Pollution Prevention Programs Across Five Industrial Sectors

Introduction

According to the EPA (2011), pollution prevention is "reducing or eliminating waste at the source by modifying production processes, promoting the use of non-toxic or less-toxic substances, implementing conservation techniques, and re-using materials rather than putting them into the waste stream." The 1990 Pollution Prevention Act likewise defines pollution prevention primarily in terms of source reduction. The State of Washington Department of Ecology (n.d.) also defines pollution prevention as "source reduction and other practices that reduce or eliminate the creation of pollutants through increased efficiency in the use of raw materials, energy, water, or other resources, or protecting resources through conservation." Pollution prevention is like preventative medicine for the earth.

The key component of a pollution reduction program, therefore, is the reduction of the amount of hazardous substances or contaminants that are produced as a by-product of industry. As a source-focused program, pollution prevention does not include recycling, cleanup, and other efforts to address waste once it has already been produced. The methods of pollution prevention will vary from industry to industry but can include "equipment or technology modifications, process or procedure modifications, reformulation or redesign of products, substitution of raw materials, and improvements in housekeeping, maintenance, training, or inventory control" (EPA 1990). The EPA (2011) also lists the use of "greener substances" and the conservation of natural resources in the manufacturing process or the delivery of services as part of a pollution prevention program.

There are five industrial sectors identified as core areas of concern and thus targets for pollution prevention. Those five sectors include Chemicals and Manufacturing Industries, Hospitality, Electronics, Building and Construction, and Municipalities and Institutions (EPA 2011). Greenhouse gas emissions reduction and a reduction in the use of hazardous materials are both central to pollution prevention. The EPA's (2011) Strategic Plan addresses issues shared in common by all five of these sectors.

Integral to the concept of pollution prevention is policy and planning. Whether through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or state-level organizations, the government plays a key role in creating, implementing, and enforcing pollution prevention programs. Non-governmental and private sector organizations also play an important role in pollution prevention programs.

Background

Fines and other punishments serve as deterrents to companies, while financial and other incentives inspire manufacturers to reduce waste at the source. In many cases, pollution prevention is implemented because of the cost savings it implies. In other words, pollution prevention itself might be a by-product of cost cutting in the manufacturing sector.

This research evaluates pollution prevention programs being implemented in all five of the industrial sectors highlighted by the EPA (2011). The evaluation takes into account incentives and deterrents — both financial and otherwise — which might inspire organizations to undertake a pollution prevention program. The research illustrates ways in which pollution prevention and cost-effectiveness converge, and how pollution prevention can be implemented on a global scale without hindering free trade. Furthermore, the meta-analysis of case studies provides an overview of the main challenges or hindrances to an effective pollution prevention program and offers corresponding suggestions.

The methods used to conduct this research include the use of the Google search engine. Using search terms related to pollution prevention, Google yields a plethora of data from government agencies regarding the philosophies and politics behind pollution prevention programs. Without focusing solely on financial data, the research does take into account which pollution prevention programs have yielded quantifiable results in terms of reducing emissions or toxic waste at the source. Case studies were drawn from the Google search engine and also from a state Division of Pollution Prevention and Environmental Assistance database.

Methods

The textile industry "has the opportunity to make numerous changes in its daily operations that will conserve limited resources, reduce the amount of harmful chemicals being released into open air and water, and impact the wellbeing of our world in a positive manner" (The National Pollution Prevention Round Table 2011). One of those changes is to reuse the dyebath rather than discard each batch. Dyebath reuse "is an attractive alternative to pretreatment systems for dyehouses that discharge to publicly owned treatment works" (The National Pollution Prevention Round Table 2011). Dyebath reuse is preferable to pretreatment because it "has been shown to reduce flow, BOD, and COD loadings by up to 33%, requires a smaller investment in equipment than pretreatment systems" (The National Pollution Prevention Round Table 2011).