[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Break-through In CO2 Cleaning



Bob,

I really agree with you on this.  We have been teaming for several years
now to develop means to rapidly and routinely make first-pass
incremental comparison of the economic, energy, environmental and safety
impacts of process designs.  The target audience for our efforts is
process design engineers in the chemcial industry and in manufacturing.
I'm not sure that this is exactly a comparative risk study, but it
perhaps is a path toward a routine capability to do integrated
design decision making. Safety, energy and presumed P2 tradeoffs become
illuminated along with economics in the 
process.  Collaborators in our work include several
universities, companies, CWRT, Battelle and others.

Pete Radecki
Center for Clean Industrial and Treatment Technologies
ppradeck@mtu.edu
906-487-2228

> 
> I served as one of the judges for the President's Green Chemistry Award Program. 
>  We scored the CO2 applications lower because they trade off energy (which also 
> pollutes) for chemicals and because there was considerable concern about the 
> safety of the equipment currently available for P2 applications.  One way to 
> lower the cost of the equipment is to skimp on the safety.  We felt there was 
> evidence of this.  It is amazing how often P2 opportunities go to higher utility 
> costs and less safety to substitute for a hazardous chemical?  Has anyone cone a 
> comparative risk study on one of these cases?  The CO2 might be a good place to 
> start.
> 
> Bob Pojasek
> Cambridge Environmental Inc.
> 58 Charles St.
> Cambridge MA 02141
> (617) 225-0812
> (617) 225-0813 (F)
> rpojasek@sprynet.com
>