[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The real definition -Reply -Reply -Reply
Sorry to be defensive, but in the before situation at this site the
emplyee/management awareness regarding chemical use seemed to be
high. The company was a small quantity generator and had no immediate
regulatory pressure to change (this was nine years ago). They were
being pro-active and the major root cause of waste seemed to be military
specs on their original product. I learned a valuable lesson on the
importance of training. BTW as an EPA employee at the time I was
amazed that a small company would invite me in to their plant to help
them set up an evaluation of potential solvent substitutes.
Now I feel better,
>>> "email@example.com" 05/02/97 07:18pm >>>
In a rare fit of ideological purity, I would argue that Lisa's example is an
illustration of failing to address the root causes of the waste (lack of
employee/management awareness regarding chemical use, regardless
of toxicity), and focusing instead on the almost-trivial symptoms (ie.,
As such, it merely underscores the importance of tackling organizational
culture in P2. As a chemical engineer, it pains me to say this, but
sometimes technology just ain't enough.
OK. I feel better now.
Maybe Mike should have said more conscientious users of materials. I
understand what he is saying. A shop I worked with replaced TCA with
d-limonene in a cleaning operation. When using TCA the TCA was well
controlled, after switching to d-limonene for that one operation shop
personnel started using the d-limonene for every cleaning situation.
The fragrance was overpowering when I revisited the shop. I'm not
saying that overall situation is not better, just that their chemical
handling became more relaxed.