Page 178 - Solid Waste Analysis and Minimization a Systems Approach

156 THE GENERAL APPROACH FOR A SOLID WASTE ASSESSMENT

For example, a picnic table made of recycled plastic costs more than a wood table, but
the plastic table lasts up to four times longer. Similarly, while reusable products may
cost more to purchase initially, they often save money over time by avoiding frequent
purchases of single-use items. The comparison process is discussed in greater detail
in Secs. 8.8.4 and 8.8.5.
Finally, there are several great and company-tested methods to encourage employee
participation that may be included in the list of waste minimization alternatives. The
goal is to develop an ongoing effort to increase and sustain employee participation.
Communication is a critical ingredient involved in all the methods, which include

■ Holding regular environmental meetings with representatives from each department
to discuss possible program changes on a regular basis.
■ Holding monthly or quarterly company-wide luncheons to promote and recognize
environmental efforts of the organization, departments, and individuals.
■ Publicizing program changes and achievements in the company newsletter.
■ Announcing special events in memos and paycheck stuffers.
■ Rewarding employees for program involvement.

8.8.4 SCREENING ALTERNATIVES

The process of creating waste minimization alternatives can generate hundreds of
options. It would be very time consuming for the team to conduct detailed financial
and operational feasibility evaluations on each option. A quick screening process can
help to quickly identify the options worthy of full evaluation and possible inclusion in
the waste minimization program. Additionally, noneffective options can be weeded
out, saving the team time and money in the evaluation process. An effective screening
process should be based on the original goals of the project and at a minimum should
examine the following:

■ Expected solid waste reduction (tons per year)
■ Expected start-up costs
■ Impact on waste removal costs (dollars per year)
■ Impact on purchasing costs (dollars per year)
■ Impact on employee moral
■ Ease of implementation

The team should keep in mind that the goal of the screening process is to quickly
identify options worthy of further analysis. A weighed scoring system can be devel-
oped to consistently rank each alternative in an objective manner. A quality deployment
function, such as the House of Quality is an excellent tool to accomplish this evalua-
tion. The House of Quality is a graphic tool for defining the relationship between an
organization’s desires and its capabilities. It utilizes a planning matrix to relate the
organizational wants (for example, solid waste reduction and cost performance) to
how the waste minimization program will or can meet those wants (for example,
process changes or recycling efforts). It looks like a house with a correlation matrix as