XIX Pollution Prevention Progression

It is easy to get the impression that there is a distinct battle' going on between those who use the terms waste minimization2 and waste red ~ c f i o n . ~ This notion, however, would preclude the concept that there may be an evolutionary transition taking place that would bring industry from one level to the next. In the related fields of environmental management4 and quality control: arguments have been made for similar transitions. Waste minimization as it has been put in practice is often onedimensional. The primary focus is on regulated hazardous wastes. It is the environmental engineer who is trylng to stem the quantity of those wastes and the resultant costs and liabilities associated with them. Because hazardous wastes often pose the greatest costs of all environmental emissions for a given facility, it is obvious why the early focus is on waste minimization. Waste reducfion, on the other hand, involves a much more direct means to prevent waste discharges to any media (i.e., air, water, solid waste, hazardous waste, and other releases) at the source. It takes additional skills to bring waste reduction beyond the use of good operating practices. The environmental engnecr must seek assistance to examine a variety of in-plant practices that can reduce the generation of those wastes. These practices include the following: input substitution or input materials modification, technology modification, closed-loop recycling and product substitution. A new regulatorv term has been brought forth in a number of states (e.g., Oregon,'Massachusetts and Maine). It's called Toxics Use