Replacement of Chlorinated Solvent Vapor Degreasers with ... · through the degreassing process at...
Transcript of Replacement of Chlorinated Solvent Vapor Degreasers with ... · through the degreassing process at...
CONTENTS
Acknowledgements . . . . . .
Preface . . . . . . . . . .
1: Overview: Introduction
2: Technical Evaluation 0-F
. . . . . . . .
1 . 1 . 1 1 . 1
t o the Problem.
Technologies. .
.
3: Economic Assessment of Costs, Payback Period and CInnual Cost Savings . . . . . . . . . . .
iv
21
4: Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5: References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author g r a t e f u l l y thanks the State of North Carolina,
Department o f Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Po l l u t i on Prevention Program f o r providing I l c o Unican Corp. the
opportuni ty t o perform t h i s study.
The author especia l ly thanks the fo l low ing I l c o Unican Corp.
i nd i v idua ls who spent many hours reviewing documentation,
preparing proposals, discussing suggestions, and ass i s t i ng the
author: Danny D iL ie l l o , David E l l i s , Donnie Harrelson, Richard
K r i esel , Nelson Marks, Robert Wright and the Indus t r i a l
Engineering Department; and, the fo l low ing Niagara Custombilt
Manufacturing Company employees: J. C h r i s Lanqmack, President;
Clark Langmack, Vice President; and Chuck Langmack, Vice
President -
i v
For many years industries throughout the United States have
used a wide variety of solvents in their day to day activities.
Because of this extensive use it is important for us to
understand what the word "solventN actually means.
"Solvent" refers to any substance capable of disolving or
dispersing another. Therefore, solvent would include substances
such as water. However, industry has restricted the word
"solvent" to mean an organic dissolving agent.
Solvents commonly used in vapor degreasers include methylene
ch 1 or i de perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene and 1,1,1
trichloroethane. Solvents costs, disposal costs and the impetus )
by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to restrict solvent
loss to the environment have caused industry to take a first (1)
hand look at minimizing or eliminating the use of solvents.
This document or text will identify, evaluate and discuss
Ilco Unican Corporations' installation of an aqueous cleaning
system to replace chlorinated solvent vapor degreasers used at
the Rocky Mount, North Carolina division.
To develop justification for an aqueous cleaning system, a
feasibility study of aqueous cleaning solutions and application
equipment was performed. This includes research and bench scale
-V-
studies of alternative solutions and equipment. In all cases the
environmental impact and waste management aspects were
consi dered.
This text will also discuss the technical and economic
evaluations of waste reduction options in addition to assessing
costs, payback period and annual costs of an aqueous cleaning
system.
All in all this text will show those readers how one
industry has comDletelv eliminated the use of a chlorinated
solvent in its manufacturing process- Conversion to an aqueous
cleaning system which uses only water has resulted in Ilco Unican
Corp. saving m o r e than $110,000 annually in addition to
eliminating up to 200,000 pounds of l,l, 1 trichloroethane
vaporized into the environment.
-vi -
OVERVIEW: Introduction to the Problem 1
1 OVERVIEW:
INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM
Ilco Unican Cwp. (Ilco) the world's largest key blank and
security product manufacturer operates a division in Rocky Mount,
North Carolina. The facility in Rocky Mount produces over
1,500,000 key blanks each day in addition to a wide variety of
lock components, such as cylinders, plugs and key bitting
machines, just l i k e those found in your local hardware store.
Since the beginning of Ilco's existence, vapor deqreasing to
clean the manufactured products using chlorinated solvents was
performed.
Figure 1.1 shows the relationship of vapor degreasing as it
fits into the Ilco manufacturing process. A s illustrated in both
manufacturing processes, products produced at Ilco traverse
through the degreassing process at one time or the other.
Two types of vapor degreasers were utilized at Ilco: a
crossrod system and a monorail system, both continuous and closed
top (see figures 1.2 and 1.3).
In vapor degreassing, the solvent is heated to its boiling
point. Table 1.1 shows boiling ranges for some of the more
popular chlorinated hydrocarbon solvents used in degreasing.
DVERVIEWi Introduction t o the Problem 2
BRASS & STRIP MFG
f I KEY
BAR STOCK MACHINING
MILLING b I I
DRILL," & MILLING
OPREA TIONS
PLATING T I
CUSTOMER 9 PACKING
FIGURE 1.1 A diagram illustrating the relationship o f vapor degreasing t o the ILCU UNICAN CURP, manufacturing process,
OVERVIEW: Introduction to the Problem 3
8 4 B A R O N E L A X E S L E E M O D E L TH=LLV
. . . ideal for cleaning large quantities of small metal parts. B u basket xork, screw machine products and stampings
OPERATION: Model TI+-LLV is a self-distilling, con- veyorized degreaser containing 14 conveyor stations in its complete cleaning cycle. Electrical switches allow either manual or continuous automatic operation of the conveyor at 12 FPM. This uni t can be equipped with two types of fixtures- pendant hangers and/or rotary baskets. I f hangers are used, work may be directly attached to the cross- rods or carried in tote baskets on pendant carriers. I f rotary baskets are used, work is placed in the baskets to be carried through the entire cleaning operation. The baskets, xilt into the conveyor mechanism. provide a gentle tumbling action which exposes all work surfaces for extremely thorough cleaning. Tum- bling also insures complete solvent drainage before work leaves the degreaser. Work enters the boiling solvent chamber, then is carried to the solvent rinse chamber. Cleaning occurs in four areas-vapor zone, boiling solvent. solvent rinse. and final vapor rinse. Parts emerge warm and dry. Fixture placement is pre-planned so that each t ime the conveyor is stopped for loading or unloading. five of t he fourteen fixtures are positioned entirely within cleaning areas. Two fixtures are completeiy immersed in solvent chambers: three fixtures are suspended within vapor zones. 1 A specially engineered Baron Blakeslee offset vapor chamber, separate f rom the work cleaning areas.
.rl acts as a contaminant collector. Cleaning is more C, effective, more efficient because work does not come in contact with Contaminated solvent in the of fset 8 chamber. This chamber also provides a considerable saving of solvent costs, since the offset design reduces evaporative solvent losses by one-thirc. . During operation of the TH-LLV, pure distillate f rom the large capacity water separator is -eturned to the { degreaser in a continuous flow. moving in the opposite direction of 'work traveling through the machine. Distillate enters the final rinse chamber. cascades rl into the boiling solvent chamoer and is finally carried by external piping to the offset chamber for contam- inant concentration and transfer to the solvent re- covery still. The continuous flow of distillate not only maintains clean solvent in the solvent rinse chamber, but also limits the contamination in the boiling solvent chamber-by dilution and overflow to the offset chamber.
CONSTRUCTION: The TH-LLV is fabricated of solid .. stainless steel with all-welded construction. The ex- a, haust hood and enclosure are mi ld steel. painted inside and outside for protection. Steam heat coils are mounted on the large, removable clean-out doors. 8 Standard equipment includes a liquid level gauge and a thermometer on avery cnamber: standard Baron Blakeslee dual vapor control: safety vapor control; water control and a ,water-cooled separator.
2
8
m ::
E
Figure 1.2 Crossrod Vapor Degreaser used at Ilco U n k a n Corp.
OVERVIEW1 Introductton t o the Problem 4
FIGURE 1,3 Monorail vapor degreaser used a t ILCO UNICAN CORP,
OVEKVIm7: Introduction to the Problem 5
Table 1 - 1 Common chlorinated hydrocarbons used in vapor degreasinq
Chl w i nated Hydr Ocar bons
Lbs. per B o i 1 i ng Range gallon at
68' F F* C*
Methylene Chloride 11.07 102- 106 39-40
Trichloroethylene 12. 22 188-198 87-92
l,l, 1 Trichloroethane (Methyl Chloroform) 12.22 188- 198 87-92
Perchloroethylene 13.55 250-254 120- 122
Source: Finish Engineering Co., Inc.
The boiling point of the solvent creates a vapor which
actually performs the cleaning of the product. From the spetrum
of degreassing solvents, the Ilco facility used 1,1,1 1
trichloroethane in its day to day degreasing operations.
l,l, 1 Trichloroethane (Methyl Chloroform) is a widely used
solvent found in various consumer products, including aerosol
formulations. Human deaths have resulted from exposure to very
high vapor concentrations in unventilated tanks, drums and bags,
but the concentrations normally encountered in an industrial
setting have little or no toxicological significance. (2)
Also, recent government reports have shown that l,l,l
trichlwoethane is one o-f the chemical constituents responsible
for ozone depletion and global warming.
STtr '0 000 ' 28 000 &002 686 T
SBL: '0 0SZ 6s 000 'OST 886 T
L6Z '0 S08 trS 000 '8ST L86 T
LTtr'O 896 ZL
Z6Z '0 L89 'ZL 005; 'L8T S86 T
OVERVIEW: Introduction to the Problem 7
A s discussed throughout this chapter. problems experienced
by Ilco's use of l , l , i trichloroethane were escalating costs of
the virgin chemical , energy costs, disposal , the potential long
term damage effect to the environment, dangers associated with
unsafe handling or use of the chemical and the continued
compliance with government regulations.
1
UVERVIEWi Introductron t o t h e Problem 8
PURCflASE
/
REGULA TORY CUMPLIANCE
FIGURE 1.4 Il lustrates a reas o f cos t associated with the opera tfon o f vapor degreasers a t ILCU UNICAN CURP.
Technical Evaluation of Technologies 9
2 TECHNICAL EVALUATION
OF TECHNOLOGIES
In our quest to eliminate our use of 1,1,1 trichloroethane,
reviewing the alternative technologies was extremely important.
This chapter discusses our technical evaluation of technologies.
To begin several questions had to be answered:
1.
2.
v 3 .
4.
5.
6.
7.
What other solvents could be used in existing equipment?
How did they compare in cost and cleaning efficiency?
Would equipment modification be required?
Would the use of ultrasonics decrease the volume of l,l, 1 trichloroethane used?
Would production be affected?
Was there standard equipment available in the mar ket p 1 ace to replace our existing equipment?
Could a capital expenditure be justified?
Solvents which are normally used in degreasing operations
throughout the automotive, metal working, electronics and
appl i ance i ndustr i es i ncl ude trichlorethylene, 1,191
tr i ch 1 oroet hane , methylene chloride, perchloroethylene,
trichlorotrif loroethane and Stoddard solvent.
Technical Evaluation of Technologies 10
When evaluating the above solvents, one needs t o consider
the a b i l i t y t o clean without damaging any of the mater ia ls of
construction of the a r t i c l e being cleaned.
I n tha t our product was manufactured from brass, the
cleaning act ion from most organic solvents would prove
sa t i s fac to ry i n the forms of se lec t i ve solvents.
We also found t h a t there i s no s ing le scale which can r a t e
solvent power on an absolute basis. However, a general guide t o
r e l a t i v e solvent ra t i ngs can be obtained by the use of K a u r i -
Butanol (KB) numbers and s o l u b i l i t y parameters. These guides are
t o independent empurical systems f o r est imating solvent power.
I n general, the higher the numbers on these solvents scales,
the stronger the solvent. I n actual p rac t ice there are many
exceptions t o the ra t i ngs suggested by these guides. Solvent
power i s only one o+ a number of physical and chemical fac to rs
involved i n a cleaning agent. 3
Table 2.1 provides a guide t o estimating solvent power and
should be used only f o r the purpose of the crudest possible
screening of candidate cleaning materi a1 s.
Technical Evaluation of Technologies 11
Table 2.1 Guides to Relative Solvent Power
Sol vent Kauri -Butanol
Number Solubi 1 i ty Parameter
Tr i c h 1 orot r i f 1 oroet hane
Stoddard Sol vent
l , l , 1 TrichloroethaneS
Tr i ch 1 oroet hy 1 ene
Methylene Chloride
31
37-39
120
130
136
7.2
7.4 - 7.5
- 9.3
9.7
SMethyl Chloroform Source: E . I . duPont deNemours & Co. (Inc.) Bulletin FST-1 (11/83)
During our efforts to review costs and cleaning efficiency,
we received considerable attention from a multitude of chemical
distributors, representatives and manufacturers. However, none
could show a cost reduction or payback. Most elaborated on their
)
abiliti,es to provide solvents with less emissions, reduced
toxicity and energy, etc.
Equipment modification in some solvent selections was also
required. Changing steam coils to reduce temperature, installing
chillers and increasing the freeboard height would have been
required. The freeboard height of a degreaser is the height
above the vapor level. Distillation of the recovered vapor was
already a part of the degreasing process at Ilco.
Technical Evaluation of Technologies 12
Ultrasonics proved it would provide a more efficient
cleaning process but would not aid in solvent recovery.
Ultrasonics would actually enhance solvent 1055.
1
All in all, our review of the solvents listed above would
not eliminate environmental restrictions or high operational
costs.
In all cases the solvent chemical manufacturers, their
representatives and distributors seemed to shy away from the use
of aqueous cleaning solutions as an alternative to our process.
However, Ilco never lost sight of this alternative technology.
After two years of attempting to find an alternative to l,l,l
trichloroethane, we decided to direct our e-fforts to degreasing
equipment manufacturers. Our goal was to develop and design our
own aqueous cleaning system.
)
Several equipment manufacturers w e r e investigated for the
potential to provide us with equipment capable of meeting our
needs.
Niagara Custombilt Mfg. Co., 13400 Glenside Road, Cleveland,
Ohio 44110, was chosen to work with Ilco because of their
ability to custom design machines to perform whatever the
customers needs maybe, quality of the materials, guarantees on
increased productivity, capability to perform a "turnkey"
installation and above a1 1 the capabi 1 i ty of
providing their expertise and limited R&D up front without any
commi ttment or capital expenditures. )
Tschnical Evaluation of Technologies 13
O u r spec i f i ca t ions were simple, we needed a machine capable
of increasing our capacity from 1 . 3 m i l l i o n t o 2.0 m i l l i o n keys
per day, loaded and unloaded a t the same po in t for operator/ labor
maximization, energy e f f i c i e n t and most important u t i l i z e d an
aqueous a l ka l i ne cleaning solut ion.
t
Discussion w i t h Niagara’s Chuck Langmack, ind icated t h e i r
major problem t o overcome i n i t i a l l y was how t o wash and dry our
keys as they were +ound i n t h i s stage of t he manufacturing
process. Figure 2.1 shows 190-285 keys loaded on a rod p r i o r t o
degreasing. This was extremely important i n tha t t he next stage
of our manufacturing required they remain on the rods.
The unique e f f e c t of solvents as previously discussed i n
t h i s chapter u t i l i z e d both heat and solvent vapor izat ion t o clean
between the keys. Vapors because of t h e i r molecular s t ruc tu re
could eas i l y penetrate the surface area between the keys c lose
proximity.
f
Niaqara overcame t h i s problem by using high pressure sprays
placed w i th in the wash cyc le so t ha t t he fo rce of so lu t i on would
spin the keys on the rod.
I f we go back t o our ancestors bas is f o r solvents and water
used as the f i r s t solvent, t h i s l i f e requirement coupled wi th
enough water and fo rce could poss ib ly clean our product as wel l
as any manufactured solvent. The same concept was used fo r
Technical Evaluation of Technologies 15
drying. Enough a i r pressure forced i n the same way would create
the drying necessary on the product.
I
Once t h i s major problem was overcome, Niagara proposed a
system w i t h a ra ted capacity o f 2300 t o 3700 keys per minute.
The capacity assumed 13 rods per minute w i t h 188 t o 285 keys per
rod. The system manufactured would be a f i v e stage system as
follows:
1) Load: The rods wi th keys would be loaded
onto a c a r r i e r 7 one rod a t a time. A picker
f inger on each c a r r i e r would p ick up a s ing le
rod from a staging loca t ion a t the f r o n t of
the washer.
2) Wash: Each key would be washed using high
pressure sprays from above and below. T h i s
would be a one minute treatment using a
rec i rcu la ted a l k a l i n e wash chemical . The
wash bath could be heated i f necessary. The
spray nozzles would be placed i n such a way
tha t they would sp in the keys on t h e i r
perspective rods. The spinning act ion
coupled wi th the h igh pressure spray would
remove any res idual surface contamination
between the keys. A s the so lu t ion was
Technical Evaluation of Technologies 16
3)
sprayed, it would be filtered automatically
using a self cleaning stainless steel screen.
The screen would insure that nozzles would
not clog.
Rinse: Each key would then be rinsed using a
metered amount of fresh water. The water
would be turned on only when the keys were in
a position to be rinsed. CI limit switch
would activate a solenoid valve to allow the
water to rinse the keys. The operator would
have the capability to control the rinsing
time, volume and pressure. This rinsing time
would range from 0 to 30 seconds. This
operator controlled feature was implemented
inasmuch as the next stage may eliminate the
rinse cycle.
4) Blow-Off Dryer: Each key would be dried
using high pressure air from centrifugal
blowers. The blowers would direct the air on
the top and bottom, spinning the keys t o
release the surface tension from between the
keys and removing any moisture without
spotting. The blow off time would be
approximately 10 seconds.
Technical Evaluation of Technologies 17
5 ) Unload: The rods would be automat ical ly
unloaded a t the f r o n t o f t he machine and
ex i ted t o a holding container which would be
transported t o fu tu re manufacturing
processes.
The machine spec i f i ca t ions would use an i n te rm i t tan t drive.
A t t he r a t e of 13 rods per minute, t he moving t ime would be 1.6
seconds and the dwell t ime would be 3 seconds. Each s t roke would
move the rods four inches on four inch centers throughout the
machine. An adjustable t imer would a l low the operator t o change
the dwell t ime f r o m 0 t o 60 seconds. The number of rods per
minute would vary d i r e c t l y w i th the dwell t ime set t ing. During
dwell time, the r i n s e would t u r n on. I
Figure 2-2 shows a three dimensional view of the carousel
machine. A s depl ic ted i n the top view, the loading and unloading
would be i n c lose prox imi ty wi th each other al lowing the operator
to monitor each pos i t ion.
Construction of the machine would be e n t i r e l y 304 s ta in less
s tee l w i t h an insu lated wash tank t o prevent heat loss i n the
event a heated w a s h was required. The s ide panels would be
constructed of safety glass t o monitor the ac t ion of the washer
from the outside. Each of the window panels would be removable
t o al low access t o the washer i n t e r i o r . The spray nozzles would
be a l l qu ick disconnect.
Technical Evaluation of Technologies 18
U t i l i t i e s included the fol lowing:
1. E l e c t r i c a l Characterist ics:
a. Dr ive Motor - 1 h.p., brake motor, 230/460/60/3
b. Wash Pump - 10 h.p., 3600 RPM, 230/460/60/3
c. Blower Motor - 1 13 20 h.p., 3600 RPM,
230/4600/60/3
d. The machine would be wired t o a cont ro l panel
mounted on the machine w i t h a disconnect and a
transformer fo r 1 l0VcIC contro l voltage.
2. Steam:
Steam provis ions would be made f o r the wash section.
3. C o m p r e s s o r fiir:
None required
Following agreement on design, machine speci f icat ions,
guarantees, and the c a p i t a l expenditure, construct ion began.
Construction was not without some stumbling blocks.
Throughout the 11-12 months of construction, our production
requirements were increasing and the ex i s t i ng equipment was not
e f f i c i ent .
The vapor degreasers required more and more maintenance
caused by temporary repa i r s preempting the a r r i v a l of the new
equipment and reluctance t o spend any money on equipment which
I
- 12
- 6
l l E M LIST 1.) FILTER 2.) KEY CARRIER 3. KEYS 4. REMOVABLE WINDOWS 5. AIR RLOW--OFF 6. CHAIN DRlM 7.) WASH PUMP 8.) OIL SKIMMER 9.) WASH HEADER IO.) CHAIN TAKE-UP SPROCKET 11.) SPRAYS 12.) FRESH WATER RINSE HEADERS 13. 5PRAY NOZZLE 14) NOZZLE BASE
OUSmUSILT. Y&#€VNRIIO m U I I
I * 1- -2" __ - PAC€ .L a .L --.A -. I __ !..- . - .- . --- -.
I
I I I
-1 I I
-1 I I
_I I I 1- I I I
-1 I I
-I I I I
Technical Evaluation of Technologies 20
would soon be obsolete. Problems i n the mater ia l handling system
on the new key washer created delsys. Some minor problems
occurred i n the blow-off and unload sect ion of the new washer. I n
l i e u of t he problems causing these delays, we s t i l l f e l t they
could be overcome once i n operation. The equipment was shipped
and ins ta l led .
Fol lowing i ns ta l l a t i on , we found the operator could feed the
product t o the washer much quicker and more e f f i c i e n t l y than the
auto-picker, therefore i t was eliminated. cllso, the blow-off
required major modif icat ion.
A f te r working out the bugs, the machine performance exceeded
the i n i t i a l capacity requirements, d i d not requ i re the use of
I steam t o wash and most important ly d i d not require t he use of any
chemicals t o clean the product.
The fo l low ing p ic tu res show the f u l l y aqueous key washer as
i t operates today.
It i s a lso important t o note t h a t an o i l skimmer which
cycles dur ing d a i l y use keeps the rec i r cu la ted water clean. I n a
24 hour day we generate only f i v e ga l lons of the o i l skimmed
so lu t ion f o r disposal. The tanks are cleaned out monthly t o
r e t r i e v e f o r recyc l ing any f i n e brass chips tha t have emanated
beyond the ch ip screens.
Economic Assessment of Costs, Payback 21 Period and Annual Cost Savings
3 ECONOMIC ASSESSMENTS OF COSTS, PAYBACK
PERIOD AND ANNUAL COST SAVINGS
The Ilco Key Washer System has proved it is more efficient
in capacity. Also, we have completely eliminated the use of any
alkaline or solvent chemicals. Water usage in the plant has
decreased by more than 50% following the washer installation.
The equipment recirculates its water supply and w e add no more
than 25 gallons of water per day. Steam heating has also been
eliminated completely. We have found that the volume and force
behind the water cleans our product satisfactorily.
Table 3.1 represents a cost justification analysis of vapor
degreasing described as the present method VI. aqueous degreasing
described as the proposed method.
Table 3.1 Economic Assessment of Costs
0mTIm RExNI-
1. Chenicals
2. Chemical D i s p o s a l
3. Energy (Gas & E l e c t r i c i t y )
4. W a t e r (Fresh)
5. water (Sewage)
6. Labor ($6.90/HR + 25% FRINGE)
!lnmLl
PRESENT =OD COST/YR 1.3 MIL/DAY 2.0 MIL/DAY
PFOPQSED METHOD m T / Y R 1.3 ImL/DAY 2.0 MIL/DAY
$ 6,000 $ 10,000
1,200 2 , 400 3 I 900 7,850
700 1 , 100 __
800 1 I 300
35,880 71,760
$189 , 660 $111 , 740 _ _
17 , 940 35 , 880
$ 30,540 $ 58,530
Economic Assessmnt of Costs, Payback 22 Period and Annual Cost Savings
NOTES:
1.
2.
7 .J . 4.
5.
6 .
l,l,l Trichloroethane cost based on invoice p lus estimated increase.
Chemical cost f o r new system based on manufacturer (Niagara) and chemical suppl ier (Dubois) estimates.
Energy consumption from invoice and estimated e l e c t r i c a l consump t i on.
Fresh water and sewage from invoice and estimate consumptions from manufacturer. Vapor degreaser water consumption f o r '87 and '88 per iod was 3.3 m i l l i o n gallons. Estimated consumption f o r the system w i l l be approximately 700,000 gal lons and could reduce i f r inse can be eliminated.
Chemical disposal cost f o r proposed system i s f o r labor of cleaning system.
Proposed system w i l l handle degreasing requirements on one (1) s h i f t f o r coined keys a t the 1.3 m i l l i o n per day volume 1 eve1 .
Table 3.2 represents the cost j u s t i f i c a t i o n payback period.
Table 3.2 Payback Period
Eased on 1.3 m i l l i o n keys per day: SYSTEM COST ANNUAL SAVINGS
Based on 2.0 m i l l i o n keys per day: SYSTEM COST ANNUAL SAVINGS
$118.210 = 1.45 YRS 8 1,200 PAYBACK
$118.210 = -90 YRS 131,130 PAYBACK
Based on an average of payback since volume w i l l increase incrementally:
1.45 YRS. + . 90 YRS. = 1.175 YRS. PAYBACK 2
Economic Assessment of Costs, Payback 23 Period and Annual Cost Savings
Table 3.3 s h o w s the actual annual cost savings a5 compared w i t h vapor degreasi ng.
Table 3.3 Actual A n n u a l Cost Savings
VAPOR DEGREXX" CCIST/YR ACTUKL COST OPERATI(XAL REQUIREMENTS 1.3 MIL/DAY 2.0 MIL/DAY 1.5 MIL/DAY
1. Chemicals $ 45,000 $ 70,000
2. Cn&cal Disposal 2,500 4,000
3. Eslergy (Gas & Electricity) 22,300 34,500
4. Water (Fresh) 2,900 4 I 500
5. Water (Sewage) 3,160 4,900
6. Labor ($6.90/HR + 25% FFUNCW 35,880 71,760
TOTAL $111,740 $189,660
$ -0-
-0-
1,600
15
25
25,000
$ 26,640
Based on t he comparison between actual costs of vapor degreassing vs. present method of aqueous degreassing a t present production r a t e our annual savings of $110,360 has been achieved.
Compared w i t h our projected payback i n Table 3.2, 1.08 years.
our payback is
T h i s has been determined as fol lows:
Equipment Cost $103,103
Labor t o i n s t a l 1 /modify 8,131
Shipping 1 255
Mater ia ls 3,646
Staf-F R&D 3.192
Total System Cost 8119,327
Sumnary 24
SUMMARY
Ilco Unican Carp. has completely eliminated vapor degreasing
and therefore the use of 1,1,1 trichloroethane at this division
and replaced the vapor degreasers with an aqueous system which
uses lO0X water.
Our production capability increased from 1.3 million keys
maximum with the use of both vapor degreasers to over 2.0 million
keys per day following installation and operation of the new
equipment.
This has resulted in an annual savings of over 9110,000 and
increased production capability.
Additionally, the environmental impact regarding pollution
prevented has resulted in a reduction of more than 175,000 pounds
of methyl chloroform emitted to the atmosphere and over 32,000
pounds of waste shipped off-site to a hazardous waste management
f aci 1 i ty.
References 25
REFERENCES
1. Capene, S.V. and Petroccia, M. Guidance to State and Local Agencies i n Preparing Regulations t o Control V o l a t i l e Organic Compounds from Ten Stat ionary Source Categories. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protect ion Agency, Research Tr iangle Park, North Carolina, September 1979.
2. Adams e t al., 1950; Avirado et . al., 1976; Bass, 1970; Eben and Eimmeree, 1974; Herd e t al., 1974 ; L i t t and Cohen, 1969; Ruotolo, 1956; Stewart, 1971; Stewart and Andrews, 1966; Stewart e t al., 1969; Torkelson e t al., 1958; von Oettingen, 1955.
7 -2. E.I. duPont deNemours Go. (Inc.) B u l l e t i n FST-1 (11/83).
I
Washers/Dryers Steel Glass Aluminum Plastic Rubber Wood 11
Food mwcessing Beverage Electronics Industry Pharmaceutical Laboratory - Bottles & C a n s From 1 Or To 10 Galloris - “‘Clrnn Room‘ SpPrifirstion: - I,@l Bulbs * Tflrrision Tub?+ * Funncls. Face Plalrs. Masks
Compulcr Part? * Ultra Clraniiig b Filtration
55 Gallon D n t n i ~ ~ Open 4 Closed . Laboraton- Glass ~ An\- S1ze Or Shape . Food \%-l-ashmq ~ Faulby. FIsh * Meat Pa( kine - 011 Ref!nei? Lahorutov Waic
PARTIAL LIST OF U S A . CUSTOMERS * Pmstek . DUPCPt * PAocOenid . PepsI~CoI3
Boeing Aircroft General S\pom.cr Mitrubishi * RoytheoP Chos Pfizer Gs~e:oi Electric . Mobi’ Oil * RCA . Coco-Colo Goodyeor * Noblsco s TQuV - Corning . IBhl . Dora Coworoilon 17
Anheuser-Buscn 0 Eli Li ly * blille B:e’,,>ng . Perrier
* Zerith
CUSTOMBILT Washer Manufacturing Co.