Pollution prevention options

Pollution prevention options are usually subdivided into four areas (1) good operating practices, (2) processes modification, (3) feedstock modification, and (4) product reformulation (Lo, 1991). The options described here include only the first three of these categories since product reformulation is not an option that is usually available to the environmental analyst, scientist, or engineer. 

Good operating practices prevent waste by better handling of feedstocks and products without making significant modifications to current production technology  

Replace desalting with chemical treatment system. 

If feedstocks are handled appropriately, they are less likely to become wastes inadvertently through spills or outdating. If products are handled appropriately, they can be managed in the most cost-effective manner. 

For example, a significant portion of refinery waste arises from oily sludge found in combined process/storm sewers. Segregation of the relatively clean rainwater runoff from the process streams can reduce the quantity of oily sludge generated. Furthermore, there is a much higher potential for recovery of oil from smaller, more concentrated process streams. 

---

The identification of pollution prevention options has become a maintenance requirement. In addition to these requirements, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) performed its first investigation of indoor air quahty. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has also begun to research air quahty. 

The purpose of this subsection is to outhne the basic elements of a pollution-prevention cost-accounting system that incorporates both traditional and less tangible economic variables. The intent is not to present a detailed discussion of economic analysis but to help identify the more important elements that must be considered to properly quantify pollution-prevention options. 

Although numerous cases have been documented where petroleum refineries have simultaneously reduced pollution outputs and operating costs through pollution prevention techniques, there are often barriers to their im-plementation. The primary barrier to most pollution prevention projects is cost. Many pollution prevention options simply do not pay for themselves, or the economics often appear marginal. Corporate investments typically must earn an adequate return on invested capital for the shareholders and some pollution prevention options at some facilities may not meet the requirements set by company policies. 

POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONAL INFORMATION ON WASTE MINIMIZATION... 

POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONAL INFORMATION ON WASTE MINIMIZATION (Indicate actions taken to reduce the amount of the chemical being released from the facility. See the instructions for coded items and an explanation of what Information to Include.) ... 

Develop some pollution prevention options for the disposal of brine or salt solution derived from a desalting operation. 

Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Institute Pollution Prevention Options Analysis Tool (p2oasys)... 

Several options have been identified that refineries can undertake to reduce pollution pollution prevention options, recycling options, and waste treatment options. Furthermore, pollution prevention options are often presented in four... 

Another model, used in the USA, is the OASYS Pollution Prevention Optional Analysis System, developed by the Toxic Use Reduction Institute. Technologies are assessed on a variety of hazard criteria, including acute and chronic human toxicity, physical properties, aquatic impacts, persistence/bioaccumulation, atmospheric releases, disposal, chemical properties, energy/resource use, product hazard and exposure potential. Alternatives are rated to... 

We define pollution prevention fairly broadly, in keeping with the actual practices widely utilized by industry. This definition is any cost-effect technique aimed at reducing chemical or energy-related emissions that would subsequently have to be treated. In keeping with the generally voluntary nature of U.S. pollution prevention activities, the double hurdle of technical and economic feasibility are met in a pollution prevention option (Fig. 4). 

The best pollution prevention options cannot be implemented unless these are identified. To uncover the best options, each waste stream analysis should follow four steps ... 

Identify the compounds triggering the concern, for example, compounds regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), and carcinogenic compounds. Determine the sources of these compounds within the process. Then develop pollution prevention options to minimize or eliminate the generation of these compounds. 

Identify the highest volume materials (often these are diluents, such as water, air, a carrier gas, or a solvent) because these materials or diluents often control the investment and operating costs associated with end-of-pipe treatment of the waste streams. Determine the sources of these diluents within the process. Then develop pollution prevention options to reduce the volume. 

During laboratory studies, reaction chemistry is confirmed, waste streams are characterized, process variables are tested, pollution prevention options are identified, data are collected for the pilot plant and process design, and the potential impact of environmental regulations is determined. 

Evaluating the incentives and obstacles to implementing the pollution prevention options. 

To better evaluate pollution prevention options, the project attempted to assess the risks posed to individuals and populations exposed to chemical contaminants released from the refinery. An initial risk assessment analysis was performed to identify chemicals requiring further study, and to establish a baseline by which to judge potential risk reduction opportunities. Since change in exposure to benzene was used as a proxy for evaluating relative risk reductions associated with alternative pollution prevention options, the usual uncertainty associated with risk assessments was not a factor in the option analysis. The uncertainty in absolute risk assessments can arise from multiple sources the use of animal study results, difficulties with human studies, variation in individual responses to chemical exposures, the impact of differing dose rates, multiple simultaneous exposure to chem-... 

Pollution Prevention Options Identired at the Williamsburg Workshop... 

Maximum Annual Average Benzene Concentrations and Benzene Exposure Associated WITH Various Pollution Prevention Options... 

Amoco/EPA Project Pollution Prevention Option Characteristics... 

The statutory requirements addressed by each option are identified in the seventh column of Table X titled Statutory program. The specified compliance dates for each statutory program are also shown in the table, as are the implementation times for each option. Since the maximum achievable control technology (MACT) requirements have not yet been specified by EPA, projects directed toward those requirements have not yet been undertaken. That being the case, the implementation times identified indicate that options 5, 8, and 9 may have difficulty achieving timely compliance with these regulatory requirements. To proceed with the analysis, requirements that might be imposed under MACT were hypothesized to specify the performance characteristics of the associated pollution prevention options. It should be noted that only those options related with compliance with the Benzene Waste NESHAP (National Emissions Standard for... 

AHP analysis involves five steps. First, identify the overall goal and the important decision criteria. For this project, the goal was to select the most effective pollution prevention options for the refinery. 

---