Upload
joshua-savage
View
28
Download
5
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
P2 Integration: Quantifying P2 with TRI and other Data Sources. Environmental Summit Baltimore May 21, 2008 David Sarokin EPA’s Pollution Prevention Division. P2 Integration Assessment. P2 Integration a central tenet of national policy Assess status of P2 Integration - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
P2 Integration:Quantifying P2 with TRI and other Data Sources
Environmental Summit Baltimore May 21, 2008
David Sarokin EPA’s Pollution Prevention Division
2
P2 Integration Assessment P2 Integration a central tenet of national
policy
Assess status of P2 Integration Where it’s working well Where there is room for improvement What P2 has accomplished the past two
decades
3
The Role of InformationThe P2 Integration report looked
at a wide variety of data sources:What do they tell us about P2What do they not tell us about P2What can we learn about individual
programs and their impact on national goals
4
DATA SOURCES
TRI
Municipal Solid Wastes
Hazardous Wastes
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Pesticide Use
Fertilizer Use
GDP/PACE
P2 Information Disconnects? Goals
5
P2 Data in TRI
6
Essay Style P2 Reporting in TRIJerome Industries:
We purchased a wave soldering machine for use with No-Lead Solder. This is for product to be shipped to Europe that must comply with the RoHS rules. Eventually, we would like all customers to go Lead-free. When that happens, we will eliminate the old wave soldering machine which the tin/lead solder is used in. The lead-free machine is a better machine with much more process controls. If it wasn't for a few customers who do not want lead-free, we would be doing 100% of our soldering with the Lead-free machine.
7
P2 Data in TRI
8
But what does it mean? P2 activity has fallen sharply in the past 17 years?
-or-
P2 is still happening, but is under-reported?
-or-
TRI reporting requirements create the appearance of a falling trend?
9
States and P2 in TRI
MNVT
ID
NV
10
PACE Survey from Census Bureau
11
PACE – P2 is 17.4% of Total Costs
$4.7 trillion in shipments
$20.7 billion in PACE
12
Percent of P2 Reporting TRI & PACE
P2 in States -- TRI vs PACE
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0
% of PACE Expenses for P2
% P
2 R
epro
tin
g i
n T
RI
CA
VTMN
NVUT
PACE-Census Bureau Survey: Pollution Abatement Cost & Expenditures
13
TRI: Total Wastes vs Releases & Transfers
15
20
25
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year
Billio
n lb
s
TRI Releases and Transfers
1.00
1.60
2.20
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year
Bil
lio
ns o
f P
ou
nd
s
Total Production Wastes Managed
14
TRI can be compared with other waste streams…Pesticides
15
…Municipal Solid Wastes
50
100
150
200
250
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Mill
ions
of t
ons
16
Wastes, Economic & Population Trends(1990-2005)
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
GDP up 38%
Population up 12.9% MSW up 15.8% Fertilizer up 12.2% GHG up 14.4% MSW/capita up 2.9% Pesticide use down 1.2% TRI TPWM down 1.9%*
Industrial GHG down 2.1%
SF6 (elec. industry) down 53%
* TRI-TPWM from 1992-2004
17
Mixed Signals on P2 Substantial industrial spending on P2, but
shrinking P2 reporting in TRI Impressive case study reductions, but hard
to find a P2 signal in national data Most waste generation trends are
increasing or flat-lining Some programs have no evidence of P2
activity
18
A Few Points to Think About Targets and Goals
Without P2 targets, it’s hard to know if we’re making appropriate progress
Information -- Consistency and Scaling Local-level and Program-level data should
mesh with national data Do we have the right info?
(e.g. No HW trends available)
Status of P2 If pollution prevention is playing a relatively
small role in national waste management, is that the path to a sustainable future?
19
Thank you.
David SarokinUSEPA Office of Pollution Prevention and ToxicsPollution Prevention DivisionWashington, DC [email protected]