CASE STUDY 1: Styrene Emission Reduction
Company Characteristics
The Company is a Corporate 3 member of the Composites Institute of Australia
employing between 6 and 20 employees fabricating wind deflectors for transport
vehicles.
Control and reduction of environmental emission are key goals of local government
under the POEO Act. Styrene is listed as a substance under the National Pollution Index
that requires reporting if styrene usage exceeds 10tonnes per year. Due to its low
threshold of smell it can also be a source of odour complaints. The fabricator has
followed a number of emission reduction techniques recommended by the Composite
Fabricators of America to reduce emission to low levels required under the US MACT
regulation. The Styrene emission factors used to calculate the emission reduction are
those in the NPI "Emissions from Fibreglass Product Manufacturing" handbook.
What did they do?
Substituted Low Styrene Emission Resins for conventional Resins
Using LSE resins that contain less styrene than the conventional resin or a styrene vapour
suppressant can reduce styrene emissions. The company uses resins that contain a
suppressant.
Applied controlled spraying techniques
By using spray equipment that operates at a low pressure to give low atomisation. By
using flanged moulds and good application technique to reduce overspray.
Why did they do it?
The Company became aware of the need for emission reduction through the Composites
Institute of Australia and compliance with the POEO Act through local government
development applications. In addition ventilation of the workplace environment to meet
worker exposure limits and comply with the WorkCover OH&S regulations could result
in an increase in environmental emissions. They saw that the adoption of proven
techniques for styrene emission reduction developed by the industry, principally in the
US, was the most practicable approach to reducing styrene emission to comply with
OH&S and POEO regulations.
Composites Institute of Australia
Model EMP
Case Study #1
What are the Outcomes?
Reductions in styrene emissions were calculated to be
LSE Resins
Controlled Spraying
Total Emission Reduction
792 kg/y
565 kg/y
1357 kg/y
30.7%
24.8%
55.5%
As well as reducing environmental emission the workplace emissions are also lower. The
overall emissions have been reduced by around 50% from the use of conventional resins
and application methods making a more pleasant working environment.
Controlled spraying also produced a cleaner environment underfoot and overspray area
was reduced by 50%.
Where to Now?
The company plans to introduce the use "FlowCoater" non-atomising equipment for layup that should give a further 19% reduction in styrene emissions and eliminate overspray
and atomisation. This will entail the cost of the FlowCoater equipment plus installation of
$30,000. Plus another $12,000 for a flameproof trolley to enable the equipment to be
moved around the workshop.
Other benefits expected to come from this change are reduced roll-out time, better
wetting of glass and higher productivity
It is estimated that the saving on wastage of raw materials by reduction in overspray and
atomisation is $ 5409 per year and from reduction in trimming of $1996 per year.
Productivity gains will be determined once the process is established.
Elimination of overspray and atomisation
Reduction of trim by 50%
Total saving in resin
Pay-back on investment
Composites Institute of Australia
Model EMP
$5409 pa
$1996 pa
$7405 pa
5.6 years
Case Study #1