INTERNATIONAL CLEANER PRODUCTION INFORMATION CLEARINGHOUSE

CASE STUDY # 213

1. Headline: A petrochemical company saves more than

2.000.000 NKR a year from implementing cleaner production

measures

2. Background: See Description of Cleaner Production

Application

3. Cleaner Production Principle: Good housekeeping, product

modification, process modification

4. Description of Cleaner Production Application: This case

study was carried out in March 1992. A variety of options were

adopted:

--Good Housekeeping--In the original process plastic powder

left over from the production process was washed away with

water which led to a basin. Another waste stream containing oil

was led to the same basin. Because the waste streams were

mixed, none of the wastes could be re-used or recycled. Change

of operation routines eliminated the oil contents and the

plastic powder was sold to a recycling company.

--Product Change-- The company uses cardboard containers and

plastic bags as packaging for their products. Current packaging

requires a non-standard pall etc. by changing the size of the

package, standard EUR-pallets can be used.

--Raw material substitution-- The company uses a large amount

of oil in their compressors. By changing the specification of

the oil, the oil can be used for a longer period of time and

oil consumption decreases.

Statoil Bamble produces polypropen (PP), polyeten with low

density (PEL) and polyeten with high density (PEH). Total

yearly production is 300.000 ton. The company has 640

employees. The following main points have been evaluated during

the project:

- When the production process is in a closing down phase,

propane gas is led to a torch. Instead of being led to the

torch, this gas can be pumped into a tank and then be used as

raw material in the production process.

- Some of the pellets from the production is of a quality too

low to be sold. These pellets can be transferred to a powder

silo and then extruded once more.

- The company uses 23 million tons of water each year for

cooling. The water is paid for, runs through the factory and is

then discharged into the fjord. Re-use of water is possible by

changes in the cooling system and investment in a cooling tower

and cooling system.

- Re-use of a large amount of the waste the company generates

each year is possible.

5. Economics: The only measure that requires substantial

investments is to lead the gas away from the torch, but the

figures have not been calculated. Regarding waste streams,

yearly changes in costs include the following: elimination of

oil in production, 250.000 nkr; elimination of non-standard

pallets, 400.000 nkr; re-use of pellets, 700.000 nkr; net

profit from sales due to re-use of used pallets, 400.000 nkr;

re-cycling of plastic bags, 120.000 nkr; re-use of extruded

plastic, 50.000 nkr; re-cycling of paper/cardboard, 315.000

nkr; and re-cycling of plastic containers, 100.000 nkr.

6. Advantages: Main benefits from implementing the cleaner

production techniques were economical as outlined above, with

net savings close to 2 million nkr.

7. Constraints: Most measures were taken are in accordance with

"good housekeeping" principles, and no particular technical

constraints were reported.

8. Contacts:

The following documents were cited:

Amundsen, A (1993) Miljoteknologi og renere produksjon.

Universitesforlaget, Oslo ISBN 82-00-41009-9

Amundsen, A et.al. (1992) Renere produksjon, Bransjemetode,

Petrokjemi, Polyolefinproduksjon. Oestfold Research Foundation

report no . OR 02-92 ISBN 82-7520-078-4, Scandpower report

no.24.21.0l/A.

Company contact:

Statoil Bamble

Att: Grant Gundersen

3960 Stathelle

Norway

TEL: +47 35 57 70 00

Norwegian State Pollution Authority

Att: Uno Abrahamsen Postboks

8100 Dep. 0032 Oslo, Norway

TEL: +47 22 57 34 00

Oestfold Research Foundation

Att: Audun Amundsen

Boks 276

N-1601 Fredrikstad

TEL: + 47 69 34 00

Scandpower A/S

Att: Helge Brakestad

Boks 3

N-2007 Kjeller

TEL: + 47 63 81 49 20

9. Keywords: ISIC Code SIC 3513, polyolefin production process,

10. Reviewer's Comment's: This case study was translated from

Norwegian and submitted to UNEP IE on behalf of the Norwegian

State Pollution Control Authority by Stiftelsen

Ostfoldforskning in February 1994. They were reviewed and

edited by UNEP IE in July 1995. They have not undergone a

formal quality review.