page 587 |
Previous | 1 of 14 | Next |
|
|
Loading content ...
58 CLEANING MODIFICATION STEPS THAT RESULTED IN POLLUTION PREVENTION AND WASTE MINIMIZATION Raymond Lizotte, Senior Environmental Specialist Texas Instruments Inc. Materials & Control Group Attleboro, Massachusetts Ken Hogue, Graduate Student Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering Worcester Polytechnic Institute Worcester, Massachusetts 01609 James O'Shaughnessy, Professor Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering Worcester Polytechnic Institute Worcester, Massachusetts 01609 ABSTRACT This chapter reviews four metal cleaning case studies at various manufacturing operations and presents the different approaches and technology assessments that were used to change these metal finishing operations. In each of the case studies, both pollution prevention and a positive financial solution were achieved. Each case was site- and time-specific, indicating that pollution prevention is a proactive and on-going optimization problem, similar to the actual manufacturing processes. The solutions included chemical substitution, process modification, process modernization, housekeeping improvements, and recycle improvements. INTRODUCTION From 1950 to 1990, cleaning with halogenated solvent was the preferred technique within industry for cleaning material when quality, speed, and versatility were required. Beginning with the passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. a number of environmental rules have been enacted that are pressuring manufacturers to find alternatives to these processes. The first rule to impact halogenated solvent cleaning were the provisions of the Clean Air Act that mandated phaseout of the chemicals that have been implicated as harmful to the stratospheric ozone layer. The ozone depleting halogenated solvents (primarily CFC-113 and 1,1,1- trichloroethane) were popular cleaning solutions throughout the electronics industry. In addition to a general phaseout in the production of ozone depleting solvents, the rule required manufacturers to pay annually escalated taxes, and place warning labels on these products. By 1994. most users of ozone depleting halogenated solvent had implemented nonozone depleting substituted technologies. In December 2, 1994, the EPA established emission limitations on trichloroethylene (TCE) vapor degreasers. This regulation, called the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) Standard for Halogenated Solvent Cleaners, requires each degreaser to demonstrate compliance with the emission limits by December 2, 1997. Failure to meet the limits would require shutdown of noncompliant degreasing operation. 52nd Purdue Industrial Waste Conference Proceedings, 1997, Ann Arbor Press, Chelsea, Michigan 48118. Printed in U.S.A. 587
Object Description
Purdue Identification Number | ETRIWC199758 |
Title | Cleaning modification steps that resulted in pollution prevention and waste minimization |
Author |
Lizotte, Raymond P. Hogue, Ken O'Shaughnessy, James C. |
Date of Original | 1997 |
Conference Title | Proceedings of the 52nd Industrial Waste Conference |
Conference Front Matter (copy and paste) | http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/u?/engext,20307 |
Extent of Original | p. 587-600 |
Collection Title | Engineering Technical Reports Collection, Purdue University |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Rights Statement | Digital object copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Language | eng |
Type (DCMI) | text |
Format | JP2 |
Date Digitized | 2009-11-03 |
Capture Device | Fujitsu fi-5650C |
Capture Details | ScandAll 21 |
Resolution | 300 ppi |
Color Depth | 8 bit |
Description
Title | page 587 |
Collection Title | Engineering Technical Reports Collection, Purdue University |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Rights Statement | Digital object copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Language | eng |
Type (DCMI) | text |
Format | JP2 |
Capture Device | Fujitsu fi-5650C |
Capture Details | ScandAll 21 |
Transcript | 58 CLEANING MODIFICATION STEPS THAT RESULTED IN POLLUTION PREVENTION AND WASTE MINIMIZATION Raymond Lizotte, Senior Environmental Specialist Texas Instruments Inc. Materials & Control Group Attleboro, Massachusetts Ken Hogue, Graduate Student Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering Worcester Polytechnic Institute Worcester, Massachusetts 01609 James O'Shaughnessy, Professor Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering Worcester Polytechnic Institute Worcester, Massachusetts 01609 ABSTRACT This chapter reviews four metal cleaning case studies at various manufacturing operations and presents the different approaches and technology assessments that were used to change these metal finishing operations. In each of the case studies, both pollution prevention and a positive financial solution were achieved. Each case was site- and time-specific, indicating that pollution prevention is a proactive and on-going optimization problem, similar to the actual manufacturing processes. The solutions included chemical substitution, process modification, process modernization, housekeeping improvements, and recycle improvements. INTRODUCTION From 1950 to 1990, cleaning with halogenated solvent was the preferred technique within industry for cleaning material when quality, speed, and versatility were required. Beginning with the passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. a number of environmental rules have been enacted that are pressuring manufacturers to find alternatives to these processes. The first rule to impact halogenated solvent cleaning were the provisions of the Clean Air Act that mandated phaseout of the chemicals that have been implicated as harmful to the stratospheric ozone layer. The ozone depleting halogenated solvents (primarily CFC-113 and 1,1,1- trichloroethane) were popular cleaning solutions throughout the electronics industry. In addition to a general phaseout in the production of ozone depleting solvents, the rule required manufacturers to pay annually escalated taxes, and place warning labels on these products. By 1994. most users of ozone depleting halogenated solvent had implemented nonozone depleting substituted technologies. In December 2, 1994, the EPA established emission limitations on trichloroethylene (TCE) vapor degreasers. This regulation, called the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) Standard for Halogenated Solvent Cleaners, requires each degreaser to demonstrate compliance with the emission limits by December 2, 1997. Failure to meet the limits would require shutdown of noncompliant degreasing operation. 52nd Purdue Industrial Waste Conference Proceedings, 1997, Ann Arbor Press, Chelsea, Michigan 48118. Printed in U.S.A. 587 |
Resolution | 300 ppi |
Color Depth | 8 bit |
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for page 587