ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY BEST PRACTICE PROGRAMME … · 5 Converting to solvent-free process reduces costs at tablet 17 coating plant 6 Making the most of solvent recovery in the

ENVIRONMENTAL

TECHNOLOGY

BEST PRACTICE

PROGRAMME

GG124GUIDE

SOLVENT MANAGEMENTIN PRACTICE: INDUSTRY EXAMPLES

GOOD PRACTICE: Proven technology and techniques for profitable environmental improvement

Be Solvent Wise

© Crown copyright. First printed September 1998.

This material may be freely reproduced in its original form except for sale or advertising purposes.

Printed on paper containing 75% post-consumer waste.

SOLVENT MANAGEMENTIN PRACTICE: INDUSTRY EXAMPLES

This Good Practice Guide was produced by the

Environmental Technology Best Practice Programme

Prepared with assistance from:

ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd

Industrial solvents are a major source of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions in the UK andare therefore subject to strict regulatory controls. The benefits of reducing solvent consumptioninclude:

■ reduced solvent purchase and disposal costs;

■ reduced solvent emissions to atmosphere;

■ less occupational exposure to solvents;

■ need to buy expensive abatement equipment reduced or eliminated.

This Good Practice Guide comprises 19 Industry Examples. Each one demonstrates the cost savingsand other benefits to companies of implementing a programme to manage and reduce their use oforganic solvents and solvent-containing materials, eg coatings and inks.

The Industry Examples cover a variety of industrial sectors so that as many companies as possiblecan draw parallels with their own processes and size of operation. They show that successful solventmanagement is not limited by the company size, the complexity of its processes or the number ofsolvents used.

The solvent reduction measures described are grouped under four headings, ie:

■ process use;

■ cleaning and degreasing;

■ recovery and re-use;

■ housekeeping and training.

Many of the measures described are no-cost or low-cost, producing a short or immediate payback.These reduction measures are described in more detail in other publications available free of chargethrough the Environmental Helpline on 0800 585794.

S U M M A R Y

Section Page

1 Introduction 1

1.1 The benefits of reducing solvent consumption 1

1.2 The purpose of this Guide 1

1.3 Solvent reduction measures 1

2 Industry Examples 5

1 Improved application and recovery equipment reduces operating 7costs at truck cab manufacturer

2 Screen printer’s long-term improvement programme produces 9significant cost savings

3 Analysis of solvent use leads to targeted improvements at 12adhesive manufacturer

4 Powder coatings reduce VOC emissions and increase product range 14

5 Converting to solvent-free process reduces costs at tablet 17coating plant

6 Making the most of solvent recovery in the speciality chemicals sector 19

7 Continuous Improvement Team drives down degreasing costs 21

8 Supply chain pressures lead to solvent reductions at engineering 24company

9 State-of-the-art spraying equipment reduces costs at furniture 27manufacturer

10 Solvent review helps foil coater identify solvent reduction measures 29

11 Independent bodyshop achieves significant cost savings 32through improved solvent management

12 Car trim manufacturer cuts solvent use by switching to 35water-based adhesives

13 Enclosed degreaser significantly reduces trichloroethylene 37consumption at small engineering company

14 Supplier helps textile printer halve solvent use 39

15 Shoe manufacturer reduces solvent use by 96% in four years 41

16 Change to IBCs reduces adhesive waste 44

17 Improved ink management produces significant cost savings for 46packaging printer

18 New HVLP spray guns cut solvent use 49

19 Electronics company simplifies processes and reduces solvent 52consumption

3 Conclusion 54

C O N T E N T S

Organic solvents are used widely by UK industry for a range of processes. However, many industrialsolvents and solvent-based coatings are expensive to buy and emit volatile organic compounds(VOCs), which have the potential to harm the environment. Environmental legislation thereforeplaces strict controls on VOC emissions from industry. Under Part I of the Environmental ProtectionAct 1990, the more polluting processes are regulated under Integrated Pollution Control (IPC) andthe less harmful processes under Local Air Pollution Control (LAPC).

1.1 THE BENEFITS OF REDUCING SOLVENT CONSUMPTION

Reducing solvent consumption has many potential benefits for UK businesses, including:

■ increased profits through reduced raw material and waste disposal costs;

■ removing the need for expensive abatement equipment;

■ reducing solvent use below the authorisation threshold for IPC/LAPC;

■ a better working environment for employees;

■ improved relationships with customers and local residents;

■ reduced insurance premiums due to lower solvent stocks.

1.2 THE PURPOSE OF THIS GUIDE

This Good Practice Guide describes how 19 UK companies have achieved cost savings and otherbenefits by taking action to reduce their use of solvents and solvent-based materials, eg coatingsand inks, through improved solvent management. Many of the measures implemented have beenno-cost or low-cost, with an immediate or short payback period.

The Industry Examples in this Guide cover a wide range of applications in a variety of industries andsectors. All of the companies are small or medium-sized, either in absolute terms or for their sector.Many have fewer than 100 employees and some fewer than 20 - or supply a specialised market, eg chemicals and electronics. Table 1 gives details of the category of reduction measure adoptedand the estimated net annual saving for each company. Within the Guide, each Industry Exampleis coded according to the category of reduction measure(s) adopted.

Don’t just look at the examples from your industry or sector. Many of the ideas are transferable andmay trigger off ideas to help your company ‘Be Solvent Wise’.

1.3 SOLVENT REDUCTION MEASURES

Within this Guide, solvent reduction measures are classified under four headings:

■ process use;




1

I N T R O D U C T I O N1

section

1

These reduction measures are described in more detail in other publications from the EnvironmentalTechnology Best Practice Programme (see Table 2). Although these publications have been groupedunder four main headings, some of them contain information relevant to more than one reductionmeasure. For example, Good Practice Guide (GG36) Reducing Costs in Vehicle Refinishing is mainlyconcerned with measures to reduce paint and solvent consumption (ie process use), but includesinformation on good housekeeping measures and solvent recovery.

All the publications listed in Table 2 are available free of charge through the EnvironmentalHelpline on 0800 585794.

The Environmental Helpline can also:

■ provide further advice about the techniques described in this Guide;

■ tell you about relevant environmental and other regulations that could affect your operations;

■ arrange for a specialist to visit your company if you employ fewer than 250 people.

2

section

1

3 section

1

Industry Company Industry/sector Number Reduction measure Net annual Example of staff savings (£)

Process Cleaning Recovery Housekeeping use and degreasing and re-use and training

1 ABT Products Ltd Metal finishing/engineering 80 ✓ ✓ 16 800

2 Bovince Limited Screen printing 60 ✓ ✓ ✓ 27 000

3 Caswell and Company Ltd Adhesives 33 ✓ ✓ 6 000

4 Derby Stove Enamelling Metal finishing/engineering 9 ✓ 19 000

5 Eli Lilly and Company Limited Pharmaceuticals 500 ✓ 100 000

6 Fine Organics Speciality chemicals 370 ✓ 72 800

7 Flight Refuelling Ltd Metal finishing/engineering 850 ✓ 35 600

8 Jenks and Cattell Engineering Limited Metal finishing/engineering 200 ✓ ✓ 8 000

9 Johnson & Johnson Furniture Furniture 140 ✓ ✓ 3 100

10 Peerless Foils Ltd Foil coating 66 ✓ ✓ 10 000

11 S&A Auto Services Vehicle refinishing 9 ✓ ✓ ✓ 2 150

12 SAI Lignotock Adhesives 210 ✓ 84 000

13 Servex Ltd Metal finishing/engineering 27 ✓ 2 380

14 Standfast Screen printing 280 ✓ 12 000

15 The Florida Group Ltd Footwear 330 ✓ 8 000

16 Ultramark Adhesive Products Adhesive products 60 ✓ 10 000

17 West of Scotland Packaging Packaging/printing 45 ✓ ✓ 38 000

18 Yeovil Motor Company (Volvo) Vehicle refinishing 10 ✓ ✓ 30 100

19 ZETEX plc Electronics 500 ✓ 2 300

Table 1 Summary of Industry Examples

Reduction measure Publications

Process use:

General Cost-effective Solvent Management Good Practice Guide (GG13)

Cost-effective Reduction of Fugitive Solvent Emissions Good PracticeGuide (GG71)

Reduce Costs by Tracking Solvents Good Practice Guide (GG114)

Stepping Ahead with Solvent Management Good Practice Case Study(GC31)

Profiting from Computer-based Solvent Management Good Practice CaseStudy (GC108)

Specific industry or process Reducing Costs in Vehicle Refinishing Good Practice Guide (GG36)

Cost-effective Paint and Powder Coating: Coating Materials GoodPractice Guide (GG52)

Cost-effective Paint and Powder Coating: Application Technology GoodPractice Guide (GG53)

Practical Measures to Save Money in Screen Printing Good PracticeGuide (GG60)

Paint and Powder Coating Use in the Metal Finishing IndustryEnvironmental Performance Guide (EG72)

Paint and Solvent Use in Vehicle Refinishing Environmental PerformanceGuide (EG73)

Solvent Use for Vapour Cleaning in the Metal Finishing IndustryEnvironmental Performance Guide (EG74)

Encore, Environmental Coating Recommendations Software (IT90)

Emission-free Mixing Creates a Stir Good Practice Case Study (GC34)

Vehicle Refinisher Saves Money by Reducing Paint and Solvent Use GoodPractice Case Study (GC77)

Simple Measures Reduce Isopropyl Use Good Practice Case Study (GC85)

UV Inks Save Screen Printer Time and Money Good Practice Case Study(GC88)

Efficient, Emission-free Mixing Future Practice Profile (FP9)

Reducing Costs and Wastes in Industrial Coating Operations FuturePractice Profile (FP76)

Cleaning and degreasing Vapour Degreasing Good Practice Guide (GG15)

Cost-effective Paint and Powder Coating: Surface Preparation GoodPractice Guide (GG51)

Recovery and re-use Solvent Capture for Recovery and Re-use from Solvent-laden Gas StreamsGood Practice Guide (GG12)

Solvent Capture and Recovery in Practice: Industry Examples GoodPractice Guide (GG100)

Housekeeping and training Good Housekeeping Measures for Solvents Good Practice Guide (GG28)

Cost-effective Paint and Powder Coating: Materials Management GoodPractice Guide (GG50)

Table 2 Relevant Environmental Technology Best Practice Programme publications

4

section

1

Industry Example 1Improved appl icat ion and recovery equipment reducesoperat ing costs at truck cab manufacturer (ABT Products Ltd)

Industry Example 2Screen pr inter ’s long-term improvement programmeproduces s ignif icant cost savings (Bovince L imited)

Industry Example 3Analys is of solvent use leads to targeted improvements atadhesive manufacturer (Caswel l and Company Ltd)

Industry Example 4Powder coat ings reduce VOC emiss ions and increase productrange (Derby Stove Enamel l ing)

Industry Example 5Convert ing to solvent-free process reduces costs at tabletcoating plant (E l i L i l ly and Company L imited)

Industry Example 6Making the most of solvent recovery in the special i tychemicals sector (F ine Organics)

Industry Example 7Continuous improvement team drives down degreasing costs(F l ight Refuel l ing Ltd)

Industry Example 8Supply chain pressures lead to solvent reductions atengineering company (Jenks and Cattel l Engineering Limited)

Industry Example 9State-of-the-art spraying equipment reduces costs atfurniture manufacturer ( Johnson & Johnson Furniture)

Industry Example 10Solvent review helps foi l coater identify solvent reduct ionmeasures (Peer less Foi l s Ltd)

Industry Example 11Independent bodyshop achieves s ignif icant cost savingsthrough improved solvent management (S&A Auto Services)

5

section

2

I N D U S T R Y E X A M P L E S2

Industry Example 12Car tr im manufacturer cuts solvent use by switching towater-based adhesives (SAI L ignotock)

Industry Example 13Enclosed degreaser s ignif icantly reduces tr ichloroethyleneconsumption at smal l engineering company (Servex Ltd)

Industry Example 14Suppl ier helps text i le pr inter halve solvent use (Standfast)

Industry Example 15Shoe manufacturer reduces solvent use by 96% in four years(The F lor ida Group Ltd)

Industry Example 16Change to IBCs reduces adhesive waste (Ultramark AdhesiveProducts)

Industry Example 17Improved ink management produces s ignif icant cost savingsfor packaging pr inter (West of Scot land Packaging)

Industry Example 18New HVLP spray guns cut solvent use (Yeovi l Motor Company(Volvo))

Industry Example 19Electronics company s impl if ies processes and reduces solventconsumption (ZETEX plc)

6

section

2

HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

I n d u s t r yE x a m p l e1

In 1994, ABT Products Ltd started asolvent reduction programme toreduce both its operating costs andits environmental impact. Thebusiness has expanded rapidly inrecent years with a correspondingincrease in its use of solvent-basedpaints. The solvent reductionprogramme has enabled theCompany to avoid an increase in theuse of related solvents. Solvent useper unit of production has, in fact,fallen.

■ Net cost savings of £16 800/year

■ Solvent waste reduced by 75%

■ Payback period on the combined measures of about nine months

■ Authorised under Local Air Pollution Control

Background

ABT Products Ltd manufactures cabs for the fork-lift truck and materials handling industries. TheCompany has around 80 employees and an annual turnover of £5 million.

In 1996, the Company used approximately 12.5 tonnes of solvents, including 21 000 litres ofsolvent-based paints, 2 500 litres of thinners and 500 litres of cleaning solvents. ABT Products isauthorised by its local authority under Local Air Pollution Control (LAPC).

Solvent Reduction Programme

In 1994, the management team at ABT realised that better solvent management would significantlyreduce operating costs and improve the Company’s environmental performance. A solventreduction programme was therefore implemented. With the assistance of a finishing consultant,the Company was soon able to identify and implement various solvent reduction measures. Theseincluded new equipment and improved working practices.

ABT began by switching from traditional spray guns to electrostatic spray guns fed by doublediaphragm pumps in both its spraying booths. The new guns and associated equipment cost£4 600/booth. Overspray has been reduced significantly and paint consumption has consequentlyfallen by approximately 33%. The new guns also provide improved viscosity control and havetherefore reduced the need for expensive paint thinners.

7

I M P R O V E D A P P L I C AT I O N A N DR E C O V E R Y E Q U I P M E N T R E D U C E SO P E R AT I N G C O S T S AT T R U C K C A BM A N U FA C T U R E R

HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

Since a variety of paints are used, each gun has to be cleaned thoroughly before each colourchange. As a result, significant quantities of cleaning solvent are required. As part of its solventreduction programme, ABT decided, in early 1996, to buy a small solvent recovery unit costing£2 000. This unit enabled the Company to process 25 - 50 litres/day of cleaning solvent for re-use.

ABT soon realised that even higher cost savings were possible with a larger unit and, hence, tradedin the smaller unit in part-exchange for a larger model costing £3 300. This larger unit allows theCompany to process 75 - 100 litres/day of dirty solvent, generating 50 - 70 litres/day of usablecleaning solvent.

Cost Savings and Other Benefits

Switching to more efficient electrostatic spray guns has allowed ABT to achieve savings ofapproximately £5 000/year through reduced consumption of paint and thinners. The paybackperiod on this equipment is therefore 22 months.

Solvent recovery means that cleaning solvent purchases have fallen by an impressive 85% since1994, to only 500 litres/year. The associated cost savings amount to around £5 300/year, giving apayback period of less than eight months in terms of raw material costs alone. Solvent recovery hasalso significantly reduced waste disposal costs. Solvent waste has fallen from one 200-litre drum aweek to approximately one drum every four weeks. This reduction saves ABT a further £6 500/year.The combined saving in solvent purchase and disposal costs of £11 800/year gives a payback periodof less than four months.

Overall, the solvent reduction programme has so far saved ABT approximately £16 800/year, givinga combined payback period of about nine months. These savings have been achieved despiteincreased output. The various solvent reduction measures have reduced solvent use per unit ofproduction.

“Savings have been particularly impressive - nearly £17 000/year since 1994 - with only a few small

investments. The solvent recovery unit has been a particularlysound purchase as it paid for itself in a matter of months.”

Mr R Gates, Finance Director, ABT Products Ltd8

I n d u s t r yE x a m p l e

1

New electrostatic spray gun in use

Bovince Limited’s environmentalpolicy includes a strong commitmentto reduce solvent consumption in itsscreen printing process. Solventreduction measures are set out in afive-year plan. So far, achievementshave mainly involved reductions inthe amount of screen cleaningmaterials purchased. Solventconsumption has fallen byapproximately 10 135 litres/year fromthis measure alone. ‘Press-ready’ inksystems were recently introduced forsome products, but the benefits havenot yet been quantified. Bovince is investigating further ways of improving itsink management and working to ensure solvent good housekeeping.

■ Net cost savings of over £27 000/year

■ Improved workplace environment

■ Payback period of 5.5 years


Background

Bovince Limited specialises in printing large format advertising posters and advertising panels forbuses and bus shelters. It also carries out some point-of-sale display work. The Company has 60employees and an annual turnover of approximately £2.5 million.

In 1995, Bovince became one of the first screen printing companies in the UK to achieve BS 7750accreditation. The Company subsequently achieved accreditation to ISO 14001 and certification tothe EC’s Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS).

Since much of its work is used outdoors, changing to water-based inks has not proved feasible. TheCompany therefore uses approximately 32 000 litres/year of solvent-based inks. It also usesapproximately 28 000 litres/year of virgin solvents for thinning inks and 13 000 litres/year of screencleaning chemicals. The Company is authorised under Local Air Pollution Control.

9

S C R E E N P R I N T E R ’ S L O N G - T E R MI M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M M EP R O D U C E S S I G N I F I C A N T C O S TS AV I N G S


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE


Solvent reduction work at Bovince began in 1991 when the Company took part in trials with a majorink manufacturer to investigate the feasibility of using water-based inks for outdoor advertising material.Although this initial project was not completely successful, solvent reduction efforts have continued.

Understanding ink and solvent use - and associated VOC emissions - has been an integral part ofthe overall corporate solvent reduction strategy. Careful consideration of possible improvementoptions has allowed Bovince to target its reduction measures. Progress in implementing thesemeasures, which are set out in a five-year solvent control programme, is reviewed formally atmanagement meetings.

One of the first major projects undertaken as part of the solvent control programme was thepurchase of an automatic screen-wash unit, costing £148 000. This unit, which uses cleaningsolvents more efficiently than the previous manual washing process, has been gradually brought upto full capacity since early 1995. In addition, the machine incorporates a distillation unit that allowsscreen-wash chemicals to be re-used in the manual screen-wash area. As a result, one solvent-basedproduct has been eliminated from the manual screen-wash process.

The recent introduction of ‘press-ready’ ink systems for products - in which inks do not require on-site mixing - is expected to reduce Bovince’s solvent consumption still further. The cost savings andother benefits are expected to be significant - not least in terms of improved workplace air quality.

10

Automatic screen-wash unit


2

HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE


Bovince still buys and mixes considerable amounts of ink. Regular meetings are now held betweenthe works manager, the print manager and the ink mixer to discuss more effective ways of usinginks in store and residues left after a job. The Company is currently considering investing in acomputerised ink formulator to improve product quality and reduce the quantity of ink residues leftafter each job.

Bovince plans to extend its solvent management work and further reduce solvent use and VOCemissions through improved good housekeeping. Large stickers have already been placed on inkand solvent containers to remind staff of good housekeeping requirements. The Company is alsodeveloping a simple lid resealing device to reduce solvent evaporation. Bovince provides employeeswith general environmental training - including solvent management - as part of its environmentalmanagement system. This training is conducted both formally and informally through the Companynewsletter and dialogue between operators and managers.


The automatic screen-wash unit, with incorporated distillation unit, has allowed Bovince to achievesignificant cost savings. On the basis of solvent consumption during the first six months of 1997,Bovince estimated that use of cleaning solvents in 1997 was 7 000 litres less than in 1996. This isdespite a 5% increase in the number of frames being washed. The associated net cost saving isabout £21 000/year. The quantity of solvent-based cleaners purchased by Bovince has fallen by3 225 litres/year, giving net cost savings of £6 150/year. In terms of reduced raw material costsalone, the payback period is 5.5 years.

There have, however, been other benefits, including productivity and health and safety benefits.

As the screen-wash unit is fully enclosed, VOC emissions have fallen significantly thus improvingworking conditions for employees. The quantity of waste solvent requiring disposal is also veryclosely monitored and effluent discharges have been reduced.

“Our long-standing commitment to the environment has included aconcerted effort to reduce solvent use in our process. We have

been pleased with our achievements to date, both in environmentalperformance and cost savings terms. We intend to give solvent

minimisation our continued dedication.” Mr D Hall, Environmental and Quality Manager, Bovince Limited

11

HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

A N A LY S I S O F S O LV E N T U S E L E A D ST O TA R G E T E D I M P R O V E M E N T S ATA D H E S I V E M A N U FA C T U R E R

Caswell and Company Ltd began asolvent management programme in1992 with the aims of achieving costsavings, improving health and safetyin the factory, and avoiding havingto invest in expensive abatementequipment. The Company’s solventmanagement strategy involvesevaluating the reasons for solventlosses and then eliminating theselosses through plant improvementand employee training. Through itsproactive solvent managementapproach, Caswell and Company Ltdhas already reduced solvent losses by500 litres/week.




Background

Caswell and Company Ltd manufactures a wide range of adhesives for a variety of industrialapplications. The Company has 33 employees and an annual turnover of approximately £3 million.

The Company’s annual solvent consumption is approximately 1 million litres. It uses a range ofsolvents including aromatic hydrocarbons, aliphatic hydrocarbons, ketones, esters, alcohols andchlorinated hydrocarbons. The Company’s processes are authorised under Local Air PollutionControl (LAPC).


Caswell and Company Ltd initiated a solvent management programme to make more efficient useof its solvents and to reduce VOC emissions, particularly from the adhesive mixing process.Reducing solvent consumption would also enable the Company to achieve compliance with LAPCrequirements without having to buy expensive abatement equipment.

As the initial step in their solvent management programme, Caswell and Company Ltd conducteda site survey and produced an inventory of solvent use. VOC emissions monitoring was also carriedout. Using a simple mass balance approach,* the Company was able to quantify solvent lossesduring mixing and hence identify the processes most in need of improvement.

12* See Good Practice Guide (GG114) Reduce Costs by Tracking Solvents, available free of charge through the Environmental

Helpline on 0800 585794.


3

HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE


Several mixing vessel lids were modified and seals improved at a cost of approximately £1 000.Solvent filler pipes were also added to minimise vapour losses during filling. Caswell and CompanyLtd has also installed condensers on mixing vessel vent pipes for solvent recovery. As a result ofthese measures, the Company has achieved significant reductions in solvent consumption and plantoperating costs.

To complement the plant improvements, Caswell and Company Ltd recently introduced an employeetraining programme. During training, the production team is made aware of how and why solventlosses occur and the implications of these losses. Employees have also received training in goodhousekeeping practices and been encouraged to suggest ways of reducing solvent losses further.Useful suggestions are passed on to other employees, thus improving working practices throughoutthe Company.


Plant modifications have reduced solvent losses by approximately 250 litres/week and produced netcost savings of £3 000/year. These measures have the additional benefits of improving air quality inthe workplace and helping the Company improve its health and safety record. The payback periodon this measure was four months.

Fitting condensers on mixing vessel pipes has produced a further saving of 250 litres/week ofsolvent. This represents an additional cost saving of £3 000/year.

“Using auditing and monitoring to establish exactly where ouremissions problems lay has allowed us to target our actions to

reduce emissions and achieve cost savings quickly.”Mr P Godfrey, Technical Director, Caswell and Company Ltd

13

A mixing vessel

P O W D E R C O AT I N G S R E D U C E V O CE M I S S I O N S A N D I N C R E A S EP R O D U C T R A N G E

Through the increased use of powdercoatings and water-based paints,Derby Stove Enamelling (DSE) hassignificantly reduced bothproduction costs and VOC emissions.The Company has reduced annualsolvent use by 20% to around threetonnes, well below the five-tonneregistration threshold for Local AirPollution Control (LAPC). DSEexpects to reduce VOC emissions by afurther one tonne/year by moving toa low-VOC degreasing agent.


■ Improved factory air quality

■ Payback periods for the various measures range from immediate to sixmonths

■ Authorisation under Local Air Pollution Control avoided

Background

The main business of Derby Stove Enamelling (DSE) is the coating of steel and aluminium products.The Company employs nine people, who work on a 24-hour continuous shift basis. Since 1985,DSE has used both powder coatings and conventional solvent-based paints.

While below the LAPC solvent-use threshold in 1995, production volumes were increasing and theCompany was concerned that it would soon require authorisation for its processes.


Faced with the possibility of having to install expensive abatement equipment, the Companydecided to move completely to compliant coatings, ie coatings that contain no more than a statedmaximum content of organic solvent.* Following discussions with its coating suppliers andcustomers, DSE opted to extend its use of powder coatings. Some of DSE’s clients specify powderpaints for their durability and for specific properties (eg fire retardency) and finishes (eg ripplefinishes) that are difficult to achieve with other types of coating.

Some powder coatings are more expensive than solvent-based paints. However, powder coatingshave a high solids content and can be applied efficiently - and with less coating waste - usingelectrostatic spray guns. The fast drying times of the new powder coatings, eg 10 - 12 minute‘bakes’ compared with 30 minutes for solvent-based paints, has enabled more products to beprocessed during each shift for the same energy consumption.

14

HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

* As specified in Secretary of State’s Process Guidance Note PG6/23 (97) Coating of Metal and Plastic.


4

HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE


Partly in response to customer pressure, DSE has replaced some solvent-based paints with two-packwater-based paints, eg for spraying railway industry products. The low VOC content of these paintshas helped to reduce solvent use further.

DSE has also experimented with water-based degreasing agents for cleaning metal surfaces. Whilethese proved inadequate, the Company still hopes to move to a low-VOC degreasing agent, ie 10 g VOC/litre compared with 850 g VOC/litre. This is expected to reduce VOC emissions by afurther one tonne/year at no extra cost.


Since DSE started making more extensive use of powder coatings, unit costs have fallen from£2.50/m2 coated for solvent-based paints to £1.50/m2 for powder coatings. Although overallproduction volumes have increased by 39%, savings of over £20 000/year have been achieved.Owing to stricter controls on special waste disposal, the coating supplier no longer takes back thewaste paint. DSE’s waste paint disposal costs have therefore increased by £1 000/year. The net costsavings from switching to powder coatings are therefore in excess of £19 000/year.

The move to two-pack water-based paints for certain applications has slightly increased unit costsfrom £2.50 to £2.90/m2, which has been offset by reduced energy costs. The old solvent-basedpaints needed to bake for 30 minutes at 120°C, while the new water-based paints need to bake for40 minutes at only 60°C.

15

Powder coatings being applied

VOC emissions have decreased significantly since April - September 1996, when they peaked dueto exceptionally high production volumes (see Fig 1). DSE has been able to demonstrate to its localauthority that its solvent use has fallen significantly. At less than three tonnes/year, solvent use isnow well below the five-tonne registration threshold for LAPC and DSE is therefore avoiding the£650/year registration fees. However, six-monthly records are still submitted to the local authorityas evidence of compliance.

Use of compliant coatings with a much lower solvent content has also improved working conditionsfor employees.

“The increased use of powder coatings has reduced our solventconsumption to well below the LAPC threshold. It has also

created a better working atmosphere for our staff and increasedour product range, which in turn has widened our client base.”

Mr B Smith, Partner, Derby Stove Enamelling

16

HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

Fig 1 Six-monthly solvent use at DSE from April 1994 to September 1997


4

Acetone is used by Eli Lilly andCompany Limited, a pharmaceuticalsmanufacturer, as the solvent for oneof its tablet coatings. As part of itsprogramme of continuousenvironmental improvement, theCompany wants to reduce its VOCemissions. End-of-pipe abatementequipment would have been veryexpensive and so Eli Lilly decided tomodify the production process toallow use of an aqueous-basedcoating. Since the Company hasalready adopted this approach for allits other coated products, the sitewill be virtually ‘VOC free’.

■ Net cost savings of around £100 000/year

■ Use of acetone to be eliminated

■ Regulated under Integrated Pollution Control

Background

Eli Lilly and Company Limited manufactures pharmaceutical tablets at its site in Basingstoke. TheCompany employs nearly 500 people and supplies its products to over 80 countries around theworld. The Basingstoke plant is regulated by the Environment Agency under Integrated PollutionControl (IPC).

One of the older production processes at the site still uses acetone as the solvent for one of its tabletcoatings. Corporate pressure to continually improve environmental performance, plus regulatorypressure to reduce VOC emissions, meant that action had to be taken.


The business planning process at the Basingstoke site includes a review of environmentalperformance. This review concludes with recommendations for environmental improvements forthe coming business year.

In 1995, two possible options for reducing VOC emissions were considered. The first option was toinstall VOC abatement equipment such as solvent recovery or thermal oxidation. The high capitalcost of such equipment, eg £300 000 - £500 000, and the high energy costs of operating theequipment ruled out this option. The alternative was to form a small technical services project teamto develop a way of converting the process from solvent-based to aqueous-based. This was thefavoured option because it tackled the root cause of the problem and repeated the switch toaqueous coatings adopted for other products.

17

C O N V E R T I N G T O S O LV E N T- F R E EP R O C E S S R E D U C E S C O S T S ATTA B L E T C O AT I N G P L A N T


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

By converting to a water-based process, the technical services project team would almost eliminateorganic solvents from the site. Only small quantities would still be needed in the site’s laboratories.This approach had not been attempted earlier because:

■ the development time was expected to be lengthy;

■ re-registration of a medicinal product can be time-consuming;

■ the product was an older one with a potentially limited lifetime.

In the event, it took about three years to develop and refine the water-based coating process.


Despite the long development time, the benefits are impressive. Production costs for this particulartablet will be reduced by 50%, giving cost savings of around £100 000/year.

Product throughput is also improved with the new water-based coating. Manufacture of the tabletstakes up less machine time, creating more production capacity. This in turn means that fewermachines are needed and expenditure on plant maintenance and renewal is reduced.

The change to a water-based coating process means that the site will no longer discharge around20 tonnes/year of acetone to atmosphere, and the high capital and operating costs of abatementequipment will be avoided. Elimination of the need to store and use a flammable substance willalso produce health and safety benefits, including improved air quality in the workplace.

“The opportunity to clean up the environment coupled with asignificant reduction in operating costs has made this a really

enjoyable project. It’s not often we get into a win-win situation,but we did this time.”

Mr W G Hooper, Team Leader of Environmental, Health and Safety, Eli Lilly and Company Limited

18

HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

Aqueous-based coating process


5

In 1995, Fine Organics initiated acomprehensive VOC reductionprogramme. Monitoring solventemissions from individual processesallowed the project team to targetthe highest emitting processes. Theteam, lead by a senior manager, thensought opportunities to reduce VOCemissions from priority processes.One process, which emitsdichloromethane, has now beenfitted with new, improvedcondensers. Solvent consumptionhas been reduced by around 52 tonnes/year. Despite the fact thatthe process operates for only 6 - 8 months/year, the payback periodfor the project is only 26 months.


■ Reduced VOC emissions

■ Payback period of just over two years

■ Regulated under Integrated Pollution Control

Background

Fine Organics manufactures a wide range of fine chemicals for the speciality polymer industry,agrochemical intermediates and the pharmaceutical industry. The Company has 370 employees.

Around 12 000 tonnes of chlorinated and non-chlorinated organic solvents are used each year atthe Company’s Teesside site. In line with Company policy, and in accordance with the authorisationsunder Integrated Pollution Control (IPC), Fine Organics had already installed equipment to eliminatesome VOC emissions, but in 1995, it decided to initiate a comprehensive release minimisationprogramme.


As VOC reduction formed an important element of the overall release minimisation programme, asenior manager was given the role of project Champion. Data on VOC emissions collected fromaround the plant as part of the IPC registration process were used to identify the processes with thehighest losses. A priority action plan was then prepared and each process investigated by the projectteam with the aim of identifying opportunities to reduce VOC emissions.

19

M A K I N G T H E M O S T O F S O LV E N TR E C O V E R Y I N T H E S P E C I A L I T YC H E M I C A L S S E C T O R


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

One process, which emitted dichloromethane (DCM), was an immediate target for action.Opportunities to improve solvent recovery were identified and it was decided to install newcondensation equipment, costing £155 000.

In the past, such solvent recovery systems had been difficult to justify as there are constraints on there-use of potentially contaminated solvents in the tightly regulated fine chemicals industry.However, this process used only one solvent, and already used solvent recovered from the existingcondensation systems. It was therefore relatively easy to prepare an acceptable financial case forthe necessary capital expenditure. From start to completion the project took six months.


Since the new condensers were installed, solvent consumption has fallen by an impressive two tonnes/week in the weeks when the process is in operation. Significant cost savings of£2 800/week have been achieved, as additional operating costs are negligible.

Annual consumption of dichloromethane at Fine Organics has been reduced by about 52 tonnes/year, giving total net savings of £72 800/year. If the process had operated continuously,the payback period for the project would have been nearly 13 months. However, because thedichloromethane mixture is processed for only half of the time, the payback period is just over two years.

“This exercise was carried out as part of a larger improvementprogramme. This particular example has shown that it is possible

to achieve environmental and cost benefits at the same time.”Dr G Richardson, Head - Quality, Safety and Environment, Fine Organics

20

HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

Installation of new condensation equipment


6

21


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

C O N T I N U O U S I M P R O V E M E N TT E A M D R I V E S D O W N D E G R E A S I N GC O S T S

Flight Refuelling Ltd has built uponprevious solvent reduction measuresby implementing a five-yearcontinuous environmentalimprovement initiative. One solvent-reducing measure identified by theContinuous Improvement Team is thereplacement of two inefficient open-top vapour degreasers with newdouble-door closed degreasers, andthe decommissioning of another olddegreaser. In addition to significantcost savings, the health and safetyrisks to operators of the degreasingsystem have decreased. A majoranticipated increase in productionhas also been taken into account.



■ Payback period of 20 months


Background

Flight Refuelling Ltd manufactures fuel systems and performs light engineering work for theaerospace industry. The Company employs approximately 850 people and has an annual turnoverof about £70 million.

Trichloroethylene accounts for 90% of the 60 000 litres of solvent used by Flight Refuelling annually.Acetone, toluene, methylethylketone (MEK) and isopropyl alcohol are also used. The Company isauthorised under LAPC and is thus required to minimise its VOC emissions.


When the current chief chemist joined the Company in April 1995, some solvent reduction measureshad already been implemented. These included the installation of a solvent distillation unit and theintroduction of high volume low pressure (HVLP) spray guns. Although these measures hadachieved significant benefits, the chief chemist realised that a formal solvent reduction programmewould produce further improvements.

To maintain the momentum of the solvent reduction programme, the chief chemist set up a smallContinuous Improvement Team. The members of the team represented a broad spectrum ofpersonnel, including an accountant and a quality assurance officer. The team’s role was to

22


7H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

Eimplement, measure and report on waste minimisation activities within the Company. In addition,the team shared ideas with the South Wessex Waste Minimisation Club and the EnvironmentalForum for Dorset Industries.

The financial director and manufacturing director were kept informed of the team’s progress,supporting the initiatives as necessary and reporting to the Company’s board. To gain backing fromthe board, the team was required to develop a ‘pecking order’. This involved tackling the ‘high-value return, low-effort’ projects first, and then considering projects requiring significant capitalexpenditure. In 1996, risk assessments were carried out on solvent-using processes in the metalfinishing and surface treatment department. These assessments were followed up by SWOT(strength, weakness, opportunity, threat) analyses.

One of the low-cost solvent reduction opportunities identified by the Continuous ImprovementTeam involved the vapour degreasing system. The team calculated that the anticipated increase inproduction would increase trichloroethylene consumption and hence increase degreasing costs by50% to £90 000/year. The Company therefore performed a mass balance analysis on all the vapourdegreasers and measured how long they were left idle. This review showed that:

■ three of the open-top vapour degreasers were inefficient and needed replacing;

■ one of these open-top degreasers was idle, on average, for 80% of the time;

■ all future degreasing requirements could be met with one fewer degreaser.

The Company therefore decided to decommission one of the degreasers and replace the tworemaining old open-top machines with two new double-door closed degreasers. Although eachnew machine cost £30 000, they use 75% less solvent than the previous degreasers. The remainingopen-top degreasers have been improved by installing piped, gravity-fed solvent top-up systems.This avoids manual refilling and hence spillage.

Coating a refuelling tank

22


7H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

Eimplement, measure and report on waste minimisation activities within the Company. In addition,the team shared ideas with the South Wessex Waste Minimisation Club and the EnvironmentalForum for Dorset Industries.

The financial director and manufacturing director were kept informed of the team’s progress,supporting the initiatives as necessary and reporting to the Company’s board. To gain backing fromthe board, the team was required to develop a ‘pecking order’. This involved tackling the ‘high-value return, low-effort’ projects first, and then considering projects requiring significant capitalexpenditure. In 1996, risk assessments were carried out on solvent-using processes in the metalfinishing and surface treatment department. These assessments were followed up by SWOT(strength, weakness, opportunity, threat) analyses.

One of the low-cost solvent reduction opportunities identified by the Continuous ImprovementTeam involved the vapour degreasing system. The team calculated that the anticipated increase inproduction would increase trichloroethylene consumption and hence increase degreasing costs by50% to £90 000/year. The Company therefore performed a mass balance analysis on all the vapourdegreasers and measured how long they were left idle. This review showed that:

■ three of the open-top vapour degreasers were inefficient and needed replacing;

■ one of these open-top degreasers was idle, on average, for 80% of the time;

■ all future degreasing requirements could be met with one fewer degreaser.

The Company therefore decided to decommission one of the degreasers and replace the tworemaining old open-top machines with two new double-door closed degreasers. Although eachnew machine cost £30 000, they use 75% less solvent than the previous degreasers. The remainingopen-top degreasers have been improved by installing piped, gravity-fed solvent top-up systems.This avoids manual refilling and hence spillage.

Coating a refuelling tank

23


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE


Based on solvent use and energy consumption, the estimated operating cost of each new degreaseris £2 000/year. This is significantly less than the estimated £18 000/year for operating each of theold open-top degreasers. Flight Refuelling also saved the cost of operating the decommissioneddegreaser (£3 600/year).

Annual savings from installing two new degreasers are estimated at £35 600/year. At currentproduction rates, the machines will pay for themselves in 20 months. Additional unquantifiablebenefits include the reduced health and safety risks associated with enclosed degreasers.

Total net savings from all the solvent reducing initiatives implemented as a result of the ContinuousImprovement Programme are over £60 000/year.

“To date, the total net savings from the Continuous ImprovementProgramme are in excess of £60000. The programme is still in its

infancy, but is expanding rapidly.”Dr B Allcock, Chief Chemist, Flight Refuelling Ltd

24


8H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

E

Jenks and Cattell Engineering Limitedhas been encouraged by its maincustomers to improve itsenvironmental performance. TheCompany is also keen to reduce itsoperating costs. Following an initialenvironmental review in 1993, theCompany switched from 1,1,1-trichloroethane totrichloroethylene and installed anew, more efficient degreaser. Thesechanges produced a 48% reduction insolvent consumption, together withsignificant cost savings. Thesesavings have encouraged theCompany to develop a formalenvironmental management system (EMS) and work towards accreditation to ISO 14001. The ultimate aim is to eliminate organic solvents from the sitecompletely.


■ Increased throughput

■ Payback period of less than 14 months

Background

Jenks and Cattell Engineering Limited manufactures pressings and welded assemblies for theautomotive industry. The Company employs 200 people and has an annual turnover of £13 million.

The Company currently uses 3.85 tonnes/year of trichloroethylene for degreasing. It does notrequire authorisation under Local Air Pollution Control (LAPC) as it does not operate any prescribedprocess (eg coating) under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.


In 1993, Jenks and Cattell realised that if it wished to maintain its standing with its main customers,it would need to provide evidence of improving environmental performance. The Companytherefore decided to review its operations with the aid of Groundwork Black Country.

An environmental review identified the need to eliminate the use of 1,1,1-trichloroethane* andreplace the Company’s old and inefficient degreasing tank. In 1995, Jenks and Cattell decided towork towards eliminating organic solvents from the site altogether.

S U P P LY C H A I N P R E S S U R E S L E A DT O S O LV E N T R E D U C T I O N S ATE N G I N E E R I N G C O M PA N Y

* Production of this ozone-depleting substance was banned from 1996 under the Montreal Protocol.

25


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

As an interim solution, a new, more efficient degreaser was installed that uses trichloroethylene.This machine, which cost £9 000, has a higher freeboard and more effective extraction andtemperature controls. It also has a roll cover that is closed when the machine is not in use. Thecombined effect of these features has been to almost halve solvent consumption.

Managers were impressed with this significant reduction in solvent use and were keen to makefurther environmental improvements. At the same time, several leading car manufacturers beganasking component suppliers to demonstrate environmental quality standards.

Jenks and Cattell used Groundwork Black Country to help them in this task and ultimately achieveaccreditation to a formal environmental management standard. As a first step, the Companyreviewed its operations to establish the main environmental impacts of these operations and thelevel of compliance with relevant legal requirements.

During this review, the Company found that its solvent management could be significantlyimproved. With the exception of purchase and accounts records, there were no records of solventuse and no one had overall responsibility for the control of solvent use. An action plan was drawnup to rectify this situation. It involved:

■ giving responsibility for solvent management to one individual;

■ setting up recordkeeping procedures to identify solvent losses to atmosphere;

■ identifying opportunities to reduce solvent use.

The works manager was appointed ‘solvent manager’; and operating procedures that reflect thenew approach to solvent use have been written. These procedures:

■ encourage good housekeeping;

■ allow for regular monitoring and reporting;

■ promote continuous environmental improvement.

The new degreaser being loaded

26


8H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

EAs part of the Company’s commitment to continuous environmental improvement, a strategicreview of degreasing operations was undertaken. The aim of this review, which took into accountcustomer requirements and changes to environmental legislation, was to phase out solventdegreasing altogether. The Company is currently seeking an appropriate non-solvent, automateddegreasing system. Meanwhile, additional improvements to degreasing operations have beenmade. These include the use of larger, lighter baskets that keep parts separate and reduce solventdrag-out.

All processes are now monitored carefully and records are kept of solvent inputs and outputs. Inthis way, Jenks and Cattell hopes to identify further areas for improvement. Improvement targetswill then be set within the framework of the Company’s EMS. The Company aims eventually to seekaccreditation to ISO 14001.


Installation of a more efficient degreaser enabledthe Company to cut solvent consumption from600 litres/month to 312 litres/month. Thisreduction presents an annual saving of over£8 000, giving a payback period of less than 14 months.

The larger capacity of the machine has alsoenabled greater throughput to be achieved.Despite an increase in throughput of morethan 100%, solvent use in 1997 was onlymarginally greater than in 1996.

“By setting up an EMS, and committing ourselves to achievingISO 14001, we have realised that there are large potential savings and efficiency gains to be made in all purchasing

and engineering decisions.”Mr C Evans, Manufacturing Director, Jenks and Cattell Engineering Limited

Fig 2 Reduction in solvent use

27


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

S TAT E - O F - T H E - A R T S P R AY I N GE Q U I P M E N T R E D U C E S C O S T S ATF U R N I T U R E M A N U FA C T U R E R

Since Johnson & Johnson Furniturebegan its solvent reductionprogramme in 1991, it has achieved a3 600 litres/year reduction in coatingand solvent consumption. Thisimpressive result have been obtainedthrough the purchase of newspraying equipment and by wasteminimisation. The Company’s long-term aim is to eliminate solventscompletely from the productionprocess through the adoption ofwater-based coatings.

■ Net cost savings of around £3 100/year

■ Improved workplace air quality

■ Payback period on combined measures of about two years


Background

Johnson & Johnson Furniture manufactures a wide range of wooden kitchen furniture products.The Company has 140 employees, of whom 90 are involved directly in production. Annual turnoveris approximately £7 million.

The Company uses about 40 tonnes/year of virgin solvents and solvent-containing paints andlacquers that are used as coatings on the wooden furniture. Johnson & Johnson is authorised underLocal Air Pollution Control (LAPC).


Johnson & Johnson’s solvent reduction programme was developed in response to three main drivers.These were:

■ economic pressures and the need to reduce operating costs;

■ regulatory pressure and the possibility of having to install expensive abatement equipment;

■ the demands of the Company’s environmental policy.

Having considered various options, the Company began to implement a variety of solvent reductionmeasures. These combined changes to production technologies with the introduction of goodhousekeeping practices.

The first solvent reduction measure involved replacing conventional paint spraying equipment withmore efficient high volume low pressure (HVLP) spray guns. This change, which cost approximately

28


9H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

E£2 000, has led to a significant reduction inoverspray. There was initially someresistance to the new guns from thesprayers - they were not comfortable withthe low pressures of the HVLP equipmentand found it difficult to achieve an evenfinish. However, appropriate training soonovercame this problem.

Johnson & Johnson also purchased hot-spray equipment at a cost of approximately£3 500. This equipment allows higherviscosity coatings to be sprayed and hasreduced the need to add solvents to thecoating to achieve even coverage.

Wherever possible, the factory recycleswaste. For example, waste solvent is usedto clean equipment in the centralised gunand cup cleaning station, which wasinstalled as part of the solvent reductionprogramme.

Johnson & Johnson is continuing to seek suitable water-based coatings or compliant coatings witha lower organic content. Eventually, it is hoped that this will lead to the elimination of solvent-basedproducts from the manufacturing process and to compliance without the need for abatement.


The reduced overspray and greater efficiency of the new HVLP spray guns have resulted in a 15%reduction, ie 2 200 litres/year in the consumption of paints and coatings. This reduction has savedJohnson & Johnson approximately £2 060/year, giving a payback period on the new equipment ofless than a year.

Solvent consumption has been reduced by a further 1 000 litres/year using the new hot-sprayequipment. This reduction represents a saving of approximately £750/year, giving a payback periodof 4.5 years. An indirect benefit has been the reduced exposure to solvents of employees preparingthe coatings for spraying. The combined payback period on the new spray guns and sprayingequipment is just under two years.

Recycling waste solvent to the centralised gun and cup cleaning station has reduced solventpurchases by 400 litres/year and achieved cost savings of approximately £300/year.

“The new spraying equipment has significantly reduced ourconsumption of coatings and thinners. We expect the realreductions to come when suitable water-based coatings are

available. We then hope to be able to eliminate solvents from the production process completely.”

Mr P Roberts, Factory Manager, Johnson & Johnson Furniture

Using a new HVLP spray gun

29

I n d u s t r yE x a m p l e1 0

HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

S O LV E N T R E V I E W H E L P S F O I LC O AT E R I D E N T I F Y S O LV E N TR E D U C T I O N M E A S U R E S

Peerless Foils Ltd has madesignificant efforts to reduce solventconsumption. Gaining accreditationto BS 7750 acted as a catalyst toimprove its environmentalperformance by reducing solventuse. A review of the use of solventsin the production process by theCompany’s Environmental SteeringGroup identified several areas forimprovement. These included goodhousekeeping practices, enclosure ofthe printing machines, and theinstallation of a distillation unit forsolvent recovery and re-use. Thesemeasures have resulted in areduction in toluene consumption of over 5%. One long-term objective is toreduce consumption by a further 20% by introducing water-based inks.

■ Net cost savings of nearly £10 000/year


■ Payback period on the measures adopted range from immediate to 3.6 years


Background

Peerless Foils manufactures hot stamping foils, which are used in the printing of boxes andhousehold goods. The Company employs 66 people and has an annual turnover of £8 million.

In the foil coating process, organic solvents are combined with resins and pigments to form acoating that is put onto a polyester film. After drying, the film becomes thermosensitive and readyfor use. Around 870 tonnes/year of solvents are used at the site. This amount includes 550 tonnesof toluene. Peerless Foils is authorised under Local Air Pollution Control (LAPC).


Peerless Foils began to investigate solvent reduction measures in late 1995 after achievingaccreditation to the UK environmental management standard, BS 7750.* A key requirement of anyformal environmental management standard is a commitment to a programme of continuousenvironmental improvement.

* Now superseded by ISO 14001.

30


1 0H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

EA solvent reduction action plan was drawn up by the Company’s Environmental Steering Group.This group, which was chaired by the general manager, included the environmental officer and thequality manager.

The team began by carrying out a review of the production process to identify the type and amountof material used at every stage. A further objective of this review was to determine whetheralternative practices and materials could be used without affecting product quality.

During the review, the team noticed poor working practices, particularly with regard to solventhousekeeping. To help improve employee awareness, the team demonstrated how significant thelosses can be from an unlidded container of solvent. To do this, they left an opened 90-litre (20-gallon) barrel of toluene on a floorscale and weighed it every hour. This exercise was thenrepeated on warm and humid days to show how atmospheric changes affect evaporation.Employees were therefore made more aware of potential losses to the workplace and theirassociated cost to the Company. The Company’s solvent reduction programme is now taken farmore seriously by all concerned and working practices are much improved.

In 1995, Peerless also decided to buy a distillation unit at a cost of £6 000. A proportion of washsolvents are now recovered and re-used in the manufacturing process.

The Environmental Steering Group is currently investigating the use of water-based inks. While thisproject is still at an early stage, Peerless is confident that it will ultimately reduce solventconsumption by 20 - 25%.

Changing the drum on the distillation unit

31


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE


As a result of good housekeeping and other no-cost changes implemented following the review,toluene consumption per unit of production has fallen by about 5%. This represents a saving ofapproximately 35 tonnes/year, worth £8 000/year for no capital outlay. Payback period on thesemeasures was therefore immediate.

In addition, the coating machines have been enclosed - at a cost of £5 000/machine - to avoiduncaptured emissions. Enclosure has also led to quality improvements and reduced waste.

The distillation unit has enabled solvent waste to be reduced by 10%, ie around 4 000 litres/year.This has reduced disposal costs by £820/year, plus a similar reduction in avoided solvent purchases.The payback period of this project is 3.6 years.

Peerless may still be required to install VOC abatement equipment to meet LAPC requirements.However, the cost savings achieved through solvent reduction measures will help to offset the highoperating costs of this equipment.

“The Company plans to drastically reduce its dependence onorganic solvents in the future. The initial improvements were

obtained easily and are available to any manufacturer as a firstquick fix. Further improvements will require management

commitment and employee involvement.”Mr B Hughes, General Manager, Peerless Foils Ltd

32


1 1H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

E

The solvent reduction programme atS&A Auto Services has allowed theCompany to keep its solventconsumption below the one-tonnethreshold for vehicle refinishingbusinesses under Local Air PollutionControl (LAPC). This is despite anincrease in the volume of work of atleast 30% since October 1996. Aseries of low-cost and simplemeasures have reduced solventconsumption by 125 litres/month,while, in addition, paintconsumption per unit of productionhas fallen by 30%.


■ Improved working conditions

■ Payback period on the measures employed range from immediate to one year


Background

S&A Auto Services is an independent accident repair business that uses organic solvents as thinnersfor paints and for degreasing. It employs nine people and has an annual turnover of £800 000.

In October 1996, the Company relocated to new premises and decided that this provided a perfectopportunity to implement better working practices. One of the main objectives of the improvementprogramme was to keep solvent use below the one-tonne LAPC threshold, as the authorisationprocess takes both management time and money (£1 000 application fee, plus £650 annual fee).The bodyshop currently uses 0.89 tonnes/year of solvent.


Working closely with its paint and degreasing chemical distributor, Hex Holdings, the Companydecided to target each solvent-containing material systematically. From regular reviews, solvent useper unit of production was already known. Material data sheets provided by the distributor gavedetails of the weight of solvent in each product and allowed identification of those products withthe highest VOC concentrations.

I N D E P E N D E N T B O D Y S H O PA C H I E V E S S I G N I F I C A N T C O S TS AV I N G S T H R O U G H I M P R O V E DS O LV E N T M A N A G E M E N T

33


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

The obvious first step was to improve the control of panel degreasing. Previously, employees pouredsolvent freely from a five-litre can onto rags, resulting in spillage and unnecessarily high solvent use.One employee now spends about 1.5 hours/week decanting degreaser into spray bottles. These arethen used to spray solvent onto rags as required. The cost of the spray bottles was just £20, butthe reduction in solvent use and subsequent cost savings have been dramatic.

The second measure involved the purchase of a spray gun cleaning machine to reduce gunwashconsumption. This machine, which cost £800, uses both clean and dirty solvent to clean the spraygun. First, dirty solvents are passed through the gun to remove most of the residual paint. The gunis then rinsed with clean solvent. In addition, solvent is also contained more effectively than withthe old machine, thus reducing solvent losses and VOC emissions.

The third measure was the installation of a computerised paint management system. This systemallows mixing ratios to be recalculated if too much paint is added, thus eliminating waste batches.It can also mix smaller amounts as the built-in scales are much more accurate than those on theprevious mixing machine. Leasing costs are £250/month.

Bodyshop employees were initially sceptical about the benefits of adopting different workingpractices. By explaining the objectives of the solvent reduction programme carefully, involvingemployees fully, and linking achieved reductions to bonus pay, the programme has been successfullyimplemented.

The computerised paint management system

34


1 1H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

ECost Savings and Other Benefits

Use of plastic spray bottles to apply degreaser to rags has reduced solvent use significantly and saved£1 370/year (see Table 3). Payback period from this measure was almost immediate. This solventreduction measure has also improved health and safety conditions in the bodyshop, with less fumesand reduced risk of fire. This has, in turn, resulted in lower absenteeism and improved employeeretention.

Degreasing solutions

Panel wipe Heavy-duty degreaser

Cost of five-litre can £17.14 £36.76

Pre-project use 6 litres/week 3.5 litres/week

Current use 2.5 litres/week 1.25 litres/week

Solvent reduction 58% 64%

Weekly cost saving £12.00 £16.54

Annual cost saving* £576.00 £794.00

* Assuming bodyshop works for 48 weeks/year

Table 3 Reductions in degreasing costs

Installation of the new spray gun cleaning machine has resulted in a reduction in purchases ofcleaning solvent from 125 litres/month to 25 litres/month, a saving of £66/month (£800/year). Thepayback period for the machine is therefore around 12 months. In addition, the machine cleans theguns more effectively, saving rework on subsequent paint jobs.

Overall, these low-cost measures have reduced solvent consumption by around 125 litres/month,representing a saving of over £2 150/year.

Use of the computerised paint management system has significantly reduced paint consumption perunit of production. Although monthly paint purchases over the period October 1996 to July 1997increased by 40% to £1 690/month, the amount of paint used per unit of production fell by 30%.Other benefits of the new system include a cleaner mixing room, less paint waste and reduced wastedisposal costs.

As a result of these improvements in its environmental performance, S&A Auto Services hasobtained new business from insurance company approvals.

“Our Company ethic is ‘use less of everything without compromise to quality’. If you stop and think, all

these measures add money to your bottom line. The important bonus is that it makes the workplace safer and

pleasanter for your employees - without them you don’t have a business!”

Mr P Smith, Proprietor, S&A Auto Services

35


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

C A R T R I M M A N U FA C T U R E R C U T SS O LV E N T U S E B Y S W I T C H I N G T OW AT E R - B A S E D A D H E S I V E S

To achieve Local Air Pollution Control(LAPC) upgrade targets agreed withits local authority, SAI Lignotockimplemented a systematic solventreduction programme. The Companychanged from conventional solvent-based adhesives to water-based andhigh solids adhesives. Between 1992and 1995 it used computer-controlledadhesive applicators. The Companyis now using approximately 100 tonnes/year less solvent than in1992/93, saving £76 000 in reducedadhesive costs. As a result of thechanges, special waste disposal costshave been reduced by more than£8 000/year. In addition, the workplace environment has improved and lessprotective clothing is now worn by employees.

■ Cost savings of around £84 000/year

■ LAPC upgrade targets achieved

■ Payback periods for various measures ranging from immediate to one year


Background

SAI Lignotock, part of the French SAI Automotive Group, manufactures a wide variety of trims andpanels for the automotive sector, bonding substrates to plastic and making use of various productionprocesses. The Company employs 210 people and has an annual turnover of £15 million.

Until 1993, use of solvent-based adhesives resulted in the use of 181 tonnes/year of solvent. TheCompany is authorised under Local Air Pollution Control.


In 1993, as part of its LAPC upgrade plan, SAI Lignotock agreed two solvent reduction targets withits local authority. These were a 25% reduction by 1995/96 and a further 25% reduction by1997/98.

To achieve these targets, the Company’s manufacturing and technical manager aimed to begin usingwater-based adhesives by 1995. The Company was aware that if it proved impossible to switch towater-based adhesives, VOC abatement equipment would have to be installed at considerable cost.

Working closely with several adhesives suppliers, the manufacturing and technical managerevaluated the use of various products. These included both low-solvent adhesives and water-based

36


1 2H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

Eadhesives. The manager also investigated the use of automated adhesive applicators to improve theefficiency of adhesive application. While the water-based adhesives appeared to bond well, the trimdid not pass rigorous automotive industry tests.

SAI Lignotock therefore decided to keep using solvent-based adhesives as an interim measure, butto reduce their level of use. This was achieved by installing two computer numerical control (CNC)machines, at a combined cost of £90 000. These controlled the level and placement of adhesive oneach trim precisely, with the result that adhesive use per trim fell from 10 g to just 1 g, while stillallowing all industry requirements to be met. These machines are currently in storage and will beused where future production runs allow.

In 1995, the Company began using an adhesive with a higher solids content, ie 16.6% instead of12.6%. This reduced VOC emissions still further. The big step was taken in 1996, however, whena water-based adhesive with a high solids content demonstrated sufficiently high standards ofperformance during automotive industry tests. This encouraged the Company to select this productfor the vacuum-lamination process, where it has been used successfully for 18 months. Water-basedadhesives are now being used on other products.

Production methods that avoid the use of adhesives entirely have also been introduced. One suchmethod involves bonding prelaminated woodstock sheet (polypropylene and wood flour) to PVCcoverings. The use of hot melts is also being considered as a further step towards completeelimination of VOC emissions from the production process.


The CNC machines reduced adhesive demand by 90%, saving a total of £270 000 during the threeyears they were in use and giving a payback period of only one year for the cost of the two machines.The other methods combined have resulted in a reduction in solvent consumption of 100 tonnes/yearcompared with the 1992/93 level, while adhesive purchases have been reduced by 24%, saving£76 000/year. Special waste disposal costshave decreased by at least £8 000/year. Giventhat water-based adhesives can be used withthe existing equipment and procedures, andhence without the need to invest in new plant,the payback is immediate.

In addition, workplace air quality has improved,while expenditure on health and safetyequipment has also fallen.

Through its solvent reduction programme, SAILignotock has easily met its LAPC upgradetargets.

“Owing to the lack of a suitable product, the uptake of water-based adhesives was only possible after extensive collaboration

between SAI Lignotock and adhesive manufacturers.Environmental issues are increasingly important to ourselves and

our customers. By increasing the use of water-based adhesivesand moving to hot melts, we are working towards zero solvent

emissions by 2001.”

1LAPC target set in 1995 and revised 1997.

Fig 3 Solvent consumption at SAI Lignotock

37


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

E N C L O S E D D E G R E A S E RS I G N I F I C A N T LY R E D U C E ST R I C H L O R O E T H Y L E N EC O N S U M P T I O N AT S M A L LE N G I N E E R I N G C O M PA N Y

Mr T Mundy, Manufacturing and Technical

Manager, SAI Lignotock

Servex Ltd sought to reduce itstrichloroethylene consumption tomaintain solvent use at the sitebelow the authorisation thresholdfor Local Air Pollution Control(LAPC). The Company had alreadyinstalled an aqueous, soak-cleanersystem for chrome products and hasnow replaced its old open-toptrichloroethylene degreaser with asecond-hand, enclosed degreaser.Further measures are planned toreduce trichloroethylene consumption further.

■ Net cost savings of about £2 380/year


■ Payback period of around 2.5 years


Background

Servex Ltd is a metal finishing and engineering company that carries out subcontract work for largercompanies. The Company has 27 employees and an annual turnover of £520 000.

The Company uses about 3 200 litres/year (around 4.7 tonnes) of trichloroethylene. This is justbelow the threshold for authorisation under LAPC. However, as Servex plans to expand itsoperations, further reductions in solvent use are considered a priority.


Servex had already started to switch from using organic solvents by investing in an aqueous cleaningsystem for its chrome product electroplating line. However, solvent consumption has remained amajor issue for the Company and, in particular, the electroplating manager. Managers are thereforeaware of the need to keep track of solvent use and to monitor VOC emissions. For example, alltrichloroethylene has to be booked out of stores and, when the degreasing tank is topped up withtrichloroethylene, the quantity is marked on a calendar. The number of items put through thedegreaser is also recorded to allow solvent consumption to be related to production levels. To

38


1 3H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

Eensure health and safety exposurelimits are met, regular monitoringof solvent emissions above thedegreaser is carried out using ameter. Although this simple VOCmeter cost £400, monitoring canbe performed in-house.

When the data from the solventtracking and monitoring workwere examined, Servex’s managersbecame aware of how muchsolvent was being lost from theopen-top degreaser and the impactit was having on workplace airquality. Initially, they consideredmaking major modifications to theexisting machine. However, theestimated cost of £16 000 wasconsidered to be too high.

After considering several options, Servex decided to install a smaller, second-hand degreasing unitfitted with a motorised closed-lid system. This unit cost £5 875. To reduce emissions further, themachine was sited in a draught-free area in the factory.

Servex is now planning further improvements to ensure it stays below the five-tonne threshold forauthorisation under LAPC. Firstly, the Company intends to install a chiller system to improvecondensation of solvent vapour. Secondly, Servex intends to move the trichloroethylene storagetank to within 20 metres of the degreaser. It will then be possible to pipe solvent directly into thedegreaser so as to avoid manual handling which can result in spillage. Servex hopes to implementthese measures in the near future.


As a result of replacing the degreasing unit, solvent consumption has fallen by 162 litres/month.This is equivalent to approximately 2.6 tonnes/year of trichloroethylene. At a cost of £915/tonne fortrichloroethylene, this represents a cost saving of £2 380/year. Assuming that the operating costsfor the new degreaser are the same as for the old one, the payback period for the replacementdegreaser is about 2.5 years.

Switching from an open-top to an enclosed degreaser has also significantly reduced employeeexposure to trichloroethylene vapour.

“We had already made an effort to reduce solvent consumption by the use of aqueous cleaning systems, but further

improvements were necessary to remain below the authorisationthreshold for LAPC. After a careful analysis of our operations,

we realised that a few simple changes could have a dramatic effect on our solvent use. We now wish we had modified the

process years ago!”Mr I Anderson, Electroplating Manager, Servex Ltd

Loading the enclosed degreaser

39


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

S U P P L I E R H E L P S T E X T I L E P R I N T E RH A LV E S O LV E N T U S E

In 1992, Standfast implemented asolvent reduction programme toachieve compliance with bothenvironmental legislation andCourtaulds Textiles Group’senvironmental policy. A review ofsolvent use and an emissionsmonitoring programme led to asolvent reduction team workingclosely with Standfast’s suppliers toidentify suitable non-solvent or low-solvent alternatives. This hasresulted in complete removal ofsolvents from some parts of themanufacturing process and has significantly reduced solvent use in others.Between 1992 and 1996, overall solvent use fell by 30 tonnes/year for no capitaloutlay.


■ Improved working conditions

■ Immediate payback


Background

Standfast, a member of the Courtaulds Textiles Group of companies, prints and dyes a wide rangeof fabrics for the home furnishings market. The Company has 280 employees and an annualturnover of approximately £15 million.

The Company currently uses approximately 22 tonnes/year of dipropylene glycol, glycol blends andalcohols. The site is authorised under Local Air Pollution Control (LAPC).


The solvent reduction programme at Standfast was initiated partly in response to the Group’senvironmental policy and partly due to increased regulatory pressures. The Company realised thatit would make progress only by involving everyone concerned. A team was therefore established,led by the purchasing manager and key technical managers.

As a first step in the solvent reduction programme, the team carried out a site review. Solventemissions were monitored, following the environmental monitoring guidelines developed byCourtaulds Textiles. The team used the inventory of solvent use and the record of solvent emissionsto develop a targeted action plan.

As part of the action plan, Standfast conducted a technical review of alternatives to its currentsolvent-based products. This review involved extensive discussions with suppliers with the aim ofreplacing products containing high levels of solvent with low- or non-solvent alternatives wherever

40


1 4H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

Epossible. The solvent content ofproducts had already begun to beused as a criterion of suppliersuitability.

The first result from the technicalreview involved a change in thedessicant used to improvemoisture gain in the steamfixation stage of the printingprocess. On the basis of advicefrom its supplier, Standfastswitched from using glycerine BPas a dessicant to dipropyleneglycol. Dipropylene glycol is lessvolatile, and less is required.

Changes were also made to thepigment system used in theprinting of fabrics. Productscontaining a high level of solvent were replaced with a water-based alternative, making this stageof the printing process completely solvent-free.

Further reductions in solvent use have been achieved through substitution of dyestuffs and inkscontaining high levels of solvent with alternatives with a low or zero solvent content. Standfast iscontinuing its solvent reduction programme, with plans for a further 10% reduction in solvent useduring the next year.


By 1996, Standfast had reduced the quantity of solvent used in the steam fixation part of theprinting process by 12 tonnes/year. This represents a cost saving of approximately £12 000/year.Payback period on this measure was immediate as no capital expenditure was involved.

Use of a water-based product instead of solvent-based products in the pigment system reducedoverall annual solvent consumption by 6.6 tonnes. Although no direct cost savings were achieved,this change eliminated the need to fit abatement equipment to the six printing machines. Thisavoided total capital costs of around £120 000.

Since 1992, the solvent reduction programme has allowed Standfast to reduce its solvent use by 30 tonnes/year. No capital expenditure was required, giving an immediate payback. An indirectbenefit is the improved air quality in the factory and the reduced need to store organic solvents onsite.

“By involving our suppliers in our solvent reduction strategy,we have been able to significantly reduce our solvent use.

This has saved us money and avoided the need for expensiveabatement equipment.”

Mr J Buckland, Technical Director, Standfast

Monitoring textile feed into the presses

41


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

S H O E M A N U FA C T U R E R R E D U C E SS O LV E N T U S E B Y 9 6 % I N F O U RY E A R S

In 1993, The Florida Group Ltd begana systematic solvent reductionprogramme with the aim ofanticipating future environmentallegislation and reducing solvent useto below the authorisation thresholdfor Local Air Pollution Control(LAPC). The associated decrease inthe health and safety risk toemployees was a further driver.After only four years, the Companyhas reduced solvent use by 96%.This impressive reduction has beenachieved mainly through substitutingwater-based products for solvent-based products. Where necessary,help has been sought from the Company’s suppliers. The complete eliminationof solvents from the production process remains a long-term aim.

■ Cost savings of around £8 000/year


■ Authorisation under LAPC no longer required

Background

The Florida Group Ltd manufactures 10 000 pairs of women’s shoes every week under a variety ofbrand names. The Company has 330 employees and an annual turnover of approximately £14 million.

In 1993, the Company carried out a site review of solvent use and emissions as required forauthorisation under Local Air Pollution Control. At that time, the Company was using about 6.5 tonnes/year of solvent in adhesives, cleaners and finishes, and was therefore over the five-tonneauthorisation threshold.


Through involvement with various shoe industry committees, the Technical Director was aware thatemission limits were likely to become increasingly strict. It was realised that small reductions insolvent use might not be sufficient to avoid future regulation. The board of directors thereforedecided that the Company should aim to replace solvent-based products with water-based oneswherever possible. The ultimate aim was the elimination of organic solvents. The associated healthand safety benefits of reducing solvent use were another factor.

42


1 5H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

ETwo members of the management team were given responsibility for overseeing the solventreduction programme. To encourage acceptance of the new practices, operators were included indiscussions with suppliers; and a training programme was initiated to ensure that everyoneunderstood the reasons for, and benefits of, the changes.

The first production area targeted for a switch from solvent-based to water-based adhesives was theclosing rooms - where the shoe uppers are prepared. A variety of suitable products were alreadyavailable, and direct substitution was possible in many cases. Where problems arose, the Companyworked directly with its suppliers to overcome them. Solvent-based brush and bench cleaners werealso replaced with water-based equivalents. The use of solvents in the Company’s closing roomshas now been banned for two years.

The second target area was the making room, where the soles are attached to the uppers. Here theCompany worked closely with its adhesive supplier to develop a water-based product with a bondstrength appropriate for footwear. After extensive testing, a satisfactory formulation was confirmedin 1996 and an immediate changeover made. This change was accompanied by an associatedswitch to water-based cleaning products.

The final step in the solvent reduction programme was to tackle solvent use in the finishing room.This has proved the most difficult area, but currently around 70% of the finishing products arewater-based. Problems have been encountered with the remaining 30% as the water-basedproducts available are unable to provide a satisfactory top brightness to some types of leather.

Following successful laboratory trials, the Company is carrying out production trials on a newproduct. If the results are acceptable, then this product will reduce further the quantity of solvent-based product in the finishing room. The Company’s aim remains the complete elimination ofsolvents in the production process.

Gluing the sole of a shoe

43


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE


In the closing rooms, the switch from solvent-based to water-based products has resulted in costsavings of around £3 000/year. In the making room, the savings from eliminating solvents wereeven higher at around £5 000/year.

As a result of its systematic solvent reduction programme, the Company now uses only 250 kg/yearof solvent. All of this solvent is used in the finishing room. Negligible capital outlay has beenrequired to achieve cost savings of around £8 000/year, giving an immediate payback. In addition,the Company is therefore no longer required to be authorised under LAPC and has hence saved theannual £650 fee.

“Substituting water-based for solvent-based products has not beenas difficult as we initially envisaged. Taking one product at a

time and working with our suppliers when appropriate, we wereable to make quite rapid progress. It’s very satisfying to know

that in only four years we have become fully compliant andsignificantly reduced our operating costs.”

Mr P Bucknall, Technical Director, The Florida Group Ltd

Fig 4 Reduction in solvent use

44


1 6H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

E

In 1996, Ultramark Adhesive Productsdecided to investigate the annualcost to the Company of the adhesiveresidues sent for disposal in thesupply drums. This investigationshowed that these residues were asignificant loss of raw material. TheCompany therefore talked to itsadhesive supplier to find ways ofreducing this waste. A simplechange to the use of refillable, one-tonne intermediate bulk containers(IBCs) has reduced adhesiveconsumption by 4.8 tonnes/year forno capital outlay.

■ Cost savings of approximately £10 000/year

■ No empty drums requiring disposal



Background

Ultramark Adhesive Products manufactures a wide range of self-adhesive films for label and signapplications. The Company has 60 employees and an annual turnover of £14 million.

The Company uses approximately 250 tonnes/year of solvent-based adhesives. It is authorisedunder Local Air Pollution Control (LAPC).


The nature of its product range commits Ultramark to the long-term use of solvent-based adhesives.Most of the VOC emissions from the production process occur during drying, and a thermal oxidationunit costing around £500 000 has been installed to achieve compliance with LAPC emission limits.However, Ultramark is keen to reduce its solvent consumption as a cost-saving measure.

The first area targeted by Ultramark was adhesive supply. The Company realised that adhesiveresidues in the 180 kg supply drums could represent a significant cost, and decided to quantify thiswaste.

Several unopened supply drums were weighed and the average weight calculated. Over the courseof several weeks, all used drums were weighed after emptying. Since the full product weight, minusdrum, was known, it was then possible to calculate the average weight of the residue adhesive.

Although each ‘empty’ drum contained only a small quantity of adhesive, the losses added up toaround 4.8 tonnes/year. Ultramark’s purchasing manager therefore contacted the adhesive supplierto discuss possible changes to the method of adhesive supply and pumping. After careful evaluation

C H A N G E T O I B C s R E D U C E SA D H E S I V E W A S T E

45


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

of Ultramark’s needs, it was decided that a switch to returnable, refillable, one-tonne intermediatebulk containers (IBCs) would be the most cost-effective solution.

IBCs can be attached directly to the factory’s adhesive pumping system. This reduces adhesivehandling and thus the potential for VOC emissions and spillage. IBCs also empty more completelywhen pumped out, leaving a far smaller quantity of adhesive residue.


This simple change from drums to IBCs has saved Ultramark approximately £8 000/year throughreduced adhesive purchase costs alone. In addition, Ultramark no longer has to dispose ofcontaminated adhesive supply drums as the supplier removes the empty containers. This has led tofurther savings of approximately £2 000/year in reduced waste disposal costs.

Overall, Ultramark has achieved cost savings of around £10 000/year for no capital outlay, giving animmediate payback. Adhesive supply in bulk rather than drums has also improved employeeworking conditions.

“Cost savings rather than solvent reduction per se were the mainmotivation behind this change. We are naturally pleased,

however, that the new system has allowed us to manage oursolvent use better, as well as save us money.”

Mr P Hulley, Technical Manager, Ultramark Adhesive Products

Intermediate bulk container connected to factory adhesive pumping system

46


1 7H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

E

In 1997, West of Scotland Packagingbegan a solvent managementprogramme with the aim ofincreasing efficiency and meetingregulatory requirements. A reviewof solvent use at the site wasfollowed by investigations intopotential solvent managementmeasures. The first major projectinvolved improved ink management,with the introduction of acomputerised ink mixing system. Inits first year of operation the systemhas significantly reduced VOCemissions and ink waste. Furthersolvent reduction measures havebeen identified and will be implemented shortly.

■ Cost savings of approximately £38 000/year

■ Reduced VOC emissions and ink waste

■ Payback period of about 4.5 years on material saving alone


Background

West of Scotland Packaging manufactures a range of printed, flexible packaging products, includingpolythene bags and printed polypropylene. The Company has 45 employees and an annualturnover of £2.5 - £3 million.

The Company, which uses approximately 220 tonnes/year of industrial methylated spirits and ethylacetate, is authorised under Local Air Pollution Control (LAPC).


To meet LAPC requirements, West of Scotland Packaging needed to reduce its VOC emissions. Asit would be difficult for the Company to move immediately to low-solvent inks, the decision wastaken to install abatement equipment. This was going to be expensive, but the Company realisedthat the capital and operating costs of the abatement equipment could be offset through improvingthe efficiency of ink use. A solvent reduction programme was therefore implemented.

The first stage of the solvent reduction programme involved carrying out a site review to gain abetter understanding of solvent use and sources of waste. The review also established a baselineagainst which progress could be assessed. VOC monitoring was also carried out to determine thelevel of captured emissions from the presses and elsewhere.

I M P R O V E D I N K M A N A G E M E N TP R O D U C E S S I G N I F I C A N T C O S TS AV I N G S F O R PA C K A G I N G P R I N T E R

47


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

Using the information obtained from the review, potential solvent reduction measures wereidentified and the most cost-effective were investigated. The small size of the Company means thatmeasures have to be prioritised and introduced as resources permit.

All employees are involved in the ongoing solvent reduction programme, with managementproviding education, training and motivation. For example, solvent good practice has beendiscussed with all the print teams to ensure that good housekeeping and the correct safetyprocedures are being followed.

With the help of its ink supplier, West of Scotland Packaging has improved the control of ink use atevery stage of the printing process. A computer-controlled ink dispensing and mixing system hasbeen installed by the ink manager, which has significantly reduced solvent evaporation and inkwaste. Individual employees previously had to mix bespoke inks before starting a job, oftenoverestimating the quantities required. Inks are now ‘made to order’ while the job is on the press.This new practice has minimised the quantity of press-returned ink after job completion, and hasreduced the need to store inks for subsequent print runs.

The Company is now planning to buy bulk storage tanks for its two main solvents. It also intendsto buy a piping network to allow solvents and inks to be pumped around the site from the storagetanks direct to the presses. These two measures will reduce solvent handling and hence reduce VOCemissions and the risk of accidental spillage.

The significant savings already achieved by these measures have inspired the Company to examineits solvent management further. A trainee environmental manager is being appointed to establisha systematic solvent management system, using a mass balance approach,* to identify further areasfor improvement.

An air-handling consultancy has also been used to advise on enclosing the presses and airrecirculation. This would reduce exhaust flow rates and increase the VOC concentration in theexhaust gases, thus reducing the cost of operating the abatement equipment.

The new computerised ink mixing system

* See Good Practice Guide (GG114) Reduce Costs by Tracking Solvents, available free of charge through the EnvironmentalHelpline on 0800 585794.

48


1 7H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

ECost Savings and Other Benefits

The total cost of the ink management system was around £138 000, but this included a newbuilding to house the system. On the basis of actual savings made since February 1997, overall costsavings from improved ink management are estimated to be about £30 000/year. Constructioncosts pushed the payback period to over 4.5 years. However, this figure does not take account ofthe reduced cost of operating the VOC abatement system or productivity gains.

The planned solvent storage and distribution system is expected to reduce solvent consumption bya further 5%, giving savings of approximately £8 000/year. The capital cost of this project will bearound £30 000, giving a payback period of 3.75 years. However, there will be additional indirectbenefits associated with safer working conditions and improved efficiency.

“While the cost of our new VOC abatement system is highcompared with our turnover, the blow has been softened by oursolvent reduction work. With the help of our ink supplier, wehave been able to make impressive savings in the first year. Weintend to make further savings through taking a more systematic

approach to solvent management in the future.”Mr T Hodgkinson, General Manager, West of Scotland Packaging

49


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

N E W H V L P S P R AY G U N S C U TS O LV E N T U S E

The bodyshop manager at YeovilMotor Company (Volvo) worked withconsultants to develop an actionplan and improve solvent workingpractices. Inefficient workingpractices in the bodyshop wereidentified through a survey, whilethe Company’s new qualitymanagement system was used toobtain accurate data on materialpurchases and use. Goodhousekeeping practices have nowbeen implemented and equipmenthas been modernised, with the aimof reducing solvent use. Solventconsumption has fallen by 15% whilepaint use has fallen by 66%, despite a 20% increase in the volume of work.

■ Estimated cost savings of over £30 000/year

■ Reduced solvent fumes in the bodyshop

■ Payback period of less than two weeks

Background

The bodyshop at Yeovil Motor Company (Volvo) carries out a wide range of damage repairs andresprays. Ten people are employed in the bodyshop, which is located in a residential area, and has anannual turnover of over £400 000. A variety of solvent-based cleaning systems and paints are used.

Solvent reduction measures were implemented to save money, improve environmental performance,and for health and safety reasons. Measures to date have successfully brought solvent volumesbelow the authorisation threshold for Local Air Pollution Control (LAPC).


In 1995, the Company appointed a new bodyshop manager. Although the manager had a goodidea of the measures needed, he sought advice from consultants on best practice and environmentalregulations. An action plan was agreed, which involved:

■ identifying key weaknesses;

■ educating employees;

■ improving equipment and procedures for handling solvents and paints.

The first stage of the solvent reduction programme was to ask employees to complete aquestionnaire supplied by the consultant. This survey identified problem areas such as poorhandling of coatings and solvents.

50


1 8H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

EThe Company was seeking accreditation to the quality management standard ISO 9000, so recordsof material deliveries and checks on paint quality were readily available. Information from the surveyand the material logs was used to put together a reasonable picture of working practices andsolvent use.

The bodyshop manager realised that increased employee awareness of the importance of goodsolvent management would make it easier to implement further changes. He therefore trainedemployees in the proper use of equipment and materials, and purchased new safety equipment.Both measures improved morale and reduced absenteeism.

The review of working practices highlighted problems with the bodyshop’s existing high volume lowpressure (HVLP) spray guns, ie poor atomisation of coatings resulting in poor finishes and extrawaste. The two spray guns were therefore replaced at a cost of £800. Use of the new guns andimproved spray gun techniques have yielded an estimated 10% reduction in coating use.

A range of good housekeeping measures have also been introduced, at no cost, to improve workingpractices in the bodyshop. Common colour scheduling is widely practised, and two employees haveresponsibility for controlling all paint mixing. These measures have reduced waste and paintconsumption significantly. A paintless dent repair system* has also been in place for three months, withtwo employees fully trained in this technique. This system has further reduced paint consumption.

To help reduce solvent use, a new empty-for-full request system for drawing solvent out of the storeshas been introduced. Previously, cans of solvent could be signed out of the stores without giving areason. This practice tended to encourage material waste. All employees now justify their requestsfor solvent on the consumables sheet and use solvents only for their designated purpose.

Solvents are now decanted into 500 ml plastic hand-held spray bottles instead of being poured fromfive-litre cans directly onto rags. This practice inevitably caused spillages, and tops were left off cans,leading to increased evaporation.

Using the paintless dent repair system

* See Good Practice Guide (GG36) Reducing Costs in Vehicle Refinishing, available free of charge through the EnvironmentalHelpline on 0800 585794.

51


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE


The various good housekeeping measures and new equipment have allowed Yeovil Motor Companyto reduce its paint and solvent use significantly. The Company estimates that paint use fell from4 000 litres in 1995/96 to about 1 350 litres in 1996/97, a reduction of 66%.

Consumption of virgin solvent in the periodApril to September 1995 was 276 kg. This fellby 15% to 233 kg between October 1996 andMarch 1997, even though the bodyshop’sworkload increased by about 20%. The paintand solvent supply data held in the new qualitymanagement system have allowed thebodyshop to report more accurate consump-tion figures to the local authority.

Yeovil Motor Company estimates that thecombined savings from reduced solvent andcoating use are £30 100/year. The only capitalcost was the purchase of two new spray guns,giving a payback period of less than twoweeks.

The bodyshop manager is now considering installing a distillation unit for on-site solvent recovery,and is investigating the use of water-based paint systems with several suppliers.

“In two years, we have managed to turn the bodyshop into acompetitive and efficient operation, which has obtained new

franchises and insurance company approvals. The solventreduction programme has been an integral part of this process.”

Mr J Hastilow, Bodyshop Manager, Yeovil Motor Company (Volvo)

Fig 5 Change in virgin solvent use and workload

52


1 9H

OU

SE

KE

EP

ING

AN

D T

RA

ININ

GR

EC

OV

ER

Y

AN

D R

E-U

SE

CL

EA

NIN

G A

ND

DE

GR

EA

SIN

GP

RO

CE

SS

US

E

ZETEX plc is committed to takingpractical measures to minimise theenvironmental impact of itsproduction processes. The Companytherefore tries to use the leastdamaging chemical formulations inall cases, and aims to reduce its useof organic solvents. Although thisapproach has not achieved majordirect cost savings, the indirectsavings and environmental benefitsare substantial. Eliminating acetonefrom one particular process andminimising waste disposal coststhrough the return of solventcontainers to its suppliers are twoexamples of no-cost measures to reduce operating costs.

■ Estimated cost savings of £2 300/year

■ Less special waste requiring disposal


Background

ZETEX plc manufactures semiconductors for a variety of markets. The Company has approximately500 employees and an annual turnover of £34 million.

The Company uses 14 640 litres/year of solvents in a variety of production processes. These solventsinclude acetone, xylene, toluene, n-butyl acetate, isopropyl alcohol and ethoxyethanol. ZETEX doesnot operate a prescribed process under Part I of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and is notrequired to register under Local Air Pollution Control.


ZETEX corporate policy requires that the least environmentally damaging chemicals be used for eachproduction process. The current lack of suitable alternatives for most applications means that theelimination of organic solvents from all processes is not currently possible. However, organicsolvents have been replaced in several areas.

The ZETEX safety officer is responsible for all chemicals, including solvents, that enter the factory,and is required to carry out research to determine the least environmentally damaging chemicalsavailable that are effective for each process. New ideas, eg switching to an alternative solvent, arediscussed with the relevant technical staff. Promising ideas are then investigated further and, wherepracticable, adopted.

E L E C T R O N I C S C O M PA N YS I M P L I F I E S P R O C E S S E S A N DR E D U C E S S O LV E N T C O N S U M P T I O N

53


HO

US

EK

EE

PIN

GA

ND

TR

AIN

ING

RE

CO

VE

RY

A

ND

RE

-US

EC

LE

AN

ING

AN

DD

EG

RE

AS

ING

PR

OC

ES

S U

SE

One recent change involved the backfill process, where the plastic resin in the semiconductors iscured after moulding. Use of toluene alone was found to be as effective as the acetone/toluenemixture that had been used previously. Eliminating acetone from the process did not require acorresponding increase in the quantity of toluene. Solvent consumption fell significantly. ZETEXwould like to eliminate the use of acetone altogether, and this change marks an important steptowards achieving this aim.

In the past, the disposal of empty solvent containers was expensive as these containers are treatedas special waste. As a matter of policy, and to minimise waste disposal costs, ZETEX now deals onlywith suppliers that will take back the solvent containers for re-use.


Eliminating acetone from the backfill process has resulted in solvent use decreasing by 75 - 100 litres/week, ie up to 5 000 litres/year. This reduction has led to cost savings ofapproximately £1 000/year, for practically no initial capital outlay. Another benefit is that at roomtemperature toluene is less volatile than acetone, reducing solvent fumes in working areas.

Refusing to deal with suppliers that do not take back solvent containers for re-use has enabledZETEX to save an estimated £1 300/year through avoidance of special waste (ie contaminatedcontainers) disposal costs.

“Our ongoing research programme aims to find the leastenvironmentally damaging chemicals for use in all our processes.

This naturally includes a commitment to reduce solvent usewherever possible. As suitable alternatives come to light, they are immediately adopted. Any cost savings come as

an added advantage.” Ms E Poulter, Safety Officer, ZETEX plc

This Good Practice Guide has shown how 19 UK companies in different industrial sectors haveachieved cost savings and other benefits by improving their solvent management. These companiessucceeded by taking positive action to reduce their use of solvents and solvent-based materials inone or more of these areas:

■ process use;




Table 1 provides a summary of the reduction measures taken by each company. Many of thesemeasures were simple to implement, low cost, and could be applicable to companies of all sizes.Table 2 is a list of all the relevant Environmental Technology Best Practice Programme publicationsoffering practical information in solvent management, all of which can be obtained free of chargethrough the Environmental Helpline on 0800 585794.

The Environmental Helpline can also:

■ provide further advice about the techniques described in this Guide;

■ tell you about relevant environmental and other regulations that could affect your operations;

■ arrange for a specialist to visit your company if you employ fewer than 250 people.

54

section

3

C O N C L U S I O N3

The Environmental Technology Best Practice Programme is a joint Department of Trade and Industry

and Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions programme. It is managed by

AEA Technology plc through ETSU and the National Environmental Technology Centre.

The Programme offers free advice and information for UK businesses and promotes

environmental practices that:

■ increase profits for UK industry and commerce;

■ reduce waste and pollution at source.

To find out more about the Programme please call the Environmental Helpline on freephone

0800 585794. As well as giving information about the Programme, the Helpline has access to

a wide range of environmental information. It offers free advice to UK businesses on technical

matters, environmental legislation, conferences and promotional seminars. For smaller

companies, a free counselling service may be offered at the discretion of the Helpline Manager.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE ENVIRONMENTAL HELPLINE

0800 585794e-mail address: [email protected]

world wide web: http://www.etsu.com/etbpp/

Documents

ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY BEST PRACTICE PROGRAMME … · 5 Converting to solvent-free process reduces costs at tablet 17 coating plant 6 Making the most of solvent recovery in the