6. How is this project environmentally proactive (i.e., goes beyond regulatory and corporate requirements)?

7. Describe the method used to develop overall waste minimization and treatment options.

8. Describe the method used to ensure that best environmental practices have been incorporated. How is the project going to impact environmental goals and plans?

Corporate goals Operating unit goals Site goals

Competitive benchmarking; best competitors emissions or discharges:

Quality of Don't Competitive More Same Less Know Information*



*High quality (well-known), Poor quality (guess), or Don't know

11. What has been done to assess the impact of this project on the community, and who has been informed?

Before1 Emission/ (thousand Discharge lb/yr)


(thousand lb/yr)

Waste Included in

Mgmt Reason for Company

Hierarchy Not Zero Env.

Method2 Discharge3 Plan?

Carcinogens Regulated4 All other5 Greenhouse/ Ozone Depletors6


Carcinogens Regulated4 Hazardous Other7


Carcinogens Regulated4 Hazardous Other7


13. Total environmental investment (thousands of dollars)

Percent of project cost Source reduction

Investment IRR (%)

Recycling or reuse

Investment IRR (%)

Waste treatment

Investment IRR (%)

For company compliance For regulatory compliance


1. For stand-alone projects, before is the amount of waste generated and after is the amount emitted or discharged to the environment. For other projects, before and after refer to the amounts emitted or discharged to the environment before and after the project.

2. Indicate A, B, C, or D; A = Source reduction; B = Recycling or Reuse; C = Treatment, D = Disposal.

3. Indicate A, B, C, or D; A = Costs, B = Technology not available; C = Time schedule precluded; D = Other (explain).

4. Use SARA 313 for U.S. and countries that have no equivalent regulation; use equivalent for countries that have a SARA 313 equivalent.

5. Includes NO, SO, CO, NH3, nonSARA or equivalent VOCs, and particulates.

6. Indicates CO2, N2O, CCl4, methyl chloroform, and nonSARA CFCs.

7. Can include (for example) TOD, BOD, TSS, and pH.

Finally, the operating conditions (e.g., temperature and pressure) and procedures, equipment selection and design, and process control schemes must be evaluated. Some minor alterations to operating conditions, equipment design, and process control may afford significant opportunities for waste minimization at the source.


The designer should review the entire process to minimize or eliminate unplanned releases, spills, and fugitive emis sions. (For example, recycle loops are used to sample batches. The use of reusable tote tanks should be promoted, and small refrigerated condensers should be installed on selected units to cut the emissions of costly volatile materials). This review should include all equipment pieces, seals, operating procedures, and so on.

The following hierarchy lists ways to eliminate or minimize fugitive emissions:

Prevent or minimize leaks at the source by eliminating equipment pieces or connections where possible and upgrading or replacing standard equipment with equipment that leaks less or does not leak at all.

Capture and recycle or reuse to prevent or minimize the need for abatement. Abate emissions to have no impact on the environment. Use the checklist shown in Table 3.9.8 in this analysis.


This step defines the waste treatment for nonuseful streams that cannot be reused or eliminated at the source. The goal here is to define the most cost-effective treatment method to render emissions and discharges nonharmful to the environment.

Waste treatment seldom has attractive economics. Waste treatment is used only as the last resort after all options to eliminate waste at the source or reuse waste are exhausted. The checklist shown in Table 3.9.9 can be used to analyze waste treatment.


Performing engineering evaluations for Steps 6, 7, and 8 is the next step and is especially important when more than one option is available to achieve the same result. Choosing between options based on economic considerations re quires information such as capital investment, operating costs, and the cost of capital. The net present value calculations and internal rate of return can economically justify one alternative over another.


Checklist E shown in Table 3.9.10 is a suggested form for this report. If projects follow a formal approval procedure, this form shows that appropriate environmental reviews were conducted.

Finally, auditing the construction and start up ensures that the environmental recommendations are implemented.

Trash To Cash

Trash To Cash

This book will surely change your life due to the fact that after reading this book and following through with the steps that are laid out for you in a clear and concise form you will be earning as much as several thousand extra dollars a month,  as you can see by the cover of the book we will be discussing how you can make cash for what is considered trash by many people, these are items that have value to many people that can be sold and help people who need these items most.

Get My Free Ebook

Post a comment