replacement of chlorinated solvent vapor degreasers with ... · through the degreassing process at...

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements . . . . . .

Preface . . . . . . . . . .

1: Overview: Introduction

2: Technical Evaluation 0-F

. . . . . . . .

1 . 1 . 1 1 . 1

t o the Problem.

Technologies. .

.

3: Economic Assessment of Costs, Payback Period and CInnual Cost Savings . . . . . . . . . . .

iv

21

4: Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

5: References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author g r a t e f u l l y thanks the State of North Carolina,

Department o f Environment, Health and Natural Resources,

Po l l u t i on Prevention Program f o r providing I l c o Unican Corp. the

opportuni ty t o perform t h i s study.

The author especia l ly thanks the fo l low ing I l c o Unican Corp.

i nd i v idua ls who spent many hours reviewing documentation,

preparing proposals, discussing suggestions, and ass i s t i ng the

author: Danny D iL ie l l o , David E l l i s , Donnie Harrelson, Richard

K r i esel , Nelson Marks, Robert Wright and the Indus t r i a l

Engineering Department; and, the fo l low ing Niagara Custombilt

Manufacturing Company employees: J. C h r i s Lanqmack, President;

Clark Langmack, Vice President; and Chuck Langmack, Vice

President -

i v

For many years industries throughout the United States have

used a wide variety of solvents in their day to day activities.

Because of this extensive use it is important for us to

understand what the word "solventN actually means.

"Solvent" refers to any substance capable of disolving or

dispersing another. Therefore, solvent would include substances

such as water. However, industry has restricted the word

"solvent" to mean an organic dissolving agent.

Solvents commonly used in vapor degreasers include methylene

ch 1 or i de perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene and 1,1,1

trichloroethane. Solvents costs, disposal costs and the impetus )

by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to restrict solvent

loss to the environment have caused industry to take a first (1)

hand look at minimizing or eliminating the use of solvents.

This document or text will identify, evaluate and discuss

Ilco Unican Corporations' installation of an aqueous cleaning

system to replace chlorinated solvent vapor degreasers used at

the Rocky Mount, North Carolina division.

To develop justification for an aqueous cleaning system, a

feasibility study of aqueous cleaning solutions and application

equipment was performed. This includes research and bench scale

-V-

studies of alternative solutions and equipment. In all cases the

environmental impact and waste management aspects were

consi dered.

This text will also discuss the technical and economic

evaluations of waste reduction options in addition to assessing

costs, payback period and annual costs of an aqueous cleaning

system.

All in all this text will show those readers how one

industry has comDletelv eliminated the use of a chlorinated

solvent in its manufacturing process- Conversion to an aqueous

cleaning system which uses only water has resulted in Ilco Unican

Corp. saving m o r e than $110,000 annually in addition to

eliminating up to 200,000 pounds of l,l, 1 trichloroethane

vaporized into the environment.

-vi -

OVERVIEW: Introduction to the Problem 1

1 OVERVIEW:

INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM

Ilco Unican Cwp. (Ilco) the world's largest key blank and

security product manufacturer operates a division in Rocky Mount,

North Carolina. The facility in Rocky Mount produces over

1,500,000 key blanks each day in addition to a wide variety of

lock components, such as cylinders, plugs and key bitting

machines, just l i k e those found in your local hardware store.

Since the beginning of Ilco's existence, vapor deqreasing to

clean the manufactured products using chlorinated solvents was

performed.

Figure 1.1 shows the relationship of vapor degreasing as it

fits into the Ilco manufacturing process. A s illustrated in both

manufacturing processes, products produced at Ilco traverse

through the degreassing process at one time or the other.

Two types of vapor degreasers were utilized at Ilco: a

crossrod system and a monorail system, both continuous and closed

top (see figures 1.2 and 1.3).

In vapor degreassing, the solvent is heated to its boiling

point. Table 1.1 shows boiling ranges for some of the more

popular chlorinated hydrocarbon solvents used in degreasing.

DVERVIEWi Introduction t o the Problem 2

BRASS & STRIP MFG

f I KEY

BAR STOCK MACHINING

MILLING b I I

DRILL," & MILLING

OPREA TIONS

PLATING T I

CUSTOMER 9 PACKING

FIGURE 1.1 A diagram illustrating the relationship o f vapor degreasing t o the ILCU UNICAN CURP, manufacturing process,


8 4 B A R O N E L A X E S L E E M O D E L TH=LLV

. . . ideal for cleaning large quantities of small metal parts. B u basket xork, screw machine products and stampings

OPERATION: Model TI+-LLV is a self-distilling, con- veyorized degreaser containing 14 conveyor stations in its complete cleaning cycle. Electrical switches allow either manual or continuous automatic operation of the conveyor at 12 FPM. This uni t can be equipped with two types of fixtures- pendant hangers and/or rotary baskets. I f hangers are used, work may be directly attached to the cross- rods or carried in tote baskets on pendant carriers. I f rotary baskets are used, work is placed in the baskets to be carried through the entire cleaning operation. The baskets, xilt into the conveyor mechanism. provide a gentle tumbling action which exposes all work surfaces for extremely thorough cleaning. Tum- bling also insures complete solvent drainage before work leaves the degreaser. Work enters the boiling solvent chamber, then is carried to the solvent rinse chamber. Cleaning occurs in four areas-vapor zone, boiling solvent. solvent rinse. and final vapor rinse. Parts emerge warm and dry. Fixture placement is pre-planned so that each t ime the conveyor is stopped for loading or unloading. five of t he fourteen fixtures are positioned entirely within cleaning areas. Two fixtures are completeiy immersed in solvent chambers: three fixtures are suspended within vapor zones. 1 A specially engineered Baron Blakeslee offset vapor chamber, separate f rom the work cleaning areas.

.rl acts as a contaminant collector. Cleaning is more C, effective, more efficient because work does not come in contact with Contaminated solvent in the of fset 8 chamber. This chamber also provides a considerable saving of solvent costs, since the offset design reduces evaporative solvent losses by one-thirc. . During operation of the TH-LLV, pure distillate f rom the large capacity water separator is -eturned to the { degreaser in a continuous flow. moving in the opposite direction of 'work traveling through the machine. Distillate enters the final rinse chamber. cascades rl into the boiling solvent chamoer and is finally carried by external piping to the offset chamber for contaminant concentration and transfer to the solvent recovery still. The continuous flow of distillate not only maintains clean solvent in the solvent rinse chamber, but also limits the contamination in the boiling solvent chamber-by dilution and overflow to the offset chamber.

CONSTRUCTION: The TH-LLV is fabricated of solid .. stainless steel with all-welded construction. The ex- a, haust hood and enclosure are mi ld steel. painted inside and outside for protection. Steam heat coils are mounted on the large, removable clean-out doors. 8 Standard equipment includes a liquid level gauge and a thermometer on avery cnamber: standard Baron Blakeslee dual vapor control: safety vapor control; water control and a ,water-cooled separator.

2

8

m ::

E

Figure 1.2 Crossrod Vapor Degreaser used at Ilco U n k a n Corp.

OVERVIEW1 Introductton t o the Problem 4

FIGURE 1,3 Monorail vapor degreaser used a t ILCO UNICAN CORP,

OVEKVIm7: Introduction to the Problem 5

Table 1 - 1 Common chlorinated hydrocarbons used in vapor degreasinq

Chl w i nated Hydr Ocar bons

Lbs. per B o i 1 i ng Range gallon at

68' F F* C*

Methylene Chloride 11.07 102- 106 39-40

Trichloroethylene 12. 22 188-198 87-92

l,l, 1 Trichloroethane (Methyl Chloroform) 12.22 188- 198 87-92

Perchloroethylene 13.55 250-254 120- 122

Source: Finish Engineering Co., Inc.

The boiling point of the solvent creates a vapor which

actually performs the cleaning of the product. From the spetrum

of degreassing solvents, the Ilco facility used 1,1,1 1

trichloroethane in its day to day degreasing operations.

l,l, 1 Trichloroethane (Methyl Chloroform) is a widely used

solvent found in various consumer products, including aerosol

formulations. Human deaths have resulted from exposure to very

high vapor concentrations in unventilated tanks, drums and bags,

but the concentrations normally encountered in an industrial

setting have little or no toxicological significance. (2)

Also, recent government reports have shown that l,l,l

trichlwoethane is one o-f the chemical constituents responsible

for ozone depletion and global warming.

STtr '0 000 ' 28 000 &002 686 T

SBL: '0 0SZ 6s 000 'OST 886 T

L6Z '0 S08 trS 000 '8ST L86 T

LTtr'O 896 ZL

Z6Z '0 L89 'ZL 005; 'L8T S86 T


A s discussed throughout this chapter. problems experienced

by Ilco's use of l , l , i trichloroethane were escalating costs of

the virgin chemical , energy costs, disposal , the potential long

term damage effect to the environment, dangers associated with

unsafe handling or use of the chemical and the continued

compliance with government regulations.

1

UVERVIEWi Introductron t o t h e Problem 8

PURCflASE

/

REGULA TORY CUMPLIANCE

FIGURE 1.4 Il lustrates a reas o f cos t associated with the opera tfon o f vapor degreasers a t ILCU UNICAN CURP.

Technical Evaluation of Technologies 9

2 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

OF TECHNOLOGIES

In our quest to eliminate our use of 1,1,1 trichloroethane,

reviewing the alternative technologies was extremely important.

This chapter discusses our technical evaluation of technologies.

To begin several questions had to be answered:

1.

2.

v 3 .

4.

5.

6.

7.

What other solvents could be used in existing equipment?

How did they compare in cost and cleaning efficiency?

Would equipment modification be required?

Would the use of ultrasonics decrease the volume of l,l, 1 trichloroethane used?

Would production be affected?

Was there standard equipment available in the mar ket p 1 ace to replace our existing equipment?

Could a capital expenditure be justified?

Solvents which are normally used in degreasing operations

throughout the automotive, metal working, electronics and

appl i ance i ndustr i es i ncl ude trichlorethylene, 1,191

tr i ch 1 oroet hane , methylene chloride, perchloroethylene,

trichlorotrif loroethane and Stoddard solvent.


When evaluating the above solvents, one needs t o consider

the a b i l i t y t o clean without damaging any of the mater ia ls of

construction of the a r t i c l e being cleaned.

I n tha t our product was manufactured from brass, the

cleaning act ion from most organic solvents would prove

sa t i s fac to ry i n the forms of se lec t i ve solvents.

We also found t h a t there i s no s ing le scale which can r a t e

solvent power on an absolute basis. However, a general guide t o

r e l a t i v e solvent ra t i ngs can be obtained by the use of K a u r i -

Butanol (KB) numbers and s o l u b i l i t y parameters. These guides are

t o independent empurical systems f o r est imating solvent power.

I n general, the higher the numbers on these solvents scales,

the stronger the solvent. I n actual p rac t ice there are many

exceptions t o the ra t i ngs suggested by these guides. Solvent

power i s only one o+ a number of physical and chemical fac to rs

involved i n a cleaning agent. 3

Table 2.1 provides a guide t o estimating solvent power and

should be used only f o r the purpose of the crudest possible

screening of candidate cleaning materi a1 s.


Table 2.1 Guides to Relative Solvent Power

Sol vent Kauri -Butanol

Number Solubi 1 i ty Parameter

Tr i c h 1 orot r i f 1 oroet hane

Stoddard Sol vent

l , l , 1 TrichloroethaneS

Tr i ch 1 oroet hy 1 ene

Methylene Chloride

31

37-39

120

130

136

7.2

7.4 - 7.5

- 9.3

9.7

SMethyl Chloroform Source: E . I . duPont deNemours & Co. (Inc.) Bulletin FST-1 (11/83)

During our efforts to review costs and cleaning efficiency,

we received considerable attention from a multitude of chemical

distributors, representatives and manufacturers. However, none

could show a cost reduction or payback. Most elaborated on their

)

abiliti,es to provide solvents with less emissions, reduced

toxicity and energy, etc.

Equipment modification in some solvent selections was also

required. Changing steam coils to reduce temperature, installing

chillers and increasing the freeboard height would have been

required. The freeboard height of a degreaser is the height

above the vapor level. Distillation of the recovered vapor was

already a part of the degreasing process at Ilco.


Ultrasonics proved it would provide a more efficient

cleaning process but would not aid in solvent recovery.

Ultrasonics would actually enhance solvent 1055.

1

All in all, our review of the solvents listed above would

not eliminate environmental restrictions or high operational

costs.

In all cases the solvent chemical manufacturers, their

representatives and distributors seemed to shy away from the use

of aqueous cleaning solutions as an alternative to our process.

However, Ilco never lost sight of this alternative technology.

After two years of attempting to find an alternative to l,l,l

trichloroethane, we decided to direct our e-fforts to degreasing

equipment manufacturers. Our goal was to develop and design our

own aqueous cleaning system.

)

Several equipment manufacturers w e r e investigated for the

potential to provide us with equipment capable of meeting our

needs.

Niagara Custombilt Mfg. Co., 13400 Glenside Road, Cleveland,

Ohio 44110, was chosen to work with Ilco because of their

ability to custom design machines to perform whatever the

customers needs maybe, quality of the materials, guarantees on

increased productivity, capability to perform a "turnkey"

installation and above a1 1 the capabi 1 i ty of

providing their expertise and limited R&D up front without any

commi ttment or capital expenditures. )

Tschnical Evaluation of Technologies 13

O u r spec i f i ca t ions were simple, we needed a machine capable

of increasing our capacity from 1 . 3 m i l l i o n t o 2.0 m i l l i o n keys

per day, loaded and unloaded a t the same po in t for operator/ labor

maximization, energy e f f i c i e n t and most important u t i l i z e d an

aqueous a l ka l i ne cleaning solut ion.

t

Discussion w i t h Niagara’s Chuck Langmack, ind icated t h e i r

major problem t o overcome i n i t i a l l y was how t o wash and dry our

keys as they were +ound i n t h i s stage of t he manufacturing

process. Figure 2.1 shows 190-285 keys loaded on a rod p r i o r t o

degreasing. This was extremely important i n tha t t he next stage

of our manufacturing required they remain on the rods.

The unique e f f e c t of solvents as previously discussed i n

t h i s chapter u t i l i z e d both heat and solvent vapor izat ion t o clean

between the keys. Vapors because of t h e i r molecular s t ruc tu re

could eas i l y penetrate the surface area between the keys c lose

proximity.

f

Niaqara overcame t h i s problem by using high pressure sprays

placed w i th in the wash cyc le so t ha t t he fo rce of so lu t i on would

spin the keys on the rod.

I f we go back t o our ancestors bas is f o r solvents and water

used as the f i r s t solvent, t h i s l i f e requirement coupled wi th

enough water and fo rce could poss ib ly clean our product as wel l

as any manufactured solvent. The same concept was used fo r


drying. Enough a i r pressure forced i n the same way would create

the drying necessary on the product.

I

Once t h i s major problem was overcome, Niagara proposed a

system w i t h a ra ted capacity o f 2300 t o 3700 keys per minute.

The capacity assumed 13 rods per minute w i t h 188 t o 285 keys per

rod. The system manufactured would be a f i v e stage system as

follows:

1) Load: The rods wi th keys would be loaded

onto a c a r r i e r 7 one rod a t a time. A picker

f inger on each c a r r i e r would p ick up a s ing le

rod from a staging loca t ion a t the f r o n t of

the washer.

2) Wash: Each key would be washed using high

pressure sprays from above and below. T h i s

would be a one minute treatment using a

rec i rcu la ted a l k a l i n e wash chemical . The

wash bath could be heated i f necessary. The

spray nozzles would be placed i n such a way

tha t they would sp in the keys on t h e i r

perspective rods. The spinning act ion

coupled wi th the h igh pressure spray would

remove any res idual surface contamination

between the keys. A s the so lu t ion was


3)

sprayed, it would be filtered automatically

using a self cleaning stainless steel screen.

The screen would insure that nozzles would

not clog.

Rinse: Each key would then be rinsed using a

metered amount of fresh water. The water

would be turned on only when the keys were in

a position to be rinsed. CI limit switch

would activate a solenoid valve to allow the

water to rinse the keys. The operator would

have the capability to control the rinsing

time, volume and pressure. This rinsing time

would range from 0 to 30 seconds. This

operator controlled feature was implemented

inasmuch as the next stage may eliminate the

rinse cycle.

4) Blow-Off Dryer: Each key would be dried

using high pressure air from centrifugal

blowers. The blowers would direct the air on

the top and bottom, spinning the keys t o

release the surface tension from between the

keys and removing any moisture without

spotting. The blow off time would be

approximately 10 seconds.


5 ) Unload: The rods would be automat ical ly

unloaded a t the f r o n t o f t he machine and

ex i ted t o a holding container which would be

transported t o fu tu re manufacturing

processes.

The machine spec i f i ca t ions would use an i n te rm i t tan t drive.

A t t he r a t e of 13 rods per minute, t he moving t ime would be 1.6

seconds and the dwell t ime would be 3 seconds. Each s t roke would

move the rods four inches on four inch centers throughout the

machine. An adjustable t imer would a l low the operator t o change

the dwell t ime f r o m 0 t o 60 seconds. The number of rods per

minute would vary d i r e c t l y w i th the dwell t ime set t ing. During

dwell time, the r i n s e would t u r n on. I

Figure 2-2 shows a three dimensional view of the carousel

machine. A s depl ic ted i n the top view, the loading and unloading

would be i n c lose prox imi ty wi th each other al lowing the operator

to monitor each pos i t ion.

Construction of the machine would be e n t i r e l y 304 s ta in less

s tee l w i t h an insu lated wash tank t o prevent heat loss i n the

event a heated w a s h was required. The s ide panels would be

constructed of safety glass t o monitor the ac t ion of the washer

from the outside. Each of the window panels would be removable

t o al low access t o the washer i n t e r i o r . The spray nozzles would

be a l l qu ick disconnect.


U t i l i t i e s included the fol lowing:

1. E l e c t r i c a l Characterist ics:

a. Dr ive Motor - 1 h.p., brake motor, 230/460/60/3

b. Wash Pump - 10 h.p., 3600 RPM, 230/460/60/3

c. Blower Motor - 1 13 20 h.p., 3600 RPM,

230/4600/60/3

d. The machine would be wired t o a cont ro l panel

mounted on the machine w i t h a disconnect and a

transformer fo r 1 l0VcIC contro l voltage.

2. Steam:

Steam provis ions would be made f o r the wash section.

3. C o m p r e s s o r fiir:

None required

Following agreement on design, machine speci f icat ions,

guarantees, and the c a p i t a l expenditure, construct ion began.

Construction was not without some stumbling blocks.

Throughout the 11-12 months of construction, our production

requirements were increasing and the ex i s t i ng equipment was not

e f f i c i ent .

The vapor degreasers required more and more maintenance

caused by temporary repa i r s preempting the a r r i v a l of the new

equipment and reluctance t o spend any money on equipment which

I

- 12

- 6

l l E M LIST 1.) FILTER 2.) KEY CARRIER 3. KEYS 4. REMOVABLE WINDOWS 5. AIR RLOW--OFF 6. CHAIN DRlM 7.) WASH PUMP 8.) OIL SKIMMER 9.) WASH HEADER IO.) CHAIN TAKE-UP SPROCKET 11.) SPRAYS 12.) FRESH WATER RINSE HEADERS 13. 5PRAY NOZZLE 14) NOZZLE BASE

OUSmUSILT. Y&#€VNRIIO m U I I

I * 1- -2" __ - PAC€ .L a .L --.A -. I __ !..- . - .- . --- -.

I

I I I

-1 I I

-1 I I

_I I I 1- I I I

-1 I I

-I I I I


would soon be obsolete. Problems i n the mater ia l handling system

on the new key washer created delsys. Some minor problems

occurred i n the blow-off and unload sect ion of the new washer. I n

l i e u of t he problems causing these delays, we s t i l l f e l t they

could be overcome once i n operation. The equipment was shipped

and ins ta l led .

Fol lowing i ns ta l l a t i on , we found the operator could feed the

product t o the washer much quicker and more e f f i c i e n t l y than the

auto-picker, therefore i t was eliminated. cllso, the blow-off

required major modif icat ion.

A f te r working out the bugs, the machine performance exceeded

the i n i t i a l capacity requirements, d i d not requ i re the use of

I steam t o wash and most important ly d i d not require t he use of any

chemicals t o clean the product.

The fo l low ing p ic tu res show the f u l l y aqueous key washer as

i t operates today.

It i s a lso important t o note t h a t an o i l skimmer which

cycles dur ing d a i l y use keeps the rec i r cu la ted water clean. I n a

24 hour day we generate only f i v e ga l lons of the o i l skimmed

so lu t ion f o r disposal. The tanks are cleaned out monthly t o

r e t r i e v e f o r recyc l ing any f i n e brass chips tha t have emanated

beyond the ch ip screens.

Economic Assessment of Costs, Payback 21 Period and Annual Cost Savings

3 ECONOMIC ASSESSMENTS OF COSTS, PAYBACK

PERIOD AND ANNUAL COST SAVINGS

The Ilco Key Washer System has proved it is more efficient

in capacity. Also, we have completely eliminated the use of any

alkaline or solvent chemicals. Water usage in the plant has

decreased by more than 50% following the washer installation.

The equipment recirculates its water supply and w e add no more

than 25 gallons of water per day. Steam heating has also been

eliminated completely. We have found that the volume and force

behind the water cleans our product satisfactorily.

Table 3.1 represents a cost justification analysis of vapor

degreasing described as the present method VI. aqueous degreasing

described as the proposed method.

Table 3.1 Economic Assessment of Costs

0mTIm RExNI-

1. Chenicals

2. Chemical D i s p o s a l

3. Energy (Gas & E l e c t r i c i t y )

4. W a t e r (Fresh)

5. water (Sewage)

6. Labor ($6.90/HR + 25% FRINGE)

!lnmLl

PRESENT =OD COST/YR 1.3 MIL/DAY 2.0 MIL/DAY

PFOPQSED METHOD m T / Y R 1.3 ImL/DAY 2.0 MIL/DAY

$ 6,000 $ 10,000

1,200 2 , 400 3 I 900 7,850

700 1 , 100 __

800 1 I 300

35,880 71,760

$189 , 660 $111 , 740 _ _

17 , 940 35 , 880

$ 30,540 $ 58,530

Economic Assessmnt of Costs, Payback 22 Period and Annual Cost Savings

NOTES:

1.

2.

7 .J . 4.

5.

6 .

l,l,l Trichloroethane cost based on invoice p lus estimated increase.

Chemical cost f o r new system based on manufacturer (Niagara) and chemical suppl ier (Dubois) estimates.

Energy consumption from invoice and estimated e l e c t r i c a l consump t i on.

Fresh water and sewage from invoice and estimate consumptions from manufacturer. Vapor degreaser water consumption f o r '87 and '88 per iod was 3.3 m i l l i o n gallons. Estimated consumption f o r the system w i l l be approximately 700,000 gal lons and could reduce i f r inse can be eliminated.

Chemical disposal cost f o r proposed system i s f o r labor of cleaning system.

Proposed system w i l l handle degreasing requirements on one (1) s h i f t f o r coined keys a t the 1.3 m i l l i o n per day volume 1 eve1 .

Table 3.2 represents the cost j u s t i f i c a t i o n payback period.

Table 3.2 Payback Period

Eased on 1.3 m i l l i o n keys per day: SYSTEM COST ANNUAL SAVINGS

Based on 2.0 m i l l i o n keys per day: SYSTEM COST ANNUAL SAVINGS

$118.210 = 1.45 YRS 8 1,200 PAYBACK

$118.210 = -90 YRS 131,130 PAYBACK

Based on an average of payback since volume w i l l increase incrementally:

1.45 YRS. + . 90 YRS. = 1.175 YRS. PAYBACK 2

Economic Assessment of Costs, Payback 23 Period and Annual Cost Savings

Table 3.3 s h o w s the actual annual cost savings a5 compared w i t h vapor degreasi ng.

Table 3.3 Actual A n n u a l Cost Savings

VAPOR DEGREXX" CCIST/YR ACTUKL COST OPERATI(XAL REQUIREMENTS 1.3 MIL/DAY 2.0 MIL/DAY 1.5 MIL/DAY

1. Chemicals $ 45,000 $ 70,000

2. Cn&cal Disposal 2,500 4,000

3. Eslergy (Gas & Electricity) 22,300 34,500

4. Water (Fresh) 2,900 4 I 500

5. Water (Sewage) 3,160 4,900

6. Labor ($6.90/HR + 25% FFUNCW 35,880 71,760

TOTAL $111,740 $189,660

$ -0-

-0-

1,600

15

25

25,000

$ 26,640

Based on t he comparison between actual costs of vapor degreassing vs. present method of aqueous degreassing a t present production r a t e our annual savings of $110,360 has been achieved.

Compared w i t h our projected payback i n Table 3.2, 1.08 years.

our payback is

T h i s has been determined as fol lows:

Equipment Cost $103,103

Labor t o i n s t a l 1 /modify 8,131

Shipping 1 255

Mater ia ls 3,646

Staf-F R&D 3.192

Total System Cost 8119,327

Sumnary 24

SUMMARY

Ilco Unican Carp. has completely eliminated vapor degreasing

and therefore the use of 1,1,1 trichloroethane at this division

and replaced the vapor degreasers with an aqueous system which

uses lO0X water.

Our production capability increased from 1.3 million keys

maximum with the use of both vapor degreasers to over 2.0 million

keys per day following installation and operation of the new

equipment.

This has resulted in an annual savings of over 9110,000 and

increased production capability.

Additionally, the environmental impact regarding pollution

prevented has resulted in a reduction of more than 175,000 pounds

of methyl chloroform emitted to the atmosphere and over 32,000

pounds of waste shipped off-site to a hazardous waste management

f aci 1 i ty.

References 25

REFERENCES

1. Capene, S.V. and Petroccia, M. Guidance to State and Local Agencies i n Preparing Regulations t o Control V o l a t i l e Organic Compounds from Ten Stat ionary Source Categories. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protect ion Agency, Research Tr iangle Park, North Carolina, September 1979.

2. Adams e t al., 1950; Avirado et . al., 1976; Bass, 1970; Eben and Eimmeree, 1974; Herd e t al., 1974 ; L i t t and Cohen, 1969; Ruotolo, 1956; Stewart, 1971; Stewart and Andrews, 1966; Stewart e t al., 1969; Torkelson e t al., 1958; von Oettingen, 1955.

7 -2. E.I. duPont deNemours Go. (Inc.) B u l l e t i n FST-1 (11/83).

I

Washers/Dryers Steel Glass Aluminum Plastic Rubber Wood 11

Food mwcessing Beverage Electronics Industry Pharmaceutical Laboratory - Bottles & C a n s From 1 Or To 10 Galloris - “‘Clrnn Room‘ SpPrifirstion: - I,@l Bulbs * Tflrrision Tub?+ * Funncls. Face Plalrs. Masks

Compulcr Part? * Ultra Clraniiig b Filtration

55 Gallon D n t n i ~ ~ Open 4 Closed . Laboraton- Glass ~ An\- S1ze Or Shape . Food \%-l-ashmq ~ Faulby. FIsh * Meat Pa( kine - 011 Ref!nei? Lahorutov Waic

PARTIAL LIST OF U S A . CUSTOMERS * Pmstek . DUPCPt * PAocOenid . PepsI~CoI3

Boeing Aircroft General S\pom.cr Mitrubishi * RoytheoP Chos Pfizer Gs~e:oi Electric . Mobi’ Oil * RCA . Coco-Colo Goodyeor * Noblsco s TQuV - Corning . IBhl . Dora Coworoilon 17

Anheuser-Buscn 0 Eli Li ly * blille B:e’,,>ng . Perrier

* Zerith

CUSTOMBILT Washer Manufacturing Co.

replacement of chlorinated solvent vapor degreasers with ... · through the degreassing process at...

Documents