8
TEAMS BEHIND THE SUCCESS ZERO DISCHARGE

Zero Discharge – Case Study

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Zero Discharge – Case Study

TEAMS BEHIND THE SUCCESSZERO DISCHARGE

Page 2: Zero Discharge – Case Study

According to the Ministry of Environment, more than 70% OF THE WASTE produced in Spain, end its route buried in a landfill.

The European Union maintains through its directives that the ship-ment of waste to this type of facility, landfills, should be the last alter-native to consider, since it is the option that produces the GREATEST NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.

Penalties for non-compliance with these standards are very important.

As a consequence of these, the prices of landfill rates are rising to pe-nalize the deposit of waste.

Page 3: Zero Discharge – Case Study

In Campofrio Food Group we think that because of the waste de-posit problem, it is important to value each and every one of the garbage that we generate.

From the Department of Environment in CFG, we bet to reduce to the maximum the amount of waste that goes to landfill.

Departments that have participated: Maintenance, Production, Purchasing and Environment.

INITIATIVES/ALTERNATIVES

1. Incineration2. Selective segregation

This was the one that fit better with our environmental manage-ment policy. This means we have to minimize the LANDFILLS deposit, by looking for new exits to the di�erent materials deri-ved from our productive processes.

Page 4: Zero Discharge – Case Study

In our VILLAVERDE'S PLANT we have started to segregate di�erent waste and have been reduced to the maximum of sending the waste of urban solid waste.

We are making a sustainable management of our residues.

All the waste goes to energy valorization instead of a landfill.

Page 5: Zero Discharge – Case Study

Below we can see the amount of garbage that has gone to landfill during the years 2014 and 2015 in the plant of Villaverde.

JANUARY

YEAR 2014 (Tn) 16,26

16 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

14,74 17,14 16,46 16,34 15,06 18,54 19,8 18,54 18,46 19 17

YEAR 2015 (Tn)

FEBREARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER

01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

2468

101214161820

TON

S

MONTHS

AÑO2014

GARBAGE

Page 6: Zero Discharge – Case Study

0

5

10

15

20

TON

S

TONS OF GARBAGE TO LANDFILL

ENERO ‘14

FEBRERO ‘14

MARZO ‘14

ABRIL ‘14

MAYO ‘14

JUNIO

‘14

JULIO

‘14

AGOSTO ‘14

SEPTIEMBRE ‘14

OCTUBRE ‘14

NOVIEMBRE ‘14

DICIEMBRE ‘14

ENERO ‘15

FEBRERO ‘15

MARZO ‘15

ABRIL ‘15

MAYO ‘15

JUNIO

‘15

JULIO

‘15

AGOSTO ‘15

SEPTIEMBRE ‘15

OCTUBRE ‘15

NOVIEMBRE ‘15

DICIEMBRE ‘15

Page 7: Zero Discharge – Case Study

JANUARY

YEAR 2014 (Tn) 16,26

16 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

14,74 17,14 16,46 16,34 15,06 18,54 19,8 18,54 18,46 19 17

YEAR 2015 (Tn)

FEBREARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER

01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

2468

101214161820

TON

S

MONTHS

AÑO2014

GARBAGE

As we can see in the graphic below the waste that has been managed as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), it has ceased to be deposited in landfills and has begun to be sustainable.

Page 8: Zero Discharge – Case Study

During January to October 2014, 171.34 tons of garbage have been managed through ENVIROTEC.

This has meant a cost of € 6,853.60 for management and € 4,840 for transport, which makes a total of € 11,693.60.

From November 2014 the waste management is done through SAICA, the cost of this management was as follows. 36.71 Tn have been handled, resulting in a cost of 2610€. This added to the managed by ENVIROTEC gives us an annual cost of 14,303€.

From March 2015 began to take out the garbage as CSR for energy recovery at SAICA plant instead of the landfill, this has made us achieve ZERO DISCHARGE of our waste with the consequent economic savings.

The cost produced in 2015 was € 15,003. It has been managed as of March 2015 as CSR instead of as junk.

If we had managed during the trash 2015 as we were doing instead of CSR the expense would have been € 20,821.

Therefore the saving is 5,818 € / year.