slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
PRESENTER: Julia Brown Waste Research Management & Training Centre Scientific Research Council PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
PRESENTER: Julia Brown Waste Research Management & Training Centre Scientific Research Council

PRESENTER: Julia Brown Waste Research Management & Training Centre Scientific Research Council

117 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

PRESENTER: Julia Brown Waste Research Management & Training Centre Scientific Research Council

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. CLEANER PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES PRESENTER: Julia Brown Waste Research Management & Training Centre Scientific Research Council

  2. CLEANER PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES Objective To provide industries with an awareness of becoming efficient in an effort to reduce the cost of production and thus earning more.

  3. CLEANER PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES Contents i. What is Cleaner Production as it relates to product, processes and services ii. Benefits of Cleaner Production Technologies iii. Execution of Cleaner Production iv. Case study

  4. Cleaner production • This is an integrated preventive strategyapplied to processes, products and services as a way to increase the efficiency and to reduce risks for human beings and the environment.

  5. Cleaner production • For processes - this is the efficient use of raw material, water and energy, the elimination of toxic or dangerous products and the reduction of emission and wastes at the source.

  6. Cleaner production • In the case of the products, the strategy is centered around lowering their environmental impact and promoting friendly designs.

  7. Cleaner production • In the case of the services, the strategy is focused on lowering the environmental impact and promoting friendly procedures during its management.

  8. Cleaner production Source reduction Internal Recycling Product Change Process Change Raw material Substitution Good Practices Technological modification Cleaner production strategies

  9. Planning and Organization Plant evaluation Implementation Feasibility Study Prism Methodology Be reminded of the increasing competitivity with Cleaner Production To obtain a commitment with the Management. Establish the evaluating organization To propose general objectives. Overcoming barriers. Begin a preliminary study Obtain funding Equipment installation. Advise evaluation of results. Project adaptation Planning of new projects Enterprise data and its processes. Materials flow of wastes and emissions. Work groups creation. Generate options in Cleaner production. Evaluate Technology. Evaluate economy. Evaluate environment, Evaluate organization, Select options.

  10. Benefits: EMS/Cleaner Production • Legislation - environmental legislation is increasing world-wide. This can reduce the risk of penalties and provide competitive advantages. • Cost Savings - This identify opportunities for cost savings via energy efficiency and waste minimization measures. • Customer requirements - increasing businesses will not want to risk reputation or inherit liabilities as a result of poor performance by suppliers.

  11. Benefits cont.: EMS/Cleaner Technologies • Market Opportunities - this can be a likely factor in market profiling and provide a competitive edge. • Corporate Image - a good environmental record can improve corporate image and better relations with stakeholders. Adverse publicity on environmental performance can be very damaging.

  12. What are the economic benefits? Economic Value Added • Energy, water and raw material • Wastes disposition • Compliments and procedures • Financing • Product responsibility Increase of income : Reduction of costs : • Flexibility in prices • Relationship with clients • Competitive and strategic positioning • Access to the maket • Increase in services Environmental System Management

  13. Prevention Discovery Internal error External error • Consultancy fees • Remediation • Loss of clients • Relation with the community • Trainning • Manteinance • Better process • Design of products • External communication • Inpsection and monitoring • Reports • Calibration • Waste of materials • Treatment and control • Productive space • Time x $1 x $10 x $100 x $1000 Reductionof costs to develop value added The cost of a failure in Environmental Quality System Approach

  14. Proactive view beyond the future Competitivity Support • Products improvement • Processes efficiency increase • Production costs decrease • Elimination costs decrease • Profit increase • Market opening

  15. Advices: Raw Material determination • Consider the following questions: • Is the size of the raw materials inventory appropriate so their losses may be minimized? • Could it be possible to reduce the transference distances between storage and processing or between operation units? • Is there any mutual contamination risk in reservoirs that may store two or more raw materials? • Are the material sacks completely emptied?

  16. Advices: Raw Material determination • Consider the following questions : • Is the raw material storage area secure? • Is there solar light incidence in the storage place? • Does the material pumping system receives maintenance? • Are there leaks? • Can the drainage be by gravity?

  17. Advises: Water consumption • Consider the following points: • From where is the water extracted and where is this stored? • Water storage capacity in plant? • How is the water transported in the plant? • Does there exist considerable precipi-tation in that place?

  18. Advices: Water consumption for each unit operation • What is the water used for in each operation? • With what frequency do each action take place? • How much water is used in each action?

  19. Advices: Reduction in water consumption • Strict control of water consumption. • Concentrations increase - Less raw material • Good manufacturing practices options. • Waste water storage options for a possible reuse. • Countercurrent soaks and recycling of soak water.

  20. Advices: Effluent contamination • ALL discharge points location. (frequently there is more than one) • Identify where do the flows of multiple operation units or process areas join. • Define a program for the volumes of water used for each unit operation. • Define maximum production conditions, opening, closing and washing to obtain the water generation characterization of the enterprise.

  21. Advices: Effluent contamination • Determine if there exit a combination of pluvial and residual waters. • Use volumetric measurement for small and intermittent flows.

  22. Advices: Effluent concentration de-termination • Include in the analysis pH, DO, BOD, suspended solids, FOG. • Use up to it may be possible a compound sampling for continuous flows.

  23. Advices: Gaseous emissions contamination • The following questions have to be asked: • Are there odour associated with any unit operation? • Is there a moment where emissions may be marked? • Is there any contamination control equipment? • Are emissions directed to the outside of the confined spaces? • Are gases washed in the enterprise?

  24. Advices: Outside residues disposal contamination • The following questions have to be asked: • Where is the origin of the residue? • Can it be optimized by any process so there may be less residue generation? • Can alternative raw materials be used to generate less residue or may facilitate its management? • Is there any component that may cause all the residue to be harmful?

  25. Areas of work involving Cleaner Technologies • Sugar Factory • Rum Distillery • Agro - Processing facilities

  26. CASE STUDY - A SUGAR FACTORY • Wastewater production • 6000 m3/hr at peak • 3200 m3/hr • reduce by approx. 50 % through separation of drains (clean water and polluted water), avoiding/reducing spillage and repairing leaking taps. • 3000 m3/hr at peak • 1600 m3/hr

  27. CASE STUDY - A SUGAR FACTORY • COST FOR TREATMENT • Approx. US$200/m3 (cost effective system) • Initial cost for treatment was • approx. US$1.2 million • After reduction • approx. US$600,000