Pollution Prevention Feasibility Analyses
The level of required analysis depends on the complexity of the considered pollution prevention project. A simple, low-capital cost improvement, such as preventive maintenance, would not need much analysis to determine whether it is technically, environmentally and economically feasible. On the other hand, input material substitution could affect a product specification, while a major modification in process equipment could require large capital expenditures. Such changes could also alter process waste quantities and compositions, thus requiring more systematic evaluation (USEPA, 1992a).
KeywordsCash Flow Feasibility Analysis Liability Cost Solvent Recovery System Economic Feasibility Analysis
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- NYS (1989) New York State Waste Reduction Guidance Manual. Chapter 5. Division of Hazardous Substances Reduction, NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- UOPARC (1987) Hazardous Waste Minimization Manual for Small Quantity Generators in Pennsylvania. Center for Hazardous Materials Research Center, University of Pittsburgh Applied Research CenterGoogle Scholar
- USEPA (1988) Waste Minimization Benefits Manual. Phase 1 Draft. Washington, D. C., Prepared by ICF Incorporated, August 26Google Scholar
- USEPA (1989) Pollution Prevention Benefits Manual, Phase II, Draft document from Pollution Prevention Clearance House (PPIC)Google Scholar
- USEPA (1992 a) Facility Pollution Prevention Guide. Chapter 6. Office of Solid Waste, Washington, D. C. EPA/600/R-92/083, MayGoogle Scholar
- USEPA (1992b) Pollution prevention News, p. 4, June issueGoogle Scholar