Page 66 - Materials Chemistry, Second Edition

Ch002-P373623.qxd 3/22/07 5:27 PM Page 47
TABLE 2.16 Cleaner Production 47
Cost/Benefit Analysis of Implementing CP Technique (Feeding Whey to 412 Beef
Cattle)
Description Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash Cash
flow flow flow flow flow flow
Factory Farm Factory Farm Factory Farm
($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($)

Whey transfer 8,750 –
and storage
equipment
Monitoring (75) (745)
equipment and
meters
Operation cost of (880) – (880) – (880) –
whey transfer
to farm
Capital investment 17,545 – 17,545 – 17,545 –
in whey WTP
(Water Treatment
Plant)
Sales of 6,000 m 3 1,050 (1,050) 7,895 (7,895) 15,790 (15,790)
whey (E 1/ton)
Saving 40 kg water/ – 1,050 – 1,050 – 1,050
head/day
Saving 2 kg dry feed/ – 24,260 – 24,260 – 24,260
head/day
Net savings 26,390 23,515 24,560 17,415 32,455 9,520
Payback period 10 1
(month)

Note: Figures in brackets indicate an increase in cost.

Prototype phase
It is often claimed that cleaner production techniques do not exist, are imprac-
tical, false, infeasible, require sophisticated know-how to implement and main-
tain, or require huge capital investment. In other words, both the factory and
the farm could claim that the aforesaid opportunities are false, and even if they
are true, these techniques cannot be implemented. The pilot project confirmed
that using whey to feed animals is technically, financially and environmentally
acceptable. This means that implementing these techniques on the proto-
type scale is not only safe but also more feasible than traditional practices.
The cost/benefit analysis in Table 2.16 shows that the techniques are
very simple and require small capital cost with a payback period of less than
10 months and one month for the factory and the farm respectively. Actually,