mark myles, turi, masccc 2013
DESCRIPTION
TURI, Toxics Use Reduction InstituteTRANSCRIPT
Pollution Prevention and Green Chemistry
Making Our Industries and Communities Safer, Healthier, and More Competitive (I’m serious)
[email protected] www.turi.org
Pollution Prevention
Massachusetts’ Toxics Use Reduction Act
(TURA)
Green Chemistry and Design for Environment
A little history of toxics and pollution prevention
[email protected] www.turi.org
[email protected] www.turi.org
Toxics – always newsworthy
Source Reduction Toxics Use Reduction
• Energy Conservation • Cleaner Production
• Resource Conservation
Treatment Recycling Waste Disposal Minimization
Energy Recovery
Pollution Control = end of pipe remediation
Pollution Prevention = greater efficiency with less or no toxic material
Pollution Prevention vs Pollution Control
[email protected] www.turi.org
Reactionary En
d-of
-the-
pipe
rem
edia
tion
4. Prevention
3. Recycling
2. Treatment
1. Disposal
Anticipatory
1. Prevention
3. Treatment
2. Recycling
SHIFT
4. Disposal
[email protected] www.turi.org
Toxics Use Reduction Act (TURA)
• Users of large amounts of toxics must:
– Report toxics use
– Pay fees
– Plan toxics reduction
• 2006 Amendments: – Designates higher and lower hazard substances
– Resource Conservation Planning – energy, water, materials
– Integrates Environmental Management Systems into TUR
Adopted 1989 Effective 1990
Expanded 2006
[email protected] www.turi.org
TURA – Major aspects
• Massachusetts competitiveness • Toxics reduction • Technical analysis • Financial analysis • Plans in good faith
[email protected] www.turi.org
Required data collection points
Production Unit
In-plant treatment or recycling
Byproduct
Raw Material
Product
Emission
[email protected] www.turi.org
Did We Achieve the Goals?
17
Total Use Production Adjusted
0.0
200.0
400.0
600.0
800.0
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Year
Mill
ions
of P
ound
s
Byproduct
0.020.040.060.080.0
100.0120.0
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Year
Mill
ions
of P
ound
s
TUR Technical Analysis
[email protected] www.turi.org
TUR Financial Analysis – costs of toxics
Material/substance cost
Worker protective equipment
Worker Compensation
Insurance
Hazardous waste hauling
Air & water emissions permitting
Air & water emissions
abatement equipment
Risk protection – accidental spills &
discharge
‘Soft’ costs – reputation, image,
etc.
TUR Plans – evaluating safer alternatives Technical Feasibility • Analyze current processes and use of
toxics • Evaluate safer alternatives • Choose alternative on technical merits • Employ sound engineering principles
Financial Viability • Collect information on cost of toxics • Determine changes in cash flows • Apply measures of profitability • Base decisions on accepted accounting
practice
Toxics Reduction Methods • Input substitution • Product reformulation • Process redesign or modification • Improve operation & maintenance • In-process recycling
[email protected] www.turi.org
Toxics Use Reduction Planners
• Only professionals able to certify MA TUR Plans
• 48-hour intensive course
• Certified by exam
TURA 20th Anniversary Video at www.turi.org
“[Becoming a TUR Planner] was a whole new career path….we have new credibility; people listen to us; we became part of the business planning process.” Jack Bailey, TUR Planner, Bose Corp.
What makes a product ‘green’?
Framework for Sustainable Products
[email protected] www.turi.org
Alternatives Assessment
Risk Assessment
Better Solutions
Problem-based approach Debates delay prevention Toxicity data limited Risk shifting Game nobody wins
Focus on solutions & opportunities Greater stakeholder participation Promotes innovation, enterprise creation Multi-risk consideration
Green Screen
• Developed by Clean Production Action
• 17 environmental, health and safety criteria
http://www.cleanproduction.org/library/Green_Screen_Report.pdf
33
Car
cino
geni
c
Mut
agen
ic
Rep
rodu
ctiv
e
Dev
elop
men
tal
End
ocrin
e D
isru
ptio
nN
euro
logi
cal
Met
abol
ites
Deg
rada
tion
Pro
duct
s
DecaBDE 1163-19-5 97 M L L M M M L L L nd L L nd L L vH Mpenta- to nona-BDE
tri- to nona-BDE
PentaBDE 32534-81-9 nd L M M H M L H L L M M nd H H vH vH
OctaBDE 32536-52-0 nd L M H M M L H L nd L L nd L L vH M ndlower
PBDEs
Human Health Effects Ecotox. Fate
Chr
onic
Per
sist
ence
Bio
accu
mul
atio
n
Breakdown Products
Decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE) - CAS# 1163-19-5
Bold text = based on experimental data. Black italics text= based on analog data or expert judgment.
Breakdown ProductsPriority Effects
Acu
te T
oxic
ityS
yste
mic
/Org
an E
ffect
s
Sen
sitiz
atio
n (s
kin)
Sen
sitiz
atio
n (re
spira
tory
)
Irrit
atio
n/C
orro
sion
(ski
n)
Irrit
atio
n/C
orro
sion
(e
yes)
Imm
une
Sys
tem
Effe
cts
Acu
te
Chemical CAS#%
in F
orm
ulat
ion
Green Screen Benchmarking DecaBDE
[email protected] www.turi.org
‘Design for Environment’ Definitions
• “…product contains only those ingredients that pose the least concern [regarding human health and environmental effects] among chemicals in their class.”
• “Ecodesign aims at reducing the environmental impact of products, including the energy consumption throughout their entire life cycle.”
“The DfE program has three priorities: • Energy efficiency - reduce the energy needed
to manufacture and use our products
• Materials innovation - reduce the amount of materials used in our products and develop materials that have less environmental impact and more value at end-of-life
• Design for recyclability - design equipment that is easier to upgrade and/or recycle”
DfE Definitions
Drivers: Legislation
REACh RoHS TURA ToSCA
EU Energy CA Appliance Efficiency
MA “Stretch Codes”
Energy
Toxics Resource Conservation
WEEE ELV
EU Ecodesign Directive: all 3
Drivers: Labeling and Certification
Drivers: Consumer Preference
We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking
we used when we created them. Albert Einstein
[email protected] +1 978.934.3298
www.turi.org