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

Re: Industry environmental initiative waning?



Rob,

Good question.  What I meant was P2 technologies that have not made it in 
the market place but are both cost effective and reduce waste.  I'm sure 
there are many more examples of these than I am aware of.  One familiar 
example is ultrafiltration membranes applied to iron phosphatizing 
baths.  The specific type of membrane required was developed originally for 
making fruit juices.  Venders generally were not successful in selling 
these systems to metal fabricators.  There are many reasons why this was 
the case but that's a whole different discussion.  Numerous P2 technology 
market failures exist in electroplating, electronics, heavy equipment 
manufacture and maintenance, food processing and I'm sure other 
industries.  Some market failures are justified.  Others need a little help 
and that's where I think government/university programs should focus.  Once 
these technologies get "on their feet" the private sector including 
consultants and suppliers can and should take over.

Hope this clarifies what I meant.

Gary



At 04:29 PM 12/18/2002 -0500, Rob Michalowicz wrote:
>Gary,
>
>What are "market failure technologies"?  Can you provide a few examples?
>
>Thanks,
>Rob Michalowicz
>President
>Chem Process & Environment Inc.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Gary Miller" <gmiller@wmrc.uiuc.edu>
>To: "Kevin Dick" <dick@unr.edu>; "Karen Shapiro" <kshapiro@tellus.org>;
><P2Tech@great-lakes.net>; <NPPR@great-lakes.net>
>Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 3:48 PM
>Subject: RE: Industry environmental initiative waning?
>
>
> > Kevin, Karen, et al.,
> >
> > All very relevant and good points.  I have 2 experiential indicators of
>the
> > interest of industry in P2.  One is applications for our annual Governors
> > Pollution Prevention awards.  We are going in to our 17th year.  the
>number
> > and quality of the applications remains pretty steady despite more (and
> > hopefully better) marketing of the awards program.  Relatively few small
> > companies apply.  There are probably several reasons why.  So that
> > indicator is O.K. but not great.
> >
> > The second is demand for technical assistance.  That indicator is very
>high
> > and increasing.  We see no overall decrease in industry interest.
>Industry
> > is willing to pay for our services and our back log of requests for
> > assistance is longer than it's probably ever been.  We specialize in
>market
> > failure technologies so as not to compete with the private sector.  With
> > our current hiring freeze on the state side and reduced grant funding (MEP
> > $s, USEPA and others) our resources are stretched.  so we are having great
> > difficulty keeping up with demands.  And there are so many great P2
> > opportunities.
> >
> > Much of this discussion has diverted to the effectiveness of various
> > programs.  That is a closely related topic.  And I'm sure regulatory
> > pressures are an important motivator.  when we get a referral from an
> > inspector the company is usually pretty interested in working with us.
> >
> > So our experience is that the interest of industry in P2, overall, is
> > high.  They don't always call it that.  Demand is perhaps the highest we
> > have ever seen.  But industry resources are also stretched and their
> > attention is being pulled in many directions.
> >
> > Kevin said one thing especially well, "They don't
> > want to spend the rest of their careers measuring and reporting how
> > successful it was."  That remains a big challenge.
> >
> > Merry Christmas
> >
> > Gary Miller
> >
> >
> > the At 10:16 AM 12/18/2002 -0800, Kevin Dick wrote:
> > >Karen notes that participation in voluntary programs has been
>disappointing.
> > >Voluntarily programs typically appeal to large corporations seeking
> > >recognition.  However, most business are small businesses (about 96% in
> > >Nevada).  Government environmental agencies are viewed negatively by the
> > >business community as imposing additional operating costs on their
> > >businesses.  Voluntary programs require businesses to expend additional
> > >resources to monitor their performance and report it to these agencies
> > >(small businesses already spend much more money per employee for
>compliance
> > >than large businesses).  Most businesses believe that any information
>they
> > >provide (particularly to USEPA) can and will be used against them.  Most
> > >incentives for volunteering do not seem to offset the downside of
>additional
> > >monitoring/reporting and the perceived greater exposure of negative
> > >consequences from providing this information to the environmental
>agencies.
> > >
> > >Our experience in Nevada has been that most businesses want to comply and
>be
> > >good members of the community and will implement P2 projects that make
>good
> > >business sense and/or reduce their regulatory exposure.  They need
> > >information and assistance to do this, and they want that assistance
> > >provided with "no strings attached."   They do not want to be the guy
>that
> > >raises his hand and steps forward out of the line.  After implementing a
> > >successful project they want to move on and do something else.  They
>don't
> > >want to spend the rest of their careers measuring and reporting how
> > >successful it was.
> > >
> > >One anomaly may be the energy star program.  However, this program has
>two
> > >advantages.  It relies on a competitive advantage for product
>manufacturers
> > >that manufacture energy star equipment and the brand development of
>energy
> > >star as an industry standard.  The other advantage is that EPA does not
>play
> > >the role of the Energy Police, and they do not already impose additional
> > >regulatory requirements for how a facility uses, monitors, and reports
>their
> > >energy consumption.
> > >
> > >
> > >Kevin Dick
> > >Business Environmental Program
> > >Nevada Small Business Development Center
> > >University of Nevada, Reno
> > >(775) 689-6677
> > >(775) 689-6689 fax
> > >dick@unr.edu
> > >http://www.nsbdc.org
> > >http://www.westp2net.org
> > >http://www.nevadamax.org
> > >
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: owner-p2tech@great-lakes.net
>[mailto:owner-p2tech@great-lakes.net]On
> > >Behalf Of Karen Shapiro
> > >Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 1:28 PM
> > >To: P2Tech@great-lakes.net; NPPR@great-lakes.net
> > >Subject: RE: Industry environmental initiative waning?
> > >
> > >Like many of the prior responders, I too believe that integrated
>approaches
> > >work best.  Voluntary programs (VPs), by themselves, are not apt to lead
>to
> > >significant aggregate environmental gains.  Thus, in my view, the best
> > >"carrot" is backed by a "stick." The size and variety of the stick can be
> > >tailored to industry/business sectors along with many other factors
>(e.g.,
> > >is the facility a good or poor environmental actor).
> > >
> > >Another reason why voluntary programs are not always effective is that
>their
> > >success hinges on the participation of many facilities/companies -- it is
> > >unlikely that a small number of participating facilities will yield
> > >significant aggregate environmental improvements.  To date, there have
>been
> > >many voluntary programs at the federal and state level.  However,
> > >participation in many of these programs has been disappointing.
> > >
> > >Why don't more firms participate in VPs?  A few years ago Tellus
>conducted a
> > >study for the Michigan Great Lakes Protection Fund entitled, "Do
>Voluntary
> > >Mechanisms Work? An Evaluation of Current and Future Program
>Performance."
> > >This study examined why firms participate in voluntary programs and what
>is
> > >needed to sustain their participation.  In a focus group comprised of
> > >industry representatives, several people noted that the uncertainty of
>VPs
> > >versus the certainty of regulations is one driver for not participating.
> > >Because participation in a VP incurs costs (including time), firms want
>to
> > >know that the VP is not ephemeral.  By comparison, focus group
>participants
> > >noted that regulations have greater staying power and therefore warrant
> > >greater resources.
> > >
> > >Lastly, the efficacy of VPs is typically difficult to measure and many of
> > >these programs are  designed without giving prior consideration to
> > >performance measures needed for gauging success.  Even the success of the
> > >33/50 program (referred to by another responder) has been debated --
>while
> > >chemical releases during the program's lifetime decreased, it is
>difficult
> > >to know to what extent reductions should be attributed to the program
>versus
> > >to pending regulations, or to what extent these reductions were in fact
>due
> > >to P2 activities.  (For a further discussion of the efficacy of VPs see
> > >http://www.tellus.org/b&s/publications/r8-031.pdf)
> > >
> > >Thank you Todd for initiating this dialogue!
> > >
> > >Karen Shapiro
> > >Senior Scientist
> > >Tellus Institute
> > >11 Arlington Street
> > >Boston, MA 02116-3411
> > >
> > >phone: 617-266-5400   fax: 617-266-8303
> > >email: kshapiro@tellus.org
> > >web: http://www.tellus.org
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Rudy Moehrbach [mailto:Rudy_Moehrbach@p2pays.org]
> > >Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 1:31 PM
> > >To: 'Terry Foecke'; Katz.John@epamail.epa.gov; Minicucci, Bob
> > >Cc: NPPR@great-lakes.net; P2Tech@great-lakes.net
> > >Subject: RE: Industry environmental initiative waning?
> > >
> > >
> > >As a P2Tech member I would like to state this has been a very interesting
> > >thread. I disagree with Jim Walsh that we should not reply to all.
>Deleting
> > >some messages that may not interest you at this time is not that big a
>deal,
> > >Mr. Walsh. Many of us are being served well by this discussion.
> > >
> > >Terry Foecke, if memory serves my right, the last time I saw Bill
>Bilkovich
> > >was at a plating shop in Virginia and you were there also.
> > >
> > >Rudy Moehrbach
> > >Staff Engineer
> > >Waste Reduction Resource Center
> > >Phone 800-476-8686
> > >Web http://wrrc.p2pays.org
> > >Check out DPPEA marketplace for waste material: www.ncwastetrader.org
> > >
> > >
> > >* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> > >p2tech is hosted by the Great Lakes Information Network:
> > >http://www.great-lakes.net
> > >To unsubscribe from this list: send mail to majordomo@great-lakes.net
> > >with the command 'unsubscribe p2tech' in the body of your message. No
> > >quotes or subject line are required.
> > >About : http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/p2tech/p2tech.info
> > >* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> > >
> > >
> > >* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> > >nppr is hosted by the Great Lakes Information Network:
> > >http://www.great-lakes.net
> > >To unsubscribe from this list: send mail to majordomo@great-lakes.net
> > >with the command 'unsubscribe nppr' in the body of your message. No
> > >quotes or subject line are required.
> > >About : http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/nppr/nppr.info
> > >* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> >
> > *******************************************************************
> > Gary D. Miller, Ph. D.
> > Assistant Director
> > Illinois Waste Management and Research Center
> > Department of Natural Resources
> > One East Hazelwood Drive
> > Champaign, IL  61820-7456
> > 217/333-8942 phone
> > 217/333-8944 fax
> > gmiller@wmrc.uiuc.edu
> >
> > www.wmrc.uiuc.edu/
> > www.pneac.org (Printers' National Environmental Assistance Center)
> > www.glrppr.org (Great Lakes Regional Pollution Prevention Roundtable)
> > www.p2rx.org (Pollution Prevention Resource Exchange)
> > www.elsevier.nl/locate/issn/0959-6526 (Journal of Cleaner Production)
> >
> >
> >
>****************************************************************************
>**
> >
> >
> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> > nppr is hosted by the Great Lakes Information Network:
> > http://www.great-lakes.net
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send mail to majordomo@great-lakes.net
> > with the command 'unsubscribe nppr' in the body of your message. No
> > quotes or subject line are required.
> > About : http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/nppr/nppr.info
> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> >
>
>
>
>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>p2tech is hosted by the Great Lakes Information Network:
>http://www.great-lakes.net
>To unsubscribe from this list: send mail to majordomo@great-lakes.net
>with the command 'unsubscribe p2tech' in the body of your message. No
>quotes or subject line are required.
>About : http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/p2tech/p2tech.info
>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
p2tech is hosted by the Great Lakes Information Network:
http://www.great-lakes.net
To unsubscribe from this list: send mail to majordomo@great-lakes.net
with the command 'unsubscribe p2tech' in the body of your message. No
quotes or subject line are required.
About : http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/p2tech/p2tech.info
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *