Measuring Environmental Performance using SGP Metrics

26
Measuring Environmental Performance using SGP Metrics by Barry Wenskowicz Pollution Prevention Engineer Narragansett Bay Commission

description

Measuring Environmental Performance using SGP Metrics. by Barry Wenskowicz Pollution Prevention Engineer Narragansett Bay Commission. Targets of the NSGP. 50% Water Reduction 50% Reduction in Metals Emissions 50% Reduction in F006 Generation 90% Reduction in Organics Usage - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Measuring Environmental Performance using SGP Metrics

Page 1: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Measuring Environmental Performance

using SGP Metrics

by Barry Wenskowicz

Pollution Prevention Engineer

Narragansett Bay Commission

Page 2: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Targets of the NSGP

• 50% Water Reduction

• 50% Reduction in Metals Emissions

• 50% Reduction in F006 Generation

• 90% Reduction in Organics Usage

• 25% Energy Reduction

• 98% Metals Utilization

• Reduction in Human Exposure

Page 3: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

P2 Assistance & Outreach

• Partnered with local trade organizations to get 20 out of 100 metal finishers to join

• Conducted P2 workshops• Mailed 100 P2 Videos• Positive recognition through Pollution

Prevention Merit Awards • Helped gather data and submit annual

worksheets• Conducted P2 assessments

Page 4: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics
Page 5: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics
Page 6: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics
Page 7: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics
Page 8: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics
Page 9: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Facility 1064 Water Conservation

Page 10: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Facility 1064

Wastewater

1.000.91

0.78

1.050.93

0.62

0.000.200.400.600.801.001.201.401.601.80

1992 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Rel

ease

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

Co

st

Page 11: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Facility 1294

Facility 1253Water Conservation

Page 12: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Facility 1253

Metals

1.00

0.59 0.56

0.81

0.58

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

1996 1998 1999 2000 2002

Rel

ease

Page 13: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Facility 1294

Wastewater

1.00 1.010.89 0.88

0.78

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

1993 1999 2000 2001 2002

Rel

ease

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

Co

st

Page 14: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Facility 1403 Water Conservation &

F006 Minimization

Page 15: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Facility 1403

Wastewater

1.00

0.670.53 0.60

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1993 2000 2001 2002

Rel

ease

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

Co

st

Page 16: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Facility 1092 Water Conservation & Dragout Recovery

Page 17: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Facility 1092

Metals

1.001.47 1.37 1.52 1.68

1.15 1.20

0.000.501.001.502.002.503.003.50

1992 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Rel

ease

d

Page 18: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Performance Relative to Best In Class

Wat

er

Met

als

F00

6

VO

Cs

Ele

c

Ave

rag

e S

core

Pro

gre

ss

1403 0.54 0.29 1.00 1.43 1.57 0.96 69%1253 2.38 2.70 0.13 0.05 1.07 1.27 67%1401 2.47 6.27 0.08 0.00 1.31 2.03 75%1281 2.45 7.45 0.00 0.00 1.14 2.21 100%1066 2.80 7.33 1.80 0.00 0.50 2.49 65%1294 3.10 6.83 0.26 5.58 0.45 3.24 34%1092 3.81 5.45 0.98 5.55 2.06 3.57 14%

1321 10.52 15.68 1.32 0.00 1.54 5.81 29%1398 13.13 8.99 0.00 7.25 0.94 6.06 60%1169 12.66 19.79 0.00 1.20 0.97 6.92 60%1355 3.53 3.95 25.52 0.00 2.00 7.00 56%1157 5.75 30.03 5.42 0.00 2.00 8.64 55%1156 6.17 44.86 2.54 0.00 1.20 10.96 96%1064 70.84 25.87 0.00 2.05 2.75 20.30 55%

1149 na na na na na na 63%1282 na na na na na na 51%1292 na na na na na na 34%1316 na na na na na na 93%1375 na na na na na na 66%1402 na na na na na na na

Facility ID Number

Page 19: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Environmental Performance and SGP Progress

0%

66

%

93

%

34

%

51

%

63

%

55

%

96

%

55

%

56

%

60

%

60

%

29

%

14

%

34

%

65

%

10

0%

75

%

67

%

69

%

0

5

10

Facility ID

Perfo

rm

an

ce relative to

b

est in

class

Pro

gress T

ow

ard

s G

oal A

ttain

men

t

Page 20: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Facility 1253 Progress

SGP Company ID: 1253 (Captive) Normalized Data Relative to BY

Year Production Water (gal) CostMetals (lbs) F006 Cost

Energy (kWh) Cost

VOCs (lbs) Water Metals F006 Energy VOCs

1996 17,396 1,757,169 $59,622 16.5 294 $189 1,212,004 $48,962 22 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001998 11,520 1,104,122 $36,548 6.5 245 $154 954,118 $37,603 11 0.95 0.59 1.26 1.19 0.761999 14,092 1,146,761 $37,009 7.5 294 $180 962,660 $36,989 9 0.81 0.56 1.23 0.98 0.512000 12,524 1,016,835 $33,738 9.6 294 $185 967,725 $38,229 7 0.80 0.81 1.39 1.11 0.442002 12,586 787,373 $25,676 6.9 294 $182 887,637 $34,463 8 0.62 0.58 1.38 1.01 0.50

2002 Change 483,938 5 -81 -10,753 8

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

1996 1998 1999 2000 2002

Page 21: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Reduced Annual Release / Unit of Product

Was

tew

ater

(g

al)

Met

als

(lb

)

F00

6 (d

ry lb

)

VO

Cs

(lb

)

En

erg

y (k

Wh

)

1403 648,713 26 0 -1,171 394,2881253 483,938 5 -81 8 -10,7531401 6,214,492 2 382 0 -241,5071281 1,417,343 92 0 0 580,7101066 -355,007 4 1,688 0 -36,6331294 1,309,810 76 355 -766 798,7531092 -6,957,410 -13 -4,333 -7,842 -2,346,384

1321 -684,349 -237 -844 0 -439,4191398 122,057 3 0 13,681 1,077,2321169 4,855,449 246 0 -971 -988,4201355 320,593 39 -9,293 20,648 -214,0391157 160,537 10 -11,842 90,5911156 2,741,658 263 17,116 -133,1721064 660,792 0 0 10,155 -2,109,219

1149 1,575,245 4 20,266 4,391 2,801,0421282 1,204,841 36 740 0 288,4861292 3,454,650 116 1,112 46 587,6811316 1,648,684 6 449 595,339 4131375 4,036,114 36 37,802 -2,913 421,6921402 112,736 1 0 0

Total 22,970,886 715 53,517 630,605 521,342

Facility ID Number

Page 22: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Reduced Environmental Releases

Collective Change in Annual Releases compared to Base Year

Release or GoalNSGP Target

RISGP Change

Annual Savings

Wastewater 50% 22.46% 22,970,886 gallons $347,825Metals 50% 35.03% 715 pounds $37,425F006 50% 33.99% 53,517 pounds $66,591VOCs 90% 58.87% 630,605 pounds $50,342Energy 25% 8.78% 521,342 kWh $20,772(Metals Utilization) 98% 79.09% na na na(Health & Safety) na 63.89% na na naTotal $522,954

Reduced Annual Release

Page 23: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Savings by Tier2002 RISGP Savings

32%

68%

Tier I

Tier II

Page 24: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Barry WenskowiczNarragansett Bay Commission

(401) 461-8848 [email protected]

Page 25: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Basis for Cost Saving Estimates

Water Supply $2.44Sewer Discharge $1.58Sewer Permit Fee $2.39Fixed Fee $0.35

Chemical WWTS $8.39

Labor $12.72Maintenance $2.03Testing $1.27

Total $31.16Non-Fixed Costs $15.14

Wastewater Treatment Costs ($/1000 gallons):

Page 26: Measuring Environmental Performance  using SGP Metrics

Alternate Units

Electricity $0.0840 ($/kWh) 0.0840 ($/kWh)Natural Gas $0.6184 ($/HCF) 0.0204 ($/kWh)Fuel Oil $0.8888 ($/gallon) 0.0217 ($/kWh)

Average (when 30% of total energy use is electric) $0.040

Energy Cost

F006 Sludge Disposal Cost 375 $/T-PackAverage T-Pack Weight 1,527 poundsCost per pound $0.2456

Basis for Cost Saving Estimates

Dragout loss ($/gallon) $2.11Replace solvent degreasing ($/lb) $0.08