MEE 6201, Advanced Pollution Prevention 1 Course Learning Outcomes for Unit III Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to: 3. Explain pollution prevention audits. Reading Assignment Chapter 7: Eco-audits and eco-audit tools Chapter 8: Case studies: eco-audits In order to access the resources below, you must first log into the myCSU Student Portal and access the Academic OneFile database within the CSU Online Library. Cheremisinoff, N. P. (2002). How to conduct a pollution prevention audit – Part 1: Do an audit in-house and avoid surprises. Pollution Engineering, 34(3), 24-28. Cheremisinoff, N. P. (2002). Conduct a pollution prevention audit – Part 2: Do an audit in-house and avoid surprises. Pollution Engineering, 34(4), 16-19. Unit Lesson Nice job progressing through Units I and II. In Unit III, we'll study audits. Chapters 7 and 8 in the textbook discuss eco-audits. This lecture will teach pollution prevention audits. An eco-audit tends to focus on reducing energy use and reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. If non-fossil energy sources are used, then CO2 emissions are automatically eliminated, and the focus is on energy reduction to conserve resources. If fossil sources are used for energy, then the challenge, though somewhat the same, moves more toward CO2 reduction, which can occur from reducing energy consumption. While eco-audits focus on reducing energy consumption and reducing CO2 emissions, the P2 audit encompasses more than energy and has an ultimate goal of source reduction. Though the Pollution Prevention Act focuses on source reduction, over the years, businesses have broadened what they consider as pollution prevention (P2). According to Cheremisinoff (2002a): P2 is any practice that:  Reduces the amount of any hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant reentering any waste stream or otherwise released into the environment prior to recycling, treatment and disposal.  Reduces the hazards to public health and the environment associated with the release of such substances, pollutants or contaminants.  Reduces or eliminates the creation of pollutants through increased efficiency in the use of raw materials or through protection of natural resources by conservation. (p. 24) Cheremisinoff (2002b) includes the corporate bottom line, "A P2 investment must be able to stand up to every other funding request and effectively compete for money on its own merits" (p. 16). Thus, though companies must comply with the laws listed in the Unit I lecture (often seen as costs rather than benefits to management) UNIT III STUDY GUIDE Pollution Prevention Audits MEE 6201, Advanced Pollution Prevention 2 UNIT x STUDY GUIDE Title as they conduct their business, it behooves companies to look at P2. Not only is P2 helpful to the environment, good P2 programs benefit a company's finances. In Unit II, you were introduced to life c ...

1. MEE 6201, Advanced Pollution Prevention 1
Course Learning Outcomes for Unit III
Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:
3. Explain pollution prevention audits.
Reading Assignment
Chapter 7:
Eco-audits and eco-audit tools
Chapter 8:
Case studies: eco-audits
In order to access the resources below, you must first log into
the myCSU Student Portal and access the
Academic OneFile database within the CSU Online Library.
Cheremisinoff, N. P. (2002). How to conduct a pollution
prevention audit – Part 1: Do an audit in-house and
avoid surprises. Pollution Engineering, 34(3), 24-28.
Cheremisinoff, N. P. (2002). Conduct a pollution prevention
audit – Part 2: Do an audit in-house and avoid

2. surprises. Pollution Engineering, 34(4), 16-19.
Unit Lesson
Nice job progressing through Units I and II. In Unit III, we'll
study audits. Chapters 7 and 8 in the textbook
discuss eco-audits. This lecture will teach pollution prevention
audits. An eco-audit tends to focus on reducing
energy use and reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. If
non-fossil energy sources are used, then CO2
emissions are automatically eliminated, and the focus is on
energy reduction to conserve resources. If fossil
sources are used for energy, then the challenge, though
somewhat the same, moves more toward CO2
reduction, which can occur from reducing energy consumption.
While eco-audits focus on reducing energy
consumption and reducing CO2 emissions, the P2 audit
encompasses more than energy and has an ultimate
goal of source reduction.
Though the Pollution Prevention Act focuses on source
reduction, over the years, businesses have
broadened what they consider as pollution prevention (P2).
According to Cheremisinoff (2002a):
P2 is any practice that:
contaminant reentering any
waste stream or otherwise released into the environment prior to
recycling, treatment and
disposal.

3. he hazards to public health and the environment
associated with the release of
such substances, pollutants or contaminants.
increased efficiency in the use of
raw materials or through protection of natural resources by
conservation. (p. 24)
Cheremisinoff (2002b) includes the corporate bottom line, "A
P2 investment must be able to stand up to every
other funding request and effectively compete for money on its
own merits" (p. 16). Thus, though companies
must comply with the laws listed in the Unit I lecture (often
seen as costs rather than benefits to management)
UNIT III STUDY GUIDE
Pollution Prevention Audits
MEE 6201, Advanced Pollution Prevention 2
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
as they conduct their business, it behooves companies to look at
P2. Not only is P2 helpful to the
environment, good P2 programs benefit a company's finances.

4. In Unit II, you were introduced to life cycle analysis (LCA).
Understanding the life cycle of a product enables
the P2 manager to locate P2 possibilities, such as fixing leaky
pipes or using more efficient fuel sources. The
textbook reading for Unit III covers eco-audits, while the
supplemental readings cover P2 audits. What is the
difference? An eco-audit focuses on energy use and carbon
dioxide (CO2) emissions with the goal being to
reduce those two quantities.
While a P2 audit will locate production areas where energy
usage can be reduced, it doesn't have the same
focus on reducing CO2 emissions as in an eco-audit. A P2 audit
looks at all types of pollution produced,
excess energy used, and protection of resources. Thus, it is
broader than an eco-audit. The LCA and P2 audit
tend to overlap in coverage but differ in when they are
conducted. An LCA is often conducted before a
process is built, while a P2 audit is conducted during operation.
Cheremisinoff (2002b) outlines the elements of a P2 audit. The
primary phases are:
1. Phase I: Pre-assessment for audit preparation.
2. Phase II: The in-plant assessment.
3. Phase III: Synthesis, benchmarking, and corrective actions.
(p. 17)
Table 1 shows the steps within each phase of a P2 audit.
Phase I: The Pre-assessment (quoted from

5. Cheremisinoff, 2002b)
Step 1 Audit Focus and Preparation
Step 1.1 Get Ready
Step 1.2 Assemble the Audit Team
Step 1.3 Identify and Allocate Additional Resources
Step 1.4 Select the Subject Facility
Step 1.5 Define the Audit Objectives
Step 1.6 Review Documentation
Step 1.7 Gain Employee Buy-in and Participation
Step 2 List the Unit Operations
Step 2.1 Refine Our Initial Checklist
Step 2.2 Conduct an Initial Walk-through
Step 3 Constructing Process Flow Sheets
Step4 Preliminary Assessment and Next Steps
MEE 6201, Advanced Pollution Prevention 3

6. UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
Phase II: The In-plant Assessment
Step 5 Determining the Inputs
Step 5.1 Determine the Total Inputs
Step 5.2 Determine the Inputs to Unit Operations
Step 5.3 Consider the Energy Inputs
Step 5.4 Record Information on Process Flow Sheets
Step 6 Accounting for Water Usage
Step 7 Measuring Current Levels of Water Use and Recycling
Step 8 Quantifying Process Outputs
Step 9 Accounting for Wastewater Flows
Step 9.1 Identify the Effluent Discharge Points
Step 9.2 Plan and Implement a Monitoring Program
Step 9.3 Reconciling Wastewater Flows
Step 9.4 Determine the Concentrations of Contaminants
Step 9.5 Tabulate Flows and Concentrations
Step 10 Accounting for Gaseous Emissions

7. Step 10.1 Quantify the Gaseous Emissions
Step 10.2 Tabulate Flows and Concentrations
Step 11 Accounting for Off-Site Wastes
Step 12 Final Preparation for the Material-Balance System
Step 13 Construct a Material Balance Information Sheet
Step 14 Evaluating Material Balances
Step 14.1 Classify the Material Balances
Step 14.2 Determine the Gaps and Inaccuracies
Step 15 Refine the Material Balances
Phase III: Synthesis, Benchmarking, and Corrective
Actions
Step 16 Low-cost/No-cost Recommendations
Step 17 Targeting and Characterizing Problem Wastes
Step 18 Segregation
Step 19 Developing Long-Term Waste-reduction Options
Step 20 Environmental and Economic Evaluation of P2 Options
Step 21 Developing and Implementing the Action Plan (p. 17)

8. Table 1 is a good outline of a P2 audit. Specific industries or
processes may have other steps, however.
Several sections of the audit will be presented as examples. As
an example, consider a fictitious company
called ALref that refines aluminum. Recall from Unit II that a
refinery separates aluminum oxide from bauxite
rock and creates alumina. Alumina chemically is Al2O3 and
looks like white powder.
Example of Step 1.1
Step 1.1 Get Ready:
April 11, 2016: Have staff in place for audit. Begin Phase I.
May 6, 2016: Have Phase I completed.
May 9-20, 2016: Discuss Phase I. Modify Phase II and III as
needed.
May 23, 2016: Begin Phase II.
July 22, 2016: Have Phase II completed.
July 25 - Aug 5, 2016: Discuss Phase II. Modify Phase III as
needed.
MEE 6201, Advanced Pollution Prevention 4
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
Aug. 8, 2016: Begin Phase III.
Nov. 18, 2016: Complete Phase III.

9. Nov. 21 - Dec. 9, 2016: Discuss Phase III.
Example of Step 1.7
Step 1.7 Gain Employee Buy-in and Participation:
Set up incentive program for employees to report leaks, suggest
where there are inefficiencies, suggest
alternative energy sources, and suggest P2 opportunities that
they spot. Do not chastise employees for trying
to change anything. Encourage them to find and discuss
possibilities for improvement. Provide $20 gift cards
to lower-level staff who propose ideas that get implemented.
Example of Step 2 (unit operations from Advameg, 2015)
Step 2. Listing the Unit Operations:
water to the crushed rock to dissolve it
and create liquid slurry containing small-sized ore particles.
ressure to the slurry,
lets it digest for an hour or so, then
depressurize and reduce the temperature. Result is a mixture of
suspended solids.
waste products called "red mud" (sand, iron
oxides and trace elements from the bauxite). The liquid in the
tanks has a consistency of coffee and
is filtered. Material on the filters is aluminum oxide but is not
yet the finished product.

10. precipitation tank where aluminum oxide crystals
are added as a seed to the wet aluminum oxide. The wet
aluminum oxide gathers on the seed
making bigger crystals. The crystals settle out.
process are heated to dry them. The
result is the final alumina product.
The unit operations are the key to a P2 audit since they will
lead to P2 opportunities that can be listed in
Phase III. As a student preparing a P2 audit for our course, you
will likely have references (such as the ones
listed in this lecture) due to unfamiliarity with the processes.
However, as a real employee of a company
preparing a P2 audit, you will be familiar with the unit
operations and thus would not have references.
As you move into Phase II of the P2 audit, useful information
for Steps 5 ("Determining the Inputs") and 6
("Accounting for Water Usage") can be found in Chapter 15 of
our textbook. The chapter has over 100 pages
of energy and water requirements to produce various products.
Example of Phase II's Step 13 Material Balance
Using flow meters, measure flow rate Q1 (gpm, i.e. gallons per
minute) of water into the grinding process.
From stoichiometry and heat balances, determine how much
water is used in the process (Q2). Measure Q3,
which is the flow of water (gpm) out of the process. Ideally,
Q3=Q1+Q2. If the computed Q3 and measured Q3
are different by over 10%, then look for leaks in the system.

11. List material balances for all processes. This lecture presents a
P2 audit outline with examples of some of the
sections as well. Please refer to Chapter 8 of our textbook,
"Case studies: eco-audits," for examples of eco-
audits. Some of the information from an eco-audit (e.g. energy
usage, materials used, and water
consumption) can be used in a P2 audit. The recommendations
in Phase III of the P2 audit should be very
specific. As an ALref P2 manager, you will have walked around
the alumina refinery numerous times,
becoming very familiar with the workers and processes. That
familiarity, along with math computations of
material and energy balances, will provide you with knowledge
of where source reduction and other P2
options can be implemented. Chapter 8 of our textbook gives
very specific numbers for energy use, material
quantities, water consumption, and other items. That type of
detail should be in a P2 audit. Cheremisinoff
(2002a) provides additional examples of P2 audits.
MEE 6201, Advanced Pollution Prevention 5
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
This lecture has contained a lot of information. You now have
an idea of the aspects of a P2 audit. Now, it's
time to go to work and prepare an audit!

12. References
Advameg, Inc. (2015). How products are made: Volume 5 –
aluminum. Retrieved from
http://www.madehow.com/Volume-5/Aluminum.html
Ashby, M. F. (2013). Materials and the environment: Eco-
informed material choice (2nd ed.). Waltham, MA:
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Cheremisinoff, N. P. (2002a). How to conduct a pollution
prevention audit – Part 1: Do an audit in-house and
avoid surprises. Pollution Engineering, 34(3), 24-28.
Cheremisinoff, N. P. (2002b). Conduct a pollution prevention
audit – Part 2: Do an audit in-house and avoid
surprises. Pollution Engineering, 34(4), 16-19.
Suggested Reading
The following reading addresses eco-data.
Chapter 6:
Eco-data: values, sources, precision
The chapter includes detailed costs, mechanical, thermal,
electrical, and eco properties of many materials,

13. which are useful to a P2 analysis and/or audit.
Chapter 15:
Material profiles
Name:
Institution:
Date of submission:
Introduction
The common variety of wastes that are produced in dry cleaning
facilities include spent solvent, empty solvent containers, used
filter cartridges, powder residue and water contaminated with
cleaning solvents. Most of the dry cleaning facilities produce a
lot of hazardous waste due to the nature of the solvents used in
the process of dry cleaning. The volume of the hazardous waste
that is produced categorizes these facilities as generators of
small quantities of hazardous waste. The treatment and disposal
of this kind of waste is quite costly for the company and can be
quite costly to the environment. The same case applies to
hydraulic fracturing industries. They are seen as a major cause
of air pollution and as a result there is need to control pollution
from the source.
Discussion
The article The Viability of Professional Wet Cleaning as a
Pollution Prevention Alternative to Perchloroethylene (PCE)
Dry Cleaning indicates that most of the dry cleaners worldwide
use toxic chemical perchloroethylene (PCE) in their operations.
The chemical is associated with some very detrimental effects
on the environment and human health. Professional wet cleaning
methods were developed as a non-toxic alternative to PCE dry
cleaning but are yet to be adopted as a worldwide technology

14. (Sinshelmer et al, 2007). The technology was showcased in a
project set up in Los Angeles to demonstrate the viability of
showcasing seven dry PCE dry cleaning to wet cleaning. The
site cleaners were able to switch to professional cleaning and at
the same time maintaining a level service.
Perchloroethylene (PCE) has been used as a cleaning agent
since the 1950s and of the 30,000 dry cleaners in operation,
85% of them use this product. Evidence of the adverse effects
that this product has on the environment began to emerge in the
1970s. Chronic exposure to perchloroethylene (PCE) leads to
dizziness, liver and kidney damage as well as respiratory
diseases. Some of the other risks include neurotoxicity and
reproductive and developmental toxicity (Sinshelmer et al,
2007). The chemical has also been proved to cause cancer. To
understand the difficulty that is experienced in the conversion
of professional wet cleaning, various questions were posed in
order to identify the concerns raised prior to the project. The
issues of concern were mainly on the degree of difficulty in
conversion as well as technical training. Data was collected
through structured interviews with each of the seven cleaners.
The performance of each of the three cleaners was used to
determine whether each one of them was able to maintain a
certain degree of quality and the level of cleanliness after
switching to wet cleaning (Sinshelmer et al, 2007). Switching to
professional wet cleaning did not have any impact on the
quality of the cleaning or the perceived customer satisfaction.
The second article FRACKING SAFER AND GREENER?
Reports on the technological developments that have been
realized in the oil and gas industry and in particular the
production of shale gas. From the data obtained from the EIA,
the total recoverable natural gas reserves worldwide rose by a
margin of approximately 40%. Most of these reserves are found
in North and South America, Europe and Asia Pacific
(Heywood, 2012). The main drawback in the use of shale gas is
hydraulic fracturing that is used in the production of the gas.

15. This is because it is regarded as a serious threat to human health
and the environment in general. If shale gas is to be used as a
source of energy, then hydraulic fracturing with horizontal
drilling is used in the creation of fissures with tight shale rocks.
Other options are administrative whereby the authorities will be
required to keep the risk posed by hydraulic cracking under
control through proper monitoring and best practice (Heywood,
2012).
The third article Opportunities for pollution prevention and
energy efficiency enabled by the carbon dioxide technology
platform focuses on the various applications that have been
developed using CO2 in the last decade. As the manufacturing
industries attempts to avoid the production, use and release of
contaminated water and CFCs, there is need to have innovative
approaches to these traditional processes of manufacturing and
elimination of pollution (Taylor, Carbonell & Desimone, 2010).
Refining of petroleum is one of the most energy intensive
sectors in the economy and accounts for about 23% of the total
amount of energy that was consumed in 1994. There is need to
develop an energy efficient solvent technology whose platform
is paramount. This is where Carbon (IV) oxide comes in.
There is a possibility that the CO2 technology could emerge and
eventually be used as a solvent in the 21st century. This
technology platform has a potential of improving the efficiency
of energy, reducing the emissions and also eliminating the
safety and health hazards. This technology will improve the
manufacturing throughput. There are a number of concepts
available for use in this approach, but still there are a number of
barriers that are experienced in attempts to adopt the CO2 based
applications (Taylor, Carbonell & Desimone, 2010).). CO2
technology can be applied in metal extractions, CO2 swellable
supports, dispersion polymerization and the dry cleaning and
degreasing industry.
Summary

16. From the discussions above and the information provided in the
articles, pollution prevention is critical in drying facilities. It
has been made apparently clear that these facilities use PCE
which has some adverse health effects on both the health of
human beings as well as the environment. Wet professional
cleaning is an alternative to the use of PCE and offers the same
quality of services as the PCE dry cleaning and in addition it is
safer and environmentally friendly.
Hydraulic fracturing of shale gas produces lot contaminants that
affect the surroundings. Green chemicals could be a good
alternative to the current methods being used by shale operators
which have been proved to be very contaminative. However, one
drawback is that this can only be applicable in certain
conditions especially when it comes to the determination of the
soil type. CO2 technologies are good alternatives to pollution
prevention. They are reasonable, cost effective and
environmentally friendly therefore making them a good strategy
for reducing the impact of CO2 to the environment.
References
Heywood, P. (2012, April). Fracking safer and greener? TCE:
The Chemical Engineer, 850, 42-45.
Sinshelmer, P., Grout, C., Namkoong, A., Gottlieb, R., & Latif,
A. (2007). The viability of professional wet cleaning as a
pollution prevention alternative to perchloroethylene dry
cleaning. Air and Waste Management Association, 57,172-178.
Taylor, D. K., Carbonell, R., & Desimone, J. M. (2010).
Opportunities for pollution prevention and energy efficiency
enabled by the carbon dioxide technology platform. Annual
Review of Energy and the Environment, 25(1),115-148.