NJTAP Pollution Prevention Case Study -- Union Ink

 

Union Ink uses a Bradley Grant to Reduce Solvent Emissions

Union Ink Company, of Ridgefield, New Jersey, manufactures specialty inks from a variety of pigments, resins and chemicals. The company was looking for a way to decrease the amount of fugitive solvent emissions and hazardous waste that were generated from their tank cleaning processes. With the aid of a Bradley Grant for $35,400, administered by the New Jersey Technical Assistance Program for Industrial Pollution Prevention (NJTAP), the company was able to reengineer its tank washing system, resulting in a 50% decrease in annual solvent purchases for cleaning purposes, and an annual cost savings of more than $17,000.

Plant Overview

The Union Ink facility, SIC Code 2893 (Printing Ink), is a small, 65 year old plant, with approximately 60 employees. Their main products are screen printing inks, which are primarily used by the textile industry. Many inks are of necessity solvent based, although the majority are now solvent free or water based, and the effort continues to eliminate solvent-based materials.

The Old System

One of Union Ink's major sources of pollution has been the batch tank cleaning process, which caused a considerable amount of fugitive solvent emissions. The company manufactures their inks in open tanks. Batch sizes vary between 40 and 150 gallons, and to avoid contamination of colors and different chemical-based inks, the tanks need to be cleaned between batches.

The cleaning for all types of inks was performed manually using solvents and a brush or rags, exposed to the open air. Manual cleaning with solvents required the operator to wear a respirator for health and safety reasons. Although the cleaning solvents were distilled and reused as much as possible, the cleaning process consumed a great deal of solvents and generated the majority of Union Ink's hazardous waste. In addition to the fugitive emissions from this process, the company would send out approximately 1,500 gallons of spent solvent and sludge every 90 days, which would be blended with fuel oil and incinerated.

Union Ink proposed to change its tub cleaning process from hand washing with solvents to an enclosed, mechanical system. In order to further decrease emissions, the company would also switch from using a solvent-based cleaner to an aqueous one. The estimated cost for the project was $70,800. The company applied for a pollution prevention grant to help finance the project.

The Bradley Grant

The Bradley Grant Program, formally known as the New Jersey Pollution Prevention Implementation Incentive Grant Program, was enacted to encourage the installation and use of pollution prevention technology at small manufacturers in New Jersey. The successful completion of the Bradley Grant Program, sponsored by former Senator Bill Bradley, is intended to show the usefulness of offering grants to small manufacturers in order to encourage pollution prevention initiatives. The Bradley Grants, funded by the USEPA and administered by NJTAP, provide financial assistance to small manufacturers, in order to implement pollution prevention programs at their facilities.

Union Ink was awarded a Bradley Grant for $35,400, half of the projected cost for acquisition and installation of aqueous cleaning equipment for their mixing tubs.

The New System

The company purchased the Robus Tank Washer system, marketed by Distil-Kleen, Inc., of Irvington, New Jersey, for the internal cleaning of their dirty tanks. The Robus system was selected because it could use a mixture of water and detergent, rather than hydrocarbon solvents, for cleaning the tanks. The tank washer uses electrically driven rotating brushes and a pneumatic lifting mechanism to thoroughly clean the tanks. A tightly seated cover with a soft gasket produces a closed system.

During the wash process, the centrifugal force of the rotating brush mechanism causes the brushes to swing out, conforming to the inner surface of the tanks and ensuring thorough cleaning. The resultant dirty water solution is treated with a flocculant, allowed to settle, and filtered. The water is adjusted for pH and discharged into the sewage drain, having passed analysis by the local sewage authority. A heavy sludge resulting from flocculation and settling is also produced from the system. It is neutralized and disposed of as a hazardous waste.

Environmental Benefits

The primary products of Union Ink are screen printing inks for textiles. Over 300,000 gallons of screen inks were produced in 1994. For each batch of ink (batches range between 40 and 150 gallons), 3 to 5 gallons of solvent were required to wash the tank in preparation for the next batch. Under the new system, each tank cleaned using the tank washer avoids the use of 3 to 5 gallons of solvent. Initial results indicate that about 15 tanks are cleaned in this manner daily, resulting in a solvent use reduction of approximately 15,000 gallons annually.

Prior to implementation, Union Ink disposed of 44,400 lbs of hazardous waste annually. With installation of the aqueous tank washing system, they have been able to reduce this amount to 17,760 lbs, a reduction of 60%. In addition, fugitive emissions have decreased from an estimated 7,140 lbs annually to 3,570 lbs, a 50% reduction.

Since the company is now using a water solution in a closed system, the only evaporation into the air is water, and employee exposure to solvent vapors has been drastically reduced. In addition, both visitors to the plant and employees have discerned a noticeable decrease in solvent odor.

Financial Savings Achieved

In addition to the environmental and employee health benefits the new system has allowed substantial savings on solvent purchases and waste disposal costs. Solvent purchases have declined from approximately 7,000 gallons to 3,500 gallons per year, saving Union Ink more than $3,500 in purchase costs. As a result of the decrease in hazardous waste volume, annual waste disposal costs have decreased from approximately $7,600 to $4,800.

The savings in raw materials and waste disposal alone produce a monetary savings of $2,050 per quarter, or $8,200 per year. There are, however, additional productivity increases as a result of the project. Previously, the mixing tanks were cleaned manually by an employee wearing a respirator. The new tank washer is automated, the wash and rinse cycle being automatically monitored by programmable controllers, and can be left to run through the complete cycle without an operator watching it. This means that the operator is free for a large part of the working day to perform other production duties, such as the processing of additional batches. Factoring in the savings due to direct labor, the annual savings increases to $17,200. The payback period for this project is 2.7 years.

Additional benefits of the new system have not yet been quantified. For example, since a respirator is no longer needed in order to accomplish tank cleaning, expenses related to the purchase, maintenance and use of personal protective equipment are expected to decrease. In addition, because the amount of solvent stored on site is reduced, the company's regulatory and reporting burden has decreased.

Conclusion

Under the Bradley Grant Program, Union Ink Company was able to implement this project, enabling them to reduce pollution and save money simultaneously. In addition to Union Ink, grants have been awarded to other small manufacturers in New Jersey, benefiting both the people of the state and the companies involved.

By installing an aqueous tank washer to replace manual tank cleaning using solvents, Union Ink has greatly reduced the amount of waste it generates. While doing so, the company has also reduced production costs and helped protect the health and safety of its employees. In addition to Union Ink, this type of system has applicability to a wide range of businesses in the paint and coatings field.