waste reduction: an effective approach to industrial waste ...waste reduction: an effective approach...

Waste Reduction: An Effective Approach to Industrial Waste Management

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Reprinted: June 1992 From: Industrial Energy Technology - 9212 For: Office of Conservation and Renewable Energy

Office of Industrial Technologies By: Office of Scientific and Technical Information

OFFICE OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES

MPARTIIENT O f ENERGY WASTEMANAGELIENTPROGRAYS

i

Waste Reduction: An Effective Approach dustrial Waste Management

Office of Waste Reduction, Waste Material Management Division

INTRODUCTION

rtment of Energy (DOE) Office of lndus- ies (OIT) has been i

improve energy efficiency and wast n-Nuclear Research and s Act granted the Energy

Research and Development Agency (ERDA), DOE’s predecessor, the authority to pursue research and development (R&D) in non-nuclear energy sources, including advanced energy conservation technologies which encompass the productive use of waste and the reuse and recycling of materials. The Act further allows Federal assistance to take the form of cooperative agreements between the Government and industry. In 1975, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act called for Federal support to increase the energy efficiency of US. industry, particularly the most energy-intensive. Subse- quent legislative actions over the last 15 years have further refined the mission and goals of OIT R&D programs, including those that target the problems of waste management.

Because energy consumption and waste generation are often linked, waste management is considered an integral part of DOE’s R&D programs. Effective management of waste can decrease energy consumption, foster economic growth and industry competitiveness, and minimize the generation of waste. Consequently, DOE supports major efforts to promote waste reduction or minimization, improve recycling techniques, and encourage the use of waste products as resources in all sectors of the economy. These efforts target not only the problems posed by the generation of residential, commercial, and industrial waste, but also wastes generated by the Federal government. Consequently, DOE waste programs are targeted toward solving internal waste problems (associated with the Department’s production and defense activities) as well as toward solutions for external waste problems in the private sector (see Exhibit 1). OIT specifically addresses external waste problems and works with the industrial sector, trade and professional groups, and other Federal and state agencies to develop technologies and concepts for effective waste management.

__

~

Exhibit 1. DOE Waste Program Interactions

E Waste Materials Management Diwsion

DOE - Defense Programs - Environmental

Restoration & Waste Management

~xtemal clients

Industrial Sector

I Other Federal I I Agencies

1 I I

I Trade & Professional

The National Energy Strategy: Powerful Ideas for America (NES), issued in spring of 1991, is the most recent policy directive aimed toward developing an effective energy framework for the future. The NES strongly supports taking actions to further increase the overall efficiency of American industry and establishes the following goals for OIT:

Improve energy efficiency and fuel-flexibility in the industrial sector; Encourage cost-effective measures to reduce energy costs; and Reduce industrial waste generation, increase recycling of wastes, and increase use of plant- and consumer-generated wastes as process feedstocks.

In addition to historical legislative mandates, the actions called for by the NES provide continuing impetus for the development of the industrial waste materials management programs undertaken by the Office of Conserva- tion and Renewable Energy (CE). Within CE, the Office of Industrial Technologies (OIT) supports a multifaceted program that addresses the problems of industrial waste faced by the private sector. The Waste Materials Man- agement Division of OIT supports programs that range

in scope from waste energy recovery to waste reduction, including some waste treatment processes. An important component of OIT is the Industrial Waste Reduction Program (IWRP), which focuses specifically on reducing energy consumption by decreasing or eliminating industrial waste materials before they are produced.

THE DOE INDUSTRIAL WASTE REDUCTION PROGRAM

~

~

The NES cites the reduction of industrial waste as an integral strategy for controlling costs, improving productivity, and thus enhancing the competitive position of U.S. industry. There are three basic ways to control industrial wastes (Exhibit 2). Of the various strategies, waste reduction is the most effective since waste is not produced in the first place and, therefore, does not require treatment or disposal. It ensures that more raw material becomes product. And unlike end-of-the pipe controls, it encourages technology innovation. In fact, as a waste management strategy, waste reduction is one of the few that not only reduces environmental liability, but provides energy savings and improves industrial competitiveness as well

I Res001

I m

Exhibit 2. Basic Waste Strategies

I IIII-IIIIIII-III-II

I - I I @educe Waste Generation

I "s I .

I @Control, Treat, and Dispose I

' @Recycle, Utilize, Convert I i i I I

1

vi

The DOE recognizes that reducing industrial waste can provide multiple benefits. As identified in the NES, R&D on advanced waste reduction technology is needed to foster the use of this strategy in industry, information barriers on waste reduction exist and must be overcome, and regulatory changes may be needed to encourage industry to make economic choices for waste management alternatives. The IWRP is aligned with and supports the goals implicit in the NES for encouraging waste reduction in industry. This cross- cutting R&D program is helping industry to take acloser look at the source of waste, and to ultimately develop cost-effective options for permanently reducing the waste burden.

IWRP funds research and development of new technologies and provides a mechanism by which these become available for investment by the private sector. The core of the IWRP is the ongoing, active role that industry plays in performing R&D and assessing new technologies. Industry support, in the form of cost- sharing, direct participation, or sharing of materials and facilities, increases the likelihood that technologies, once developed, will find practical application in the commercial sector, through the economic pull of the market. The capabilities of the national laboratories, universities, and private laboratories are all utilized to support IWRP R&D efforts.

A multitude of factors can affect waste generation and the economics of waste control. As a result, the adoption of waste reduction practices across industries, companies, and even plants within the same company has been sporadic and inconsistent. IWRP circumvents this erratic track record by focusing on strategies that will provide comprehensive waste reduction techniques that

are also attractive to industry. The five waste reduction strategies identified by IWRP are

“Housekeeping” measures, or simple plant main- tenance and production practices; Recycling waste within the industrial process; Redesigning the production process; Feedstock substitution; and Redesigning the product to optimize material use.

Exhibit 3 highlights the characteristics of IWRP waste reduction strategies and the types of industries likely to benefit from each.

An essential part of the IWRP strategy is to interact with other organizations involved in waste reduction activities. While the program has a unique perspective in its objective to save energy, it shares a large area of common interest with industry and other Federal agencies in the technical activities and policy issues of waste reduction. In particular, the IWRP is working with EPA’s Office of Pollution Prevention to share information and explore opportunities for complementary and cooperative activities. In industry, activities are coordinated with various organizations such as the Center for Waste Reduction Technology, which was established by the American Institute of Chemical Engineers. Dialogue is also maintained with industry trade groups such as the Chemical Manufacturers Association, the American Petroleum Institute, and the National Center of Manu- facturing Sciences. Informal contact is also maintained with representatives of the chemical and petroleum refining industry, other DOE offices, state environmental officials, and others involved in waste reduction efforts. These activities provide a basis for joint action by industry, government, and academia to exploit waste reduction opportunities.

the entire production process from raw

and new technology through removal of

ulations, that improve industrial energy efficiency

vii

Exhiblt 3. Characterlstics of Waste Reductlon Strateglea

Strategies: Housekeeping

Timing of Impacts Near-term Near- & mid-term

Mid- & long-term

Near- & mid-term

Long-term

Capital Cost L O W Varies High Low Moderate to high

Incremental Operating Cost

Low Low to moderate Law Moderate to high

Varies

Moderate Moderate Low

Moderate to high High Varies High Energy Saving Moderate Potential

Characteristics of I All industries Industries where Application is Most Likely

All industries except those with very stringent or high quality demands

Frequently changing, high- tech industrial products;

Large-scale manufacturers of consumer goods;

Frequently changing, high- tech industrial products;

Some commodity gaods;

Job shops for industrial P-;

Suppliers to companies practicing waste reduction

Consumer goods manufacturers Some commodity

goods;

Consumer goods manufacturers

I

Steel finishing, Medical, Chemicals Equipment, Automobiles

Electronic components, Foundries, Printing, Paints, Chemicals

Consumer electronics, Chemicals

Industry Examples Rubber, Electroplating, Textiles,

. Chemicals

Electronic components, Chemicals, Appliances, Steelmaking

R&D, Assessments

R&D R&D, Assessments, Information transfer

R&D, Assessments

Possible Federal Information transfer, Contribution Assessments

Funding Mechanisms

IWRP uses three procurement instruments to support the program: solicitations advertised in the Commerce Business Daily, unsolicited proposals,l and Field Work Proposals through national and government laboratories. Both solicited and unsolicited proposals typically result in cost-shared cooperative agreements that are negotiated with industry, universities, and other research organizations. The national laboratories have a special arrangement with DOE and use Field Work Proposals. The national laboratories can also use special procurement instruments with industry to obtain required industrial support (see inset).2 Proposals are evaluated to ensure that DOE is committing funds to

~

~

__

-

viii

NOTICE OF PROGRAM INTEREST

IWRP recently issued an open Notice of Pro- gram Interest (NOPI) to solicit cooperative R& D with industry to develop cost-effective technologies for waste reduction in the chemicals industry. The NOPI focuses on innovative industrial processes, process changes, feedstock substitution, and/or product changes that will conserve energy while economically minimizing or reducing waste materials, with the primary focus on the chemicals sector.

efforts that will reap the greatest benefit to the public and industry. Five criteria used specifically for evaluation of proposals submitted to IWRP include energy savings, waste reduction potential, economic attractiveness, level of industrial support, and need for government funding.

For proposals to be considered, they must represent a minimum national energy savings of 1 trillion Btu per year, projected for the year 201 0, assuming a realistic market penetration of the technology. Further, the economics must be sufficiently attractive to sustain industrial interest, as industrial support is required on all

R&D projects. Industrial cost-sharing may vary depend- ing upon the specific project but must be a minimum of 50 percent over the life of the project. Finally, the proposed effort must demonstrate the need for government funding, (i.e., why industry will not pursue this project without government support).

Targets of Opportunity for Waste Reduction

IWRP supports an R&D strategy that focuses on the development of cross-cutting waste reduction technologies that are applicable to many industrial processes, with the potential to impact a wide cross-section of the industrial sector. Although much of the research supported by IWRP is aimed toward those wastes which pose especially severe or costly environmental problems, all waste streams, including hazardous and nonhazardous wastes, regulated and nonregulated wastes, represent waste reduction opportunities (see Exhibits 4 and 5). Preliminary analysis of the waste and energy characteristics of US. industry has indicated that the chemicals, petroleum, primary metals, pulp and paper, and mining industries are prime targets for waste reduction. IWRP focuses efforts on these industries, as well as a number of others where waste reduction is a top priority.

__

~

Exhibit 4. Nonhazardous Waste Targets of Opportunity

Fran: Repatto Ccngese: Sdld Waste Dlspd In llm UnlW States. Volumes I and 2 EPN530-SW-88011. US. Envirmentel Pratedm Agency. Weah. D.C.

Pulp & Paper

Primerv MWs Oer%ldty Productla

reather goods. transportation equipment, watsr trealment

Food and Klnbed Produds

ix

Exhibit 5. Hazardous Waste Targets of Opportunity

For example, the chemicals industry is a major area of opportunity, primarily because it is the second largest industrial energy consumer in the United States [at the 2-digit Standard Industrial Code (SIC) level], accounts for 70 percent of hazardous waste, is the largest emitter of toxic chemicals (46 percent of the total releases and transfers of toxic chemicals in 1988), and spends more on pollution abatement than any other industry ($4.2 billion in 1988) (Refs. 3 to 5). IWRP is supporting a number of efforts involving chemicals and related processes, as well as research that addresses the problems of industrial waste in a myriad of other industries. These include electronics manufacturing, metal parts production, coatings, petroleum refining, and natural gas production.

Industrial Waste Reduction Program Structure

The IWRP is structured to reduce waste materials in industry or promote such reductions by overcoming important barriers that currently exist. Program elements are complementary and proceed in parallel.

Industrial Waste Characterization is needed to better understand the types and magnitudes of industrial waste streams, and this requires accurate, standardized data on the generation of both hazardous and nonhazardous waste. Without reliable data, it is difficult to determine with confidence the highest priority technology needs.

Under this program element, IWRP will work with both public and private sources to collect, review, and stan- dardize existing data, as well as determine future data needs. Ultimately, the information developed will be used to build a central industrial waste database that will aid in funding decisions and expedite the transfer of waste reduction technology to industry.

Opportunity Assessmentsare needed to identify high- priority waste reduction opportunities and to assess those opportunities on the basis of energy potential, economic benefits, and impacts on waste generation. Through such assessments, research areas or industrial processes with optimum potential for improvements through waste reduction can be identified. Under this element, IWRP supports various studies and opportunity assessments in conjunction with industry advisory groups, relevant trade associations, and others. The results of opportunity assessments are used by IWRP to establish the need for government involvement in technology development, to determine industry’s willingness to participate and cost-share, and to optimize the use of funds for critical waste reduction research opportunities.

InstitutionaIAnalysisis needed to help understand the key factors that affect industrial investment in waste reduction technology, thereby facilitating implementa- tion of available and emerging technologies. Many of these factors are related to financial and structural factors (e.g., cost of capital, firm size, market conditions, etc.), or to nonfinancial issues (e.g., regulatory requirements, liability concerns, corporate philosophy, etc.). Institutional issues can create barriers that affect corporate investment decisions and limit adoption of new technologies. Analysis of these issues will, allow IWRP to incorporate R&D strategies that reduce pr overcome critical institutional barriers and optimize industry adoption of new waste reduction technology.

TechnologyR&DProjectsare central to the success of the IWRP. Technology R&D is needed to promote the development of energy-efficient, environmentally sound, and economic solutions for minimizing waste generation in industry. Waste reduction frequently requires process and equipment redesign, and consequently, technologic innovation can be critical in finding effective solutions to waste generation. Under this element, IWRP works with industry, national laboratories, and universities to conduct avariety of cross-cutting technology R&D projects aimed at reducing industrial waste generation. These efforts ultimately provide tangible results in the form of new waste reduction tools and technologies that can subsequently be commercialized and adopted by industry.

Technology and Information Transfer is needed to move IWRP-sponsored technology development into the marketplace and into plant operations. Without effective technology transfer mechanisms, many oppor-

X

tunities for industry to take advantage of the benefits of technologic innovation may be lost. When employed as an integral component in the planning and implementa- tion of technology R&D, technology transfer can suc- cessfully promote the use of new technology in industry. IWRP encourages technology transfer through industrial cost-sharing, conferences and workshops, and a number of other outreach programs. Through these efforts, the IWRP effectively disseminates information on waste reduction practices, educates both the public and private sectors about industrial waste reduction technologies, and promotes technology adoption on a commercial scale.

SELECTED CURRENT RESEARCH EFFORTS

IWRP projects are already underway in all five program elements. Many of these projects show great potential for providing considerable energy, economic, and environmental benefits.

Industrial Waste Characterization

Characterization of Major Waste Data Sources. A first step to understanding and correcting the problems created by the diversity of data available on waste generation is to identify the major sources of industrial waste data and to examine their key characteristics. In 9 recognition of this, IWRP supported an effort to charac- terize 22 major sources of data on industrial waste and related industrial activity. The result is a comprehensive source document that provides an excellent starting point from which to assess the industrial generation of waste.6

Simultaneous Waste and Energy-Environment- Economic Tabulations (SWEET). IWRP is supporting a project at the Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, to summarize waste and energy data gath- ered on industrial processes through various mecha- % nisms. The approach being taken is to combine a number of databases maintained by both the Census Bureau and the Environmental Protection Agency (see Exhibit 6).

~

~~~

Exhibit 6. Analysis of Industrial Waste and Energy Data

Department of Commerce

Product . EPA 1987 I 7-Digit Product Cad0

Energy & Materials Consumpfion. Pollution

I NONHAZ I

xi

The ultimate goal is to develop an online retrieval system that contains dollars spent per dollar per product for energy and pollution control, classified by 7-digit SICS. This will allow prioritization of technology research to address those areas with the highest levels of pollution control costs and energy costs.

Opportunity Assessments

C WRT Workshop to Identify Key Research and De- velopment Needs for Waste Reduction in the Chemi- cal Industry. The Center for Waste Reduction Tech- nologies (CWRT) conducted a workshop sponsored by IWRP to identify priority waste reduction opportunities in industry. The workshop was one step in the process of forming a consensus of critical R&D needs that could be pursued by CWRT, individual companies, or government agencies. The workshop was useful in that it generated a list of R&D needs for waste reduction in

production, as well as industry priori- ties for both the near and long term.’

Waste Materials Reduction in the Chemicals Industry. With support from IWRP, Argonne National Laboratory consulted with chemical firms about the type of R&D programs that the industry would find most useful in its effort to reduce waste. This activity resulted in a draft program plan that identified high-priority opportunities for waste reduction, with salient details on research barriers, commercialization obstacles, and likely industrial participants.* The assessment has been used by IWRP as a tool in establishing the current R&D agenda.

Institutional Analysis

Federal Legislative and Regulatory Incentives and Disincentives forlndustrial Waste Reduction. IWRP supported an effort to identify Federal legislation and regulations that stimulate or hinder waste reduction activities. The result was a report that examined the many institutional factors affecting industrial investment in waste reduction technology. It also identified options that the Federal government could implement to foster both available and emerging waste reduction efforts, by either increasing incentives or removing disincentives that are grounded in legislative and regulatory action^.^

a

Technology Research and Development

Dual-Cure Photocatalyst Coating Systems. Of the 7 billion pounds of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted every year, a substantial percentage are associated with the general use of solvents in industry, including paints and other coating systems. To meet Federal and state regulations designed to minimize or

eliminate emissions of VOCs, many industries need new solventless or near solventless coatings that are easily applied, quickly cured, and have physical properties equivalent to or better than traditional coatings. With support from IWRP, the 3M Corporation is developing an ultraviolet-curable catalyst that is capable of curing mixed polymer systems used in coatings, inks, and adhesives.i0-12 The dual-cure photocatalyst system produces considerably fewer VOCs than conventional coatings and allows greater flexibility in tailoring the final properties of the cured coating. Initial markets for the new coating have been identified as aircraft topcoats and primers and saturation coatings for the backing of high-temperature electrical tape. By the year 2010, commercial use of the new system could reduce VOC emissions by over 500 million pounds per year. The process could also save an estimated 30 trillion Btu per year by 2010, both from avoided manufacture and disposal of VOCs and from reduced energy requirements for the coating process.

Silicon Oxide Utilization. The open-hearth furnace technology currently used by the U.S. silicon/ferrosilicon industry is limited by the fact that it wastes energy; producessignificantquantities of very fine “fume”(Si02), which is a respiratory hazard; and produces substantial quantities of off-gases that contribute to global warming. These limitations have stagnated industry growth and encouraged the penetration of low-cost imports, seri- ously eroding profitability. With support from the IWRP, Dow Corning Corporation (DCC) is working to develop closed furnace, direct current (dc) production technologies to replace the alternating current (ac) open hearth processes for both silicon and ferrosilicon p r o d u ~ t i o n . ~ ~ , ~ ~ On the basis of data from small-scale closed furnace tests, energy savings are estimated to be 49,000 Btu per pound of silicon produced. These savings will come from reduced raw materials losses (37 percent), recovery of off-gas for fuel (24 percent), and reduced bag house and process electricity consumption (39 percent). By the year 201 0, it is estimated that 100 percent of U.S. silicon production will come from closed furnace technology. On the basis of silicon and ferrosilicon demand projections, the energy saved in the year 2010 will be 86 trillion Btu. This would correspond to an annual reduction of carbon dioxide emissions of 1 to 3 million tons per year and the elimination of 0.4 million tons of very fine silicon dioxide fume particles in the year 201 0. Dow Corning also predicts that over the long term, silicon production costs for the dc submerged-arc closed furnace could be cut to $0.35 per pound, which repre- sents a 40 percent cost reduction over conventional open hearth processes.

Self-cleaning Soldering Processes. Throughout the electronics industry, ozone-depleting chlorofluorocar- bons (CFCs) are the solvents of choice for many elec-

~

~

- ~

- -

xii

tronic assembly cleaning processes. With IWRP support, Sandia National Laboratories, together with Motorola, Inc., and Los Alamos National Laboratory, are working to address the problem of eliminating CFC solvent cleaning systems from electronics assembly production. The project involves an investigation of a new self-cleaning soldering process that entirely elimi- nates the need for cleaning solvents. The process uses a dilute adipic acid flux to remove oxidation prior to soldering and dilute formic acid in a nitrogen cover blanket to inhibit oxidation during soldering. The adipic acid is evaporated during soldering, and the formic acid is converted to carbon dioxide and water.

It has been estimated that 11,000 tons per year of equivalent CFC-11 ozone-depleting emissions are generated by the U.S. electronics industry as a result of in- line cleaning of electronics assemblies. The goal of this project is to eliminate all of this waste using CFC- alternative cleaning systems. Assuming a 3 percent annual growth in the industry, the potential waste reduction in CFC-11 equivalent emissions by 2010 would approach 18,000 tons. A conservative estimate of the corresponding energy savings by 201 0 is about 18 trillion Btu per year.

Supercritical Fluid Cleaning. A multipartner R&D program is being supported by IWRP to develop a supercritical fluid (SCF) cleaning technology as an alternative to the existing CFC-based solvent technology. Los Alamos, Sandia, and Pacific Northwest laboratories, together with industry partners Boeing Company, Hughes Aircraft, Honeywell Defense Avionics, Auto- clave Engineers, and IBM, are addressing technical challenges to SCF systems development on the commercial scale. SCF technologies, particularly those using C02, are being applied in processes to clean metal parts (e.g., small, precision parts, fasteners, etc.), electronics assemblies, and optical components.

Informal estimates project that if 20 percent of the CFCs currently used for cleaning could be replaced by SCF cleaning technology, approximately 100 million pounds of CFCs could be displaced from current use, represent- ing roughly $500 million per year in solvent costs. Energy savings are also expected to be significant. For example, SCF cleaning processes use roughly half the energy required for conventional vapor degreasing units.

Hydrogen Metal Oxide Catalysts for Production of Oxygenated Products. The U.S. market for oxygenated hydrocarbons is in excess of 3 billion pounds per year. The processes currently used to produce oxidized hydrocarbons (typically by oxychlorination) generate large by-product streams of hazardous wastes. Two processing technologies, producing either a halogenated hydrocarbon or aqueous waste stream, are currently used to produce oxidized hydrocarbons. For one large-volume product (roughly 500 million pounds) pro-

duced via a halogenated hydrocarbon route, approximately 125 million pounds of halogenated hydrocarbon waste or 20 billion pounds of halogen-containing aqueous waste are produced. Development of an efficient direct catalytic oxidation process could eliminate or greatly reduce these waste streams. In addition to the production of toxic waste streams, traditional halogenated hydrocarbon processes are very energy intensive. Substitution of a more efficient process could thus achieve significant energy and operating cost savings as well as reduce waste generation.

With IWRP support, Sandia National Laboratory and Shell Development Company are working to develop

w catalysts for oxidation of hydrocarbons based on hydrous metal oxide ion-exchangers. The new catalysts will provide a lower energy route to the desired products and because they are more selective, will produce fewer by-products or less chemical waste. For 1 billion pounds of product, energy savings are estimated to total approximately 5 trillion Btu per year in 2010, at an estimated annual cost savings of $8 million. Equally important, for a large facility (100 to 500 million pounds per year), the quarter-pound of chemical waste produced for every pound of product will be eliminated. In large facilities where 40 pounds of aqueous waste are produced for every pound of product, roughly 75 percent of that waste could be eliminated.

Separation of Hydrogen Sulfide. Hydrogen sulfide is a very toxic waste gas generated in petroleum refining and natural gas production. EPA regulations prohibit the release of hydrogen sulfide into the atmosphere, and industry has developed methods for purging the sulfur and essentially rendering these waste streams harm- less. The most widely used treatment technology (the Claus/SCOT process) uses a significant amount of energy and also releases large volumes of valuable hydrogen gas into the atmosphere. Substantial energy and cost savings could be realized from an alternative. process that recovers both hydrogen and sulfur from hydrogen sulfide waste streams.

With IWRP support, Argonne National Laboratory is working with e Gas Research Institute and a number of industrial participants to develop and evaluate a process for separation of both hydrogen and sulfur from waste gases.I5-l7 The current members of the industry working group actively involved in this effort include Amoco Oil Company, the Electric Power Research Institute, UOP, and Wavemat, Inc. The following companies have provided consult- ing services: Stauffer Chemical Company, Stearns- Roger, and Varian Corporation.

The process uses a microwave-generated “cold,” nonequilibrium plasma to dissociate hydrogen sulfide into elemental hydrogen and sulfur. In refining operations, this hydrogen would be recycled and displace the

- ~

-

xiii

hydrogen production required for de-sulfurizing crude oil. In some natural gas facilities, hydrogen could be recovered from the hydrogen sulfide waste stream and sold on the open market, displacing hydrogen production at separate facilities. Assuming that the first commercial-scale microwave plasma waste-treatment process could be on stream in 1998, potential market penetration for this technology could be as high as 90 percent by 201 0, saving 62 trillion Btu per year and reducing wastes by 56 million tons per year.

National Industrial Competitiveness Through Effi- ciency: Energy, Environment, and Economics (NE@). The NICE3 program addresses waste minimization and reduction through simultaneous improvements in energy efficiency, pollution efficiency, and competitiveness. The program is cost-shared and coordinated with DOEAWRP, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Commerce (DOC), individual states, and industry. Ongoing projects include

Reclaim and Reuse Waste Water. A source reduction/water recycling demonstration project jointly supported through NICE3, the State of Ohio, and PPG Industries. The technology under development uses a nonthermal, nonvaporization physical separation system to recover reusable water from paint wastewater, which must normally be disposed of as hazardous waste.

Methanol Recovery Process. A project supported through NICE3, the State of Texas, and FMC Corporation to recover waste methanol solvent from catalyst regeneration processes. The use of steam distillation is being investigated as a means to recover 90 percent of the volume of methanol used in the process. The solvent is currently disposed of through incineration.

. VOC Control Strategies. This effort focuses on development of low-cost, energy-efficient solvent recycling and control technology designed to minimize VOC emissions in small-scale applications; innovative approaches to development and transfer of information on VOC minimization are also under investigation. The project is sponsored through NICE3, the State of New York, Niagara Mohawk Power, and Carrier Corporation.

%

Technology and Information Transfer

Symposia and Industry Workshops. IWRP periodi- cally provides support for workshops and symposia for those interested in waste reduction strategies. This summer, IWRP will be cosponsoring (with Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the American Institute of Chemi- cal Engineers) the Pollution Prevention in the Manufac- turing Industries Symposium.

Inventory of Industrial Waste Reduction Minimiza- tion R&D Organizations. As part of its technology transfer efforts, IWRP develops informational documents for dissemination to the public and private sectors, and strives to stay abreast of current developments in the field. To assist in this effort, IWRP is sponsoring a project with Research Management Consultants, Inc., to assimilate data on Federal R&D organizations that are actively involved in waste reduction activities.

IMPACTS OF THE IWRP: ENERGY, ECONOMIC AND WASTE REDUCTION BENEFITS

Energy Savings. US. industry directly consumes nearly 30 quads of primary energy resources, or more than one-third of all the energy used in the US. every year (including electrical energy losses). Manufacturing operations use about 80 percent of the industry total, with feedstocks accounting for about 5quads of this.18119 When industry generates waste, valuable energy is usually wasted at the same time. This wasted energy is accounted for in the embodied energy of unused or poorly used raw materials, in the energy content of the waste streams, and in the energy required to clean up and dispose of wastes. Four to seven quads of the industry total are used to produce and process raw materials that end upas waste, and two additional quads are used in waste treatment and disposal. The fuel value of industrial wastes, including agricultural and forest wastes, has been estimated to be a substantial 10 to

OF WASTE REDUCTION

o reduce production costs by

VOCs. Thenew

for VOCs under the amended Clean hout incurring additional costs.

ners, is developing a process to separate hydrogen and sulfur from waste gases generated in petroleum refining and natural gas production. The process will do more than just reduce the costs usually spent on disposal of these waste gases. Turning these wastes into useful feedstocks will make them a source of profit.

xiv

I 15 quads. Consequently, industrial waste reduction and decreased energy use are inherently complementary. For example, an estimated three to four quadrillion Btu (quads) could be saved annually if industry could simply reduce waste by 50 percent.20

Contribution to Economic Competitiveness. Spiraling costs for pollution disposal and control are a source of increasing concern throughout the industrial sector. The cost to industry of handling, cleaning, and disposing of these wastes is estimated at about $45 billion per year, and total national environmental spending is estimated at over $80 billion per year.21122 The costs of waste treatment and disposal are expected to increase because of decreasing availability of hazardous and other waste landfills and as industry complies with recently enacted or proposed environmental legislation (e.g., the Clean Air Act). Waste reduction can help industry defray the costs of waste management. In fact, the contribution that waste reduction makes to the productivity and competitiveness of a particular industry is the key motivation for private sector investment in waste reduction strategies. So far, the evidence is overwhelming: waste reduction pays. Hundreds of U.S. companies have instituted waste reduction measures that have lowered production costs and raised corporate profits while reducing energy use and environmental impacts.

Waste Reduction. Industry is responsible for a large portion of the hazardous wastes that ultimately enter the environment in the United States (see Exhibit 7). Indus- trial operations contribute to worker exposure to toxic products and wastes and to the environmental and health problems associated with waste disposal sites. Industry emits a portion of the waste gases that contribute to global warming (e.g., carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and CFCs), manufactures all of the CFCs in use, and emits some of the waste CFCs. Industry also generates wastes that are often associated with habitat destruction (sulfuric acid, hydrochloric acid). Quite simply, when less waste is produced by industry, the environment benefits directly. Less waste must be treated and disposed of, workers are exposed to fewer hazards, and fewer toxins are emitted to the atmosphere. In addition, when energy is saved through waste reduction, the environment benefits indirectly by avoiding the emission of pollutants associated with the combustion of fuels. For example, the 3M Corporation, considered a leader in promoting waste reduction, has pursued pollution prevention efforts in its facilities since 1975. By 1990, the 3M program had resulted in a reduction in air pollutants by 134,000 tons; elimination of 16,900 tons of water pollutants; a decrease in sludge discharge by41 0,000 tons; and reduction in waste water emissions by 1.65 billion gallons. The total cost savings resulting from these reductions have now reached $537 million.23

Exhibit 7. Estimates of Industrial Waste Streams

Total: 12 Billion Tons

Nonhazardous wastes

7.8 Billion Tons

Hazardous Wastes

0.3 Billion Tons

I and Gas Wastes 2.5 Billion Tons

Mining Wastes 1.4 Billion Tons

From: Report to Congress: Solid Waste Disposal in the United States, Volumes 1 and 2. EPAi530-SW-88-011. US. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

Waste Minimization: lssues and Options. Prepared for US. Environmental Protection Agency by Versar, Inc. and Jacobs Engineering Group, Washington, D.C.

SUMMARY The IWRP is making a significant contribution to the national effort to control, reduce, and utilize industrial waste products. IWRP has assumed the role of assist- ing and encouraging industry, laboratories, and universities in building the technology base that will enable more widespread adoption of waste reduction practices.

A concerted effort to implement waste reduction as an industrial waste management option will have substantial impacts. It will reduce the amount of energy industry consumes, help to mitigate hazards posed to the environment by industrial waste, and improve the competitive position of U.S. industries. These impacts will provide tremendous benefits to the nation as a whole by positively influencing economic growth, environmental quality, and conservation of our precious resources. Indeed, the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) has estimated that, with ambitious programs, industry could reduce its generation of hazardous wastes by as much as 50 percent over five years.21

The diverse and complex nature of the industrial waste stream, however, often presents barriers to effective waste management. This diversity is manifested in the continually evolving nature of the IWRP. Open solicitations, industry participation, opportunity assessments, legislativehegulatory analysis, and aggressive technology transfer efforts are clearly integral to the success of the R&D component of the program. IWRP will continue to develop a balanced waste reduction effort and ultimately do its part to help industry permanently reduce the waste burden.

XV

For further information on the Industrial Waste Reduc- tion Program, contact Bruce Cranford, Program Man-

and Renewable Energy; Office of Industrial Technolo- gies; 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.; Washington, DC 20585.

P; US. Department of Energy

7.

8.

69 10.

11.

12.

REFERENCES

1. Guide for the Submission of Unsolicited Proposals, DOEIPR-0014, US. Department of Energy, Office of Procurement, Assistance and Program Management, Washington, D.C.

2. R. Treager et al., Technology Transfer-What’s In It for Me? pp. 73-77 in Chemical Engineering Progress, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, 1990. Toxics in the Community 1988, EPA 56014-90-017, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, US. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 1990. The Toxics Release Inventory: A National Perspective, 1987, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washing- ton, D.C., 1989. Manufacturer’s Pollution Abatement Capital Expendi- tures andoperating Costs, MA200(88)-1, Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C., 1990. Characterization of Major Waste Data Sources, DOE1 CE/40762T-H2, Office of Industrial Technologies, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C., 1991. Report of the CWRT Workshop On: Waste Reduction Opportunities in Industry, DOE/CE/40762T-H4, Office

0

3.

4.

5 0

of Industrial Technologies, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C., 1991. Waste Materials Reduction in the Chemical Industry: Draft Program Plan for 1992-1996, ANLIESDiTM-19, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Ill., 1990. Federal Legislative and Regulatory Incentives and Dis- incentives for Industrial Waste Reduction, DOEICEI 40762T-H3, Office of Industrial Technologies, U.S. De- partment of Energy, Washington, D.C., 1991. S. S. Keipert, Dual Cure Photocatalyst Systems for Solventless Coatings, International Workshop on Sol- vent Substitution, Phoenix, Ariz., December 1990. M. C. Palazzotto et al., Dualcure Compositions forHigh Solids Coatings, First North American Research Confer- ence on Organics Coatings Science and Technology, Hilton Head, N.C., December 1990. M. C. Palazzotto et al., Dual Cure Photocatalyst Sys- tems, American Chemical Society 1990 National Meet- ing, High Solids Symposium, Washington, D.C., De- cember 1990.

Reports generated by Federal agencies or national laboratories that are referenced in this article (denoted by accession numbers with DOE, EPA, QTA, MA, or

an be obtained through The National Tech- ion Service (NTIS); U.S. Department of

Commerce; 5285 Port Royal Road; Springfield, VA 22

1 3. Closed Furnace n Production Development: Final Report, Phase 11, DOElIDl12624-1, U.S. Department of

Washington, D.C., 1992 (in press). saj et al., Silicon Smelting in a Closed Furnace,

Electric Arc Furnace Conference, Toronto, Canada, November 1991.

15. Treatment of Hydrogen Sulfide Waste Gas: Annual Report for f Y 1990, ANUENSTTM-14, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Ill., 1990.

16. J. Harkness, A. Gorski, and J. Daniels, Hydrogen Sulfide Waste Treatment by Microwave Plasma Dissociation, Proceedings of the 25th lntersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, American Institute of Chemi- cal Engineers, New York, 1990.

17. J. Harkness, A. Gorski, and J. Daniels, Microwave Plasma Dissociation of Hydrogen Sulfide, American Institute of Chemical Engineers Spring National Meet- ing, New Orleans, La., March 1988.

18. Annual Energy Review, 1989, DOEIEIA-0384(89), En- ergy Information Administration, US. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C., 1990.

1 9. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey: Consump- tion of Energy, 1985, DOEIEIA-0512(85), Energy Infor- mation Administration, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C., 1988.

20. A. Schroeder, Unpublished data, Office of Industrial Technologies, US. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C., 1990.

21. Serious Reduction of Hazardous Waste for Pollution Prevention and Industrial Efficiency, OTA-ITE-317, U.S. Office of Technology Assessment, Washington, D.C., 1986.

22. Pollution Prevention Research Plan: Report to Con- gress, EPAl60019-901015, Office of Research and De- velopment (RD-681), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 1990.

23. Pollution Prevention Pays: Status Report, 3M Corpora- tion, St. Paul, Minn., 1991.

0 0

0

xvi

waste reduction: an effective approach to industrial waste ...waste reduction: an effective approach...

Documents