Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
WASTE MANAGEMENT ADVISORY NOTE Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Branch
Environmental Health Section Division of Health Services - Box 2091 N.C. Department of Human Resources
Raleigh, N.C. 27602-2091
k6 C%Q)
William L. Meyer, Head %i& ~~lv$c&4 M4y2g@86 - Volume 22
A ,,
Reducing Hazardous Waste Generation with Examples from the Electroplating Industry
‘ I
Prepared by Jerome Kohl, Jeremy Pearson, and Brooke Triplett
Industrial Extension Service School of Engineering
North Carolina State University Raleigh, North Carolina
I n t r o d u c t i o n and Acknowledgments
Th is Waste Management Advisory Note discusses a number o f op t ions f o r managing hazardous wastes and demonstrates, us ing case s tud ies, how t h e e lec- t r o p l a t i n g i n d u s t r y has app l i ed these opt ions.
Chapter One, e n t i t l e d "Why Change?", d iscusses l e g a l , economic, and environmental f a c t o r s t h a t mot iva te a reduc t ion i n sludge product ion. Chapter Two, e n t i t l e d "A D i r e c t i o n f o r Change", presents a h ie ra rchy o f hazardous waste managing methods from t h e most t o t h e l e a s t des i rab le. Chapter Three, e n t i t l e d "Methods o f Reducing Waste Generat ion w i t h Case Studies f rom t h e E l e c t r o p l a t i n g Indus t ry " , d iscusses general approaches t o reducing hazardous waste product ion. Case s tud ies are inc luded i n Chapter 3 t o demonstrate how these approaches are put i n t o p rac t ice .
Nor th Caro l i na S o l i d and Hazardous Waste Branch. t o thank E m i l B reck l i ng , Lee Crosby, Ter ry Dover, W i l l i a m Meyer, Lee M i t t e l s t a d t and W i l l i a m Paige o f t h e branch f o r t h e i r he lp and support f o r t h i s Note.
The m a t e r i a l i nc luded i n t h i s Note i s a condensed and an updated vers ion o f t h e manual, "Managing and Min imiz ing Hazardous Waste Metal Sludges", by J. Kohl and B. T r i p l e t t , December 1984, which has been r e w r i t t e n so t h a t a wide v a r i e t y o f i n d u s t r i e s might f i n d t h e i n fo rma t ion use fu l . The 1984 manual was funded by t h e Governor's Waste Mpnagement Board o f t h e S ta te o f Nor th Caro l ina and i s a v a i l a b l e from t h e board.
Funding f o r t h e prepara t ion o f t h i s Note was prov ided by a g ran t from t h e We would p a r t i c u l a r l y l i k e
The most va luab le p a r t o f t h i s Note i s t h e case s tud ies. and t h e i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h i n t h e companies who have been w i l l i n g t o share t h e i r ideas and accomplishments regard ing t h e m in im iza t i on o f waste i n these case s tud ies are g r a t e f u l l y acknowledged.
prov ided i n p u t and c o n s t r u c t i v e comments on much o f t h i s Note; Gary Hunt and Roger Schecter o f t h e Nor th Caro l i na P o l l u t i o n Prevent ion Pays Program, who have shared t h e i r i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h us, and Martha Br inson and Jenny Jackson, who e d i t e d t h i s Note.
S e c r e t a r i a l ass is tance has been prov ided by Sue E l l i s , Dianne Hain, Brenda Long, Hugh Mum, and Debbie R i t t e r .
The companies
I would p a r t i c u l a r l y l i k e t o acknowledge t h e he lp o f George McRae who
* Governor's Waste Management Board, 513 Albemarle B u i l d i n g 325 N.
S a l i s b u r y S t ree t , Rale igh, Nor th Caro l i na 27611 (919) 733-9020.
i
While we have made every e f f o r t t o ensure t h e accuracy o f t h e i n fo rma t ion conta ined i n t h i s Note, we d i s c l a i m any r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r e r ro rs . send y o u r comments, cor rec t ions , and ideas f o r improvement t o t h e sen io r author.
Please
Jerome Kohl, Senior Extens ion S p e c i a l i s t Nuclear Engineer ing Department, Box 7909 Nor th Caro l i na S ta te U n i v e r s i t v Raleigh, Nor th Caro l i na 2769517909 (919) 737-2303
ii
Table o f Contents
Page
i iii
V
1
I n t r o d u c t i o n and Acknowledgements ....................................... Table o f Contents ....................................................... Summary and Recommendations ............................................. Chapter 1 . Why Change? .................................................
A . L i a b i l i t y ....................................................... 1 . Superfund ................................................... 2 . RCRA Regulat ions and L i a b i l i t y .............................. 3 . Abbreviated Check l i s t f o r Choosing a TSD F a c i l i t y ...........
B . Economics ....................................................... 1 . Government Incen t i ves ....................................... 2 . Other Incen t i ves ............................................
A D i r e c t i o n f o r Change . Hierarchy o f Management Methods .... A . L i a b i l i t y ................................................... B . Regulat ions ................................................. c . Cost ........................................................ D . Conservat ion o f Resources ................................... E . The H ierarchy ...............................................
Chapter 3 Methods o f Reducing Waste Generat ion w i t h Case Studies from t h e E l e c t r o p l a t i n g I n d u s t r y ................
A . Hazardous Waste Aud i t s .......................................... B . Changing t h e Process ............................................
1 . Hexavalent t o T r i v a l e n t Chrome .............................. 2 . F i l t e r M o d i f i c a t i o n s ........................................ 3 . Rinse Techniques ............................................ 4 . Dragout Reduct ion ........................................... Improv ing Management o f Waste ................................... 1 . Reducing S p i l l s and Leaks ................................... 2 . Reducing Scrap and Rework ................................... 3 . T r a i n i n g Personnel .......................................... 4 . S e l l i n g o r Exchanging Wastes ................................ I n s t a l l a t i o n o f Recovery Equipment .............................. 1 . I d e n t i f y i n g Needs ........................................... 2 . Evaporat ion ................................................. 3 . I o n Exchange ................................................ 4 . 5 . Reverse Osmosis ............................................. 6 . Sludge Dry ing ...............................................
Chapter 2 .
C .
D .
E l e c t r o l y t i c Metal Recovery (EMR) ...........................
3 3 4 5 6
7
7 7 7 7 8
11
11 12 13 13 14 17 17 18 18 18 19 21 21 22 24 25 26 27
iii
i v
Summary and Recommendations
The i n c e n t i v e s t o change a manufactur ing process t o a more env i ron- m e n t a l l y sound a l t e r n a t i v e i n c l u d e t h e reduct ion o f : long-term d isposal l i a b i l i t y , l e g a l compliance e f f o r t s , cos t of raw m a t e r i a l s , d isposal costs, and consumption o f n a t u r a l resources. A h ierarchy i s presented t h a t shows t h e d i r e c t i o n we suggest be taken t o reduce l i a b i l i t y and improve t h e b e n e f i c i a l use o f our resources based on these incent ives.
hand l ing and waste recovery. e l e c t r o p l a t i n g sludges has prompted t h e i n d u s t r y t o i n v e s t i g a t e a l t e r n a t i v e s by which waste product ion i s reduced o r e l iminated.
New environmental r e g u l a t i o n s make disposal o f hazardous wastes more d i f f i c u l t , more c o s t l y and increase t h e d e s i r a b i l i t y o f seeking ways t o reduce waste.
The e l e c t r o p l a t i n g i n d u s t r y i s r i c h with examples o f improving waste The h i g h cos t o f meta ls and o f d ispos ing o f
V
Chapter 1. Why Change?
Why i s it impor tant t o make an e f f o r t t o reduce hazardous waste genera- t i o n ? The major mo t i va t i ona l fo rces t o implement hazardous waste reduc t ion programs i n c l u d e l e g a l l i a b i l i t y , economic i ncen t i ves , and t h e r e l a t i v e ease o f t h e change. Environmental impact can be lessened by reducing waste genera- t i o n o r implementing a l t e r n a t i v e waste t reatment methods. While most people d e s i r e a c lean environment, t h e economic payback and a concern over l i a b i l i t y must be present be fore a change i s made. addresses t h e two major m o t i v a t i n g factors...
A. L i a b i l i t y
d i f f i c u l t va lue t o q u a n t i f y ) i s f requen t l y omit ted, y e t t h e r e i s a l i a b i l i t y assoc iated wi th each management technique. i t i s impor tant t o cons ider l i a b i l i t y under Superfund and RCRA. then cons ider t h e impact on t h e l i a b i l i t y assoc iated w i t h each o p t i o n ava i lab le .
The d iscuss ion t h a t f o l l o w s l i a b i l i t y and economics.
When comparing waste management techniques, t h e cos t o f l i a b i l i t y (a
To pu t l i a b i l i t y i n t o perspect ive,
1. Superfund The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and L i a b i l i t y Act,
42 U.S.C. Sec t ion 9601, - et. ("Superfund" o r "CERCLA") au thor izes t h e Federal Government ( th rough the EPA) t o respond t o re leases or threatened re leases o f substances, which i n c l u d e hazardous wastes, t h a t may endanger p u b l i c h e a l t h or wel fare. Costs are covered by a fund t o t a l i n g more than $1.6 b i l l i o n , 86 percent o f which i s f inanced by taxes on t h e manufacture o r impor t o f c e r t a i chemicals and petroleum. The remainder comes from general revenues.y Th is fund i s re imburs ib le . The EPA takes l e g a l a c t i o n t o recover c leanup cos ts f rom those subsequently i d e n t i f i e d as respons ib le f o r the release. respons ib le p a r t y e x i s t s , they are j o i n t l y and s e v e r a l l y l i a b l e unless t h e damages are d i v i s i b l e . T h i s means t h a t t h e generator would be he ld l i a b l e f o r t h e harm caused by t h e re lease o f t h e hazardous substances even i f they are t r a n s f e r r e d t o a t h i r d pa r t y . It a l s o means t h a t p o t e n t i a l l y t h e generator would pay t h e e n t i r e amount o f t h e damages, unless i t i s shown t h a t t h e harm caused by t h e waste i s d i v i s i b l e . (Th is d i v i s i b i l i t y has no t been demon- s t r a t e d i n any CERCLA case t o date.) t ake ordered a c t i o n can be pena l ized fo r damages equal t o t h r e e t imes t h e government's response costs.
p a r t i e s f inance t h e cleanup ac t i ons when poss ib le . D i r e c t government act ion, when c a l l e d f o r , can take t h e f o l l o w i n g forms:
Immediate removals, when a prompt response i s needed t o prevent harm t o p u b l i c hea l th , wel fare, or t h e environment;
Planned removals, when an expedi ted, but no t necessa r i l y immediate response i s needed t o min imize t h e danger o f exposure t h a t cou ld otherwise occur i f response were delayed; and
The standard o f l i a b i l i t y i s s t r i c t l i a b i l i t y , and i f more than one
Anyone l i a b l e f o r a re lease who f a i l s t o
EPA's enforcement e f f o r t seeks t o ensure t h a t responsib le , p r i v a t e
a )
b )
'The 1984 Congress f a i l e d t o a c t on extending o r mod i fy ing t h e Superfund Act. Ac t i on i s expected i n 1986.
1
c) Remedial ac t ions , which are longer- term and u s u a l l y more expen- s ive , aimed a t permanent remedies, and which may o n l y be taken a t s i t e s l i s t e d on t h e EPA's Nat iona l P r i o r i t i e s L i s t .
S i t e s on t h e Nat iona l P r i o r i t i e s L i s t were ranked by t h e MITRE Corpora-
The present
t i o n . invo lved, t h e c loseness of t h e s i t e t o humans, and poss ib le pathways o f t h e substances i n t o t h e environment (such as s o i l , water, and a i r ) . l i s t ranks over 800 s i t e s nationwide.
Examples o f €PA cleanups under Superfund and cos t recovery f rom t h e generators a re as fo l l ows :
L e n o i r Ref in ing . was a so l ven t r e c y c l e r f o r l o c a l f u r n i t u r e manufacturers. back log and s t i l l bottoms were drummed and s to red i n an outdoor, uncovered area. d e t e r i o r a t i n g and leak ing. Few had l a b e l s i d e n t i f y i n g t h e contents and fumes f rom t h e drums were de tec tab le w i t h i n severa l yards o f t h e s i t e . The s i t e posed a hazard t o t h e l o c a l populat ion, d r i n k i n g water suppl ies, and recrea- t i o n a l areas.
The rank ing i s based on t h r e e concerns.. t h e t o x i c i t y o f t h e substance
The Leno i r R e f i n i n g Company, Lenoi r , Nor th Caro l ina,
Many o f t h e drums were uncovered o r
The spent so lvent
The back log began accumulating.
On October 14, 1982, t h e EPA began a planned removal o f t h e hazardous wastes. About 1,300 drums and 160 cub ic yards o f contaminated s o i l were removed. The €PA recovered a t o t a l o f $113,000 from L e n o i r R e f i n i n g Company and s i x respons ib le generators i n t h e f u r n i t u r e indus t ry .
Chem Dyne Waste Dump.2 The Chem Dyne waste dump i n Hamilton, Ohio began opera t ion i n 1974 accept ing waste acids, heavy meta ls and cyanides. I n 1981 government i n v e s t i g a t o r s found t h a t over a thousand drums and 14 bu lk storage tanks were l e a k i n g i n t o t h e ground water.
A group o f 158 companies who had sent waste t o Chem Dyne agreed t o c lean up t h e waste s i t e , which inc ludes c lean ing t h e contaminated water t a b l e u n t i l contaminat ion i s reduced t o a s p e c i f i e d l e v e l ( g e n e r a l l y 100 p a r t s per b i l l i o n ) . Remedial cleanup began i n l a t e October 1985 a f t e r a consent decree was signed by t h e group o f companies, t h e U.S. €PA and t h e Department o f Jus t i ce . The cleanup i s expected t o take a t l e a s t t en years and cos t $12 m i 11 ion.
I n add i t i on , t h e l i a b l e companies are requ i red t o pay p e n a l t i e s t o t a l i n g $7 m i l l i o n t o fede ra l and s t a t e governments. The federa l government has spent more than $7 m i l l i o n t o remove some o f t h e most dangerous contaminants f rom t h e s i t e .
2Raleigh News and Observer, June 14, 1985, pg. 14A and phone i n t e r v i e w w i t h Donald Bruce, €PA Region 5, Ohio Superfund U n i t (312) 886-7240.
2
2. RCRA Regulat ions and L i a b i l i t y
o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r h i s hazardous waste. (TSD), o r t r a n s p o r t e r s p i l l s hazardous wastes, or i f hazardous wastes are re leased i n t o t h e environment ( leaks , leaching, etc.) , t h e generator can be h e l d l i a b l e f o r any damages and cleanup cos ts t h a t t h e TSD or t r a n s p o r t e r does no t pay. The generator does n o t have t o be proven neg l i gen t i n o rder t o be h e l d l i a b l e f o r t h e hazardous wastes. l i a b i l i t y w i thou t f a u l t .
en force t h e r u l e s under RCRA. Under RCRA Sect ion 3009, t h e Sta te law and r u l e s cannot be l ess s t r i c t than RCRA. The S t a t e adopted RCRA regu la t i ons as s t a t e r u l e s f o r generators. The Sta te has o the r r u l e s on o the r sub jec ts t h a t a re not i n t h e Code o f Federal Regulations.
on enforcement, t h e EPA can take a d d i t i o n a l enforcement act ions, i n c l u d i n g assessing f i n e s above t h e f i n e s assessed by t h e State.
taken.Q An e l e c t r o p l a t e r generated approx imate ly 300 ga l l ons per day o f wastewater f rom a copper and chromium p l a t i n g l i n e . The wastewater was c o l - l e c t e d i n two t reatment tanks. Once a week, approx imate ly 1500 ga l l ons were ba tch- t rea ted w i t h c a u s t i c t o r a i s e t h e pH t o 8.5 t o 9.0. The d i sso l ved copper and chromium p r e c i p i t a t e d t o fo rm t h e hydrox ide sludge. A f t e r 24 hours, t h e s ludge s e t t l e d t o t h e bottom o f t h e tanks. The l i q u i d above t h e sludge was discharged t o t h e munic ipa l sewer. removed and s t o c k p i l e d on p l a n t property.
The s t o c k p i l e o f sludge meets t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f a waste p i l e as de f ined by RCRA; t he re fo re , t h e e l e c t r o p l a t e r (genera tor ) i s sub jec t t o n o t i f y t h e EPA o f such a c t i v i t y . I n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r case, t h e company f a i l e d t o do so. A compla in t i n s p e c t i o n brought t h e s i t u a t i o n t o t h e a t t e n t i o n o f t h e Nor th Caro l i na S o l i d and Hazardous Waste Management Branch.
company's a c t i v i t i e s as a generator o f hazardous waste ( e l e c t r o p l a t i n g s ludge) and submit a remedial a c t i o n p lan t o t h e Branch o f f i c e . t o cocer immediate removal o f t h e waste and associated contaminated s o i l , Approximately 80,000 pounds o f contaminated ma te r ia l had t o be removed and mani fested t o an EPA-approved d isposa l f a c i l i t y . The t o t a l cos t o f t h i s removal was approx imate ly $125,000.
Under RCRA's " c rad le t o grave" phi losophy, a generator i s neve~ r e l i e v e d I f a t r e a t e r , s to re r , d isposer
Th is i s c a l l e d " s t r i c t l i a b i l i t y , " o r
The S t a t e o f Nor th Caro l i na has taken t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o implement and
I f t h e U.S. EPA decides t h a t t h e Sta te o f Nor th Caro l i na i s t oo l e n i e n t 1
T e f o l l o w i n g case i s an example o f enforcement a c t i o n t h a t t h e Sta te has
The sludge was p e r i o d i c a l l y
A f t e r t h e inspec t ion , t h e company was requ i red t o n o t i f y t h e EPA o f t h e
The p lan was w r i t t e n
3. Abbreviated Check l i s t f o r Choosing a TSD F a c i l i t y
The i d e a l way t o e l i m i n a t e l i a b i l i t y i s t o change t h e manufactur ing processes t o e l i m i n a t e waste product ion. I f t h i s i s not poss ib le , a h ie rarchy
3Wi l l i am Paige, Nor th Caro l i na S o l i d and Hazardous Waste Branch.
3
o f waste management methods o f f e r e d i n Chapter 2 can he lp i n making a choice t h a t may reduce r i s k . I f wastes must be shipped t o an ou ts ide f a c i l i t y , t h e t r a n s p o r t e r and TSD f a c i l i t i e s must be se lec ted w i t h care. An abbrev iated c h e c k l i s t t o he lp i n such a choice i s o f f e r e d below:
a) (SHWMB) t o be sure t h e t r a n s p o r t e r o r TSD f a c i l i t y has an i d e n t i f i c a t i o n number and t h e proper permit . Check w i t h t h e reg iona l o f f i c e o f t h e EPA and DOT. Check t h e SHWMB records regard ing compliance s ta tus , v i o l a t i o n s and l e g a l act ions. It i s good t o ma in ta in an on-going d ia logue w i t h t h e S ta te about t h e chosen f a c i l i t y .
d e a l i n g w i t h it.
Look a t t h e s i z e o f t h e backlog of unt rea ted ma te r ia l . ground-water mon i to r i ng and ask t o see t h e i r mon i to r i ng l a b resu l t s . dec id ing on a f a c i l i t y , inspec t t h e s i t e a t l e a s t once a year. Make sure t h e operators agree t o unannounced v i s i t s .
Make c o n t r a c t con t in - gent on percent be ing i n compliance w i t h a l l State, f ede ra l and l o c a l laws and ru les . bottoms or i n c i n e r a t o r ashes.
Check w i t h t h e s t a t e ' s S o l i d and Hazardous Waste Management Branch
b)
c )
Check the company's repu ta t i on w i t h i t s c l i e n t s and any o the r groups
Never use a f a c i l i t y w i thou t f i r s t i nspec t i ng t h e s i t e persona l ly .
A f t e r
Ask t h e company f o r a l i s t o f c l i e n t s .
Look a t p rov i s ions f o r
d ) Work out a d e t a i l e d con t rac t w i t h t h e company.
Know where the wastes are g o i n g and what i s be ing done w i t h any s t i l l
e) Check t h e company's f i n a n c i a l s t a b i l i t y . Ask the f a c i l i t y f o r f inan- c i a l statements over t h e l a s t 10 years. Look a t assets and l i a b i l i t i e s . Note t h e ne t annual income.
Check w i t h t h e SHWMB t o make sure t h a t t h e company i s i n compliance with a l l RCRA f i n a n c i a l requirements f o r c losure , pos t -c losure and l i a b i l i t y coverage.
g) man i fes ts prompt ly. Keep a m f e s t s . Remember t h a t the regu la t i ons governing hazardous waste d isposal are r e t r o a c t i v e and t h e r e i s no s t a t u t e o f l i m i t a t i o n s .
f )
Keep good records forever . Make sure t h e TSD f a c i l i t y re tu rns the
h) Make sure a l l empty drums are re tu rned or destroyed. Regardless of
i )
t h e o r i g i n of t h e waste, t h e company whose name i s on t h e drum may be blamed.
and n o t i f y t h e SHWMB immediately. I f t h e problem i s no t c leared up promptly, sw i t ch t o another company.
j ) Always remember: u l t i m a t e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r any damages o r cleanup cos ts r e s u l t i n g f rom wastes l i e s w i t h t h e generator, now and forever .
6. Economics
I f t h e company's ac t i ons are i r r e g u l a r , d iscuss t h i s w i t h t h e company
One impor tan t m o t i v a t o r i n t h e hand l ing o f wastes i s t h e economic fac to r . w i l l be shown as economic.
I n t h e case s tud ies inc luded i n Chapter 3, t h e mo t i va t i on f requen t l y A r e t u r n on investment or a sho r t payout t ime i s
4
f r e q u e n t l y t h e bas i s on which a change i s s o l d t o management. posed change, an es t imate of t h e cos ts and savings i s necessary t o determine a payout.
For each pro-
1. Government Incen t i ves
Some o f t h e lesser-known incen t i ves i n v o l v e ac t i ons by t h e S ta te o f Nor th Caro l i na and t h e f e d e r a l government t o encourage companies t o reduce hazardous wastes and t o reduce t h e danger o f ground water p o l l u t i o n .
a )
(1) Encourage compliance w i t h s t a t e and fede ra l p o l l u t i o n abatement requirements;
(2 ) p o l l u t i o n c leanup requirements; and
(3 ) advantage t o non-complying companies.
b ) The Nor th Caro l i na i n c e n t i v e s c u r r e n t l y i n ex is tence are:
(1) meet c e r t a i n c r i t e r i a and be approved by appropr ia te l o c a l and s t a t e a u t h o r i t i e s ;
( 2 ) p o l l u t i o n o r t o recyc le o r p rov ide resource recovery o f s o l i d waste;
( 3 ) above;
( 4 ) above; and
(5 ) Program f o r implement ing p o l l u t i o n prevent ion p ro jec ts .
I ncen t i ves are o f f e r e d by t h e government t o :
Avoid o r m i t i g a t e economic harm t o i n d u s t r i e s fo rced t o comply w i t h
Help ensure t h a t complying companies are no t a t a compet i t i ve d i s -
Tax Exempt I n d u s t r i a l Development and P o l l u t i o n Con t ro l Bonds4 must
Exc lus ion from l o c a l p roper t y tax5 on p roper t y used t o abate water
Reduct ion o f f ranch ise tax6 f o r cos ts o f p roper t y used as i n I tem 2
Sixty-month amor t i za t ion7 on cos ts o f p roper t y used as i n I tem 2
Matching fund grants8 a v a i l a b l e f rom t h e P o l l u t i o n Prevent ion Pays
4See N.C. General S t a t u t e 159C and 1590.
5See N.C. General S t a t u t e 105-275.
%ee N.C. General S t a t u t e 105-122.
'ISee N.C. General S t a t u t e 105-130.10.
8Mr. Roger N. Schecter, P o l l u t i o n Prevent ion Pays Program, Department o f Natura l Resources and Community Development, P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, Nor th Caro l i na 27607, (919) 733-7015.
5
I n c e n t i v e s o f t h i s type are cons tan t l y changing. I n o rder t o determine t h e sav ings f o r p o l l u t i o n abatement equipment, it i s nec ssary t o t a l k t o a t a x adv i so r o r t o federa l and s t a t e government agencies. 5
c ) Pena l t i es as i ncen t i ves inc lude:
(1 ) approving or recommending t o p r i v a t e p a r t i e s any f a c i l i t i e s t h a t have Category 1 v i o l a t i o n s .
(2 )
( 3 ) Normal business expenses through compliance are t a x deduc t ib le bu t
( 4 )
( 5 )
2. Other Incen t i ves
RCRA l e g i s l a t i o n and EPA enforcement p o l i c i e s p r o h i b i t t h e EPA from
The S ta te a l s o f o l l o w s t h i s procedure.
RCRA l e g i s l a t i o n , EPA p o l i c i e s and s t a t e procedures r e q u i r e t h a t p e n a l t i e s be l a r g e enough t o o f f s e t any economic ga in f rom noncompliance.
pena l t y expenses are not t a x deduct ib le .
and bad p u b l i c re la t i ons .
Exchange Commission (SEC) i f t h e company i s pub l i c .
The cos t o f l o s t goodwi l l i s immeasurable i n terms o f l o s t customers
Compliance ac t i ons o f c e r t a i n types must be repor ted t o t h e Secur i t y
Other i n c e n t i v e s inc lude:
a)
b)
The need t o ma in ta in and enhance t h e s ta tus o f t h e company i n t h e eyes o f t h e community and customers.
E a r l y payback o f investment o r a s a t i s f a c t o r y r e t u r n on t h e investment.
When c a l c u l a t i n g the payback o r r e t u r n on investment, balance t h e i nves t - ment aga ins t t h e -d isposal cos t and t h e l i a b i l i t y .
9For more i n f o r m a t i o n on t a x and o t h e r i ncen t i ves f o r p o l l u t i o n abatement equipment, con tac t Dr . L inda L i t t l e , Execut ive D i r e c t o r , Governor's Waste Management Board, 513 Albemarle Bu i l d ing , 325 N. Sal isbury S t ree t , Raleigh, Nor th Caro l i na 27611, (919) 733-9020.
6
Chapter 2. A D i r e c t i o n f o r Change-Hierarchy o f Management Methods
wastes as w e l l as op t ions f o r recyc l i ng , s o l i d i f y i n g , o r o therwise d i spos ing o f t h e sludge. F i g u r e 2.1 es tab l i shes a h ie ra rchy o f op t ions f o r managing waste. It i s des i rab le t o take a look a t t h e process, determine t h e c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n on t h e ladder , then t r y t o move up t h e ladder. j u s t i f y a move up t h e ladder, i t i s wise t o look a t f u t u r e l i a b i l i t y , regu la - t i o n s , economics and environmental impact.
A. L i a b i l i t y
t i o n i n a dec i s ion on how t o handle hazardous wastes. The RCRA " c rad le t o grave" ph i losophy and t h e l awsu i t s be ing c a r r i e d ou t under Superfund aga ins t generators, who i n t h e pas t may have been l e g a l l y d ispos ing o f wastes which now must be exhumed from o l d l a n d f i l l s and rebur ied, a r e s t rong f a c t o r s which mo t i va te m in im iz ing t h e use o f l a n d f i l l s , even approved hazardous waste land- f i l l s . Whi le i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o assess a per-day cos t o f t h i s f u t u r e l i a b i l i t y , t h i s must be considered i n making dec is ions regard ing d i s p o s i t i o n o f wastes.
B. Regulat ions
The recent R C R A amendments r e q u i r e l a r g e generators t o have a hazardous waste m in im iza t i on program. E f f e c t i v e September 1, 1985, a generator must s i g n a c e r t i f i c a t e on each Uni form Hazardous Waste Mani fest s t a t i n g t h a t t h e generator has a program t o minimize t h e amount and t o x i c i t y o f waste generated and t h a t t h e genera tor ' s proposed t reatment o r d isposal method minimizes t h e t h r e a t t o human h e a l t h and t h e environment. The e f f o r t s t o min imize wastes must be i nc luded i n t h e annual r e p o r t t o t h e State.
There a r e a v a r i e t y o f op t ions fo r managing p l a n t operat ions t o reduce
When t r y i n g t o
As d iscussed i n Chapter 1, l i a b i l i t y may be t h e most impor tant considera-
Any a c t i o n taken t o minimize a p p l i c a b l e regu la t i ons w i l l reduce t h e paperwork and recordkeeping requirements.
c. cos t
The cos ts o f pay ing someone t o reuse a spent s o l u t i o n o r sludge must be balanced aga ins t t h e t o t a l d isposal costs. As discussed i n Chapter 1, l i a b i l i t y should be i nc luded i n cos t cons iderat ions. Yet, l i a b i l i t y i s o f t e n n o t inc luded because it i s d i f f i c u l t t o quant i f y . With environmental impai r - ment l i a b i l i t y insurance, i t i s eas ie r t o q u a n t i f y t h e e f f e c t o f changing a hand l ing method. But very few generators have such insurance, and such p o l i c i e s a r e now d i f f i c u l t t o obtain. Insurance companies can p o i n t out t h e types o f environmental impairment p o l i c i e s ava i lab le . L i a b i l i t y cost should be based on t h e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t , i n t h e l i f e t i m e o f t h e waste, a l i a b i l i t y i ssue w i l l be r a i s e d and on t h e magnitude o f t h a t l i a b i l i t y .
D. Conservat ion o f Resources
It i s f o o l i s h t o mix h i g h concent ra t ions o f these m a t e r i a l s and then bury t h e m ix tu re i n a manner t h a t makes r e t r i e v a l d i f f i c u l t . From a long- term p o i n t o f view, it i s i n i n d u s t r y ' s best i n t e r e s t t o min imize t h e purchase o f v i r g i n mater ia ls .
Solvents and metals a re a l l m a t e r i a l s o f l i m i t e d supply.
E. The H ierarchy
has been developed and i s shown i n F igu re 2.1. changing t h e process o r housekeeping t o reduce o r e l i m i n a t e waste produc- t i o n . l a n d f i l l . opt ions.
Help i s a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e generator who wants t o improve was&handling techniques. The Nor th Caro l i na P o l l u t i o n Prevent ion Pays Program , Depart- ment o f Natura l Resources and Community Development, coord inates t h e S ta te ' s e f f o r t i n p o l l u t i o n prevent ion and waste reduct ion. The goal i s t o f i n d and promote ways t o reduce, prevent, and recyc le wastes be fore they become p o l l u - t an ts . Th is s ta tewide e f f o r t addresses issues surrounding t o x i c ma te r ia l s , water and a i r q u a l i t y , and s o l i d and hazardous waste.
Consider ing t h e above fac to rs , a h ie rarchy f o r hand l ing hazardous wastes
Probably t h e poorest op t i on i s t h e placement o f s o l i d i f i e d wastes i n a Table 2.1 summarizes the l i a b i l i t y and economics o f t h e var ious
The most d e s i r a b l e o p t i o n i s
The program draws toge the r e f f o r t s t o reduce p o l l u t i o n through the a p p l i - c a t i o n o f technology t r a n s f e r s , research, f i n a n c i a l assistance, and techn ica l assistance. The program works d i r e c t l y w i t h t h e Department o f Human Resources on s o l i d and hazardous waste, t h e Department o f Commerce, t h e Governor's Waste Management Board on waste p o l i c y , and t h e Board o f Science and Technology on research and education. Pub l i ca t i ons and serv ices i nc lude
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
"The P o l l u t i o n Prevent ion Bibl iography," which references almost 1000 repor ts , a r t i c l e s , research papers, and ac tua l case s tud ies on p o l l u t i o n prevent ion techniques;
"N.C. Accomplishments" and "Environmental A u d i t i n g i n Nor th Caro l ina" which descr ibe success s t o r i e s i n waste reduc t ion and a u d i t i n g programs;
" P o l l u t i o n Prevent ion T ips " which summarize c u r r e n t technology and economic assessment on p o l l u t i o n prevent ion and s p e c i f i c i ndust r i es ;
Chal lenge Grants which prov ide matching funds f o r implementing p o l l u t i o n prevent ion p ro jec ts ; and
Research funds which are a v a i l a b l e f o r s tud ies o f new o r deve lop ing waste-reduct ion methods.
"Mr. Roger N. Schecter, P o l l u t i o n Prevent ion Pays Program, Department o f Natura l Resources and Communlty Development, P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, Nor th Caro l i na 27607, (919) 733-7015.
8
Figure 2 . 1
OPTIONS FOR MANAGING ELECTROPLATING SLUDGES ,
F Solidify Waste and Send to Non-Secure Landfill
greatest
Liability
least least
Solidify Waste and Send to Secure Landfill I- Solidify and Stabilize Waste and
r S e n d to a Secure Mono-Fill
Recycle-Recover Metal Values Out of Plant
Recycle-Recover r Metal Values L
-
In Plant
Eliminate Sludge Production
greatest
* Desirability
9
Table 2.1
Overview o f Var ious Handl ing A l t e r n a t i v e s f o r Meta l -Conta in ing Wastes
Opt ion L i m i t a t i o n s L i a b i l i t y Economics
Improve housekeep- i n g p r a c t i c e s t o min imize waste generat ion
Change process t o minimize o r e l i m i - na te waste genera- t i o n
Recycle i n - p l a n t
Recycle ou t -o f - p l a n t
S o l i d i f y - p lace i n secure l a n d f i l l
Secure l a n d f i l l
S o l i d i t y - p lace i n non-secure l a n d f i 11
Management must be amenable t o proce- dura l changes
Process and manage- ment must be amen- a b l e t o change
Cap i ta l f o r equip- ment, opera t ing and maintenance problems and expenses
Concentrat ion l e v e l s o f contaminants i n s o l u t i o n s and s 1 udges , modi f i ca- t i o n o f process may be necessary
Expense f o r s o l i d i - f i c a t i o n process as w e l l as f o r secure l a n d f i l l
No f r e e l i q u i d s
Reduced
Great ly reduced or e l im ina ted
Grea t l y reduced o r e l im ina ted
Grea t l y reduced, but : t ranspor ta - t i o n , f a i l u r e o f recyc le r , d isposa l o f res idue
Reduced, bu t : t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , f u t u r e s i t e problems
Transpor ta t ion ; f u t u r e s i t e problems
D e l i s t i n g may be withdrawn; s i t e problems
L i t t l e o r no cap i - t a l investment
Depends on p a r t i c u - l a r s i t u a t i o n
Depends on p a r t i c u - l a r s i t u a t i o n
Process mod i f i ca- t i o n expense, t ranspor ta t i on , u s u a l l y cheaper than l a n d f i l l i n g
$25-$250 per ton f o r s o l i d i f i c a t i o n , $85-$100 per b a r r e l f o r secure land- f i l l i n g
$85-$100 per b a r r e l
$25-$250 per ton
10
Chapter 3.
I n t h e h ie ra rchy o f waste management methods presented i n Chapter 2, t h e
Methods o f Reducing Waste Generat ion w i t h Case Studies f rom t h e E l e c t r o p l a t i n g Indus t ry .
most d e s i r a b l e op t i on i s t o change t h e process so t h a t hazardous wastes are e l i m i n a t e d a l together . i s no t always poss ib le . op t ions t o reduce, recyc le, reuse, o r burn be fore dec id ing t o p lace t h e waste i n a l a n d f i l l .
A hazardous waste a u d i t i s a h e l p f u l s tep i n s t a r t i n g t h e process o f Once t h e sources o f waste p roduc t ion are p i n -
Because o f t h e c u r r e n t s t a t e o f t h e technology, t h i s Therefore, i t i s o f t e n approp r ia te t o examine o t h e r
reducing waste generat ion. po inted, examinat ion o f ways t o change t h e process, improve t h e management o f t h e waste, o r recyc le o r reuse wastes may begin.
A. Hazardous Waste A u d i t s l 1 * l 2
Hazardous waste a u d i t s focus ing on a l l types o f waste streams are valu- a b l e f o r waste management personnel. i s t o (1) i d e n t i f y which waste streams can be e l im ina ted o r reduced, (2 ) i n s u r e compliance w i t h c u r r e n t regu la t ions , ( 3 ) i d e n t i f y f u t u r e p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l investments and f u t u r e compliance expendi tures, and ( 4 ) a l e r t employees t o t h e importance o f waste con t ro l .
improve t h e environmental impact o f t h e s i t e ' s a c t i v i t i e s . be w e l l organized with a step-by-step procedure or plan. by t h e a u d i t must be co r rec ted through an implementat ion program. a u d i t inc ludes :
The purpose o f t h e hazardous waste a u d i t
A successfu l a u d i t program requ i res a commitment f rom management t o The approach must
Problems uncovered A t y p i c a l
1) Determine which m a t e r i a l s used i n t h e p l a n t w i l l be hazardous wastes i f s p i l l e d , spo i led , o r discarded.
2) Take a waste inventory . L i s t waste streams t h a t are normal ly o r occas iona l l y hazardous. m a t e r i a l s w i l l become wastes. J u s t i f y why t h e waste i s i n t h e inventory .
For a l l wastes, l i s t waste name, source, s torage method, q u a n t i t y generated per u n i t o f t ime o r per u n i t o f product, hand l i ng method, and cos t o f handl ing.
Prepare a waste i n f o r m a t i o n sheet t o make f u t u r e d isposal eas ie r . Inc lude i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f waste, hazardous waste
Assume hazardous
3 )
4 )
'"'Environmental A u d i t i n g In fo rmat ion" i s a v a i l a b l e from t h e North Caro l i na P o l l u t i o n Prevent ion Pays Program. i n f ormat ion.
Arbor Science, 1983, Chapter 16.
See Chapter 2 f o r con tac t
12Gary F. Lingren, "Guide t o Managing I n d u s t r i a l Hazardous Waste," Ann
11
numbers and codes, repo r tab le q u a n t i t y f o r s p i l l s , DOT sh ipp ing d e s c r i p t i o n and i d e n t i f i c a t i o n numbers, DOT hazard c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , DOT l a b e l and con ta ine r s p e c i f i c a t i o n s , d isposa l m e t h o d l f a c i l i t y , t ranspor te r , p l a n t s torage area, hand l i ng precaut ions, and t o x i c i t y ra t i ng .
I n v e s t i g a t e how t h e waste can be e l im ina ted , reduced, recyc led, or reused ins tead o f sending it t o a l a n d f i l l or an o f f - s i t e t reatment f a c i l i t y .
5)
Case Study
Hazardous Waste Aud i ts
Company: Stanadyne, Inc., Moen D i v i s i o n Sanford, Nor th Caro l i na 27330 George F. McRae
In fo rmal a u d i t s have brought about ideas t h a t have reduced sludge generat ion.
Summary:
I n fo rma l hazardous waste a u d i t s proved h e l p f u l t o Stanadyne, Inc. George McRae, P la t i ng /Po l l u t i o n Cont ro l Manager, has reduced Stanadyne's sludge generat ion a f t e r implementing ideas generated from these aud i ts .
108,000 pounds o f sludge con ta in ing 12 percent copper, 7 percent chromium, and 6 percent n i cke l . t h e z inc d i e cas t p l a t e r , t h e brass p l a t e r , t h e s t r i p p e r f o r brass par ts , t h e braz ing s e t up f o r brass f i t t i n g s , and t h e chemical e t che r f o r brass par ts . From each o f these f i v e areas, t h e chemical composition, t h e q u a n t i t i e s generated and t h e o r i g i n s o f t h e wastes were determined.
reduce t h e waste. A number o f these ideas were implemented and two o f these ideas a r e presented as Case Studies 3.3 and 3.5.
reduced t o t h e maximum degree economical ly p r a c t i c a l as requ i red a f t e r September 1, 1985, under t h e 1984 RCRA reau tho r i za t i on .
B. Changing t h e Process
Before l o o k i n g a t waste recovery or r e c y c l i n g equipment, i t i s a good idea t o make a l l j u s t i f i a b l e m o d i f i c a t i o n s t o t h e cu r ren t process. With c u r r e n t technology, many processes can be changed t o e l i m i n a t e or reduce
The f i r s t s tep was t o analyze t h e waste. I n 1983, Stanadyne generated
The waste i s produced i n f i v e areas o f t h e p lan t :
For each o f these waste o r i g i n s , Stanadyne examined ideas t o e l i m i n a t e or
These a u d i t s w i l l h e l p Stanadyne c e r t i f y t h a t t h e waste volumes have been
13From s l i d e p resen ta t i on by George F. McRae a v a i l a b l e from the Governor 's Waste Management Board, (919) 733-9020.
12
hazardous waste generat ion. Some examples i n t h e e l e c t r o p l a t i n g i n d u s t r y i n c l u d e hexavalent t o t r i v a l e n t chrome, f i l t e r mod i f i ca t i ons , improved r i n s e techniques, and dragout reduc t ion which are discussed below.
1. Hexavalent t o T r i v a l e n t Chrome
T r i v a l e n t chromium i s rep lac ing hexavalent chromium i n many p l a t i n g app l i ca t i ons . Pioneer Metal F i n i s h i n g has been a successfu l t r i v a l e n t chrome p l a t e r f o r e i g h t years. The b e n e f i t s o f t r i v a l e n t chrome inc lude (1 ) a lower concent ra t ion o f chrome i n t h e p l a t i n g ba th reduces t h e t reatment cos t f rom dragged-out s o l u t i o n and from bath dumps, (2 ) t r i v a l e n t chrome i s l ess t o x i c than hexavalent chrome, (3 ) t r i v a l e n t chrome reduces t h e weight and volume o f wastes t h a t must be sent t o a l a n d f i l l .
Company :
Summary :
Supp l i e r :
Case Study 3.2
Hexavalent t o T r i v a l e n t Chrome
Pioneer Metal F i n i s h i n g F r a n k l i n v i l l e , New Jersey 08322 Harry De Soi, Pres ident
T r i v a l e n t chrome produces one seventh o f t h e sludge produced w i t h hexavalent chrome. T r i v a l e n t chrome i s much s a f e r t o use; lower ba th concent ra t ions help reduce dragout; and Pioneer Metal can now meet d ischarge standards without d i f f i c u l t y .
Harshaw/Fi l t r o l Company 3915 D Va l l ev Court Winston-Sal&, NC 27106 (Local Contact ) (800) 321-4802
Hexavalent chromium p l a t i n g normal ly operates a t 32 ounces o f chrome per ga l lon. T r i v a l e n t chromium p l a t i n g operates a t j u s t 2.7 ounces o f chrome per ga l lon. From Pioneer M e t a l ' s experience, hexavalent p l a t i n g produces seven t imes more sludge than t r i v a l e n t . Metal i s exper iment ing w i t h Envi rochroine" p l a t i n g baths which only r e q u i r e 0.7 ounces o f chrome per ga l lon, thereby reducing t h e dragout and t h e sludge product ion.
To f u her reduce t h e i r wastes, Pioneer
2. F i l t e r M o d i f i c a t i o n s
Stanadyne, Inc., has mod i f i ed t h e procedure used t o change t h e f i l t e r t o reduce t h e amount o f p l a t i n g s o l u t i o n going t o waste d u r i n g f i l t e r changes. I n e l e c t r o p l a t i n g , a f i l t e r i s requ i red t o ma in ta in p l a t i n g ba th q u a l i t y and minimize r e j e c t s due t o poor p l a t i n g (roughness).
14Envirochrome i s a r e q i s t e r e d trademark o f W. Canninq Plc.. Birminqham. England and i s s o l d b Summit , NJ 07901 (2013 460-7900.
t h e Freder ick Gumm Chemical Company; P.O.-Box 1108,
13
Case Study 3.3
Company: Stanadyne, Inc., Moen D i v i s i o n Sanford, Nor th Caro l i na 27330 George F. McRae
An a i r blowdown bn t h e f i l t e r chamber was i n s t a l l e d t o remove t h e l i q u i d l e f t behind a f t e r a pump-out.
P.O. Box 707
Summary:
Supp l ie r : Baker Brothers-South
Raeford, Nor th Caro l ina 25376 (919) 875-4167
Stanadyne was concerned w i t h t h e l i q u i d re ta ined i n t h e bottom o f t h e vessel a f t e r t h e f i l t e r chamber was pumped out. They i n s t a l l e d a low-pressure a i r connect ion t h a t would blow t h e l i q u i d back t o t h e p l a t i n g bath. b lowing system r e s u l t s i n a f i l t e r which i s much d r i e r and s a f e r t o change and which e l i m i n a t e s bath l i q u i d going t o t h e drain.
The a i r -
3. Rinse Techniques
NCR Corpora t ion has found t h a t they could reduce opera t ing cos ts w i thou t
Since t h e change, t h e i r water usage has decreased by 90 percent, NCR i s a l s o r e c y c l i n g valu-
NCR c la ims an economic
s a c r i f i c i n g e f f i c i e n c y by changing from a countercur ren t r i n s e ba th t o a spray r i n s e bath. and n i c k e l recovery has increased t o 99 percent. ab le chemical s a l t s r e s u l t i n g i n a reduc t ion i n waste s ludge generat ion. I n s t a l l i n g spray r i n s i n g requ i res inexpensive equipment and simple process changes r e l a t i v e t o o the r waste reduc t ion techniques. payback o f 1.5 years f o r spray r i n s i n g equipment over countercur ren t r i n s e techniques.
Case Study 3.4
Spray Rinse Techniques
Company: NCR Corpora t ion Cambridge, Ohio J i m Adams
Summary: Spray r i n s i n g decreases water consumption by 90 percent over countercur ren t r i n s e techniques.
R ins ing i s est imated t o consume 90 percent o f t h e water coming i n t o a p l a t i n g operat ion. a l s o decreases the volume o f the wastewater be ing sent t o t h e t reatment system, r e s u l t i n g i n lower expendi tures on wastewater t reatment chemicals. There a r e o t h e r low-water r i n s e techniques t h a t requ i re l i t t l e o r no c a p i t a l .
Conserving water no t o n l y decreases c o s t l y water b i l l s but
14
b) countercur ren t r inse- -very e f f i c i e n t , m u l t i p l e use o f water, u t i l i z i n g two o r more r i n s e tanks, w i t h f r e s h water in t roduced i n t h e l a s t tank on ly ; water f lows toward t h e contaminat ion source;
i s in t roduced i n each tank; c ) s e r i e s rinse--more e f f i c i e n t than a s ing le - runn ing r i nse , f r e s h water
d) spray r i n s e - - e f f i c i e n t f o r some p l a t e d i tems, works best on f l a t sheets; and
e ) dead, s t i l l , o r rec la im r i n s e - e s p e c i a l l y e f f i c i e n t i f used a f t e r metal p l a t i n g ba th f o r purposes o f recover ing t h e meta l .
The b e n e f i t s o f countercur ren t r i n s i n g i n terms o f water reduc t ion are shown i n Figure. 3.1. i n water usage comes from t h e a d d i t i o n o f t h e f i r s t few stages. The l a w o f d im in i sh ing re tu rns i s a t work here, and t h e exact number o f stages t o add w i l l depend upon f a c t o r s such as cost o f water and wastewater t reatment and t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f space. Table 3.1 shows t h e economics o f staged r i n s i n g f o r one s e t o f cond i t ions .
The graph demonstrates t h a t t h e most dramat ic reduc t i on
Figure 3 . 1
Effect of Added Rinse Stages on Water Use
764 -
50Q -
250 -
Rinse Stages
15M. S i t t i g , ~~~~ " E l e c t r o p l a t i n g and Related Metal F in i sh ing : Tox ic M a t e r i a l s Control",Noyes Data Corp., Park Ridge, NJ, 1978.
P o l l u t a n t and
15
Table 3.1 Economics o f Staged R ins ing f o r One Set o f Cond i t ionsX
Payof f on Number o f Water To ta l Water Incremental I n i t i a l
Stages Flow (GPO) Costs(a) ( $ / y r ) Cap i ta l Investment
1 125,000 $35,000 - - 2 12,000 $ 3,400 $25,000( b ) 1 year
3 1,500 $ 420 $35,000 3 years
4 2 50 $ 70 $45,000 29 years
( a )
( b ) I n i t i a l investment a l lows f o r m o d i f i c a t i o n s t o h o i s t i n g system.
To ta l water cos ts (purchase p lus t rea tment ) a t $.85/1,000 gal lons.
Add i t i ona l l a b o r not included.
* From ‘ ‘Con t ro l l i ng P o l l u t i o n f rom t h e Manufactur ing and Coat ing o f Metal
Products”, U.S. EPA, Environmental Research In fo rma t ion Center, Technology Trans fer , May 1977.
16
4. Dragout Reduction
Dragout r e f e r s t o t h e s o l u t i o n t h a t adheres t o o b j e c t s removed from p l a t i n g baths and r i n s e baths. Min imiz ing dragout w i l l minimize t h e amount of meta ls t h a t contaminate t h e next bath o r r inse.
Case Study 3.5
Dragout Reduction
Company: Stanadyne, Inc., Moen D i v i s i o n Sanford, Nor th Caro l ina 27330 George F. McRae
Dragout i s reduced by reducing bath concentrat ions, a l t e r i n g machine mot ion and des ign ing p a r t s and racks f o r maximum drainage.
Summary:
Stanadyne p r a c t i c e s a number o f techniques t o minimize dragout. These techniques inc lude:
a) S o l u t i o n makeup. By reducing t h e a c i d copper baths f rom 32 oz/gal t o 24 oz/gal, dragout metal content i s reduced by 20 percent. By reducing hexavalent chrome baths from 32 oz/gal t o 28 oz/gal , dragout metals can be reduced by 14 percent.
Machine motion. Hydrau l i c l i f t s on rack conveyors can be adjusted t o minimize dragout w i thout l o w e r i n g produc t ion by a l t e r i n g t h e withdrawal r a t e and t h e hang time.
Par ts designed f o r d r a i n a b i l i t y w i t h no cups o r she1 ves w i 11 reduce dragout. Stanadyne redesigned t h e i r p l a t i n g racks w i t h minimum sur face area (sur face area was reduced by as much as 55 percent) , minimum h o r i z o n t a l surfaces, no pockets and e f f e c t i v e o r i e n t a t i o n o f t h e p a r t t o promote drainage and t o minimize dragout.
b)
c ) Par ts and rack design.
C . Improving Management o f Waste
good idea t o improve housekeeping and waste management methods t o decrease water usage, decrease wastes generated and increase t h e process e f f i c i e n c y . good e f f o r t i n housekeeping can minimize t h e c a p i t a l expendi ture f o r recovery o r r e c y c l i n g equipment by reducing t h e requ i red s i z e o f t h e new equipment. Some p o s s i b i l i t i e s fo l low.
Before l o o k i n g i n t o waste recovery o r r e c y c l i n g equipment, i t i s a l s o a
A
17
1. Reducing S p i l l s and Leaks16
S p i l l s and leaks are a common headache shared by near l y a l l manufacturers There i s no magical cure f o r these problems, bu t t h e min imi - and businesses.
z a t i o n o f t h e i r frequency and impact should be pursued. Leaks are going t o occur and common sense d i c t a t e s t h a t t h e i r r e p a i r be undertaken prompt ly.
t reatment and d isposal costs. Prevent ion o f acc identa l s p i l l s and tank over- runs i s a must. Improved personnel t r a i n i n g can he lp min imize these pro- blems. An ana lys i s o f the cause o f each s p i l l can r e s u l t i n t h e fo rmu la t i on o f procedures t h a t w i l l prevent f u tu re occurrences.
equipment o r operat ions t h a t could cause t h e re lease o f hazardous mater ia ls . From t h e a u d i t , recommendations fo r changes inc lude i n s t a l l i n g improved pump seals, i n s t a l l i n g be l lows valves t o rep lace packed valves, i n s t a l l i n g tank l e v e l c o n t r o l s t h a t w i l l shut down pumps t o avo id o v e r f i l l i n g and implementing a r e g u l a r i ns t rumen ta t i on check t o i nsu re t h e o p e r a b i l i t y o f sa fe ty c o n t r o l s when needed.
The capture of t h e l e a k i n g s o l u t i o n s w i thou t d i l u t i o n w i l l decrease waste
Aud i ts o f t h e process as descr ibed on pages 11 through 12 can h e l p reveal
A s p i l l - r e c o v e r y p lan w i l l i n v o l v e t r a i n i n g , equipment and supp l ies t o enable recover ing t h e s p i l l e d q u a n t i t y p r e f e r a b l y i n a usable c o n d i t i o n and w i t h minimum d i l u t i o n o r contamination. w i t h copious q u a n t i t i e s o f water on l y compounds t h e recovery cost.
I n general, washing leaks and s p i l l s
2. Reducing Scrap and Rework17
To reduce scrap, it i s necessary t o i d e n t i f y t h e sources o f de fec ts t h a t l ead t o scrap and c o r r e c t t h e process causing t h e defects . t h a t generates a hazardous waste, t h e t o t a l q u a n t i t y o f hazardous waste can be reduced by m in im iz ing t h e amount o f product waste and rework.
I n s p e c t i n g t h e product p r i o r t o each produc t ion step avoids producing wastes t h a t w i l l r e s u l t f rom sh ipp ing and rework ing r e j e c t e d product ion.
3. T r a i n i n g Personnel
T r a i n i n g personnel can (1 ) meet RCRA t r a i n i n g requirements, (2) reduce
For any process
accidents, (3) he lp o b t a i n t h e cooperat ion o f employees i n reducing scrap, s p i l l s , s p o i l e d s o l u t i o n s and leaks and (4 ) he lp ob ta in t h e i r ideas f o r design changes and opera t ion changes t o reduce waste generat ion.
T r a i n i n g should i n c l u d e techn ica l and regu la to ry in fo rmat ion , t h e savings p o t e n t i a l
T r a i n i n g i s a cont inuous e f f o r t and should be so scheduled.
16Adapted from George F. McRae, "In-Process Waste Reduction," P l a t i n g and
I7Adapted from George F. McRae, "In-Process Waste Reduction," P l a t i n g - and
Surface F in i sh ing . June, 1985, pg. 14.
Sur face F i n i s h i n e , June, 1985, pg. 14.
18
f rom reduced wastes and in fo rma t ion on how reduced wastes w i l l b e n e f i t t h e employees, f o r example, by he lp ing i nsu re t h e i r jobs.
E f f o r t should be made t o take f u l l advantage o f employees' t e c h n i c a l a b i l i t i e s and t h e i r closeness t o t h e process.
Many companies have found i t wor thwhi le t o o f f e r i ncen t i ves f o r reduced waste and f o r waste reduc t ion ideas. The employees' f u l l support i s needed t o make a waste reduc t i on program work.
4. S e l l i n g o r Exchanging Wastes
I f ways t o recyc le o r reuse wastes are not f eas ib le , o r i f the purchase o f r e c y c l i n g equipment i s no t j u s t i f i a b l e , s e l l i n g o r exchanging waste remains a p o s s i b i l i t y . Stan Tay lo r o f Data General i n Clayton, Nor th Caro l ina, sug- gests t h a t b reak ing even o r making a smal l p r o f i t i s worth l e t t i n g someone have t h e waste on an as- is basis.
I n making break-even cos t c a l c u l a t i o n s o f a "sale," i n c l u d e t h e non- r e c y c l i n g d isposa l cost , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n cost , b u r i a l cost , and l i a b i l i t y cost . I f it i s no t poss ib le t o break even w i t h t h e waste as i s , it may be poss ib le t o make t h e waste a marketable product through a process m o d i f i c a t i o n such as concent ra t ing o r dry ing.
sludges and t h e d e s i r a b l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f metal wastes accepted by them. Prime cons ide ra t i on should be given t o t h e repu ta t i on o f t h e company se lected s ince t h e generator i s s t i l l l i a b l e f o r these wastes. l a n d f i l l s g r e a t l y reduces the l i a b i l i t y .
Table 3.2 presents a l i s t o f metal recovery f i r m s t h a t purchase metal
Keeping wastes ou t o f
Case Study 3.6
S e l l i n g Metal Sludges
Company : Data General Clayton, Nor th Caro l i na Stan Tay lo r
metal value. Minor process changes were necessary t o make t h e s ludge acceptable f o r recovery. t h e l a n d f i l l i n g cost .
Summary: Data General s e l l s sludges t o a German company which recovers t h e
They save money by e l i m i n a t i n g
Data General t akes t h e r e c y c l i n g approach t o improve t h e i r management o f wastes. T h e i r goal has been t o send no sludges from t h e i r wastewater t r e a t - ment p l a n t t o l a n d f i l l s . The s teps they take t o accomplish t h i s i n c l u d e t h e segregat ion o f wastes, changing t h e composi t ion o f coagulants used i n t h e t reatment process (use o f a polymer i ns tead o f f e r rous s u l f a t e and alum) and t h e m o d i f i c a t i o n o f s o l i d s separat ion, t h i c k e n i n g and d r y i n g processes. The f i l t e r press has been mod i f ied t o produce a sludge o f 60 percent so l ids . E l e c t r o l y t i c metal recovery equipment removes lead from t h e sludge t o increase i t s value. F o r t y thousand pounds o f sludge were so ld t o a German company one
19
Table 3.2. E l e c t r o p l a t i n q : le ta l Mar ie Recyclers
Sludges and so lu t i ons : Cu s t r i p p i n g and cyanides
Cu, m s t base
i a r t e s Accepted
Xe td l s Recovered
Required Metal COF.re"t
Other Soecral R e q u i r a x n
S
Transpor t
Product
I I Reclaim A I e tchants , 1 Cu etchants from I Sludges t
i c i r c u i t board Sludges, so lu t i ons , 1 , ' . and cyanides acids. f e r r i c c h l o r i d e
and aluminum m a t e r i a l s etchants, C r , Sn [ 1 i ndus t r y I
I and Pb s t r i p p e r s and so lde r cond i t i one rs
Same as Waste ~ Cb and 2n
! ' i
! ~ Cu, Sn. N i , and Cu, pvecious !Sane as waste
Penni t s
neta ls , and metals and accepted above precious metals (cyanide
h l o n k t a l s 40 Rector S t New York,NY 1000 (2121742-1043
1 precious metals I i accepted above
!
Sludges
Cu, C r , Sn, N i , and prec ious metals
20?? Cu or h ighe r 2-20s o t h e r meta!s
Sample s i r e ; 2 01.
Payment f o r metals, prec ious metals, penal ty f o r undesi rab le compounds
Ship t o overseas r e f i n e r i e s
None (b roke r )
o r l d Resources Co. : 1603 Anderson Rd
Macdermid, Tnc. i Madison i n d u s t r i e s 1 Nor th land ChemrcaT7
2787 Uaterbury,CT 26724 Old 8ridge.N.l 0885d Providence,RI 32905 20 Brookside Rd P.O. Box 175 275 Aliens Av a (203)575-5700 i (201)727-2225 (40:]781-6340 (516)349-8800 /(301)525-2200 1 (319)537-3537
I
i ' [low levels (100 ppml jmiXtUreS accepted 1 I NO : requirement, 1 I iNOt app l i cab le i v o t a p p l i c a b l e 14 oz. Cu/gai.,
I I tem basis,
i sold t ed waste ! inater ia l s ; mixtures (ma t e r i a i Content I l o t h e r metals Streams il P I U S jdCCePted I I j i
45, Be, Pb ! 2 02. s l i d g e 1100 z! l i q u i d
' 2 Ib dry cake a r 1 I I gal . l i q u i d Sludge ! I
i I I
i dec is ion basea i ? a p ? n t fsr Rh, ? t , !Payrent based on )n p r a f i t l c a s t f ac to rs
iA l content
i I I
iAu. Ag * pd
!
;el l e r pays Depends on l o c a t i o n S e l l e r pays ( S e l l e r j pays and q u a n t i t y
i
' a r t 8 I jNone j None P a r t 8 I n t e r i m s ta tus P a r t 8
year. Data General saved money compared t o t h e cos t o f l a n d f i l l i n g t h e sludge. Brokers such as Bernard Kramarsky and Amlon Metals, l i s t e d i n Table 3.2, handle such f o r e i g n shipments.
v ices. exchanges across t h e count ry t h a t prov ides t h i s l i s t i n g serv ice. es tab l i shed i n 1978, i s a n o n - p r o f i t i n fo rma t ion c lear inghouse sponsored by t h e Urban I n s t i t u t e o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f North Caro l i na a t Char lo t te . They p u b l i s h a l i s t o f wastes t h a t a re a v a i l a b l e f o r sa le as we l l as a l i s t o f wastes t h a t some f i r m s would l i k e t o buy.
D. I n s t a l l a t i o n o f Recovery Equipment
Al though t h e company pa id Data General l ess than t h e t r a n s p o r t cost ,
Another o p t i o n a v a i l a b l e i s l i s t i n g @e wastes w i t h waste exchange ser- The Piedmont Waste Exchange (PWE) i s one o f a number o f waste
The PWE,
1. I d e n t i f y i n g Needs
Throughout t h i s note, the r e c u r r i n g theme has been t o encourage t h e reduc t i on o f p o l l u t i o n i n operat ions. determine recovery equipment needs are examined. i n t h e type o f equipment t h a t would be use fu l . Th is sec t i on i s aimed a t successfu l a p p l i c a t i o n s o f recovery equipment i n t h e e l e c t r o p l a t i n g indus t ry .
I n t h i s sect ion, t h e requirements t o Each i n d u s t r y i s d i f f e r e n t
Recovery techniques vary depending upon t h e ma te r ia l be ing recovered. The f o l l o w i n g quest ions can he lp i d e n t i f y recovery equipment needs:
What waste streams are worth recover ing? Determine t h e amount o f va luab le wastes going t o waste t reatment. Contact recovery equipment supp l i e rs t o d iscuss t h e app l i ca t i on . (Many supp l i e rs o f f e r t echn ica l ideas as w e l l as c a p i t a l cos t estimates.) Complete an economic a n a l y s i s f o r each waste stream. Remember t o i nc lude l i a b i l i t y i n t h e economi CS.
How much m a t e r i a l should be recovered? (The law o f d im in i sh ing returns.) When t h e incremental cos t exceeds t h e incremental savings, recovery i s no longer valuable. Contact supp l i e rs t o determine t h e incrementa l cos t and savings.
What steps he lp cope w i t h recyc led i m p u r i t i e s ? I f i m p u r i t i e s b u i l d up, choose a recovery technique t h a t w i l l be more s e l e c t i v e f o r t h e va luab le ma te r ia l s , o r watch what i s added t o t h e process. water p u r i t y and purchased chemicals ' p u r i t y .
What i s r i g h t f o r a p a r t i c u l a r process? Th is can be answered a f t e r cons ider ing t h e above quest ions. Consider l i a b i l i t y , waste d isposal cos ts and t h e company's po l i cy .
Check
l acon tac t Mary McDaniel, D i r e c t o r , Piedmont Waste Exchange, UNCC Urban I n s t i t u t e , Char lo t te , Nor th Caro l ina 28223, (704) 597-2307.
21
I f recovery equipment proves uneconomical a f t e r cons ider ing a l l f ac to rs , s e l l i n g t h e waste stream t o companies t h a t have r e c y c l i n g o r recovery equip- ment i s a v i a b l e so lu t ion . Companies t h a t have t h e equipment may a l ready be l i s t i n g t h e i r serv ices i n t h e Piedmont Waste Exchange.
Because o f t h e h igh cost o f metals, t h e e l e c t r o p l a t i n g i n d u s t r y was d r i v e n t o search f o r recovery methods t o remain compet i t i ve . number o f recovery methods a v a i l a b l e f o r e l e c t r o p l a t i n g which i nc lude evapora- t i o n , i o n exchange, e l e c t r o l y t i c metal recovery, reverse osmosis and sludge dry ing .
There are a
2. Evaporat ion
Evaporat ion i s a concent ra t ion process. Water i s evaporated from a so lu t i on , i nc reas ing t h e concent ra t ion o f s o l u t e i n t h e remaining so lu t i on . Evaporat ion i s t h e best -establ ished and genera l l y t h e most app l i cab le approach f o r r e t u r n o f dragout. a l t e r n a t i v e s , i t s s i m p l i c i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y are f f s e t t i n g f a c t o r s which must be entered i n t o a r e a l i s t i c economic comparison.
While evaporat ion i s t h e most energy- in tens ive o f t h e
14
Company:
Summary:
Supp l ie r :
Case Study 3.7
Evaporator
Easco Hand Tools Gastonia, Nor th Caro l ina R ick S t i n n e t t , P lan t Engineer
Evaporator recovers chromium t h a t i s dragged out o f p l a t i n g baths. Contaminants are removed by a c a t i o n exchange u n i t .
Corning Glass Works Corning Process Systems BF P l a n t B i g F l a t s , New York 14814 (607) 974-0280
Easco Hand Tools i s c u r r e n t l y us ing a Corning evaporator f o r chromic ac id According t o R ick S t i n n e t t , P l a n t Engineer, t h e evaporator was recovery.
s i zed by assuming t h a t 80 percent o f t h e d a i l y chromic a c i d consumption i s recoverable f rom t h e r i n s e baths. Mr. S t i n n e t t po in ted out t h a t t h e evaporator no t on l y concentrates t h e chromium bu t a l so t h e contaminants. remedy t h i s problem Easco i n s t a l l e d a c a t i o n exchange u n i t t o remove i m p u r i t i e s .
To
"From "Ava i l ab le Technology f o r Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal" , S ta te o f C a l i f o r n i a Heal th and Welfare Agency, 1982, Jan Radimsky, (916) 324- 1819.
22
Case Study 3.8
Evaporator
Company: Eastern P l a t i n g Newport, Tennessee Roger Woods
f o r a payback from s i x weeks t o s i x months.
133 L v l e Lane
Summary: Evaporator recovers n i c k e l and chromium ( t r i v a l e n t and hexavalent)
Supp l ie r : Techmatic, Inc.
Nashv i l le , Tennessee 37211 (615) 256-1416
Eastern P l a t i n g i s c u r r e n t l y us ing f o u r "Headie" evaporators manufactured by Techmatic, Inc. chrome and hexavalent chrome. payback i s anywhere from s i x weeks t o s i x months. Roger Woods a t Eastern P l a t i n g says h i s experience w i t h "Headie" evaporators has been exce l l en t . They have low maintenance requirements and are inexpensive t o operate, making these h i g h l y recommended.
The evaporators are used t o concentrate n i c k e l , t r i v a l e n t Cost per evaporator i s est imated a t $2500 and
Case Study 3.9
Evaporator
Company: Pioneer Metal F i n i s h i n g F r a n k l i n v i l l e , New Jersey 08322 Harry De Soi, Pres ident
B o i l e r evaporates water t o concentrate t r a c e i m p u r i t i e s as p a r t o f a zero wastewater d ischarge system.
1300 Schwab Road H a t f i e l d , Pennsylvania 19440
Summary:
Supp l ie r : Zerpol
(215) 368-0501
Harry De Soi, Pres ident o f Pioneer Metal F in i sh ing , Inc., u t i l i z e s h i s
I n t h i s Zerpol i n s t a l l a -
For Pioneer,
b o i l e r as an evaporator i n which t o concentrate t r a c e i m p u r i t i e s f o r d i s - posal . Th i s unusual concent ra t ion technique i s p a r t o f a zero wastewater d ischarge system i n s t a l l e d f o r Pioneer by Zerpol. t i o n , long- term s e t t l i n g a f t e r p r e c i p i t a t i o n permi ts water reuse. l a t i o n r e q u i r e s very c l o s e a t t e n t i o n t o dragout, p a r t design, rack design, r i n s i n g , b a t h chemist ry and the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f contaminants. t h i s c lose a t t e n t i o n has r e s u l t e d i n a major reduc t i on i n sludge generation.
The i n s t a l -
23
3. I o n Exchange
I o n exchange i s a process which removes one i o n from a s o l u t i o n and s u b s t i t u t e s i t f o r another ion. The exchange mate r ia l i s a g ranu lar s o l i d known as an ion-exchange res in .
Metal f i n i s h i n g f a c i l i t i e s u t i l i z e i o n exchange t o concentrate and p u r i f y t h e i r baths. cadmium, chromium (hexavalent and t r i v a l e n t ) , copper, cyanide, gold, i r o n , lead, manganese, n i cke l , selenium, s i l v e r , t i n and z inc.
As an end-of-pipe t reatment i o n exchange i s f e a s i b l e but i t s g rea tes t value i s i n recovery app l i ca t ions . recover process chemicals. Evaporat ion i s o f t e n requ i red t o f u r t h e r concentrate t h e metals so t h a t they may be returned t o process solut ions.20
I o n exchange has proven e f f e c t i v e f o r aluminum, arsenic ,
I o n exchange has several a p p l i c a t i o n s i n t h e metal f i n i s h i n g indus t ry .
It i s commonly used t o p u r i f y r i n s e water and
Case Study 3.10
I o n Exchange
Company: Lufkin--The Cooper Group Apex, Nor th Caro l i na 27502 Ter ry Parsons
payback was c a l c u l a t e d a t 5 years.
925 Brock Road South Toronto, Ontar io , Canada L1W 2x9
Summary: N icke l i s recovered from t h e r i n s e ba th by i o n exchange. The i r
Supp l ie r : Eco-Tec
(416) 831-3400
L u f k i n has i n s t a l l e d an Eco-Tec i o n exchanger t o recover n i c k e l . The contents o f t h r e e r i n s e tanks f lows i n t o a h o l d i n g tank where m ix ing occurs. The so lu t i on , which conta ins 267 ppm N i , i s f i l t e r e d t o remove inso lub les , i t then en te rs t h e i o n exchanger and e x i t s w i t h a concent ra t ion o f 10 ppm N i . N i cke l recovered as n i c k e l s u l f a t e w i t h a concent ra t ion o f 16 oz/gal and a pH o f 1 goes through d e a c i d i f i c a t i o n , e x i t s w i t h a pH o f 3 and i s re turned t o t h e p l a t i n g bath. L u f k i n suggests t h a t accuracy be used i n de termin ing t h e s i z e o f t h e i o n exchanger needed. tenance and care requ i red f o r proper operat ion.
The i o n exchanger i s regenerated w i t h s u l f u r i c acid.
A lso p a r t o f t h e purchase cons idera t ion i s recogn i t i on o f t h e main-
20From "Ava i l ab le Technology f o r Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal" , S ta te o f C a l i f o r n i a Hea l th and Welfare Agency, 1982, Jan Radimsky, (916) 324- 1819.
24
4. E l e c t r o l y t i c Metal Recovery (EMR)
E l e c t r o l y t i c recovery i s a process i n which t h e r e i s e lec t rochemica l reduc t i on o f metal i ons a t t h e cathode where these ions are reduced t o elemental metal. anode. E l e c t r o l y t i c recovery i s used p r i m a r i l y t o remove metal i ons f rom so lu t i ons .
A t t h e same time, t h e r e i s e v o l u t i o n o f oxygen a t t h e
Conventional e l e c t r o l y t i c recovery equipment cons is ts o f a dragout recovery tank l oca ted i n t h e p l a t i n g l i n e and an e l e c t r o l y t i c recovery tank and r e c i r c u l a t i o n pump remote f rom t h e p l a t i n g l i n e . A t y p i c a l e l e c t r o l y t i c recovery tank uses s t a i n l e s s s t e e l o r carbon f i b e r cathodes upon which t h e recovered metal i s deposited. A f t e r t h e coa t ing i s s u f f i c i e n t l y t h i c k , t h e metal can be peeled o f f and re tu rned t o t h e r e f i n e r , o r t h e p l a t e d s t a i n l e s s s t e e l can be used f o r anodes i n t h e p l a t i n g bath.
High p l a t i n g e f f i c i e n c i e s r e q u i r e t h e s o l u t i o n t o be reasonably we l l a g i t a t e d i n t h e e l e c t r o l y t i c c e l l where t h e cathode sheets are i n use.
To avo id bu i l dup o f harmful i m p u r i t i e s i n t h e r e c i r c u l a t i n g so lu t i on , a f r a c t i o n o f i t may need t o be dumped t o waste t reatment.
E l e c t r o l y t i c recovery i s used t o recover copper, t i n , s i l v e r and o the r meta ls f rom p l a t i n g and e tch ing ba th dragout. Because t h e e l e c t r o l y t i c process main ta ins a low concent ra t ion o f metal i n t h e dragout recovery process r e l a t i v e t o t h a t i n t h e p l a t i n g bath, metal dragover i n t o t h e succeeding r i n s e tank i s minimized. This , i n turn, minimizes e l o a d on t h e waste t rea tment system and eventual p o l l u t a n t discharge rate. !ti
Case Study 3.11
E l e c t r o l y t i c Metal Recovery
Company: Caro l i na Ga lvan iz ing Aberdeen, Nor th Caro l i na Ernes t Arsenau l t
EMR recovers 60-80 percent o f t h e copper fo rmer l y l o s t . Summary:
Caro l i na Ga lvan iz ing i n Aberdeen, Nor th Caro l ina, and Daystrom F u r n i t u r e i n South Boston, V i r g i n i a , are two companies t h a t have used EMR technology. Ernes t Arsenaul t o f Caro l i na Ga lvan iz ing s a i d t h a t 60 t o 80 percent o f t h e copper fo rmer l y l o s t was recovered by t h e i r EMR i n s t a l l a t i o n .
21From "Ava i l ab le Techno1 ogy f o r Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal ", Sta te o f C a l i f o r n i a Hea l th and Welfare Agency, 1982, Jan Radimsky, (916) 324- 1819.
25
5. Reverse Osmosis
Reverse osmosis i s s i m i l a r t o evaporat ion i n t h a t it concentrates most
Reverse osmosis app l i es h igh pressure t o a s u i t a b l e t h i n membrane, c o n s t i t u e n t s o f dragout so t h a t the concentrate can be re tu rned t o t h e p l a t i n g bath. overcoming t h e osmotic pressure and passing water through t h e membrane. The metal s a l t molecules do no t pass through t h e membrane. Th is process prov ides a r e l a t i v e l y s a l t - f r e e water stream and a s o l u t i o o f metal s a l t s a t a h ighe r concen t ra t i on than the o r i g i n a l dragout so lu t i on . 92
According t o B i l l Davis o f Sepratech, reverse osmosis i s p a r t i c u l a r l y use fu l f o r removing water from d i l u t e so lu t ions . I n p l a t i n g , t h e most suc- c e s s f u l a p p l i c a t i o n has been n i c k e l recovery f rom a countercur ren t r inse. For a p p l i c a t i o n s where metal recovery i s o f low p r i o r i t y , reverse osmosis can p rov ide a water savings and reduce t h e load t o t h e wastewater t reatment system.
Case Study 3.12
Reverse Osmosis
Company: Acme-United Corporat ion Fremont, Nor th Caro l ina 27830 David Birkhead
Reverse osmosis recovers n i c k e l s a l t s worth $40,000 f o r a two-year payback on t h e equipment.
Osmo Membrane System 5951 Clearwater D r i v e Minnetonka, MN 55343
Summary:
Supp l ie r : Osmonics, Inc.
(612) 933-2277
Acme-United found t h a t t h e i r reverse osmosis i n s t a l l a t i o n produced t h e f o l l o w i n g sav ings f o r a n i c k e l recovery app l i ca t i on :
Deionized water reduced N icke l c h l o r i d e reduced N icke l s u l f a t e reduced B o r i c a c i d reduced Waste t reatment sludge reduced
95% 94% 93% 79% 93%
The t o t a l cost o f t h e 1980 i n s t a l l a t i o n was $62,000, which inc ludes $39,000 o f reverse osmosis equipment. a pay back pe r iod o f approximately two years.
A savings o f $40,000 per year prov ides
22From "Ava i l ab le Techno1 ogy f o r Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal ", Sta te o f C a l i f o r n i a Hea l th and Welfare Agency, 1982, Jan Radimsky, (916) 324- 1819.
26
I n i t i a l l y , several problems prevented smooth opera t ion o f t h e reverse osmosis equipment. Since t h e u n i t concentrates every th ing , a carbon-packed f i l t e r was i n s t a l l e d t o remove i r o n from t h e concentrat ion. A problem w i t h b r i gh tness was resolved by changing t h e type o f b r i g h t e n e r used.
Company:
Summary:
Supp l i e r :
Case Study 3.13
Reverse Osmosis
S tan ley Tools Cheraw, South Caro l i na 29520 Mike Vannest
Reverse osmosis recovers n i c k e l s a l t s f o r t h e i r " s t i l l " r inse. They expect a payback o f 1.3 years f o r t h e i r second i n s t a l l a t i o n .
Osmonics, Inc. Osmo Membrane System 5951 Clearwater D r i v e Minnetonka, MN 55343 (612) 933-2277
Stan ley Tools has been us ing a 25 gal lon-per-hour reverse osmosis i n s t a l -
Stanley Tools r e c e n t l y purchased used reverse osmosis equipment
l a t i o n w i t h g rea t success f o r t h e l a s t e i g h t years t o recover n i c k e l s a l t s f rom t h e i r " s t i l l " n i c k e l r inse . The n i c k e l s a l t s are re tu rned t o t h e n i c k e l p l a t i n g bath. w i t h a 39 gal lon-per-hour capac i ty f o r $24,000 ($56,000 value new). Stanley Tools expects a 1.3 year payback f o r t h i s i n s t a l l a t i o n .
Maintenance f o r t h e reverse osmosis equipment i nvo l ves a minimal amount o f t ime. Membrane c lean ing and f i l t e r replacement a re performed once a week. One person f o r each i n s t a l l a t i o n has been assigned these responsi- b i l i t i e s and t h e t r a i n i n g f o r these tasks cons is t s o f one two-hour session. It i s est imated t h a t t h e f i l t e r s cost $30 per year and t h e t o t a l maintenance i n c l u d i n g t h e f i l t e r cos t i s o n l y $100 p e r year. The f i r s t reverse osmosis i n s t a l l a t i o n ran seven years be fore t h e membranes had t o be replaced.
M r . Vannest o f S tan ley Tools recommended t h a t reverse osmosis equipment be c a r e f u l l y s ized. I f i n s t a l l a t i o n i s t o o la rge , f requent shutdowns become necessary due t o t h e r e l a t i v e l y low volumes o f waste. ab le s ince they increase maintenance and wear on t h e equipment. hand, i f an i n s t a l l a t i o n i s t o o s m a l l , p a r t o f t h e waste stream must go untreated.
Shutdowns are undes i r - On t h e o ther
6. Sludge Dry ing
Sludge d r y i n g i s a technique t h a t can reduce t h e volume and weight o f the sludge. and are removing water w i t h c e n t r i f u g e s and f i l t e r s . p rov ide a s o l i d conten t o f 20 t o 30 percent by weight. and b u r i a l o f sludge i s p r i c e d by t h e t o t a l volume o r t o t a l weight, i t i s d e s i r a b l e t o t r y t o f u r t h e r d r y t h e f i l t e r cake o r c e n t r i f u g e output. f i r m s o f f e r i n g exper imental sludge dryers a re l i s t e d below.
Many e l e c t r o p l a t e r s a re t a k i n g t h e sludge from t h e i r s e t t l i n g vessel These techniques w i l l
Since t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
Three
27
a) JWI, I ~ c . , ~ ~ i s o f f e r i n g t h e J-MATE Hydroxide Sludge Reducer. device, an i n f r a r e d heat source vapor izes water f rom a con ta ine r i n which the sludge i s ag i ta ted . The process cont inues u n t i l t h e s o l i d conten t i s 60 t o 80 percent. Several of these d rye rs a re i n opera- t i o n . George F. McRae o f Stanadyne, Inc. i n Sanford, NC i n s t a l l e d a 5 cubic f o o t d r y e r w i t h a dust c o l l e c t o r f o r about $20,000. hour c y c l e t ime d r i e s the sludge t o about 70% so l ids . He est imates t h e e l e c t r i c a l usage t o be about $5.30 per load.
feeds sludge i n t o the d r y i n g chamber. Dan Singelyn o f Techmatic repo r t s t h a t they are ach iev ing s a t i s f a c t o r y opera t ion on c e n t r i f u g e - d r i e d sludges and be l i eves t h a t a r e c e n t l y mod i f ied model w i l l suc- c e s s f u l l y d r y f i l t e r cakes as we l l .
Sonodyne Indus t r i es25 has developed a pu lse d r y i n g system which w i l l be used t o dry e l e c t r o p l a t i n g sludge. pa r t s , us ing a s o n i c a l l y generated pressure pu lse t o r a p i d l y move wet sludge through t h e dryer.
WMI, Inc.,26 prov ides bo th gas - f i r ed and e l e c t r i c sludge dryers. Energy cos ts f o r gas are approximately 30% o f e l e c t r i c costs. Hor i zon ta l l i d design permi ts l o c a t i o n d i r e c t l y under t h e f i l t e r press. S t a r t i n g w i t h 20-30% d r y s o l i d s f i l t e r cake, t y p i c a l c y c l e t i m e t o a t t a i n 70-80% d r y s o l i d s powder i s 3-5 hours. s i z e s are a v a i l a b l e f rom 4 cub ic f e e t t o 48 cub ic f e e t capac i t ies .
I n t h i s
The 4-7
b) Techmatic, i s producing a d rye r i n which a r o t a t i n g auger
c ) The equipment i s f r e e o f moving
d)
S ix standard
23JWI, Inc., 2155 112th Avenue, Hol land, MI 49423, (616) 772-9011.
24Techmatic, Inc., 133 L y l e Lane, Nashv i l le , TN 37211, (615) 256-1416.
25Sonodyne Indus t r i es , 11135 SW Cap i ta l Highway, Por t land, OR 97219, (503) 245-7259.
26Waste Management, Inc., 5304 Panola I n d u s t r i a l Blvd., Decatur, GA 30035, (404) 987-3248.
28
North Carolina Department of Human Resources Division of Health Services Environmental Health Section Solid 6 Hazardous Waste Management Branch P. 0. Box 2091 Raleigh, NC 27602
BULK RATE U. S. POSTAGE P A I D I
RALEIGH, NC 27611 PERMIT $ 1547
