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

RE: Spent Toner


I doubt the brick maker is not getting any benefit from this.  Are they
being paid to take the toner, if so, how much ?  Toner is messy to handle
and unless they were being paid a lot to take it, no one would bother.  Then
there is the issue of the generator having to pay to get rid of it. Since
its not hazardous, why would they be motivated to pay someone a high fee to
take it ?  If the brick maker is paying for it, then there most likely is a
beneficial reason.

My guess is that the toner creates a darker blacker brick.  Perhaps it
speckles the surface and makes the brick look like its covered with soot.
Used brick sells for a premium over raw red brick and this may be the
benefit created.  If so, the brick maker may see this as an economic
advantage.  Since this is all a guess, why don't you ask them ?

Just my thoughts,


> ----------
> From: 	rtgriffin@deq.state.va.us[SMTP:rtgriffin@deq.state.va.us]
> Sent: 	Tuesday, March 03, 1998 4:19AM
> To: 	p2tech@great-lakes.net
> Subject: 	Spent Toner
> Hi P2 Techsters!  
> Is anyone aware of any innovative approaches for reusing spent toner?  
> We're working with a company who has an aggressive cartridge recycling
> system 
> and wants to find the most environmentally-friendly method for getting rid
> of 
> the unreusable toner.  It's not hazardous and can be landfilled, and 
> currently they are paying to have it blended with fuel for heating.  
> They are considering an offer by a NC brick-making company to use the
> spent 
> toner. The brick-maker mixes the spent toner with water to create a slurry
> which is added to the brick solution.  Reportedly, all of the toner 
> (polystyrene, iron oxide, and contaminated paper fibers) are baked off in
> the 
> kilning process.  It sounds good to the company since the brick-maker will
> take it.  However, they wonder about the advantage to the brick-maker
> since 
> the toner evidently doesn't add any mass to the bricks.  In addition,
> there 
> are handling difficulties and presumably increased air emission 
> considerations.
> Does anyone have any further insight on this methodology and its potential
> benefits and drawbacks?  NC folks, could the company be getting any kind
> of 
> subsidy or other financial consideration for taking the spent toner like
> in 
> the case of fly ash?
> Thanks,
> Tom Griffin
> VA DEQ Office of Pollution Prevention
> P.O. Box 10009
> Richmond, VA  23240-0009
> 804-698-4545, fax-X4277
> email rtgriffin@deq.state.va.us