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

Re: No Waste Technology

No resistance to zero waste goals or technologies here.  Zero waste/zero
reject is an appropriate goal for any company -- practical issues involve
the pathway that goal is reached/pursued.  My comments reflect experiences
with small businesses, which is where most P2 technical assistance goes to.
Most (all?) of the example "zero waste" programs/technologies provided
reference large companies. [As an aside, I have seen larger companies claim
P2 progress by outsourcing waste generating processes to smaller companies
without "greening" their supply chain]  In the context of this dialogue, I'd
be interested in your views on (1) the best way to acheive P2 implementation
with small business and (2) why overall risk reduction/resource conservation
isn't the preferred way to consider proposed zero-waste technology.

Michael Keefe

-----Original Message-----
From: rpojasek@sprynet.com <rpojasek@sprynet.com>
To: p2tech@great-lakes.net <p2tech@great-lakes.net>
Date: Tuesday, January 13, 1998 4:54 PM
Subject: No Waste Technology

>At the risk of keeping this discussion going for a little while longer, I
>note that DuPont has set a ZERO WASTE goal for its facilities (maybe they
>this on their web site).  Incremental improvement will not get them there
>quickly.  GE has instituted a "six sigma program."  They currently have
>35,000 defects per million (3 sigma).  They are trying to go to 3.5 defects
>million (6 sigma) in 5 years (See Forbes, 1/26/98 p.44).  I have spoken to
>of their environmental people who believe this program will be applied to
>as a defect.  Xerox has a goal of zero waste factories (check out their
>at www.xerox.com).  The paper industry has been looking at minimum effluent
>mills (TAPPI Press, 1996).  There is a great note on GREEN CHEMISTRY in
>(ACS) in the December 22, 1997 issue (p.47).  There are making things with
>totally new pathways eliminating large amounts of waste along the way.
>TetraTech or other large engineering firms be working on these projects if
>are so worried about the laws of thermodynamics?  We need new technology in
>of these cases, totally new ways to make the things we want.  Finding
>substitutes will only get us new wastes.  Why have large companies been
>in this direction and the P2 community is refusing to budge?  By the way,
>have received some good examples along the way with this discussion.  I am
>surprised at the resistance to this concept by some members of the list.
>Bob Pojasek