1、API PUBL8331 94 0732290 0544935 494 FO NG PREVENTION c d- Strniegies fw Tiyl c Envirqnmental Partnerrbip One of the most significant long-term trends affecting the fvture vital of the petroleum industv is the publics concerns about the environment. Recognizing this trend, API member companies have d
2、eveloped a positive, forward looking strategy called STEP: Strategies for Todays Environmental Partnership. This program alms to address public concerns by improving our industtys environmental, health and safety performance; documenting performance improvements; and communicating them to the public
3、. The foundation of STEP is the API Environmental Mission and Guiding Environmental Principles. , API ENVIRONMENTAL MISSION AND GUDING ENVIRONMENTAL PRINCIPLES The members of the American Petroleum Institute are dedicated to continuous efforts to improve the compatibility of our operations with the
4、environment wmle economically developing energy resources and supplying high qual products and services to consumers. The members recognize the importance of efficiently meeting societys needs and our responsibility to work with the public, the government, and others to develop and to use natural re
5、sources in an environmentally sound manneiwhiie protecting the health and safety of our employees and the public. To meet these responsibilities, API members pledge to manage our businesses according to these principles: D D D D To recognize and to respond to community concerns about our raw materia
6、ls, products and ,operations. To operate our plants and facilities, and to handle our raw materials and products in a manner that protects the environment, and the safety and health of our employees and the public. *. s To make safety, health and environmental considerations a priority in our planni
7、ng, and our development of new products and processes. To advise promptly, appropriate officials, employees, customers and the public of information on significant industry-related safety, health and environmental hazards, and to recommend protective measures. 3 To counsel customers, transporters an
8、d others in the safe use, transportation and disposal of our raw materials, products and waste materials. To economically develop and produce natural resources and to conserve those resources by using energy efficiently. I To extend knowledge by conducting or supporting research on the safety, healt
9、h and environmental effects of our raw materials, products, processes and waste materials. To commit to reduce overall emission and waste geteration. To work with others to resolve problems created by handling and disposal of hazardous substances from our operations. i To participate with government
10、 and others in creating responsible laws, regulations and standards to safeguard the community, workplace and environment. , To promote these principles and practices by sharing experiences and offering assistance to others who produce, handle, use, transport or dispose of similar raw materials, pet
11、roleum products and wastes. API PUBL*33L 94 m O732290 0544917 2b7 m Environmental Performance Indicators: Methods for Measuring Pollution Prevention Health and Environmental Affairs Department API PUBLICATION NUMBER 331 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT BY: SUMMATIONS VERSAR, INC. 3617 ORDWAY ST., NW WASHINGT
12、ON, DC 20016 6800 VERSAR CENTER SPRINGFIELD, VIRGINIA 22151 SEPTEMBER 1994 American Petroleum Institute API PUBLs333 94 m 0732290 0544938 IT3 FOREWORD API PUBLICATIONS NECESSARILY ADDRESS PROBLEMS OF A GENERAL NATURE. WITH RESPECT TO PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES, LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL LAWS AND REGUL
13、ATIONS SHOULD BE REVIEWED. API IS NOT UNDERTmG TO MEET THE DUTIES OF EMPLOYERS, MANUFAC- TURERS, OR SUPPLIERS To WARN AND PROPERLY TRAIN AND EQUIP THEIR EMPLOYEES, AND OTHERS EXPOSED, CONCERNING HEALTH AND SAFETY RISKS AND PRECAUTIONS, NOR UNDERTAKING THEIR OBLIGATIONS UNDER LOCAL, STATE, OR FEDERAL
14、 LAWS. NOTHING CONTAINED IN ANY API PUBLICATION IS TO BE CONSTRUED AS GRANTING ANY RIGHT, BY IMPLICATION OR OTHERWISE, FOR THE MANU- FACTURE, SALE, OR USE OF ANY METHOD, APPARATUS, OR PRODUCT COV- ERED BY LETTERS PATENT. NEITHER SHOULD ANYTHING CONTAINED IN ITY FOR INFRINGEMENT OF LETTERS PATE“. THE
15、 PUBLICATION BE CONSTRUED AS INSURING ANYONE AGAINST LIABIL- Copyright O 1994 American Petroleum Institute ii API PUBL*331 74 0732290 05YY919 03T ACKNOWLEDGMENTS THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE ARE RECOGNIZED FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS OF TIME AND EXPERTISE DURING THIS STUDY AND IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT
16、API STAFF CONTACTS Barbara Bush, Health and Environmental Affairs Department Genevieve Laffly Murphy, Manufacturing, Distribution 20 states included facility planning provisions. As a result of these initiatives, many facilities are now required to develop plans for reducing waste and periodic repor
17、ts on the progress made toward implementing such plans. The petroleum industry itself is moving towards a self-assessment process that will aid companies in monitoring their environmental progress. In 1990, the American Petroleum Institute (API) added a set of Guiding Environmental Principles to its
18、 bylaws. In the following year, API endorsed in principle a process to demonstrate adherence to the Guiding Environmental Principles that include management practices, company self-assessment to monitor progress in implementing the management practices, and resource materials that companies may find
19、 helpful in implementing the management practices. To determine which pollution prevention practices are most appropriate, API encourages the use of facility-specific assessments followed by the development of plans that include goals for attainment over time. This strategy allows for maximum flexib
20、ility and consideration of site-specific conditions to be factored into the planning process. Measuring Performance and Progress: The Driving Forces Pollution prevention can be achieved through a variety of practices. Regardless of the specific techniques employed, a key aspect of pollution preventi
21、on is how to measure it to determine how successfully implementation is being achieved. Quantification of pollution is central to this activity. Quality management theory identifies three generic forms of metrics: stakeholder metrics taken at the “end“ or “side of a process at the interface with the
22、 external environment and/or marketplace (e.g., analytic measures used in risk assessments; public opinion polls) results metrics that quanti the results desired by stakeholders; and process metrics that are necessary to assure that the process in under control. These three metrics form a logical hi
23、erarchy: if the process is under control, preferred results will be attained; if the preferred results are attained, stakeholder needs will be met. Metrics are useful tools. They can provide information on progress and business objectives and, for those factors that are within ones sphere of influen
24、ce, they track the quality of business decisions and the need to allocate additional resources to improve practices. It is crucial to note that some metrics are useful for explaining results, but these parameters may not be anything that one has much influence over. Other metrics may also measure im
25、provement, but are of outcomes that are subject to our rational control. 2 API PUBLa33L 74 0732270 0544925 333 = The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), compiled under section 3 13 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right To Know Act (EPCRA), also known as Title III of the Superfund Amendments and
26、Reauthorization Act (SARA), is frequently cited as a tool for assessing progress towards pollution prevention. Although it was not developed specifically for this purpose, it is the only database that is multi-media in its scope and organization. The TRI documents the annual releases of some 300 che
27、micals and chemical categories as reported by the manufacturing sector. Beginning in 1992, facilities that report under the TRI are required to report on an expanded set of elements that include the quantities of chemicals entering residual streams prior to any recycling, treatment, or disposal. The
28、 Pollution Prevention Task Force of the American Petroleum Institute initiated this project with the primary purpose of identifiing other methods of measuring progress towards pollution prevention. This was born out of recognition that when new measurements like the TRI are established, considerable
29、 care must be exerted to assure that the appropriate aspects of an operation are subjected to scrutiny. Are the right things being measured? Are all the right things being considered? Is there an appropriate target performance level? In light of these concerns, the objectives of this project were de
30、fined as follows: to determine what measurable parameters could be used or need to be developed to demonstrate progress towards pollution prevention in the petroleum industry and . to determine what methods could be used to measure the parameters. The project execution strategy included: (1) the ide
31、ntification of the most relevant available information sources used by EPA and industry in defining pollution prevention and the measurement of progress towards that end; (2) the development of a list of measurable parameters that could be used to demonstrate progress towards pollution prevention; (
32、3) the determination of measurement methods that can be applied to the parameters; and (4) the organization of the information acquired in steps (1) through (3) into a format that would be most useful to petroleum industry facilities. This report identifies a variety of methods for demonstrating per
33、formance and progress towards pollution prevention in each sector of the petroleum industry. The tools discussed here are based on pollution prevention techniques that are already in use at companies or facilities, or that have been used in other industrial sectors in similar situations. API invites
34、 its membership to review these measures as an aid for developing internal pollution prevention programs, or to measure the effects of programs already in place. Application of these measures may include the following benefits: Support for internal planning or tracking of pollution prevention efSort
35、s. Where companies have put programs in place, these measurement techniques may help produce uniform data on program effectiveness. Support for management performance goals. Where companies have adopted pollution prevention goals as performance targets for managers, these tools may be applied to eva
36、luate management performance. 3 API PUBL*33L 94 0732270 054492b 27T 9 Public discussions. Because pollution prevention is a topic of strong public interest, companies may use the methods in this document to measure pollution reductions in new ways to increase the publics understanding of complex iss
37、ues. Where pollution prevention programs are already in place, companies may find the data generated by these tools to be valuable for outreach on environmental issues. 4 API PUBL*33L 74 0732290 0544927 Lob MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS There are many ways to approach the measurement of pollution preventio
38、n progress. The lists of methods presented in this document contain numerous examples, but are not exhaustive. Most are based on approaches already in use at oil companies or are in use in other industrial sectors with similar processes. Some are original ideas suggested through the review of the li
39、terature on pollution prevention. In determining which approaches are appropriate, the following questions should be considered: What is to be measured? The ideal in environmental risk management is to measure end-points, such as actual human exposure to carcinogens. This is not always possible or p
40、ractical. Frequently there are intermediate end-points that, through modelling and other estimation techniques, may be used to arrive at the desired end-point. How accurate does the measurement have to be? Accuracy requirements should be a function of the intended use of the data. Because of the imp
41、lications for reporting burden and measurement costs, the necessary accuracy of the measurement should be carefully considered. Does the measurement need to be accurate only as to the direction of trends, within an order of magnitude, within a few percent, or within a few tenths of a percent? Can th
42、e parameter be estimated through models or must it be measured directly? How many sampling points are needed for the desired accuracy? Do measurement techniques exist? Once a statistic is defined, is there more than one acceptable way to estimate or measure the parameter? The various measurement par
43、ameters that were identified in this study were organized into five categories, ranging in nature from least quantitative to most quantitative: 1) Program-oriented Measurements 2) Activity-based Measurements 3) Mass-based measurements 4) Concentration-based Measurements 5) Normalized Efficiency Meas
44、ures a) By Activity/Operation b) By Production c) By Waste Generation Activity measurements, such as documenting the consistent use of Class II well injection (an indicator of reliable reinjection), are sometimes more useful than quantitative calculations, especially where waste generation rates are
45、 determined by external factors like well depth, crude oil quality, or unique reservoir characteristics. Where quantitative statistics are calculated, it can be more useful to define the parameters by which a statistic is normalized (e.g., by product, barrel throughput, or time interval). 5 API PUBL
46、X331 94 0732290 0544928 042 It is important to note that across categories listed above, there is an inverse relationship between the ease with which data can be acquired and the amount of information provided by the parameter. For example, program indicators (e.g., the existence of a pollution prev
47、ention or recycling program), are perhaps one of the easiest statistics to acquire. However, knowledge of the number of programs that exist within a company or facility provides only a limited amount of information on performance and does not provide any indication of the types of activities pursued
48、 by the facility or the quantities of waste being reduced by implementation of any program. Mass-based measurements, such as those gathered under the TRI or in the API Refining Survey, require more sophisticated data collection efforts, but can also provide quantitative information about chemical re
49、leases or waste stream generation. Mass-based measurements do not, however, account for production fluctuations that may influence generation and release quantities. Mass-based measurements must be normalized by some type of facility operations parameter (e.g., activity, production, throughput, or waste generation) to indicate the efficiency of pollution prevention operations. Collection of this type of statistic is likely to be more resource intensive. It is also important to recognize that pollution prevention progress, regardless of the type of parameter, inherently ca
