Strategies for Identifying Pollution Prevention Opportunities via Lean Manufacturing

1. Strategies for Identifying Pollution Prevention Opportunities via Lean Manufacturing Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Resource Center practical solutions for economic and environmental vitality November 2010

2. Sleuthing for Pollution Prevention Opportunities Why? What and Where? How? Adding the Green to Lean

3. Prevention and Avoidance Trumps (The Environmental Hierarchy) BPEO = Best Practicable Environmental Option

4. Why Look for Waste and Toxics? $$ Do you give a 2nd thought to the true cost of “wastes”? • What is the cost to pre-treat wastewater? • permitting fees • buffering chemicals • energy • sampling & testing time and expense • disposing of any dewatered or filtered solids • filtration supplies • disposal of packaging from purchased supplies • maintenance of the pre-treatment system • What is the annual cost of lighting and heating unused space? • What is the cost of discarding unusable packaging • Really paying supplier • Pay for disposal ($200/ton in Seattle)

5. Why Look for Waste and Toxics? • Reduce Toxics – Human, Environmental, Business Benefits • Indoor air quality at the workplace • Effluent and emissions released to the environment • Exposure to employees and end users of products containing potentially toxic materials (Phthalates in your shower curtain) • Reduced liability • Reduced permitting or regulatory burden

6. Where to Look for Waste and Toxics? • Production • Facility • Grounds • Maintenance • Pollution control and waste management systems • Office/administrative operations

7. Where? In Production • Waste process heat • Inefficient use or overuse of water, energy, compressed air, materials • Overspray or over-applied coatings • Overprocessing (e.g., curing parts longer than necessary) • Scrap and rework • Inventory that is unusable or expired • Idle equipment • Other non-product output (filters, cutting fluids, tumbling media, floor coverings, cleaning or processing solvents)

8. Where? At the Facility (Inside and Out) • Facility drains • Storm drains • Floors • Chemical and raw material inventory • Dumpsters, garbage cans, scrap piles • Material movement equipment (forklifts, cranes, fleets) • Unnecessary lighting • Lush, green landscaping (pesticides, water use)

9. Where? In Maintenance • Lubricants • Hydraulics • Machine shop • Cleaning materials, chemicals and rags

10. Where? In Pollution Control and Waste Management • Bag house dust • Filtrates from stills, baths, wastewater treatment • Dewatered solids • Hazardous waste collection or accumulation area • Throughout production and chemical management or storage areas

11. Where? In Administration • Paper and office supply use • Printing and copying “culture” • Employee cafeteria or food consumption (including packaging) • Unused space heating and cooling • Employee commute

12. How to Look for Wastes and Toxics? • P2 audit or checklist templates • VSM / Process mapping adding inputs/outputs • Invite the third party inquisition on a walkthrough or assessment (Someone not familiar with day to day) • Material balance • Scrap rates • Dumpster dive (and other solid waste piles/collections) • Purchasing records and bills (materials, all utilities) • Senses: Smells, Sights, and Sounds • Publically available emissions or materials data

13. Examples: Process Specific P2 Checklist Excerpt for Metal Finishing Parts Cleaning:  Mechanically pre-clean parts as much as possible first.  Determine level of cleaning needed.  Work with the supplier to use a corrosion inhibitor more easily removed or compatible with the cleaning system used on site.  Arrange for JIT delivery to reduce or eliminate need for corrosion protection.  Use a lower vapor pressure cleaner.  Use an aqueous cleaner. Reduce Drag Out Losses:  Extend drip time; install drip racks.  Install drainage boards between tanks to route drag out into the correct process tank.  Reduce workpiece withdrawal rate from the chemical bath.  Install air knives or water misters to remove drag out.  Lower the concentration of plating bath constituents, increase the plating solution temperature. Both actions will reduce solution viscosity to enhance runoff. • Rack workpieces being plated so that cavities open downward to promote draining. • Use non-ionic wetting agents ….

14. Examples (How)Pre-Assessment Baseline Metrics Etc. Etc. , (See Handout)

15. Weekly delivery schedule Production Control Market Forecast Annual Production Plan Customer A Customer B D Supplier 1 Supplier 2 Daily schedule D Weekly schedule WK WK Daily schedule I 30 days Shipping Receiving I Assembly & Inspection Welding Painting Milling I I I 5 days 2 people 3 people 3 people 2 people C/T = 2 min C/O = 2 hr Uptime = 74% C/T = 4 min C/O = 3 hr Uptime = 61% C/T = 2 min C/O = 30 min Uptime = 93% C/T = 7 min C/O = 4 hr Uptime = 48% 2 days 2 days 1 day 2 days 3 days 2 min 4 min 7 min 2 min Total Lead Time = 10 days Value Added Time = 15 min Current State Value Stream Map (Unmodified)

16. Current State Value Stream Map (Modified with Materials) EHS EHS Welding Milling I I 2 people 2 people 12 lbs 10 lbs Materials Used = 22 lbs Materials Needed = 13 lbs Materials Wasted = 8 lbs 8 lbs 5 lbs Top line: Materials Used by Process Bottom line: Materials Added to Product During the Process Materials lines can be developed for any major material source used in processes and products

17. Current State Value Stream Map (Modified with Water & Materials) EHS EHS EHS Paint Purge Spray Line Surface Prep I I I 1 person 1 person 1 person 0 lbs 10 lbs Materials Used 5 lbs N/A 2 lbs 7 lbs Materials Needed Water Used 5 gal 5 gal 4 gal Water Needed 3 gal 2 gal 5 gal Water Used = 14 gal Water Needed = 10 gal Water Wasted = 4 gal Materials Used = 15 lbs Materials Needed = 9 lbs Materials Wasted = 6 lbs

18. Current State with Inputs/Outputs(Akin to Process Mapping) Grit & additives Filters, Nozzles, Masking, Rags Paint & Solvent Solvent Compressed Air Compressed Air/Energy Energy Water Compressed Air/Energy Paint Purge Spray Line Surface Prep Solvent (with paint residuals) Surplus paint & solvent, & solvent-laden rags Air leaks, GHGs Air leaks, GHGs Air leaks Contaminated water Fugitive dust Spent filters, masking tape and paper, nozzles, rags Buffer chemicals Spent grit Filters Greenhouse gases (GHG) Overspray Wastewater Pre-treat Effluent Solids, filters Energy Hazardous/toxic Water Related Non-haz Waste

19. Examples: Diagram Inputs/Outputs

20. Super Sleuthing for Opportunities • PPRC or other facility walkthrough list (handout) • Research the process beforehand, especially common wastes, emissions, effluent, etc. • Research available emissions or waste data (TRI, Fire Marshal, state data) • Research their permit status • Identifying potential opportunities is not (usually) rocket science, moreso an inquisitive way of thinking about pollution and avoidance. • There’s never a stupid question! Leave no stone unturned. • Even if a question or idea turns out to be infeasible, it spurs further thinking and a possible trail to other opportunities or solutions

21. Opportunities – Understand their Emissions

22. Super Sleuthing for Potential Solutions • Contact PPRC to help research • Contact material or equipment suppliers for feasibility and potential cost savings • Review MSDS or other product specs on chemicals of potential concern • Utilize free tools and services • WSU Energy Extension • Energy Star Profile • Alternatives databases (EPA DfE, SAGE, Cleaner Solutions) • Additional expertise may be necessary for more in-depth analysis or feasibility evaluation of findings and recommendations • energy auditing and analysis expertise, • wastewater engineering, • chemical engineering, • extruding equipment • Spray paint efficiency training

23. www.cleanersolutions.org

24. www.p2pays.org/ref/19/18161/index.cfm.htm

25. www.pprc.org/hubs

26. Maximize Paint Transfer Efficiency Finding: Poor painting techniques and transfer efficiency Solution: STAR Spray Efficiency Training Results:Woodfold Mfg. in Oregon has shown a minimum savings of $34,000 in paint costs and $4,000 savings in reduced filter changes.

27. Maximize Transfer Efficiency Finding: Variability in application of fiberglass and less than optimal transfer efficiency Results: Reduced overspray and variability in material thickness

28. Material Use • Finding: Waste of about 1 gallon of paint with each custom color mix • Solution: Alternative container • Result: Reduced overproduction of custom color paints by 48 gallons/year Minimum Fill Line for Gun Operation After Before

29. Material Consumption (and Time) Canyon Creek Cabinet Company-Wood Waste (Washington) Before: Lots of waste wood 368 sheets/day cut @ 120 sec/sheet = >12 hours Solution: 3 new crosscut saws • Results: 219 cuts @ 21 sec/cut = 1 hour 17 minutes ----------------------------------------------------------------------- • Reduction in time: 90% = $31,000 • Reduction in sheets required: $194,000/year • Reduction in waste removal: 580,000 lbs/year and $58,000/year

30. Scrap and Rework (Lean Waste) Before After After Finding: Poor visibility and ergonomics resulted in inadequate detection of defects to repair prior to coating. Solution: Hang panels in-line, better lighting, stand inspect Results: Changes reduced cost of rework by $208,000/year, improved ergonomics, reduced material travel and handling.

31. Scrap and Rework Plastic Food Package Manufacturer • Finding: 30% finished-product scrap rate and a “culture” that this is OK because they just regrind and put it back into the process. After all, it’s “recycling”! • We demonstrated the cost of this practice: “Back of envelope” calculation including material handling, grinding time, energy to re-extrude, grind, grinder maintenance, material: >$600k /year • A “lightbulb” moment • Solution: Just communicating this cost to staff and the expectation to minimize this “scrap culture”, is expected to achieve 5% scrap reduction. They are working on optimizing downstream processes to maximize quality of the finished product and reduce the amount of rework.

32. Water Use at a Food Processor • Finding: • Use of heated water, with high-volume hoses and nozzles to clean up residual food processing waste from vessels and floor. (Especially intensive water use before processing Kosher foods). • Solutions: • Manual pre-cleaning • Some mechanical vessel cleaning • Switch to low-volume-high-pressure hoses and nozzles • Harder employee access to hoses; easier access to brooms/squeegies • Changed standard operating procedure.

33. Water Use at a Food Processor Results: Found local composter to take all recovered solids – diverting at least 50% of previous volume from landfill Projected reduction of heated water, and wastewater generation by 30%. This also reduces the amount of pre-treatment, treatment chemicals, water sampling and testing, and energy to heat cleaning water and run the pre-treatment system. Wastewater savings are projected at 6 gallons/minute and $15,000 per year.

34. Water Reuse • Nature’s Path (Washington project) • Finding: Trucked collected oven condensate to wastewater treatment facility over 100 miles away. • Solution: Condensate recapture system for reuse onsite as makeup water. • Result: Savings of >$12,000 per year in wastewater treatment costs (plus reduced time and expense of trucking the water) • Columbia Paint (Washington Project) • Finding: Vessel wash water containing white pigment discharged to wastewater • Solution: Collection of white and off-white wash water to use for tank cleaning • Results: Avoid annual use of 36,900 gallons of city water

35. Toxics & Emissions Reduction • Canyon Creek Cabinet Company • Finding: >150,000 pounds volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions per year – pushing close to Title V air permit limits. One high VOC source was topcoat material for finished cabinets, which was applied twice to each panel. • Solution: Alternatives assessment and evaluation for substitute product. Identified a one-coat product that resulted in less overall VOC content for their coatings • Results: Reduced VOC emissions by 114,535 pounds/year. Now will not need to file for Title V air permit even with a 70% increase in production.

36. Energy Efficiency • Paint Curing • Finding: Neanderthal 60’ gas convection oven running 24/7 • Potential Solution: Replace with infrared or halogen curing system that can potentially save the energy cost per part by 20 %. • Utility Pole – Kiln Drying • Finding: Inadequate kiln drying resulted in running poles through kilns twice because pole surface areas facing inward to the log stack were not drying. • Potential Solution: Optimize fans and air flow, add additional spacers between logs in the stack, to optimize drying around • the entire circumference of the pole. (Unconfirmed if implemented or amount of energy reduced).

37. Reuse • Finding: • - Company purchase $18,000/yr. in biodegradable peanuts to ship products out, and • $Paid 280/month for two containers for recycling cardboard • Solution: • - Shred cardboard and use in place of peanuts • Results: • Eliminated one recycling container • Annual savings $19,680 (after paying for the cardboard shredder) • Source: ConnStep Manufacturing Resource - Connecticut MEP)

38. Reuse

39. Other Examples • Booty recycling at ON • Multiple lab refrigerators in a refrigerated room – adding heat • Record storage in an unused building heated in winter (in Idaho) for no other purpose than to keep fire sprinkler lines fluid in event of fire. (Suggestions? Transfer to e-data storage, or move records to another room in a building that requires heat anyway and has sprinklers).

40. What to do with All The Great Ideas? Low hanging fruit or Low-tech solutions? • JUST DO IT!!!! • Schedule a mini-kaizen event – internal or with TechHelp to assist and facilitate • Have company establish an internal Green Team to work on opportunities over time • PPRC’s rapid response service for potential solutions

41. Potential Metrics Economic Metrics: Energy Metrics: • Environmental savings identified • Lean savings identified • Other cost savings • One time potential cost savings identified • Individuals trained • Jobs created • Jobs retained • Total annual potential impact identified • Number of small businesses engaged • Percentage of small businesses engaged • Number and value of SBA loans granted • Capital infusion dollars invested • Hours of counseling provided • Energy conserved (MM BTU/kWh) • Energy intensity per unit of production • Carbon reductions (tons) • Carbon intensity per unit of production Environment Metrics: • Air emissions reduced (lbs) • Solid waste reduced (lbs) • Material intensity per unit of production • Hazardous waste reduced (lbs) • Hazardous materials reduced (lbs) • Water pollution reduced (lbs) • Water used/conserved (gal) • Water intensity per unit of production

42. Environment Metrics & Some Suggestions for Data Sources (Baseline): • Air emissions (lbs) • Air permit – monitoring, reporting • Solid waste (lbs) • # of dumpsters (density conversion) • Garbage can /dumpster dive inspections • Rejected product • Recycling or composting bills • Material intensity per unit of production • Hazardous waste (lbs) • Waste manifests • TRI Data • Logs • Hazardous materials (lbs) • MSDS • Purchasing records • Inventory records • Water pollution (lbs) or wastewater (gal) • Storm water • NPDES Permit • Wastewater • Pretreatment Permit • Sewer Records • Water consumed (gal) • Point of use or flow meters (if available) • Utility Records • Water intensity per unit of production • Energy consumed (MM BTU/kWh) • Defer to NEEA • Energy intensity per unit of production

43. Resources – Where to Get Help • UW Industrial Assessment Center • Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance • PPRC (Michelle) • Utilities • SBDC – Environmental Assistance Coordinator • City Public Works Staff • County

44. Breakout Exercise MetalTek (A “fabricated” metal fabrication and coating company) Exercise: Review description of company, baseline metrics, and current state VSM 1) What obvious and potential opportunities do you see? 2) What questions would you ask the company?

45. Thanks for your Time Contact PPRC at: 1402 Third Ave, Suite 1420 | Seattle, WA 98101 T 206.352.2050 |F 206.352.2049| www.pprc.org Michelle Gaither | Environmental Engineer | mgaither@pprc.org Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Resource Center practical solutions for economic and environmental vitality