1

IINDUSTRIALNDUSTRIAL EECOLOGYCOLOGY AAPPLICATIONSPPLICATIONS: : Contaminant Sources and Fate Contaminant Sources and Fate in the NYin the NY--NJ Harbor WatershedNJ Harbor Watershed

Earth Institute Seminars on Sustainable Development Earth Institute Seminars on Sustainable Development Columbia UniversityColumbia University

October 12October 12th, th, 20062006

Marta A. Panero, Ph.D.Marta A. Panero, Ph.D.Director, Harbor Project, NYASDirector, Harbor Project, NYAS

NYNY--NJ Harbor NJ Harbor & its & its

watershedwatershed

2

Why use Industrial Ecology?Why use Industrial Ecology?SystemsSystems--based approach based approach –– concerned with the concerned with the interrelationships of anthropogenic systems and their interrelationships of anthropogenic systems and their impact on the environment: impact on the environment:

Model interactions among and between industries and consumers baModel interactions among and between industries and consumers based sed upon a natural analogue (Descriptive)upon a natural analogue (Descriptive)Seeks to optimize the total industrial materials cycle from virgSeeks to optimize the total industrial materials cycle from virgin material to in material to finished product to waste disposal in order to lessen the impactfinished product to waste disposal in order to lessen the impact of these of these processes on the environment (Prescriptive)processes on the environment (Prescriptive)

Goal: materials and energy optimizationGoal: materials and energy optimizationDeDe--materialization: minimize extraction & usematerialization: minimize extraction & useMaterial integration: reuse; recycling Material integration: reuse; recycling Cradle to cradle approach Cradle to cradle approach

Analytical toolsAnalytical tools: : material flows, mass balance, life cycle analysismaterial flows, mass balance, life cycle analysis

Overall Goals of Project:Overall Goals of Project:Identify Identify the locations in five toxicant cycles (Hg, Cd, the locations in five toxicant cycles (Hg, Cd, PCBs, dioxins and PAHs) where pollution prevention PCBs, dioxins and PAHs) where pollution prevention (P2) would most efficiently contribute to long(P2) would most efficiently contribute to long--term term reductions in loadings to the harborreductions in loadings to the harbor

Develop with a stakeholders consortium Develop with a stakeholders consortium practical P2 practical P2 strategies that address toxicantstrategies that address toxicant releases / emissions. releases / emissions.

Encourage implementationEncourage implementation of the recommended of the recommended actions by integrating stakeholders into the research actions by integrating stakeholders into the research and policy making process and policy making process

3

ResearchResearchIdentify sourcesIdentify sources, flows and sinks for contaminants , flows and sinks for contaminants through the region including products, processes and through the region including products, processes and sectors that produce, use and/or release these sectors that produce, use and/or release these contaminantscontaminants

Develop a Substance Flow AssessmentDevelop a Substance Flow Assessment, , quantifying contaminant flows and transformations quantifying contaminant flows and transformations (from extraction, production, consumption, to post(from extraction, production, consumption, to post--consumption, including disposal rates) [Industrial consumption, including disposal rates) [Industrial Ecology assessment]Ecology assessment]

Quantify contaminant flows in and out of the Quantify contaminant flows in and out of the HarborHarbor –– through air, water and land [Harbor Mass through air, water and land [Harbor Mass Balance]Balance]

The Industrial Ecology Approach:The Industrial Ecology Approach:Understanding contaminant movements (PCBS)Understanding contaminant movements (PCBS)

Closed Applications:Dielectric Fluids, Light Ballasts, Electromagnets

Partiallyclosed Applic.

Fluids (Hydraulic, Heat transfer) Switches,

Open Applic.Inks,Lubricants, Wax,

Flame Retard., Adhesives,Surface coatings,

Waste:Spills, Dredging,Decommissioned Equip.Building demolition

Recycling Operations:Mineral oilCarbonless copy paperPlastics

Interim Storage & Permanent Disposal

IndustrialDumpsites

& Reservoirs

LandfillsPOTWs

WTEProducts

made withrecycledmaterials

Soil

Food

Water

Air

Inadvertent Production

4

Mass balance for the HarborMass balance for the Harbor

Harbor Estuary

River Input*

Atmospheric flows

EmissionsDeposition

Wastewater/CSO

Tidal Exchange

Advection

Resuspension

Sediment flux

Burial

Seawater Incursion

*includes indirect deposition

Runoff

Landfill leachate

Dredging

Modeling system interactionsModeling system interactions

The Environment

MaterialInput

The Economy Air

House-hold

Sector

reuse

Product Waste OutputLand

Water

Production(Ind./Comm.

Services)

Harbor

Waste Output

Recycle

reuse

5

Evaluating the impact of “legacy” sitesEvaluating the impact of “legacy” sitesEstimating contaminant remobilization:Estimating contaminant remobilization:The amount of dioxins (or other contaminants), mobilized annuallThe amount of dioxins (or other contaminants), mobilized annually by y by soil runoff from a given site or area can be calculated as:soil runoff from a given site or area can be calculated as:Dioxins in Runoff = Soil Loss x Contaminated Area x Dioxin Dioxins in Runoff = Soil Loss x Contaminated Area x Dioxin Concentration in SoilConcentration in Soil

Soil LossSoil Loss –– USLE = R x K x LS x C x PUSLE = R x K x LS x C x P

RUSLE2RUSLE2 -- software and databases for different geographical areas software and databases for different geographical areas are available for download at the USDAare available for download at the USDA--ARS National Soil Erosion ARS National Soil Erosion Research Laboratory, Purdue University website Research Laboratory, Purdue University website ((http://fargo.nserl.purdue.edu/rusle2_dataweb/RUSLE2_Index.htmhttp://fargo.nserl.purdue.edu/rusle2_dataweb/RUSLE2_Index.htm ))

6

Stakeholder involvementStakeholder involvement.Develop P2 Strategies with Consortium of

stakeholdersContinually present findings to Consortium for decision-making and recommend P2 strategies

Find leverage points for intervention. Identify economic sectors, substitute materials, technologies and/or alternative practices that provide effective leverage for policy tools.

Public Opinion Survey / Sector meetingsDetermined total costs associated with P2 plan

ImplementationIdentifying implementers (relevant actors and sectors)Partner with action oriented groupsMonitoring results

Why a Stakeholders’ Consortium?Why a Stakeholders’ Consortium?

Emphasizes public involvement and communication: Emphasizes public involvement and communication: New Paradigm: Inform, Include, DecideNew Paradigm: Inform, Include, Decide

Involves stakeholders in research, development of P2 Involves stakeholders in research, development of P2 strategies & implementationstrategies & implementation

Participants guide research and provide key dataParticipants guide research and provide key dataOpportunity for mutual understanding Opportunity for mutual understanding BuyBuy--in from participants results in higher implementation rates in from participants results in higher implementation rates

Open process acts as educational forumOpen process acts as educational forumAlternative valuation toolAlternative valuation toolDiversity of sponsorsDiversity of sponsors

7

Developing P2 Action plansDeveloping P2 Action plansFind all leverage points for intervention

Identify economic sectors, substitute materials, technologies and/or alternative practices that provide effective leverage for policy tools.Determine costs (when feasible) associated with P2 plan

Setting priorities for action – multi-criteria:total ongoing releasesfate and transporttoxicity of the contaminant in relation to receptors

Promoting implementationIdentify implementers (relevant actors and sectors)Partner with action oriented groupsMonitoring results

CCASEASE SSTUDIESTUDIES: :

research findings & policy research findings & policy recommendationsrecommendations

8

Research Findings: Research Findings: Hg initial releases to all media (kg/yr), by sectorHg initial releases to all media (kg/yr), by sector

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

kg/y

r

Dental Facilities Hospitals HouseholdsSwitches: Auto Fluorescent Lamps LaboratoriesThermostats Coal comb:Utilties Coal Comb: IndustrialAutos: fuel combustion Switches: Lighting BatteriesCrematoria Switches Appliances

Mercury Inputs to the HarborMercury Inputs to the Harbor

Proportion of Mercury Contributed by Each Pool

9%51%

40%

Landfill Wastewater Air

Proportion of Methyl-mercury Contributed by

Each Pool

71%

17%

12%

9

Sectors Contributing Hg to Wastewater

Dental Facilitiessilver amalgam

Hospitalsmeasuring devices instrumentslaboratories dental clinics

LaboratoriesChemicalsreagents vaccines

Household:ThermometersHuman & product waste (e.g.,

cleansing agents)

Share of Actual Hg Releases via Wastewater

Waste

Hospitals

Labs

Dental Facilities

Thermometers

Primary vs. Final Wastewater Releases Primary vs. Final Wastewater Releases --combined sewer systemcombined sewer system

HARBOR

POTW

Sludge (70-85%)

15-30% outflows

Fertilizer, burial, WTE

Sanitary system

Storm water system

tributary

Combined sewer overflow

10

Mercury key findings:Mercury key findings:

IE inventory helpful to identify all contaminant sources, including the cumulative impact of small quantity generators (SQG)Using material flow analysis helps regulatory agencies identify all sources of potential concern, not just large onesIE demonstrates the need to follow materials from primary to secondary sources, to pools and sinksMFA metrics (mass) modified to integrate risk into P2 prioritization Use of indicators (economic, environmental) to inform policy debate

Estimated total Cadmium Estimated total Cadmium ReleasesReleases

Products (kg/yr) Confidence ReleaseBattery disposal 120,000 L air/ landfillsOther products disposal 40,000 L air/ landfills

Processes (kg/yr) Confidence ReleasePhosphate Fertilizer Applictn 500 M soilSewage Sludge Land Applctn 500 M soilMetal Plating Production 400 L air, waterCement Production 300 M airFossil Fuel Combustion 200 M airTires 100 L soilPlastic Additives Production 80 M airPetroleum Refineries 50 M airSecondary Steel Production 40 M airMSW Incineration 40 H air

11

Cadmium: Key FindingsCadmium: Key Findings

Use of cadmium has changed dramatically over the last 20 years – (75% used for Ni-Cd batteries)

Cd flows through the economy larger than inputs to the harbor – discrepancy between IE & MB assessments

Assumption that discrepancy could be explained by battery recycling put to the test (survey)

Survey finding: low recycling rates for regionDiscrepancy explained by MSW management

practices – NYC exports to other regions; NJ does notCampaign to increase battery recycling rates based on

precautionary principle System boundary - Impacts are not always regionalImpacts on Harbor depend on current practices

PCBs: Industrial Ecology analysisPCBs: Industrial Ecology analysis

US PCB production (1929-1975) = 568,000 T 77% of PCBs produced for use in closed systems (transformers, large & small capacitors)10% semi-open applications (hydraulic, heat transfer fluids)13% open applications (paint, carbonless paper)

Production generally prohibited since 1977

PCB in closed applications – use permitted

Last account of PCBs in use conducted in 1980s:70% of PCB transformers at non-utility facilities ~ 79,000 T30% of PCB transformers at utilities ~34,000T80% of PCB contaminated transformers at utilities ~ 120T85% of PCB large capacitors at utilities ~ 40,000TSmall capacitors: 870M in 1977 (ea. w/ 0.05 lb; total = 20,800T)

12

Estimating # of Transformers & CapacitorsEstimating # of Transformers & Capacitors

Number of PCB Capacitors in operation Number of PCB Capacitors in operation 1994 1994 20032003

~ 200 ~ 200 8,0008,000

(16% of 50,000 (16% of 50,000 units contained units contained >50ppm)>50ppm)††

11,60011,60020,70020,700200,000200,000--Total Total -- both PCB & PCB both PCB & PCB contaminated units contaminated units ––19941994

NYC DEP & Con Edison,1998NYC DEP & Con Edison,1998

60 units 60 units (Con Edison)(Con Edison)

72,800 to 76,90072,800 to 76,900unitsunits

1,400,000 1,400,000 --1.480,0001.480,000

US EPA national inventory, US EPA national inventory, 19941994

19981998199419941998199819941994Numbers of TransformersNumbers of Transformers

20,75020,750(6,250) (6,250)

(14,500) (14,500)

6,0556,055 (83% or (83% or 5,025 privately 5,025 privately owned)owned)

358,000358,000((108,000)108,000)(250,000) (250,000)

104,284104,284

Total Total -- 19881988PCB transformers (PCB transformers (>>500ppm) 500ppm) PCB contaminated(>50PCB contaminated(>50--<500ppm)<500ppm)NonNon--substation units only, 1985substation units only, 1985

1985/81985/81985/81985/8Numbers of TransformersNumbers of Transformers

ReportedReported(registry)(registry)

Estimates from Estimates from inventory inventory

Reported Reported (registry)(registry)

Inventory Inventory

Estimates for the Harbor Estimates for the Harbor WatershedWatershed

NationwideNationwideEstimating the number of Estimating the number of PCB Transformers & PCB Transformers & CapacitorsCapacitors

Contaminated Mineral Oil Contaminated Mineral Oil Transformers Transformers

TOTAL estimate for Utilities TOTAL estimate for Utilities 5.1 tons PCB5.1 tons PCB

Other Utilities (assuming all<50ppm) Other Utilities (assuming all<50ppm) 3.6 tons PCB3.6 tons PCB

Total NYC utilities (tons) Total NYC utilities (tons) 1.5 tons PCB1.5 tons PCB

3,2843,28431.331.350,07250,072Total NYC utilities (lbs)Total NYC utilities (lbs)

20.220.250.050.02,0722,072RockawayRockawayKeyspanKeyspan

3,263.63,263.612.612.648,00048,000NYCNYCConEd totalConEd total

676.0676.013.713.79,9689,968QueensQueens

799.2799.212.412.413,10413,104BrooklynBrooklyn

236.4236.48.88.85,5225,522BronxBronx

4.64.61.01.010,81710,817Staten Is.Staten Is.

1,547.41,547.428.828.88,5888,588ManhattanManhattanCon EdCon Ed

Lbs. PCBLbs. PCBppm (avg)ppm (avg)UnitsUnitsLocationLocationOwnerOwner

13

Small PCB CapacitorsSmall PCB CapacitorsOver 100 million small PCB capacitors produced in US

PCB capacitors sold in the watershed: 5.2M – 5.8M Average quantity: 24 grams each~ 120 - 140 tons PCBs in small capacitors in watershed

High uncertainty about their fate If only 10%-30% still in use - 12-14 tons PCBs

Small PCB capacitors are not regulated as hazardous waste and may be sent to landfills or municipal waste incinerators

Landfills that accept “fluff” material (e.g.metal shredding) have higher concentrations of PCBs in leachate

Limited funding for PCB small capacitors collection programs

Limited public awareness about household products containing PCBs

Products containing PCBsProducts containing PCBs

Small capacitors in:Fluorescent lamp ballastsCertain household appliances such as old refrigerators & microwave ovens

Paints – oldCarbonless paper – oldCertain pigments and dyesGlossy papers with special inks Kaofin Certain flocculants used at POTWs

14

Inadvertent Production of PCBs:Inadvertent Production of PCBs:

PCB 11 or 3,3’-dichlorobiphenyl is a significant congener in ambient waters in the NY/NJ Harbor, Long Island Sound, and the New York Bight. PCB 11 is estimated to represent 10 to 20% of total PCBs entering the NY/NJ Harbor Inadvertent production of PCB 11 is related to pigment manufacturing. The effluent at various NY & NJ wastewater treatment facilities are dominated by PCB 11

Federal rules state that non-Aroclor PCB concentrations discharged to water from manufacturing or processing sites are limited to less than 0.1 ppm for any resolvable gas chromatographic peak

Contaminated Sites: Superfund, Contaminated Sites: Superfund, Brownfields and LandfillsBrownfields and Landfills

179 Superfund sites in region (64 in NY & 115 in NJ)550 Brownfields sites in NJ (at least 34 sites in NY, but no information to assess whether they have PCBs)60 contaminated landfills in NJ (no information for NY)26 “other contaminated sites” in NJClean up schedule of Superfund sites has slowed down to less than half the rate of the 1990s when an average of 87 sites were being cleaned each year. In 2003 only 40 Superfund sites were cleanedFunding drying up – taxpayers money being requested to fund Superfund program in 2005Remobilization of PCBs from contaminated sites:

VolatilizationRunoff Leachate Groundwater

15

PCBs: Mass balance findingsPCBs: Mass balance findingsOngoing releases from upriver (including the Hudson

River Superfund Site) account for ~50-55 % of PCB inputs to the Harbor

The remaining 45-50% is local inputs and the homolog distributions are different than the upstream sourceStormwater runoff (17%); CSO (17%); WWTP are minor input (5-10%);Inadvertent ongoing production/use (10-15%); PCB 11, 35, 77, 209

Hudson

East River

Atm Dep

Wastew ater

CSOs

RunoffHudson

East Ri ver

Atm Dep

Wastewater

CSOs

Runof f

Homologs 3, 4, 5 Homologs 7, 8, 9

PCBs PCBs -- key findingskey findingsHR Upstream and downstream PCB inputs –

different homologue patterns

SQG: cumulative impact of small capacitors overlooked:US (2004) : 40M – 50M units (960 – 1,200 tons) ?Harbor watershed (2004) : ~2.5M - 3M (60 – 70 tons) ?

10-20% disposal rate/yr: (6 - 14 T/yr)

Inadvertent production: ~ 10-15% of current PCB loadingsUsage/disposal:

uneven reporting requirements on usage/disposal (large capacitors)Regulatory gapLimited recycling opportunities

Opportunities for P2 / BMPsImpact of 179 Superfund sites in Harbor region

27% - waste storage/treatment & 8% - recycling26% - manufacturing/industry23% - unknown; other – 9%mining/extracting/processing – 3%Government – 3%; residential – 2%

16

PAHs PAHs –– Summary of estimated Summary of estimated releases to all mediareleases to all media

kg/year in the watershed

839,300

345,800

288,100

136,300

31,800

14,700

14,400

700

Total

Residential Fuel Combustion

Products with Naphthalene (eg. Mothballs)

Mobile and Stationary Combustion Sources

Industrial Sources

Oil Spills and Dumping

Open Burning

Natural Sources

2,100

97,700

286,000

341,200

4,500

7,500

1,300

1,100

32,500

700

100

100

12,500

9,500

3,700

2,700

1,800

200

200

100

100

1

9,000

5,400

1

700

400

14,400

2,800

1,000

Residential- Wood Stoves and Fireplaces

Commercial Fuel Combustion

Residential Fuel Combustion

Mothballs

Metal Coating

On-Road Vehicles

Non-Road Engines

Tire Wear

Rail

Personal Watercraft

Port- Vessel

Port- Activity

Airplane

Pow er Generation

Gasoline Distribution

Cement

Industrial Fuel Combustion

Refineries

Incineration, WTE

Incineration, Medical Waste

Steel Production- EAF

Incineration, Sew age Sludge

Incineration, Hazardous Waste

Steel Production- Casting

Used Motor Oil

Oil Spills (Averaged over 4 years)

Leaking Underground Storage Tanks

Tire Fire

Open Burning- Refuse

Open Burning- Agricultural Plastics

Forest Fires

atmosphereLandWater

unknow n

Estimate PAH Emissions from Each Sector (kg/yr)Estimate PAH Emissions from Each Sector (kg/yr)

17

Estimated PAH Releases to Each Estimated PAH Releases to Each MediaMedia

kg/year in the watershed

Not including mothballs

950

534,700

17,650

Water

Land

Atmosphere

Estimating Transport from Estimating Transport from Source to HarborSource to Harbor

18

Fate & Transport via WaterFate & Transport via Water

BiodegradationAdvectionDredging

Sediment

Dissolved/Particulate

Spills & wastewaterSpills & wastewater

Photo oxidationAdvection

Evaporation/Deposition

Regional Water Regional Water EmissionsEmissions

19

Fate & Transport via AirFate & Transport via Air

Particulate/GaseousPhoto oxidationAdvection

Particulate/DissolvedBiodegradationAdvectionDredging

Runoff

Sediment

Region I:(NJ) Bergen, Passaic, Essex, Union, Hudson(NY) 5 Boroughs NYC

Region II:(NJ) Sussex, Morris, Somerset, Middlesex, Monmouth(NY) Rockland, Westchester, Orange, Putnam

Region III: (near Hudson)Ulster, Dutchess, Greene, Columbia, Albany, Rensselear

20

GasGas--Particle PartitioningParticle Partitioning

Jersey

City New

Brunswick Chester Estimated (urban) (urban) (suburban) % gas

Percentage of total PAHs in gas (versus aerosol) phase Naphthalene nr nr nr 99% Acenaphthylene nr nr nr 99% Acenaphthene nr nr nr 99% Fluorene 99.1% 98.2% 99.5% 99% Phenanthrene 98.0% 97.7% 98.3% 98% Anthracene 90.7% 92.3% 87.9% 90% Fluoranthene 86.8% 83.9% 86.4% 85% Pyrene 80.3% 77.5% 76.4% 78% Benz[a]anthracene 4.2% 5.1% 4.3% 4% Benzo[b+k]fluoranthene 1.1% 2.4% 0.5% 1% Benzo[a]pyrene 1.6% 4.7% 0.7% 2% Perylene 1.1% nr nr 1% Dibenzo[a,h+a,c]anthracene 0.5% 2.0% 3.3% 2% Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 0.4% 2.5% 0.2% 1% Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene 0.4% 2.1% 0.6% 1%

Region I Estimated Particulate Emissions Region I Estimated Particulate Emissions vs. Measured Urban Runoffvs. Measured Urban Runoff

0

500

1000

1500

2000

Nap

Acenap

Fluor

Phen

Fluoran

th

Pyrene

B[a]a

Benz[b

]

Benz[k

]BAP

DBAB[ghi]

Inden

o

Perylen

e

kg/year

Estimated particulate emission Measured urban runoff

21

Region II Particulate Emissions vs. Region II Particulate Emissions vs. Measured Inputs from NJ TributariesMeasured Inputs from NJ Tributaries

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Nap

Acen

apFlu

or

Phen

Fluora

nth

Pyren

eB[a

]a

Benz

[b]

Benz

[k]BA

PDB

AB[g

hi]

Inden

o

Peryl

ene

Estimated particulate emission Measured urban runoff

kg/year

NY Region II Particulate Emissions NY Region II Particulate Emissions vs. Measured Inputs from the vs. Measured Inputs from the

Hudson RiverHudson River

0

250

500

750

1000

Nap

Acenap

Fluor

Phen

Fluoran

th

Pyrene

B[a]a

Benz[b

]

Benz[k

]BAP

DBAB[ghi]

Inden

o

Perylen

e

Estimated particulate emission Measured urban runoff

kg/year

22

Fate & Transport via LandFate & Transport via Land

BiodegradationAdvectionDredging

Sediment

Dissolved/ParticulateRunoff &Leaching

Photo oxidationAdvection

Evaporation/Deposition

PAH Leaching from SolidsPAH Leaching from Solids

DesorbtionDesorbtionLeachingLeachingBioavailabilityBioavailabilityToxicityToxicity

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00Time (days)

Cum

ulat

ive

Mas

s D

esor

bed

(as

% A

CN-

extr

acta

ble)

H-p PyrH-p ChrH-p BAPL-p PyrL-p ChrL-p BAP

23

Factors Limiting Leaching of Factors Limiting Leaching of HOCsHOCsProperties of Contaminant: HydrophobicityProperties of Solid

Quantity & Properties of organic matterProperties of organic matterPhysical properties (particle size, surface area, porosity)

Properties of LeachantDOC concentrationFlowrate (infiltration rate)

Estimated Stocks of PAHs: Estimated Stocks of PAHs: Creosote MaterialsCreosote Materials

unknown

19,057,400

16,480,500

35,537,900

Marine Pilings,creosote

Railway Ties, creosote

Utility Poles, creosote

Total

kg PAH

24

Parking Lot SealantsParking Lot SealantsBackground:

• Sealants used to protect asphalt surfaces (i.e. parking lots and driveways).

• Two types of sealant: Asphalt based and Coal-tar based. (coal-tar sealants predominately used east of the Rockies)

• Concern with coal-tar and asphalt based sealants:

• Contain PAHs

• Abrade from surface over time and are transported via runoff.

• Data:

•Peter VanMetre, U.S. Geological Survey

• Robert P. DeMott, Pavements Coating Technology Center

Parking Lot Sealants, cont.Parking Lot Sealants, cont.

Problem: how do yields change over time?

Parking lot Sealants

Yield (µg PAH/m2 /rain event) = 946 (according to Mahler et al, 2005)

Coal tar sealant consumed in the watershed area (gallons/yr) = 5,800,000

Can we calculate a release in the watershed?

25 kg PAH for 1 rain event in the watershed.

~118 days of rain per year in watershed area

What if only asphalt based sealant was used?

11 kg PAH for 1 rain event in the watershed.

25

Parking Lot Sealants, cont.Parking Lot Sealants, cont.

05,000

10,00015,00020,00025,00030,00035,000

Nap

Acenap

Acenaph

thene Flour

Phen

Anth

Fluoranth

Pyrene

B[a ]a

Chrysene

Benz[b

]

Benz[k]

BAPDBA

B[ghi]

Inden

o

mg/

kg

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Nap

Acen

apFlu

or

Phen

Fluora

nth

Pyren

eB[a

]a

Benz

[b]

Benz

[k]BA

PDB

AB[g

hi]

Inden

o

Peryl

ene

PAH concentration in coal tar sealant concentrate (30% coal tar)

Region II Particulate Emissions vs. Measured Inputs from NJ Tributaries (kg/yr)

ND ND

Materials & products containing PAHsMaterials & products containing PAHs

Used-motor oil Driveway sealants (with coal tar)Heating oil Creosote (wood preservative)Dandruff shampoo (with coal tar as ingredient)

Processes that release PAHs:Vehicle driving Wood Stoves and Outside Boilers, BBQOpen burning of waste Tire combustion

26

Data sources & gapsData sources & gapsMercury, Cadmium- Still commercialized (produced, used)

- National Material Flows Available from US Geological Service- Industry data by sectors; some data by products

PCBs- Production is banned but still inadvertently produced

and used in products /discarded - No regional material flow analysis- National Inventories of “allowed uses” from 1980s or early 1990s only

Dioxin, PAHs- Not commercialized, (by-product)

- Must rely on emission factors and level of activity- Some inventories available for certain sectors

ChallengesChallenges

How to include small, dispersed sources or SQGHow to include small, dispersed sources or SQG::Include representatives of SQG (e.g., trade associations)Include representatives of SQG (e.g., trade associations)

How to balance the leverage of large interest groupsHow to balance the leverage of large interest groups

Disseminating findings widelyDisseminating findings widely

Ensure implementation of Ensure implementation of allall strategies strategies recommended by the consortiumrecommended by the consortium

27

What aids the process?What aids the process?Systems approach (Industrial Ecology)

ID all sources & pathways provides new opportunities for interventionID all sectors & parties that are stakeholders

Stakeholder frameworksets its own learning & policy making dynamicdifferent points of view and interests co-existflexibility integrating different levels of participantsEducational forum

For copies of documents and more For copies of documents and more information about our project:information about our project:

http://www.nyas.org/programs/harbor.asp

“Pollution Prevention and Management Strategies for Mercury in the NY/NJ Harbor”

“Survey of Public Opinion: Opinions of Stakeholders on Issues that Concern the Future of the Harbor”

“Pollution Prevention and Management Strategies for Cadmium in the NY/NJ Harbor”

“Pollution Prevention and Management Strategies for PCBs in the NY/NJ Harbor”