11-13

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
                                           TABLE II-2

                                           COATINGS
         Coating
          Advantages
    Disadvantages
      Water-based
   Durable
   At least as cheap to use as
   conventional coatings
   Low VOC content
   Equipment cleans with soap and
   water
   Decreased insurance costs,
   because fire hazard is eliminated
   Lower volume of material to
   store
Need for corrosion-resistant
equipment
Evidence of grain raising on
some types of wood from
some formulations
Possible need for air
movement or heat to facilitate
drying
Surface must be free of oily
films
Higher viscosity, possibly
requiring changes in piping
and pump system
Need for better temperature
and humidity control	
      Polyester and
      Polyurethane
!   High gloss
!   Very durable
!   Low VOC content
Difficult to repair
Requires a "clean room"
environment
       CCvbased
!   Low VOC content
!   Elimination of the cost, odor,
   flammability, toxicity, and oven
   sagging associated with cutting
   solvents
Royalty costs
Special sprayer and delivery
system needed
Pumps and mixers required to
handle the viscous Unicarb™
formulations
Limited industrial experience
      UV-curable
!   Low energy costs
!   Very low VOC content
!   Very durable finish
!   Rapid curing
Higher coating costs
Difficult to cure
irregular-shaped pieces
Limited to clear or semiclear
finishes and thin films
      Nitrocellulose
!   Established methods
!   Easy repair
!   Fast drying	
Average to poor durability
High VOC content
Toxic and flammable
11-14
                                                                   Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
        Application Methods

        The following techniques are used for coating applications:  (1) flat line finishing,
        (2) spray application, (3) brushing, and (4) dipping. Within each technique there are
        many variations. Flat line finishing is used to coat only flat stock.  Dipping is usually    ^QW transfer
        not used for hollow pieces.  Spraying is the most commonly used technique. One way    efficiency = money
        of measuring the efficiency of coating usage is to examine transfer efficiency (TE).  TE    wasted
        is defined as the ratio of the solid coating deposited on a surface to the total amount of
        coating used, expressed  as a percentage.  For example, if one-half sprayed of the
        coating stays on the target, the system has a TE of 50 percent. Although 50 percent TE
        is almost twice that usually achieved by conventional spray guns, one-half of all
        material purchased  is still wasted.  Examples of savings from  improved TE (for
        example, by better equipment or operator training) are shown in Table II-3.

        Electrostatic

        During  electrostatic finishing, coating particles are  atomized and given a negative
        charge, whereas the piece to be finished is either grounded or given a positive charge.
        Electrostatic attraction pulls the particles to the product. This attraction results in a
        high TE, which allows each piece to be finished with fewer passes, thereby using less
        coating material and saving time  and money. The main advantage of using this type
        of system is the high TE. One effect of electrostatic finishing responsible for increased
        TE  is called "wraparound."  This is the tendency of the charged coating particles to
        effectively cover the sides of the piece being sprayed and even for particles that go past
        the  piece to be attracted to the back of the piece.  Another property of electrostatic
        finishing, the Faraday cage  effect, causes the particles to deposit only around the
        entrance of a cavity, often making touchup painting necessary. The particles must
        possess sufficient momentum to overcome the Faraday cage effect but not so much that
        the attractive forces are completely negated. Therefore, balancing particle velocity with
        electrostatic voltage is essential to optimizing TE. Another consideration is  that the
        workpiece must be a conductor. Obviously, this is no problem for metal finishing, but
        it is a concern for wood finishing. When the wood has a sufficient moisture content,
        it is a reasonably effective conductor. However, when the wood is very dry, it does not
        conduct well enough  on its  own. Nonconductive surfaces must be treated with a
        coating that increases the electrical attraction between the charged coating particles and
        the piece to be finished.  One common type of treatment is to  apply sensitizers to the
        wood surface. Sensitizer formulations are applied in a thin colorless film that picks up
        moisture from the surrounding air. This moisture makes the piece conductive  enough
        to spray electrostatically and the  sensitizer dissolves into the applied coating. Using
        a sensitizer is a process that is sensitive to humidity and is not
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                                11-15

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
                                                TABLE II-3

                SAVINGS PER $1,000 SPENT ON COATING MATERIALS WITH IMPROVED
                                     TRANSFER EFFICIENCIES (TE)
                                                  NewTE

                   45%         50%        60%        70%         80%         90%
  Old
  TE
         20%
         25%
         30%
         35%
         40%
         45%
556
444
333
222
111
0
600
500
400
300
200
100
667
583
500
417
333
250
714
643
571
500
429
357
750
688
625
563
500
438
778
722
667
611
556
500
        Note:

        Example—A company uses 100 gallons of finish per month spraying cabinet doors ($10 per
        gallon for a total of $1,000). The conventional spray guns that the company uses are 30 percent
        efficient. If company switches to an air-assisted airless spray system which is 60 percent
        efficiently, the company would save $500 per month.	
11-16
                                                               Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
    effective when relative humidity is below 40 percent.  The rewards of using electrostatic
    finishing may be worth the effort, however, because the coating cost may be reduced by
    about 40 percent.

    The two main types of electrostatic equipment are rotary atomizers and electrostatic spray
    guns. Some rotary atomizers use rotating disks, and others use balls. Disks are best for
    long thin parts and flat pieces, whereas balls are better for shorter, wider pieces.  Low-speed
    rotary atomizers rely on electrostatic force to atomize the coatings, whereas the high-speed
    versions use centrifugal force to atomize the coatings.  Both apply a negative charge to the
    particles. Electrostatic spray guns may be of either the air or airless variety.  These spray
    guns operate in a manner similar to that of conventional guns, using air or fluid pressure for
    atomization. Additionally, the particles are charged by an electrode at the tip of the gun.
    The overall TEs  are generally better with the rotary atomizers than with the electrostatic
    spray gun. Electrostatic spray guns produce  particles with greater momentum, tending to
    increase overspray. Also, they are less efficient at electronically charging the paint particles
    than the rotary atomizers.  Electrostatic spraying equipment can cost over $60,000 and,
    consequently, may be too expensive for smaller shops.

    High-Volume/Low-Pressure (HVLP) Spray

    HVLP spray guns use a high volume of air at low pressure—no greater than 10 pounds per
    square inch (psi)—to atomize  a  stream of coating material.  At low pressures, coating
    materials are propelled at lower velocities than with conventional systems. At these lower
    velocities, "bounce-back" is minimized, and TE is improved. This softer spray is also good
    at penetrating recessed areas. However, this higher TE is achieved at the cost of a lower
    fluid flow rate.  The finish achievable  with HVLP is comparable to finishes with    increasing transfer
    conventional spray, when                                                             efficiency from 30%
    low- to medium-viscosity coatings are used.  As with all spray gun techniques, TEs    t  ^QO/ w/-// cu+
    depend on operator skill level, type of equipment,  coating formulation, and operating
    pressure.  HVLP systems typically have TEs in  the  40-  to 70-percent  range.  As
    described in a later section, operator skill level is  the  most reliable predictor of TE.
    Nevertheless, it is also vitally important that gun performance is optimized, for example,
    with proper system pressure and the optimal spray gun tip.

    There are two basic types of HVLP systems;  one is operated with a compressor; the other
    is operated with  a turbine. When a compressor is used a conversion kit is purchased to
    allow the use of HVLP. This kit contains filters to clean the air and a regulator to control
    air pressure.  Turbines are ideal for use with HVLP systems, because they are designed to
    produce a high volume of warm, dry, low-pressure air. The heated air produced by most
    turbines can improve the ability of coating to flow and speed drying.
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                                11-17

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

                    Airless Spray
11-18
                    As the name implies, this method of atomizing coatings does not use compressed air.
                    Instead, hydraulic pressure is used to force the material through the small opening of the
                    spray gun nozzle to atomize the coating.  The system can be adjusted either by adjusting
                    the viscosity or changing the fluid pressure.  Airless systems have several advantages.
                    First, airless systems have better TEs than conventional systems.  Second, when heavy
                    films are desirable,  a single coating with airless  spray often yields results that would
                    require two coats, applied conventionally.  Also, because the airless guns deposit material
                    faster,  a gun may be moved faster  to produce a given film thickness.  This results in
                    greater productivity  and less operator fatigue.  Other reported benefits are (1) fewer
                    rejections, because of a more consistent finish, and (2) as much as 15 percent savings
                    in material costs.

                    Although materials do not need to be  reformulated for use with an airless system, heating
                    the coatings is one way  to improve the system.  Heating coating materials for an airless
                    system provides three main advantages:  (1) because of increased atomization, finer
                    finishes are possible; (2) because of the lower viscosity of heated liquids, hydraulic
                    pressures necessary for atomization  may be lowered, and (3) the heated spray facilitates
                    solvent evaporation for faster drying. The main disadvantage of airless spray is that the
                    quality of the finish is usually lower than with conventional spray.  This is not true in
                    applying thicker coats, however, in which airless spray is quite effective.

                    Air-Assisted Airless Spray

                    In an air-assisted system, air jets assist in the final break-up of a pressurized liquid stream.
                    Air-assisted, airless  spray systems use a pressurized stream  of coating, as with airless
                    spray, with air jets assisting in the atomization of the  coating material. This system wastes
                    less paint and achieves a higher quality finish than an airless spray.  In fact, the finish
                    achieved with air-assisted airless  spray is  comparable to the  finish obtained with
                    conventional air  spray, and a 5 percent reduction in annual feedstocks has been
                    documented.

                    Vacuum Coating

                    Vacuum coating is  another application method with a TE of near 100 percent, but it is also
                    limited in the shapes of pieces that it can accommodate.  The application is performed in
                    a coating chamber.  This chamber has openings on opposite sides that are the same shape
                    as, but slightly larger than, the piece to be finished.  Coating material fills the chamber to
                    above the openings.  Because the chamber is under a vacuum, coating material does not
                    spill out of the openings. The workpiece is passed through the chamber.  After the
                    workpiece exits the chamber, a stream of air removes the excess finish. Film thickness is
                    controlled by varying the coating's viscosity, the magnitude  of the vacuum,  and the
                    intensity of the air jet. The major
                                                                     Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
    limitation of this technology is that it can accommodate only pieces possessing the same
    silhouette dimensions over the entire length of the part. The system is intended mainly for
    use with waterborne coatings, because the vacuum would tend to deplete solvent-based
    finishes.

    A few advantages that a company could receive from  using this technology are
    (1) significantly lower material costs, resulting from very high TE,  (2) improved
    coating quality, (3) higher productivity, and (4) lower direct labor costs.

    Flat Line

    As the  name implies,  flat line finishing is the coating method of choice for finishing
    essentially flat workpieces. Prior to finishing, the pieces are sanded to uniform thickness,
    and a filler is applied to function as a base for the subsequent coatings. Roll coaters apply
    the finishes and are often engraved to produce  a wood-grain effect on panels made from
    particle board. Applying the finish with rollers results in a very high TE and allows the use
    of high solids coatings that are difficult or impossible to spray.  UV curing is an excellent
    option after flat line finishing, because it is efficient at curing flat pieces.  If a company
    manufactures flat pieces, it can use materials much more  efficiently, with  significant
    savings, by converting  from  conventional spray finishing to flat line finishing or another
    technique designed for  flat pieces, for example, curtain coating or vacuum coating.

    Curtain Coating

    Curtain coating,  or "pouring,"  is a high-speed production process  for applying smooth films
    to flat or moderately curved workpieces.  This is related to the older principle of flow
    coating—moving an object  through a continuous falling stream of material.  In curtain
    coating, however, the piece is passed through a pressure head or over a weir-head at very
    high production  rates, about 150 meters per minute. The excess coating material is trapped
    in a reservoir and recirculated with minimal losses.

    Dipping

    Dipping is another direct application technique.  A workpiece, which may be of any shape,
    is submerged in  a tank of the desired coating material.  The object is removed from the tank,
    and the excess is allowed to drain back into the coating tank. It is crucial that the viscosity
    of the coating material  be optimized to achieve the desired film thickness. It is also vital
    that the piece be allowed sufficient time for excess material to drain off while the piece is
    still above the tank.  Without sufficient time, material will be wasted.

    In summary, various  acceptable application methods are available, and every organization
    should  evaluate its application methods  periodically  and make  modifications when
    necessary.   Table II-4 summarizes the advantages and disadvantages  of the various
    application methods.
Choice of
appropriate coating
methodology will
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                                11-19

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
                                            TABLE II-4
                                    APPLICATION METHODS
Application
Technologies
Conventional
Low- Volume/
High-Pressure
Spray
HVLP Spray
Air- Assisted Airless
Spray
Airless Spray
Electrostatic Spray
Electrostatic Rotary
Atomizers
Dip Coating
Flow Coating
Curtain Coating
Vacuum Coating
Advantages
! Excellent atomization
! High production rate
! Low overspray and good transfer efficiency
! Reduced waste
! Lower booth cleaning costs
! Lower filter replacement costs
! Decreased VOC emissions
! Lower worker exposure
! Good atomization
! Good transfer efficiency
! High coating flow rate
! No air hose
! Good transfer efficiency
! Able to handles viscous fluids
! Good transfer efficiency
! Uniform film thickness
! Edge cover
! Excellent atomization
! Excellent transfer efficiency
! Handles any type of finish
! Uniform film thickness
! High production rates
! Low labor costs
! Excellent transfer efficiency
! Excellent transfer efficiency
! High production rates
! Low labor costs
! Low maintenance
! Excellent transfer efficiency
! Uniform film thickness
! Very high production rates
! High production rates
! Excellent transfer efficiency
! Lower labor costs
Disadvantages
Extensive overspray — poor TE
Booth cleanup costs
Filter replacement costs
Hazardous waste disposal costs
High VOC emissions
Less complete atomization
Need for clean dry air
Slower application rate
! Increased maintenance
! Increased training required
! Skin injection dangers
! Reduced spray pattern coated
! Relatively poor atomization
! Skin injection danger
! Increased training and maintenance
required
! Bulky delicate guns
! High equipment and maintenance costs
! Faraday cage effect
! Importance of cleanliness
! Safety and fire hazard
! Part must be conductive
! Cost
! Faraday cage effect
! Importance of cleanliness
! Safety and fire hazard
! Parts must be conductive
! Cost
! Importance of coating viscosity
! Not suitable for hollow pieces
! Fire hazard
! Below-average appearance
! Below-average appearance
! Importance of coating viscosity
! Viscosity-dependent
! Only for flat work
! Suitable only for pieces with uniform
silhouettes
! Based for use with waterborne coatings
11-20
                                                                    Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
    Application Technique

    Because spray painting allows fast and even coverage with relatively low labor costs, it is
    often the application method of choice in the wood finishing industry.  However, applying
    coatings with a spray gun tends to waste much more material than brushing, rolling, or
    dipping, which typically have TEs  of over 90 percent. Conversely, spray application can
    result in TEs of as low as 20 percent.  Any coating material that does not stay on the
    product is wasted. If the  TE of a  system is 30 percent, you are wasting 70 percent of
    your money spent on coating materials!  Many factors affect TE,  including (1) spray
    equipment type, (2) equipment maintenance and optimization, (3) size and shape of the
    target, (4) type of coating, (5) air pressure and velocity, and (6) fluid flow rate.  One way
    to improve TE is to use the spray equipment as it was meant to be used. People frequently
    increase air and fluid  pressure beyond recommended limits.  This produces a mist that is
    easier for unskilled workers to apply uniformly.  Unfortunately, high velocities increase
    bounce-back, and the ventilation  system tends to carry  off most of the coating mist,
    resulting in low TEs. Consequently, overspray is directly related to air and fluid pressure;
    these pressures should be as low as possible. Figure II-3 shows typical TEs of various
    application methods.
Material that does
not stay on product
is material wasted.
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                              11-21

-------
     &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Good training is the
easiest way to save
money.
                        Air and fluid pressure and spray gun type are very important; however, according to a 1992
                        study by the Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Research Center, the factor most
                        consistently influencing TE is the skill level of the operator. Therefore, training operators
                        in proper spray technique is the easiest way to significantly decrease pollution and save
                        money.

                        Proper Spray Technique

                        The following are fundamentals of good spray technique:
Fifty percent overlap of the spray pattern

Spray gun held 6 to 8 inches from the workpiece

Constant gun speed of about 250 feet per minute

Holding the spray gun perpendicular to the workpiece surface

Triggering the gun at the beginning and end of each pass
                        If less than a 50 percent overlap is used, the workpiece will become streaked.

                        If more is used,  coating material is wasted,  and the operator makes more passes than
                        necessary to finish the piece, requiring excessive time spent on each piece.  To maintain a
                        50 percent overlap, the painter, on the first pass, aims the spray gun nozzle at the edge of
                        the workpiece. On each subsequent pass, the painter aims the spray gun at the bottom edge
                        of the previous pass.

                        The distance between the spray gun and the workpiece must remain constant for a uniform
                        finish. A separation of 6 to 8 inches is usually ideal. As the separation increases, the width
                        of the spray pattern on the workpiece increases, and the thickness of the film decreases.
                        Also, a separation of more than 8 inches often results in some of the finishing material
                        drying before it reaches the surface.  This dry material either bounces off the surface,
                        thereby wasting material, or sticks to the surface, thereby producing a grainy finish. Spray
                        guns should be adjusted for the separation that will be used, and operators then need to
                        maintain that distance.

                        A consistent finish also requires a  constant gun speed.  Changing the  speed varies the
                        amount of material  being applied  to the surface.  Low gun speeds may result in the
                        application of too much finish, causing runs. High gun speeds may result in poor aiming,
                        improper gun control, and a distorted spray pattern. All of these demonstrate inefficient use
                        of materials.  Gun speeds that are too high may also lead to inadequate coating thickness.
     11-22
                                                                           Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
    Maintaining the gun perpendicular to the surface is also important. Failing to hold the gun
    perpendicular to the workpiece results in uneven coating, and the increased  angle of
    incidence of the spray increases the amount of material that rebounds off the surface.
    Arcing or fanning the gun constantly changes the gun distance and the gun angle, making
    a uniform finish unlikely.

    Training Operators

    A company can derive the following benefits from a formal training program for spray
    operators:

            \      Reduced material costs

            !      Higher quality finish

            !      Reduced VOC emissions

            !      Less overspray and reduced cleanup costs

            !      Higher production rate

    Training is often conducted on the  shop floor by a coworker who shows spray techniques
    to a new operator. This method of training is inefficient at best. The trainee will often pick
    up and repeat the bad habits of the coworker. Also, the coworker will often neglect to
    convey important points that seem obvious to an experienced operator but are not obvious
    to a new employee.

    Formal training, however, should include an explanation of the fundamentals of good spray
    technique and how these techniques can benefit the operator. First, good technique makes
    the job easier for the operator.  Through proper spraying, the operator can spray the piece
    faster and use fewer strokes. For example, if an operator can reduce the number of strokes
    needed to finish a piece of furniture by just five, and the operator sprays 200 pieces each
    day,  the operator would save 1,000 strokes per day.  Second, good spray technique will
    result in  a higher quality finish.   Generally, people take pride in their work  and will
    appreciate the opportunity to make a better product.

    Ideally, each operator should be videotaped periodically.  The operator should then meet
    with the supervisor and technical personnel to review the tapes. Because spray operators
    are usually very knowledgeable, they can often identify poor techniques  by watching
    themselves on tape.  Constructive advice and "hands-on" instruction under production
    conditions should follow the videotape review.  Next, the operators should be retaped and
    given an opportunity to compare the two tapes. This allows the operators to  see their
    improvement.  One company, conducting this training twice a year, reported an 8 to 10
    percent reduction in the amount of finishing material being used, resulting in annual
    savings of $50,000 to $70,000.
Proper supervision
will ensure that
principles learned in
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                               11-23

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
                   Even with good training, supervision is necessary to ensure that operators do not revert to
                   bad habits.  To maximize TE, regardless of the type of system used, excessive air or fluid
                   pressure must be avoided to maximize TE.

                   Also, training must be specific to the equipment and materials being used.  For instance,
                   because of their higher solids content, waterborne coatings do  not need to  be applied as
                   thickly as solvent-based finishes.

                   Operation and Maintenance

                   Direct Transfer of Coatings to the Spray Guns

                   A system that transfers coatings directly to the guns, instead of by hand with a bucket,
                   offers many advantages. It may be economically justified even if your shop uses as little
                   as 30 to 40 gallons a week.

                   A direct transfer system eliminates the need to fill a can from a drum each time a coating
                   is needed. The following savings can be expected:

                           !      Discounted costs from bulk purchases

                           !      Less material waste from minimizing spills, evaporation, and loss of
                                  skimmings on the side of the drum

                           !      Lower labor costs because of less  time spent collecting paint from the
                                  storage area, adjusting the coating's viscosity, and filling  pressure pots
                                  and gravity containers

                           !      Lower solvent costs, because containers no longer need to be cleaned at
                                  the end of the shift

                   The savings in time increase productivity.  Finish quality is also improved, because the
                   finishing material that reaches the gun is more consistent.

                   The three main types of transfer systems are (1)  dead-end, (2) simple flow, and (3) fully
                   recirculating. A dead-end system merely supplies the material to the end  point with no
                   return line.  This type should be used only for materials in which settling is not a problem.
                   A simple flow system has  a return line to the storage tank from the farthest point of use.
                   This  continuous circulation prevents settling in  most materials.  The fully recirculating
                   transfer system is designed to circulate the material even in the hose of the spray gun. This
                   type of system is used only for coating materials  with very high settling rates.
11-24
                                                                     Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
    Caring for Spray Equipment

    All equipment, especially the spray equipment, must be maintained regularly to minimize
    replacement costs and optimize performance.  This, in turn, helps prevent pollution. The
    following measures, among others, will help ensure reliable spray operations:

            !      Place compressor where it  gets fresh air, and clean and  lubricate  it
                   regularly.

            !      To avoid spray gun clogging, keep feed tanks free of dried finish particles
                   by cleaning them properly, and use proper agitation to prevent skin from
                   forming.

            !      Never mix air in material hoses.

            !      Optimize selection of needle, nozzle, and air cap for each type of finish.

            !      Do not spray lacquer and varnish in the same booth, because  this can
                   result in spontaneous combustion.

    Use Heat Instead of Solvents to Thin Coatings

    The viscosity  of coatings  must often be adjusted before the coating can be sprayed.
    Traditionally, this has been accomplished by adding organic solvents. The cost of solvents
    is  a significant part of the overall cost of materials, and solvents are sources of air
    pollution. An alternative to solvent thinning  is to use heat to reduce coating viscosity.
    Benefits include lower solvent usage, fewer emissions, viscosities that are more consistent,
    and faster curing rates.

    Closed-Loop Recycling  of Lacquer

    HisStrand Chemical ofLenoir, North Carolina, has developed a method of recycling
    lacquer dust.  For this program, the dust must come from conventional  nitrocellulose
    lacquers.  Lacquer dust is the flammable overspray residue in spray booths, on baffles, and
    in  filters.  The only cash outlay required is a sifter, which can be bought for about
    $1,500. Depending on the size of the facility, this cost can typically be recovered in a
    few weeks to a few months.  The process is closed-loop recycling, the lacquer dust  is
    eventually resprayed onto product.   The lacquer dust becomes a basic  ingredient in
    formulating the sealers, and coatings for backs and drawers.  Usually, each pound of lacquer
    dust yields 1 gallon of sealer.  This reduces  disposal costs and material costs, with a
    minimal change in labor costs.
Treat equipment as if
it is your own.
Thinning with heat
means faster curing.
Recycling
nitrocellulose
lacquers saves
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                               11-25

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

                   Inventory Management
                   Improved inventory control can reduce costs and minimize waste. If too much finishing
                   material is purchased, (1) the production of that piece could end, leaving a large quantity
                   of material unused, and (2) the material may deteriorate before it can be used.  Companies
                   should work with their suppliers to accurately determine inventory needs so that excess is
                   minimized.  Stock stored beyond its shelf life, or stock that becomes unusable because
                   production has been completed, results in two preventable costs:  (1) costs from unneeded
                   material purchase, and (2) costs associated with disposal of the waste material.

                   If there is excess finishing material at the end of a production run, a company has  several
                   options.  The best option is, obviously, to find another project on which to use the material.
                   Other options include (1) returning unused containers to the original vendor, (2) contacting
                   other finishers about their potential needs, and (3) contacting a waste or materials exchange.
                   Options for managing waste or excess solvents are shown on Figure II-4.

                   Recycling

                   Recycling solvents by  purifying through distillation is an attractive alternative that will
                   reduce material cost and minimize waste.  Distillation  is a proven technology with
                   equipment available in a variety of sizes.  It may  be performed on  site or by  off-site
                   vendors. On-site recycling that occurs as part of the coating process, closed-loop recycling,
                   is considered a pollution prevention technique.  An example of closed-loop recycling is
                   recovering coating material from, and returning it directly to, an application unit. Another
                   option to extend solvent life is to remove particulate matter from the solvent by settling or
                   filtration so that the fluid may be reused in a rough cleaning of materials.

                   Another form of on-site recycling is capturing overspray in the spray booth and returning
                   it to the process.  A water wall flowing over a series of baffles at the back of the spray
                   booth can capture overspray from the air.  The  coating and water mixture forms a  sludge.
                   If the coating material  is immiscible with  water, the coating can be  easily separated and
                   recycled. If the coating material cannot be easily separated from water, ultrafiltration can
                   be used to separate the water from the  coating material. Ultrafiltration uses membranes
                   with small (about  0.01-micron) pores to  filter the  mixture.  Water passes through the
                   membrane, but coating particles are too large to pass through the membrane pores.
11-26
                                                                      Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                                                11-27

-------
      &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Leave containers
open, and watch your
profits evaporate!
 Used solvent should
 be reused for product
formulation or for a
EQUIPMENT CLEANING

    Equipment cleaning is required when a process is completed, a color change is needed, or
    maintenance is required.  When assessing the pollution prevention opportunities in the
    cleaning process, a facility should use good operation practices to minimize the frequency
    of cleanings.  For instance, production may be sequenced so that pieces requiring light-
    colored paint or stain are sent through the finishing line first, followed by the pieces that
    require darker finishes. This minimizes the need for cleaning between runs. Also, it should
    be determined whether cleaning is even necessary. For some low-cost items, the cost of
    replacing the item may be less than the costs associated with cleaning solvent, solvent waste
    disposal, and additional labor. However, the cost of properly disposing of the item must
    be considered.

    When cleaning is necessary, facilities should incorporate mechanical cleaning (scraping and
    wiping) into cleanup procedures. Floors should be cleaned with squeegees instead of rags,
    brooms, or mops.  Where possible, Teflon-lined tanks can be used to improve drainage and
    reduce coating deposits. When tanks are cleaned, operators should use rubber wipers to
    manually scrape the sides to remove coating deposits.

    If cleaning with solvents is necessary, alternative solvents are available, the use of
    which results in lower VOC emissions than the use of conventional solvents. Dibasic
    esters are one class of alternative solvents. Solvents with low volatility should be used to
    minimize emissions. When conventional solvents are used, there are still a few options that
    reduce pollution and save money. The  easiest and most obvious way is to fully use the
    solvents that are purchased.  Most companies dispose of their solvents long before they
    should do  so.  Solvents should be disposed of or recycled only because they have lost
    their cleaning effectiveness, not just because they look "dirty. " Also, leaving solvents
    open to the air creates unnecessary VOC emissions, and the money spent on the solvent
    evaporates. A way to use solvent more efficiently is to flush solvent into a trap for reuse
    in swishing the pressure pot.  Also, solvent pumps should be maintained and replaced, as
    needed, to prevent leakage.

    When considering what type of finish to use, remember that using water-based finishes
    eliminates the need to use solvents in equipment cleaning.

    Regardless of whether aqueous or solvent solutions are used to clean equipment,  there are
    a few techniques that will minimize the volume of the waste.  First, if lines are being
    cleaned, use air to blow  residue back into the pots before final cleaning with water or
    solvent; this reduces the  amount of coating material wasted and helps to minimize the
    amount of cleaning fluid  used. Second, when using water or solvent to clean, use high
    velocities instead of large volumes; this cleans more efficiently so that less cleaning fluid
    is required. Third, spray cleaning solvent into a container, preferably below the fluid line,
    for reuse instead of spraying the cleaning solvent into the  air; this "used" solvent can be
    used for rough cleaning or for product formulation.
      11-28
                                                                          Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*

COATING PREPARATION

    Proper coating material preparation is important for waste and cost minimization.  Too
    much reduction may result in sagging, whereas too little can cause poor flow, orange peel,
    and other defects. These problems can, in turn, result in rejects and wasted or unusable
    material. Here are a few tips to enhance the formulation:

            !       Always add the reducer to the material (instead of the reverse), and add it
                   slowly while stirring vigorously.

            !       Test for complete mixing by  taking a few drops from the top of the
                   container and a few from the  bottom; put each on a separate piece of
                   glass, and watch for differences in color or rate of flow down the glass;
                   noticeable differences probably indicate that additional mixing is needed.

            !       Mix materials well before use; some need to be mixed while in use to
                   ensure the uniformity of the finish.

            !       Cover tanks to prevent evaporative losses.
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                             11-29

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

                                         BIBLIOGRAPHY

                                             Sheet 1 of 5

    Adams, Larry. 1991. "Finishing Materials: Must Compliance Mean an Inferior Product?"  Wood &
           Wood Products.  December. Pages 113-119.

    Akzo Coatings Inc. (no date).  "Useful Facts & Figures." Fourth edition. Industrial Wood Coatings
           Business Unit.

    Artistic Finishes, Inc. 1992. "Investigation of Low-Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Coatings and
           Methods for Finishing Wood Substrates." Thomas Leach.  Roseville, Minnesota. December
           11.

    Bankert, Peter J.  1990. "Waterborne Paint Circulation." Industrial Finishing.  July. Pages 42-43.

    Battelle.  (no date). "Draft Training Manual on Techniques for Reducing or Eliminating Releases of
           Toxic Solvents in Wood Finishing Operations."

    Blackman, Ted. 1991. "Recycling: Not Just for Papers and Bottles Anymore."  October. Pages 19-20.

    Christiansen, Rich. 1991. "Pennsylvania House Scores a Finishing First."  Wood & Wood Products.
           October.  Pages 53-55.

    Dambele, Paul, and others. 1992.  "A Guide to Pollution Prevention for Wood Furniture Finishing."
           August.

    Dunne, Beverly.   1993.  "Environmental, Educational Concerns Affect Sanding." Wood & Wood
           Products. May.

    Furniture Design & Manufacturing.  1993.  "Recycling Program Delivers Finishing  Savings."  March.

    Heltzer, Josh.  1992.  "Wooden Furniture Finishing:  A Pollution Prevention Assessment." Tufts
           University. April 30.

    Higgins, Thomas.  1989. "Hazardous Waste Minimization Handbook." Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsen,
           Michigan.

    Hunag, Eddy, Carry Watkins, and Robert McCrillis.  1993. "Development of Ultra-Low VOC Wood
           Furniture Coatings." For U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Pollution Prevention
           Conference on Low- and No-VOC Coating Technologies, San Diego, California. May 25-27
       11-30
                                                                   Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*

                                         BIBLIOGRAPHY

                                             Sheet 2 of 5

    Indiana Department of Environmental Management. 1993. Pollution Prevention for Industrial Coating.
           Office of Air Management, Office of Pollution Prevention and Technical Assistance. December

    Industrial Finishing.  1990.  "How Rapid Rack Raised Transfer Efficiency." October. Pages 20-24.

    Koeing, Karen Malamud. 1991. "Terra on Firm Ground with VOC Safety Compliance."  Wood &
           Wood Products.  August. Pages 126-130.

    Kohl, Jerome.   1986.  "Managing and Recycling Solvents in the  Furniture Industry."  Industrial
           Extension Service, School of Engineering, North Carolina State University. Raleigh, North
           Carolina. May.

    Marg, Ken.  1989. "HVLP Spray Puts You into Compliance." Metal Finishing. March.  Pages 21-23.

    Minnesota Technical Assistance Program (MnTAP).  1991.  "Intern  Project Summary; Water-Based
           Substitutes for Wood Finishing Lacquers."  Minneapolis, Minnesota. December.

    MnTAP.  1993a.  "Waste Reduction Alternatives for Spray Painting and Coating."  Minneapolis,
           Minnesota.

    MnTAP.  1993b.  "Case Study; Reuse of Wood Finishing Overspray."  Minneapolis, Minnesota.
           January.

    MnTAP.  1993c.  "Intern Summary; Increasing Transfer Efficiency through Part Placement, Spray
           Adjustment, and  Overspray Reuse."  Minneapolis, Minnesota. April.

    North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, (no date).  "Overview of
           Coating Technologies." Sharon M. Johnson.

    North Carolina Department  of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.  1989.   "Companion
           Document for the Conference on Waste Reduction for Industrial Air Toxic Emissions."
           Greensboro, North Carolina. Pollution Prevention Pays Program.  April 24-25.

    North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.  1993.  "Case Studies; A
           Compilation of  Successful Waste  Reduction Projects Implemented  by  North  Carolina
           Businesses and Industries."  Office of Waste Reduction. Pollution Prevention Pays Program.
           September.
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                        11-31

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

                                          BIBLIOGRAPHY

                                              Sheet 3 of 5

    North Carolina State University, School of Engineering.  1986.  "Managing and Recycling Solvents in
           the Furniture Industry."  May.

    Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention  Research Center.  1992.  "Transfer Efficiency and VOC
           Emissions of Spray Gun and Coating Technologies in Wood Finishing."

    Robinson, Frank,  and Dennis Stephens.  1990.  "Understanding Electrostatic  Finishing." Industrial
           Finishing. September. Pages 34-37.

    Ross, Vincent. 1989. "Pollution Prevention Waste Reduction for Industrial Air Toxic Emissions; Waste
           Reduction—Pollution Prevention in the Furniture Industry."  Ross Associates, Inc.  Greensboro,
           North Carolina.  April 24-25.

    Scharfenberger, James A.  (no date).  "Automated Electrostatic Equipment for the Wood Industry."
           Electrostatic Equipment Division, Ransburg Corporation.  Indianapolis, Indiana.

    Schneberger, Gerald. 1991. "The Basics of Statistical Process Control (SPC)." Industrial Finishing.
           June. Page 28-30.

    Schrantz, Joe.  1989.  "New CO2 Spray Finishing Technology!"  Industrial Finishing.  September.
           Pages 27-32.

    Schrantz, Joe.  1990. "Exciting Infrared and Ultra Violet (UV) Developments." Industrial Finishing.
           September. Pages 14-21.

    Schrantz, Joe. 1991. "Intense Resin R&D Bearing Fruit." Industrial Finishing.  January. Pages 20-
           24.

    Toxics Use Reduction Institute, (no date). "Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Program, Curriculum
           for Toxics Use Reduction Planners." University of Massachusetts. Lowell, Massachusetts.

    Toxics Use Reduction Institute.  1992. "Toxics Use Reduction Research Directory."  University of
           Massachusetts. Lowell, Massachusetts.

    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  1987. "Project Summary; Evaluation of the Problems
           Associated with Application of Low-Solvent Coatings  to Wood Furniture."  Air and Energy
           Engineering Research  Laboratory.   Research  Triangle  Park, North  Carolina.   May.
           EPA/600/52-87/007.

    U.S. EPA.  1989. "Pollution Prevention Benefits Manual, Volumes I and II, Phase II."  Office of Policy
           Planning and Evaluation and Office of Solid Waste. October.
        11-32
                                                                    Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*

                                         BIBLIOGRAPHY

                                             Sheet 4 of 5

    U.S. EPA. 1991a. "SWAMI Version 2.0." May.

    U.S. EPA.  199Ib. "Industrial Pollution Prevention Opportunities for the 1990s."  EPA/600/8-91/052.
           August.

    U.S.  EPA.  1991c.  "Guideline Series; Control of VOC Emissions  from Wood Furniture Coating
           Operations, Draft." Chapters 1-5.  Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Air Quality Planning
           and Standards. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. October.

    U.S. EPA.  1992a. "User's Guide:  Strategic Waste Minimization Initiative (SWAMI) Version 2.0, A
           Software Tool to Aid in Process Analysis for Pollution Prevention." January. EPA/625/11-
           91/004.

    U.S. EPA.  1992b.  "Pollution Prevention Options in Wood Furniture Manufacturing; A Bibliographic
           Report." Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Washington, D.C. February. EPA/560/8-
           92/001C

    U.S.  EPA.  1992c.  "Facility Pollution Prevention Guide." Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory,
           Office of Research and Development. Ohio.  May.

    U.S.  EPA.  1992d.  "PIES  Quick-Reference Guide."  Office  of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
           September.

    Walberg, Arvid C.  1990. "Boost Overall Transfer Efficiency."  Industrial Finishing.  May. Pages 20-
           30.

    Washington State Department of Ecology, (no date).  "Success Through Waste Reduction; Proven
           Techniques from Washington Businesses, Volume II."  Olympia, Washington.

    Washington State Department of  Ecology.  1991.  "Success Through Waste Reduction;  Proven
           Techniques from Washington Businesses." Olympia, Washington. May.

    Wood & Wood Products.  1989.  "Material Makeup Changing to Meet Finishing Rules." November.
           Pages 101-105.

    Wood & Wood Products.  1990.  "Waterborne Lacquers Help Solve Emissions Problems." Pages 42
           and 43.  October.
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS FOR THE WOOD FINISHING INDUSTRY
                                                                                         11-33

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

                                         BIBLIOGRAPHY

                                            Sheet 5 of 5

    Wood & Wood Products. 1992. "EPA Studies Economic Impact of VOC Reductions." May.  Pages
           74-81.

    Wood & Wood Products. 1993.  "Reduce Hazardous Waste by On-Site Distillation." May. Pages 114-
           115.
       11-34
                                                                  Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
 Section III
Case Studies

-------
&&&*

CASE  STUDY NO.  1—Conversion to HVLP

           Introduction

           Tiz's Door Sales, Inc. (IDS), is located in Everett, Washington, and employs over 60 people.
           IDS manufactures wood products for both remodeling and new home construction.  Its product
           line includes interior and exterior doors and frames, window and base moldings, and stained
           railings.

           Process Prior to Pollution Prevention

           The  company was using conventional spray guns, which were about 20 percent efficient
           manual-spray lines.  High-quality finishes were obtained by using conventional solvent-based
           coatings.

           Current Process

           IDS was very aggressive in its source reduction efforts. IDS installed automated flat line spray
           equipment, which provides maximum application efficiency and recycles overspray, thereby
           saving 220 gallons of lacquer per week.

           Where possible, solvents and coatings have been switched from toluene-based solutions to less
           hazardous blends.  Heat, instead of solvents, is used to thin coatings for application.

           IDS has converted all manual-spray lines to high-volume/low-pressure (HVLP) spray guns,
           which provide a high transfer efficiency (TE) and result in less overspray. This not only reduces
           the amount of waste generated but also provides immediate dividends by reducing the amount
           of coating material needed to finish each piece. Less overspray also means lower maintenance
           of equipment and lower labor costs. IDS found that using HVLP even resulted in a faster
           production rate—that is, although the application rate is slower, the drying time was less.

           Using dedicated pumps and lines for each type of coating was another simple change that
           resulted in a large reduction in the amount of solvent needed. This reduced the cleaning required
           between coats.  When cleaning is required, operators block gun nozzles and blow air back
           through the guns and delivery systems to reduce waste material even further.

           Savings

           TDS has reduced the amount of its coatings use by one-half. In 1991, 18,000 gallons were
           saved.  At $10/gallon,  this was a savings of $180,000!  In  addition, the  company
           experienced  significant savings in labor costs from less  time spent on  cleanup,
           maintenance, and material handling. Also, waste disposal costs were reduced dramatically.

           The improved working environment is cleaner and safer, which has led to lower absenteeism and
           injury.
CASE STUDIES
                                                                                        III-l

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
            Taken from  "Success Through Waste Reduction; Proven  Techniques from Washington
            Businesses, Volume II," Washington State Department of Ecology.
III-2
                                                                      Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*

CASE STUDY NO.  2—Solvent Recycling


           Introduction

           The Doling Company, located in Mt. Olive, North Carolina, manufactures wood office furniture
           with four different style lines and seven different finishes.

           Process Prior to Pollution Prevention

           Until January 1983, the company was burning spent solvents from the wood finishing process
           for fuel.

           Current Process

           In considering ways to reclaim spent solvents, Boling found it difficult finding commercial
           recyclers in its region. In 1983, Boling installed a "Little Still" to recycle spent lacquer thinners
           from the plant's washoff operations.

           Early in the operation of the still, Boling encountered a few problems because of improper
           washoff collection practices. Boling realized that, in addition to problems associated with the
           washoff collection practices, Boling realized that the composition of the seven-component
           washoff solvent blend changed with distillation. It could not be reused in the washoff operation.
           However, by mixing one part  acetone with three parts reclaimed solvent, the reconstituted
           mixture could be used as a thinner in the spray coating operation.

           The plant's washoff operation generates about 10 to 15 gallons of spent solvent per day.  Forty
           to 60 gallons per week are reclaimed for the spray operation. The still is operated four times
           per week to avoid accumulation of spent solvents. It operates on  a 7-hour distillation/1-hour
           cooldown cycle.  The rest of the solvents and the still bottoms remain in the plastic liner. The
           plastic bag liner is removed about once a week and burned in the plant's wood-chip fueled boiler
           for heat recovery. The boiler provides steam to the drying ovens  and the drying kilns. In the
           winter,  the boiler provides space heat for the plant.

           Savings

           In  1983, the cost of the  still  was $4,825.  It was estimated that (1) the labor cost was
           $0.02 per gallon of solvent recovered, (2) the power cost was $0.05/gallon, and (3) the cost of
           the plastic bag liner containing  the still bottoms was $0.05.  This resulted in  a total still
           operation cost of $0.12 per gallon of solvent reclaimed. With the addition of acetone to the
           seven-component washoff solvent blend, the mixture is reconstituted as a thinner. This reuse
           reduces the amount of virgin-blend solvent purchased for the spray mix. In 1985, the cost of
           the virgin-blend solvents was $2.67/gallon. The cost of reclaiming the solvent and adding
           acetone was $1.00.

           The net savings is about $100per week. In addition, the cost of disposal is avoided. Another

CASE STUDIES                                                                                III-3

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
            Doling plant pays $0.40 per gallon to dispose of the same spent solvent. The still paid for
            itself in about 1 year of operation.
            Taken from "Managing and Recycling Solvents in the Furniture Industry," Industrial Extension
            Service, School of Engineering, North Carolina State University. May 1986.
III-4
                                                                      Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
CASE  STUDY NO. 3—Wood Waste to Energy
           Introduction

           Stanley Furniture (previously known as Burlington Furniture) is a furniture manufacturing
           company located in Lexington, North Carolina.

           Process Prior to Pollution Prevention

           The furniture maker shipped spent solvents to a landfill in South Carolina.

           Current Process

           Stanley installed an in-house incinerator to burn its spent solvents for heat recovery.  The
           incinerator has a lower chamber and an upper chamber. Plant wastes are segregated into four
           groups:  solids, heavy liquids (such as stains and glazes), sludges, and solvents. The solids and
           sludges are burned in the lower chamber. Wastewater from the rag wash is treated, and the
           residue is mixed with sawdust, in addition to water wash curtain sludges, and is burned in the
           lower chamber. The solvents are burned in the upper chamber, which uses No. 2 fuel oil as its
           primary  fuel.  The  upper chamber runs at a temperature of 1,800°F.  The heat from the
           incinerator fires a boiler to make steam,  which is used to wash and dry rags. During winter,
           excess heat is used  to supplement the plant's space heat. The incinerator ash is considered
           nonhazardous and is sent to the county landfill.

           Savings

           The incinerator was installed at an initial cost of $1.5 million. The facility anticipates a 3-year
           payback period.  The incinerator burned 4,000 gallons of spent solvent, which was part of the
           1.5 million pounds of waste burned in the incinerator. In addition to saving money in-house,
           Stanley made additional income by charging other small local furniture companies $29.00 per
           drum of spent solvents for incineration. Because of the high energy content of spent wash-off
           solvents, measured in British thermal units (Btu), Stanley finds that it is easier and cheaper to
           send its wastes to be used as fuel than to  have solvents recycled.
           Taken from "Managing and Recycling Solvents in the Furniture Industry," Industrial Extension
           Service, School of Engineering, North Carolina State University.  May 1986.
CASE STUDIES
                                                                                         111-5

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
CASE  STUDY NO. 4—Switching to  Water-Based Inks
           Introduction

           Kemp Furniture Industries is a furniture manufacturing facility located in Goldsboro, North
           Carolina.

           Process Prior to Pollution Prevention

           Kemp Furniture has a five-stage printer for printing wood grain on fiberboard and plywood
           pieces before assembly and final finishing. Solvent-based inks were used in the printing line.
           Spent solvent from equipment cleanup was sent to a recycling company to be distilled and sold
           back to Kemp.

           Current Process

           Kemp Furniture's printing division switched from using solvent-based inks to water-based inks.
           The only adjustments needed for changing to water-based inks were  a higher drying oven
           temperature and minimal operator training.  The water-based inks are nontoxic, and wastes from
           press cleanups may be flushed into the city sewer without treatment.

           The printing operation still requires the use of solvent-based finishes before and after printing;
           also, to keep the wood from showing through, some solvent-based coatings are still required
           when putting on a white finish.  Kemp has made housekeeping improvements in its use of
           solvent-based finishes, including keeping waste streams segregated and effectively using
           solvents in a countercurrent manner. Virgin solvent is first used to flush out the pump and lines
           of the application  equipment.  This "spent" solvent is then used as a thinner for the finishing
           material. The solvent reclaimed by the recycling company is used for cleaning the dirtier parts
           of the equipment, such as rollers and belts. When this reclaimed solvent is too dirty for reuse,
           it is sent back to the recycler.

           When there is no viable alternative to solvent-based finishes, Kemp reduces the use of solvents,
           thereby reducing the amount of spent solvent generated, by using  different spraying equipment.
           Savings

           Water-based inks cost about one-half of the price of solvent inks.  Kemp estimates that the
           change to water-based inks has reduced the printing line's spent solvents stream by 30 to 40
           percent.
           Taken from "Managing and Recycling Solvents in the Furniture Industry," Industrial Extension
           Service, School of Engineering, North Carolina State University.  May 1986.
III-6
                                                                   Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
    CASE STUDY NO. 5—Conversion to HVLP

    Introduction

    Thomson Crown Wood Products, Inc.  (Thomson Crown), manufactures wood and wood-finished
    television cabinets in Mocksville, North Carolina.

    Process Prior to Pollution Prevention

    Thomson Crown sprayed its cabinets by using an air-assisted airless spray gun. These guns used air
    pressure of up to 55 pounds per square inch (psi) to atomize the coating material. This high pressure
    resulted in poor TEs.

    Current Process

    Thomson Crown tested four different HVLP spray guns using penetrating stain
    (no-wipe), glaze, sap stain, equalizer, toner, shade, and water-based black paint. Because of its specific
    product line, Thomson Crown chose a spray gun that would work well with a heavier finish. Each
    manufacturer produces a spray gun with slightly different properties—underlining the necessity of
    customizing equipment choice to product goals.

    Using the HVLP spray guns, Thomson Crown has experienced the following reductions in material:
    (1) 65 percent for equalizer, (2) 65 percent for stain, (3) 65 percent for toner, (4) 35 percent for glaze,
    (5) 35 percent for no-wipe,  and (6) 53 percent for water-based black paints.

    In addition to using different  spray guns, Thomson Crown has also altered its printing process room to
    incorporate  roll-on finishings of all top and end panels of the outside cabinet.  This  modification
    resulted in 60 percent of the company's spray operations being diverted to the printing room.  This
    reduced purchases of coatings by an additional 50 percent.

    Savings

    The material use reductions resulting from the change to HVLP guns total over 13,300 gallons per
    year of coatings, translating to an annual savings of over $137,000.  The pollution prevention
    project cost of about $21,000 was recovered in 2 months.
    Taken from "Pollution Prevention Case Studies," North Carolina Department of Environment, Health,
    and Natural Resources, Office of Waste Reduction. September 1993.
CASE STUDIES
                                                                                        III-7

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

    CASE STUDY NO. 6—Reusing Overspray

    Introduction

    Medallion Kitchens, located in Waconia, Minnesota, is a leading woodworking company that
    manufactures kitchen cabinets and bathroom vanities.  Medallion Kitchens was interested in using
    materials more efficiently to (1) reduce raw material costs, (2) reduce VOC emissions, (3) minimize
    hazardous waste disposal costs and the  liabilities associated with hazardous waste disposal, and (4)
    decrease labor costs related to sludge removal, dewatering, and handling.

    Process Prior to Pollution Prevention

    Wooden cabinet pieces are stained and then finished with a solvent-based catalyzed sealer and topcoat
    before the pieces are assembled into the complete cabinets.  Sealer and topcoat applications are
    automated.  A central conveyor belt, two water-wash spray booths, and two drying ovens are all
    automated. Sensor-triggered automated spray guns apply coatings to cabinet parts in each spray booth.
    Overspray waste has been a problem. Before any changes were made, about 75 gallons of sealer were
    used per day, and the process generated  about 50 gallons of hazardous waste sludge per day.

    Process Changes

    Medallion Kitchens decided to invest in a reclamation system to collect sealer overspray.  The system
    consists of two holding reservoirs and minor plumbing.  It was designed to catch most of the overspray
    before it fell into the water-wash tank.

    Innovative features of the final reclamation system include the following:

               !         Cooling water was added under the  collection trays to  minimize solvent
                        evaporation.
               I
                        Collected material is agitated to prevent "skinning."
               !         The reclamation tray and support assembly were designed to fit well into the
                        spray booths and provide for easy removal.

               !         A nonstick coating was applied to the collection trays to decrease labor and
                        material costs required for cleaning.

     Collected solvents are recirculated through a pumping system to prevent curing.  After about 5 gallons
     of overspray have accumulated, the overspray is manually removed and transferred to the mixing area.
     Solvent and catalyst are added to the material, as needed, to obtain the desired coating properties, and
     material is added back to the spray system to be reused. Some time is required for employees to
     maintain the new reclamation system.  However, time is also saved, because the spray booth now
     requires less maintenance. The effective solids TE has increased from 40 percent before installation
     to about 80 percent. The system cost about $2,500 per booth to install, about $2,000 for materials,
    III-8
                                                                   Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*
    and about $500 for labor.

    Savings

    An average of 11.5 gallons of overspray was collected each day during October and November 1992.
    Assuming a raw material cost of $8 per gallon, Medallion Kitchens will save about $23,000
    annually on raw materials as a direct result of collecting its overspray.

    Also, hazardous sludge generated by operations in the sealer spray booth has decreased from 50 to 25
    gallons per day.  Related waste disposal costs have been halved, saving the company around
    $30,000 per year, resulting in a total annual savings of $53,000.
    Taken from "Case Study:  Reuse of Wood Finishing Overspray," Minnesota Technical Assistance
    Program.  1993.
CASE STUDIES
                                                                                        III-9

-------
&&&*
    APPENDIX
    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

     The  following  are  additional documents  on pollution prevention that you may find useful.
     Unfortunately, they are available only in English.  Copies of documents with an U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency document number  may  be obtained from the EPA Center for Environmental
     Research Information (CERI) or the Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse (PPIC).  Some
     documents are available, without charge, from PPIC.  For a current list of these documents, please
     contact PPIC.
           EPA CERI Publications Unit
           26 West Martin Luther King Drive
           Cincinnati, OH 45268
           (513) 569-7562
    GENERAL INFORMATION
PPIC
401M Street
Mail Code PM221A
Washington, DC 20460
(202)260-1023
PIES
Technical Support Office
SAIC
7600-A Leesburg Pike
Falls Church, VA 22043
(703) 821-4800
        Akzo Coatings Inc. (no date).  "Useful Facts & Figures." Fourth edition. Industrial Wood Coatings
                Business Unit.

        Battelle. (no date). "Draft Training Manual on Techniques for Reducing or Eliminating Releases of Toxic
                Solvents in Wood Finishing Operations."

        Higgins, Thomas. 1989.  "Hazardous Waste Minimization Handbook." Lewis Publications, Inc. Chelsen,
                Michigan.

        Kohl, Jerome. 1986. "Managing and Recycling Solvents in the Furniture Industry."  Industrial Extension
                Service, School of Engineering, North Carolina State University. Raleigh, North Carolina. May.

        Toxics Use Reduction Institute, (no date). "Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Program, Curriculum for
                Toxics Use Reduction Planners."  University of Massachusetts. Lowell, Massachusetts.

        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1989. "Pollution Prevention Benefits Manual, Volumes I and   n,
                                                                                              Phas
                                                                                              eH."
                                                                                              Offi
                                                                                              ce of
                                                                                              Polic
                                                                                              y
                                                                                              Plan
                                                                                              ning
                                                                                              and
                                                                                              Eval
                                                                                              uatio
                                                                                              n
                                                                                              and
                                                                                              Offi
                                                                                              ce of
                                                                                              Solid
    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
                                                                                              A-l

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

                                                                                                           Wast
                                                                                                           e.
                                                                                                           Octo
                                                                                                           her.

         U.S. EPA. 1991. "Guideline Series; Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Wood            Furn
                                                                                                           iture
                                                                                                           Coat
                                                                                                           ing
                                                                                                           Oper
                                                                                                           ation
                                                                                                           s,
                                                                                                           Draf
                                                                                                           t."
                                                                                                           Cha
                                                                                                           pters
                                                                                                           1-5.
                                                                                                           Offi
                                                                                                           ce of
                                                                                                           Air
                                                                                                           and
                                                                                                           Radi
                                                                                                           ation

                                                                                                           Offi
                                                                                                           ce of
                                                                                                           Air
                                                                                                           Qual
                                                                                                           ity
                                                                                                           Plan
                                                                                                           ning
                                                                                                           and
                                                                                                           Stan
                                                                                                           dard
                                                                                                           s.
                                                                                                           Rese
                                                                                                           arch
                                                                                                           Tria
                                                                                                           ngle
                                                                                                           Park

                                                                                                           Nort
                                                                                                           h
                                                                                                           Caro
                                                                                                           lina.
                                                                                                           Octo
                                                                                                           her.

         U.S. EPA. 1992. "Facility Pollution Prevention Guide." Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Office of    Rese
                                                                                                           arch
                                                                                                           and
                                                                                                           Dev
                                                                                                           elop
                                                                                                           ment

                                                                                                           Ohio

    A-2

-------
&&&*
                                                                                             May.
    SANDING



        Dunne, Beverly. 1993. "Environmental, Educational Concerns Affect Sanding." Wood& WoodProducts. May.
    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
                                                                                             A-3

-------
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&


    ALTERNATIVE COATING AND APPLICATION METHODS

        Bankert, Peter J. 1990. "Waterborne Paint Circulation." Industrial Finishing.  July.  Pages 42-43.

        Christiansen, Rich. 1991. "Pennsylvania House Scores a Finishing First."  Wood & Wood Products.
                 October. Pages 53-55.

        Industrial Finishing. 1990. "How Rapid Rack Raised Transfer Efficiency." October.  Pages 20-24.

        North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, (no date). "Overview of         Coat
                                                                                                      ing
                                                                                                      Tech
                                                                                                      nolo
                                                                                                      gies.

                                                                                                      Shar
                                                                                                      on
                                                                                                      M.
                                                                                                      John
                                                                                                      son.

        Marg, Ken. 1989.  "HVLP Spray Puts You into Compliance." Metal Finishing. March.  Pages 21-23.

        Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Research Center. 1992. "Transfer Efficiency  and VOC Emissions of
                 Spray Gun and Coating Technologies in Wood Finishing."

        Robinson, Frank, and Dennis Stephens. 1990. "Understanding Electrostatic Finishing." Industrial Finishing.   Sept
                                                                                                      emb
                                                                                                      er.
                                                                                                      Page
                                                                                                      s34-
                                                                                                      37.

        Scharfenberger, James A.  (no date). "Automated Electrostatic Equipment for the Wood Industry."
                 Electrostatic Equipment Division, Ransburg Corporation. Indianapolis, Indiana.

        Schrantz, Joe. 1989.  "New CO2 Spray Finishing Technology!"  Industrial Finishing.  September.
                 Pages 27-32.

        Schrantz, Joe. 1990.  "Exciting Infrared and UV Developments." Industrial Finishing.  September.
                 Pages 14-21.

        Schrantz, Joe. 1991.  "Intense Resin R&D Bearing Fruit." Industrial Finishing. January. Pages 20-24.

        Walberg, Arvid C.  1990.  "Boost Overall Transfer Efficiency." Industrial Finishing.  May. Pages 20-30.

        Wood & Wood Products.  1989. "Material Makeup Changing to Meet Finishing Rules." November.
                 Pages 101-105.

        Wood & Wood Products.  1990. "Waterborne Lacquers Help Solve Emissions Problems." Page 42 and 43.
                 October. Page 42-43.


    RECYCLING

        Blackman, Ted. 1991. "Recycling: Not Just for Papers and Bottles Anymore." October. Page 19-20.


    A-4                                                      Pollution Prevention for the Wood Finishing Industry

-------
&&&*

        Furniture Design & Manufacturing. 1993. "Recycling Program Delivers Finishing Savings." March.

        Wood & Wood Products. 1993.  "Reduce Hazardous Waste by On-Site Distillation." May. Pages 114-115.


    COMPUTER  SOFTWARE

        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  1992.  "User's Guide:  Strategic Waste Minimization
               Initiative (SWAMI) Version 2.0, A Software Tool to Aid in Process Analysis for Pollution Prevention.'
               January. EPA/625/11-91/004.

        U.S. EPA.  1991. "SWAMI Version 2.0." May.
    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
                                                                                               A-5

-------
                MAILING LIST FOR FUTURE PUBLICATIONS
Name:  	    Organization:

Position: 	    Address:

Phone:  	

Fax:    	
                                          SURVEY:
                   DID YOU FIND THIS MANUAL USEFUL?


                               Please help us by answering the following questions:

A.     PROFILE OF YOUR ORGANIZATION

       () Trade Association                        () Business                           ()  Government Office

       () Other 	


       What product or service does your business/organization provide? 	
       How old is your business/organization? 	years

       How many employees work in your business/organization? 	


B.     TRAINING NEEDS

       U.S. EPA and SEDESOL plan to add sections to this manual or develop new manuals for other industries in the border area.
       Which industries should be addressed next? 	
       () Agriculture Chemicals                 () Other	

       What type of training would you attend?

       () Technical Workshops        () General Training          () None               () Other.

       U.S. EPA and SEDESOL are considering holding training sessions on "pollution prevention."

       What information would be useful to you in this area?

-------
C.      USEFULNESS OF MANUAL

        Did you find the format of this manual useful?           () Yes
        ()  No

        Did you find its content useful?                       () Yes
        ()  No

        How would you improve it? 	
        What other information should be included?
                                           4444444 (fold here) 4444444

        Who else should receive this manual?

        Name:   	   	

        Address: 	   	
D.      ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

        Please provide any additional comments on this manual and its usefulness.
        Please fold on the dotted line and mail. If you have any questions regarding this publication or would like additional information,
        you may contact U.S. EPA (214) 665-6580, or SEDESOL (525) 553-6421.
                                           4444444 (fold here) 4444444
                                                                                                             Place
                                                                                                            Stamp
                                                                                                             Here
                                               ROBERT LAWRENCE  (6M-PP)
                                               POLLUTION  PREVENTION  COORDINATOR
                                               U.S.  EPA REGION  6
                                               1445  ROSS  AVENUE
                                               DALLAS TX  75202
                                                   (Place tape here)

-------