Hazardous Waste Minimization: Part V Waste Minimization in the Petroleum Industry

The extractive nature of the petroleum industry sets it apart from other industries in many respects. The nature of this industry places it at somewhat of a disadvantage to other industries when attempts are made to foster waste minimization practices and programs. However, this is no excuse for the industry to not further vigorously pursue minimizing waste. This paper describes the petroleum industry and the products it makes along with their associated waste streams. The industry’s commitment to waste minimization is described with examples of specific minimization projects provided. Although the opportunities for minimization are limited, the economic incentives for reducing waste disposal costs, not to mention long term liability from improper disposal practices, has put the petroleum industry on the road to waste minimization.     

Hazardous Waste Minimization: Part IX Waste Minimization in the Automotive Repair Industry

Waste minimization in the automotive repair industry is characterized by the large numbers of small quantity generators (SQG) producing solvent, alkaline and detergent hazardous wastes. On-site management of multiple processes which vary depending on the size of shop make the administration of hazardous waste policies particularly complex. This paper presents the quantities and types of hazardous materials typically produced. Guidelines are presented to allow generators to organize a waste minimization program.     

Hazardous Waste Minimization: Part VIII Waste Minimization in the Pesticide Formulation Industry

The pesticide formulation industry is dependent upon the basic manufacturers for the main raw materials. Waste minimization efforts are, therefore, limited to process/handling sources. The economic incentive for waste reduction has mandated significant changes throughout each facility. There are waste problems, however, that require industry-wide action, e.g., empty containers. The ongoing regulatory actions affecting this business will require continuing efforts to maintain operations.     

Hazardous Waste Minimization: Part I Waste Reduction in the Chemical Industry

Recognizing the need for minimizing the generation of hazardous waste, the chemical industry is experiencing a surge in the initiation of programs for reducing such waste. With a new realization that the cost of handling waste may be many times higher than the value of the materials lost in it, the industry needs to examine a new end-point for optimizing its processes; one that includes the total cost of waste management as well as the conventional cost elements such as raw materials, power and the like. The authors discuss some of the problems that industry is encountering; then describe Du Pont’s approach to waste reduction in terms of administrative and technical activities. They emphasize that, in addition to meeting environmental needs, waste reduction often makes good sense solely from an economic point of view.     

Hazardous Waste Minimization: Part IV Waste Reduction in the Metal Finishing Industry

The metal finishing industry uses over 40 production processes to produce a wide range of metal products. Waste streams generated include wastewater, waste oils, spent solvents, and spent process solutions. Currently a wide variety of techniques which minimize waste are available. Cost-effective methods to reduce electroplating wastewater contamination include water conservation and drag-out reduction, recovery and management. Ways to cost-effectively reduce the generation of spent metal-working fluids include establishing a fluid management program and installing a fluid recovery system. However, before any techniques are selected, a waste reduction survey should first be conducted.     

Hazardous Waste Minimization: Part II Waste Minimization in the Electronics Products Industries

An overview is provided of the production processes, waste generation, and waste management of the electronics products industries. Chosen product areas include electron tubes, semiconductors, capacitors/resistors, and printed circuit/wiring boards. Examples are given of specific processes and associated waste streams. Waste minimization activities are identified, and specific examples of successful applications provided. While faced with a wide variety of waste streams, many opportunities for waste minimization exist and await only application.     

Hazardous Waste Minimization: Part VII (A) Hazardous Waste Minimization within the Department of Defense

This article is a series of representative case studies of Department of Defense hazardous waste minimization. Each Military Department and the Defense Logistics Agency describe actual accomplishments. Areas covered range from production line modification to product specification change. These efforts are part of a Department of Defense plan composed of individual programs executed independently by each military service and defense agency.

Part VII of the hazardous waste minimization series appears in two separate installments: this installment, Part VII (A), deals with Department of Defense waste minimization efforts in vehicle repair operations, explosives manufacturing, and abrasive blasting processes; Part VII (B) will cover shipboard mercury wastes, industrial chemical control, solvent reclamation, and hazardous property sales efforts.     

Hazardous Waste Minimization: Part Vii (B) Hazardous Waste Minimization within the Department of Defense

This article is a series of representative case studies of Department of Defense hazardous waste minimization. Each Military Department and the Defense Logistics Agency describe actual accomplishments. Areas covered range from production line modification to product specification change. These efforts are part of a Department of Defense plan composed of individual programs executed independently by each military service and defense agency.

Part VII of the hazardous waste minimization series appears in two separate installments: the first installment, Part VII (A), dealt with Department of Defense waste minimization efforts in vehicle repair operations, explosives manufacturing, and abrasive blasting processes; Part VII (B) covers shipboard mercury wastes, industrial chemical control, solvent reclamation, and hazardous property sales efforts.     

Hazardous Waste Minimization: Part X The Waste Minimization Assessment: A Useful Tool for the Reduction of Industrial Hazardous Wastes

This article describes the “nuts and bolts” of implementing a waste minimization program at an industrial facility which has made a commitment to carry out such a program for waste reduction and/or elimination. Under EPA sponsorship, a waste minimization assessment methodology has been developed and applied in a total often such assessments at industrial and DOD facilities. The article reviews the eleven distinct steps that represent the preferred procedure for carrying out a waste minimization assessment at an industrial site. This procedure is presented in detail in the recently published “The EPA Manual for Waste Minimization Opportunity Assessments.” Two case studies are presented which have employed this methodology to develop waste reduction options in the areas of source reduction and recycle/reuse. Lessons learned during the development and application of this methodology are also presented.     

Automated Economic Analysis Model For Hazardous Waste Minimization

Abstract

The U.S. Army has established a policy of achieving a 50 percent reduction in hazardous waste generation by the end of 1992. To assist the Army in reaching this goal, the Environmental Division of the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (USACERL) designed the Economic Analysis Model for Hazardous Waste Minimization (EAHWM). The EAHWM was designed to allow the user to evaluate the life cycle costs for various techniques used in hazardous waste minimization and to compare them to the life cycle costs of current operating practices. The program was developed in C language on an IBM compatible PC and is consistent with other pertinent models for performing economic analyses. The potential hierarchical minimization categories used in EAHWM Include source reduction, recovery and/or reuse, and treatment. Although treatment is no longer an acceptable minimization option, its use is widespread and has therefore been addressed in the model. The model allows for economic analysis for minimization of the Army’s six most important hazardous waste streams. These include, solvents, paint stripping wastes, metal plating wastes, industrial waste-sludges, used oils, and batteries and battery electrolytes. The EAHWM also includes a general application which can be used to calculate and compare the life cycle costs for minimization alternatives of any waste stream, hazardous or non-hazardous. The EAHWM has been fully tested and implemented in more than 60 Army installations in the United States.     

Evaluation of Chemical Exposures in the Hazardous Waste Industry

Abstract

The assessment of personnel exposure to volatile solvent vapors is an important aspect in any comprehensive health and safety program. This is particularly true at Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) and for industries dealing with volatile solvents. This paper presents organic vapor monitoring data from seven TSDFs and from several routine small business and household activities. It shows that proper controls at TSDFs effectively reduce personnel vapor exposure. Through an examination of data from a specialized business such as a TSDF, along with data from more routine activities, a different perspective arises regarding potential hazards associated with hazardous waste disposal activities.     

Refinery Sludge Treatment/Hazardous Waste Minimization Via Dehydration and Solvent Extraction

Abstract

The patented Carver-Greenfield (C-G) Process®, a combination of dehydration and solvent extraction treatment technologies, has a wide range of uses in separating hydrocarbon solvent-soluble hazardous organic contaminants (indigenous oil) from sludges, soils, and industrial wastes. As a result of this treatment, the products from a C-G Process facility are: ? Clean, dry solids which are typically suitable for disposal in nonhazardous landfills;

? Water which is treatable in an industrial or Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) wastewater treatment facility;

? Extracted indigenous oil containing hydrocarbon soluble contaminants which may be recycled or reused or disposed of at less cost because its volume is smaller than the original waste feed.

The C-G Process was demonstrated on spent oily drilling fluids as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program. This paper summarizes the use of the C-G Process for economical treatment and minimization of hazardous refinery wastes, reviews the SITE program results, and describes extending the C-G Process technology to treatment of other wastes. Estimated treatment costs are presented.     

Obtaining a Part B Permit for Hazardous Waste Incineration

The objectives of this study were to compare changes in atmospheric deposition rates for water soluble Zn, Cu and Mn associated with a doubling of the generating capacity of a fossilfuel power plant located in southern Maryland with concentrations of extractable metals in soils and In corn and soybean foliage.

Three atmospheric deposition samples were collected monthly during each summer from 12 research and monitoring sites located 1.6, 4.8 and 9.6 km distances from the Chalk Point Generating Station for two years before and after the June 1975 expansion of generation capacity from 660 to 1320 MW. Crop leaf samples were collected at flowering, and 0-15 cm depth soil samples were collected from research plots each May.

Averaged over monitoring sites and plant operational periods, respectively, significant decreases were found in atmospheric deposition rates for Zn and Mn from pre- to post-plant expansion and with increased distances. The Cu deposition rates remained unchanged from pre- to post-expansion; however, a trend for decreased rates with distance was observed.

Significant differences were found in the levels of soil extractable Zn, Cu and Mn among the 12 sites and with distance from the power plant. Also, combined over sites, significantly higher levels of extractable Zn and Mn were found during post-expansion which were attributed to general increases in soil acidity found in all soil research sites.

Significant increases in foliar Cu and significant decreases in foliar Mn concentrations were found in both crops from pre- to post-expansion. Leaf Zn concentrations declined in soybeans but remained unchanged in corn after plant expansion. Leaf Mn levels were highest in both crops at 1.6 km compared to more distance sites; however, foliar Zn and Cu concentrations In both crops were similar across distances from the power plant.

The increase in soil extractable Zn and Mn associated with the decreases in soil pH were typically 100X larger than the recorded decreases in water soluble Zn and Mn deposition associated with power plant expansion. The observed changes in rates of metal deposition would be expected to have only minimal effects on the metal nutrition of the crops; however, the quantities of Zn and Cu being deposited would likely prevent deficiencies from occurring on the Atlantic Coastal Plain soils.     

The 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments: A Bold Experiment in Hazardous Waste Management

The 1984 amendments by Congress to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) resulted primarily from a sense of frustration with EPA's apparent lack of progress in addressing the myriad problems associated with hazardous waste management. The amendments were also a manifestation of Congress’ clear sense of purpose in wanting to steer a radically different course at much greater speed. Whether this bold experiment works remains to be seen. EPA appears to be committed to carrying out both the letter and spirit of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, but no one should underestimate the magnitude of the task.     

Treatment Technologies For Hazardous Wastes: Part IV A Review of Alternative Treatment Processes for Metal Bearing Hazardous Waste Streams

The U.S. Congress and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency believe that treatment and recovery techniques should be given maximum priority when considering methods for managing the nation's generated hazardous waste. A prohibition for the disposal of certain categories of hazardous wastes either directly onto or into the land without being treated to an accepted degree prior to such disposal practice has been promulgated.¹ Wastes containing toxic metals and cyanide complexes have been selected as a group to be restricted. Due to the high generation rate associated with this category, a large capacity of waste treatment processing will be required. Existing and emerging treatment alternatives which are or have the potential to be employed for waste treatment of metal bearing wastes are presented in this paper.     

Reducing Risk in Hazardous Waste Management

Over the past several years, the Environmental Protection Agency has attempted to institutionalize an approach to its activities that is characterized by an active attempt to separate risk assessment from risk management activities. This approach, while not new in concept, has only been evolving at EPA for about four years. The Office of Research and Development, or ORD, has organized its research planning activities around this risk assessment-risk management concept. In order for the approach to succeed, it is necessary to develop the data and methodology necessary to undertake risk assessments both in the area of human health and ecology, and to develop methods to reduce those risks. Accordingly, we have organized our research planning into four major areas: Human Health Risk, Environmental or Ecological Risk, Exposure Assessment, and Risk Reduction. What I would like to do is outline briefly the breadth and diversity of EPA’s research program and the Agency’s research needs.     

Technological Innovation in Hazardous Waste Remediation

The following is the first in a series of articles on various efforts to encourage and support innovation in hazardous waste treatment technologies for sites and affected groundwater. This article provides a brief discussion of the origins of the U.S. EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) Technology Innovation Office (T1O), its mission, and the major initiatives underway or under contemplation. Subsequent articles will provide progress reports on these initiatives and other activities related to technology innovation by federal and state regulators, technology developers, responsible parties, the engineering community, and other interested parties.     

Cofiring Hazardous Waste Fuels in Industrial Processes

Although energy-intensive industrial processes have the potential to incinerate hazardous wastes while effecting fuel cost savings, increased government regulation and heightened public interest require that the financial aspects of a hazardous waste fuel (HWF) program be considered fully. Apparent fuel savings are offset by the capital requirements for institutional factors such as permitting and public relations. This paper provides cost information for initiating and operating a HWF program, and outlines the steps required to perform a thorough financial analysis. Falling fuel prices lessen the appeal of HWF programs, and unless the facility is paid to accept the HWF, only very large users (more than 80 × 10⁹ Btu/yr) of energy can consider them. The paper includes a figure from which the reader can estimate the return on investment for HWF programs over a range of program sizes (80 × 1200 × 10⁹ Btu/yr).     

Treatment Technologies For Hazardous Wastes: Part III Treatment Technologies for Corrosive Hazardous Wastes

In this paper, the authors present generation and treatment information for corrosive hazardous wastes (EPA Hazaradous Waste Codes D002 and K062). The authors discuss the state of the art for several treatment trains used to process specific types of corrosive waste. Treatment trains incorporate various unit processes selected from but not limited to the following: neutralization, filtration, carbon adsorption, biological oxidation, distillation, air flotation, and incineration. Unit processes are selected to form trains according to the corrosive characteristics of each individual waste stream. The treatment processes discussed are proposed to be used instead of landfills for disposal of corrosive waste.