DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Report Here

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Report Here Workshop on the Design of Sustainable Product Systems and Supply Chains September 12–13, 2011 Arlington, Virginia Final Report ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Troy Hawkins, Chair Maria Burka Heriberto Cabezas Bruce Hamilton Darlene Schuster Raymond Smith ADVISORY COMMITTEE Ignacio Grossmann Thomas Theis Eric Williams Bert Bras Raj Srinivasan Bhavik Bakshi Saif Benjafaar Alan Hecht SUPPORT STAFF Susan Anastasi Michelle Nguyen Erin Chan Dan Tisch Donna Jackson Sonia Williams TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………………1 About the Workshop, Goals, and Overview………………………………………………….......3 Workshop Schedule………………………………………………………………………………4 Summary……………….………………………………………………………………………....7 Appendix A: Goals of the Workshop............................................................................................................... A-2 List of Participants...................................................................................................................... A-3 Biosketches................................................................................................................................. A-5 Position Statements................................................................................................................... A-26 Notes from Breakout Group Sessions....................................................................................... A-69 Appendix B: “Welcome to the Design of Sustainable Product Systems and Supply Chains Workshop”..................................................................................................................... B-2 Bert Bras, “Design of Sustainable Products Systems and Supply Chains: Some Concepts, Cases, and Lessons from an Engineering Perspective”........................................... B-11 Thomas Theis, “Consumption, Sustainability, and Social Benefits”.........................................B-25 Bill Flanagan, “LCA from an Industry Perspective”.................................................................B-37 Joseph Fiksel, “EPA Sustainability and the Design of Sustainable Product Networks and Supply Chains”......................................................................................B-46 Bruce Hamilton, “Funding Opportunities at NSF for Proposals on Sustainable Product Systems and Supply Chains”................................................................... B-57 Cynthia Nolt-Helms, “P3 (People, Prosperity and the Planet) Award Program: A National Student Design Competition for Sustainability”.................................................... B-70 Ignacio Grossman, “Discussion of Session II Breakout Questions”........................................ B-81 Eric Williams, “Orientation for Session III”............................................................................. B-93 Workshop on the Design of Sustainable Product Systems and Supply Chains, September 12-13, 2011 Final Report, February 29, 2012 2 Workshop on the Design of Sustainable Product Systems and Supply Chains September 12–13, 2011 National Science Foundation Arlington, VA ABOUT THE WORKSHOP The Workshop on the Design of Sustainable Product Systems and Supply Chains was held September 12–13, 2011 at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) offices in Arlington, Virginia. The Workshop was co-sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Research and Development (ORD), the National Science Foundation, (NSF) and the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) Center for Sustainable Technology Practices. The purpose of the Workshop was to foster collaboration and promote the development of a research community focused on sustainability and supply chains. This was accomplished by bringing together a diverse group of researchers and other professionals with experience relevant to sustainable supply chain design. GOALS OF THE WORKSHOP The goal of the workshop was to engage experts with experience in several areas. From experts with experience working within a broad, systems perspective, the goal was to elicit understanding of the key shortcomings of current practices and identify practical ways in which new or repurposed approaches could be integrated within existing frameworks. In the case of experts with experience working within a narrower focus, the goal was to work together to understand how these approaches could be integrated within existing frameworks or larger-scale models. Finally, the goal was also to explore opportunities for applying discipline-specific approaches to other problems related to the design of sustainable supply chains. OVERVIEW The following report provides the agenda of the meeting events, an executive summary of the reports back from the Breakout Groups, as well as additional perspectives. The report includes two Appendices: the first provides the notes from the Breakout Group sessions, as well as meeting materials, including the goals of the meeting, a list of participants, biosketches and position statements of the participants, and complete contact information on the participants; the second provides the PowerPoint presentations given at the meeting. Readers are advised to refer to these resources for more detailed information. Workshop on the Design of Sustainable Product Systems and Supply Chains, September 12-13, 2011 Final Report, February 29, 2012 3 MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2011 WORKSHOP SESSION I: PERSPECTIVES ON THE DESIGN OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT SYSTEMS AND SUPPLY CHAINS Introduction of Organizing Committee & Staff Support Troy Hawkins, ORD, EPA Welcome to NSF Bruce Hamilton and Maria Burka Introductions of Participants Workshop Goals and Overview Troy Hawkins PRESENTATIONS Design of Sustainable Products Systems and Supply Chains: Some Concepts, Cases, and Lessons from an Engineering Perspective Bert Bras, Georgia Institute of Technology Consumption, Sustainability, and Social Benefits Thomas Theis, University of Illinois, Chicago Avoiding Unintended Consequences in the Design of Sustainable Supply Chains Sherilyn Brodersen, Kraft Foods LCA from an Industry Perspective Bill Flanagan, GE Global Research EPA Sustainability and the Design of Sustainable Product Networks and Supply Chains Joseph Fiksel, U.S. EPA, The Ohio State University SUPPORTING SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING RESEARCH THROUGH NSF AND EPA Funding Opportunities at NSF for Proposals on Sustainable Product Systems and Supply Chains Bruce Hamilton, NSF P3 (People, Prosperity, and the Planet) Award Program: A National Student Design Competition for Sustainability Cynthia Nolt-Helms, National Center for Environmental Research (NCER), EPA Workshop on the Design of Sustainable Product Systems and Supply Chains, September 12-13, 2011 Final Report, February 29, 2012 4 SESSION II: DISCIPLINARY DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIES Discussion of Session II Breakout Questions Ignacio Grossman, Carnegie Mellon University Participants were provided with the following series of questions to discuss in their Breakout Groups: 1. What are the challenging industry and societal problems to be solved? What are the future drivers for design of sustainable products, manufacturing systems and supply chains? What are the next generation sustainable design-enabled strength areas in the U.S.? 2. Where are the gaps in knowledge? What are the problems faced by existing sustainable design capabilities? 3. What are the opportunities for design of sustainable products, manufacturing systems, and supply chains? SESSION III: WHAT ARE THE COMMON PROBLEMS, COMMON AREAS OF NEED, COMPLEMENTARY AREAS TO BE INTERFACED, AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR CROSS-DISCIPLINARY FERTILIZATION FACILITATED BY DESIGN OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT SYSTEMS AND SUPPLY CHAINS? Orientation for Session III Eric Williams, Rochester Institute of Technology The Breakout Groups were asked to discuss the following specific questions within their groups: Group 1: How does sustainable design affect or impact economic drivers? Group 2: What technologies/tools and their integration are needed, where is the expertise, and what is the state of technical capability? Group 3: What are the respective roles of industry, government, and academia and how should they interrelate? What partnerships/coalitions are needed? Group 4: How will new and emerging technologies and capabilities need to affect organization roles and responsibilities (academia/industry, researcher/research teams)? Group 5: Where education and training are needed? BREAKOUT GROUPS REPORT BACK Workshop on the Design of Sustainable Product Systems and Supply Chains, September 12-13, 2011 Final Report, February 29, 2012 5 TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2011 SESSION IV – WORKSHOP DELIVERABLES On the second day of the workshop, the participants were asked to work within their groups to discuss the following issues and develop recommendations in the context of near-term and long- term, priority, and reality: 1. Identify and exemplify major application impacts, directions, and the potential for design of sustainable product systems and supply chains 2. Identify and recommend research areas that aim toward the fulfillment of this potential 3. Identify associated areas of needed emphasis with sustainable design education and training, interdisciplinary development, and support and approaches to collaboration. The Breakout Groups were also asked to answer the following questions: 1. What investments are needed by whom, financial and other? 2. What are the key learnings and take-aways from the workshop? SESSION IV BREAKOUT GROUPS REPORT BACK WRAP UP AND
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Encouraging Green Building Practices a Discussion Paper About Community Resilience November 2015
    Encouraging Green Building Practices A Discussion Paper about Community Resilience November 2015 Planners in local government have a Brief: The construction, operation, and number of tools available to encourage demolition of buildings and infrastructure green building practices that will reduce is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and have other positive emissions. How we build today locks us environmental impacts. Key strategies in to a future of high or low emissions include: requiring new construction to depending on the choices we make. meet LEED standards, providing financial Planners have a number of tools to incentives for green building practices, encourage practices that not only mitigate emissions but also reduce other and revising engineering and design critical environmental impacts. standards. Introduction Problem Washington is a leader in green building Washington State has set a goal of practices nationwide, and many reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) initiatives at the state and local level emissions to 50% below 1990 levels by have been undertaken to encourage 2050. If it is to meet this goal, reducing energy efficiency, use of alternative the emissions that result from electricity energies. Despite this, the state’s and heat used in buildings will be a key emissions from this sector have held factor. In Washington, roughly 40% of steady over the past several years, with GHG emissions result from building slight decreases in emissions from energy use. Additionally, GHGs heating (RCI in the Figure 1 below) being embodied in construction materials have offset by increases in emissions from the potential to make up a significant electricity usage. proportion of the State’s emissions, and efforts to reduce these emissions during the construction and demolition phases are critical to a holistic approach to green building.
    [Show full text]
  • Siting of Renewable Energy Facilities Within the Montachusett and North Middlesex Regions
    LEED Certification Introduction As a voluntary certification program for buildings, homes and communities, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), provides third-party verification of green buildings. Beginning in March 2000, the goal of the LEED Certification program was to conserve energy and water, reduce landfill waste and greenhouse gas emissions and provide a healthier and safer indoor environment for occupants. The program is run through the U.S Green Building Council (USGBC), which is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization “committed to a prosperous and sustainable future for our nation through cost- efficient and energy-saving green buildings”. To date USGBC has 77 chapters, 13,000 member companies and organizations, and more than 181,000 professionals who hold LEED credentials as of June 2014. 117 According to USGBC, LEED is “the most widely recognized and widely used green building program across According to USGBC, LEED v4 the globe”. Today, there are more than 53,000 LEED will “open up LEED to a wider projects, comprising more than 10.1 billion square feet of range of building types and construction space. USCBC claims that by becoming LEED manufacturing industries, certified, buildings can experience lower operating costs delivering the benefits of green building up and down the supply and increased asset values, and can become qualified for chain. It will advance tax rebates, zoning allowances, and other incentives. 118 environmental footprint issues, LEED Certification can be pursued across a variety of like climate change, and encourage optimization of industries and sectors, and through its implementation, energy and water use.” can promote economic growth in the clean energy, biotechnology, nanotechnology, and green business sectors.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction
    2019 Global Status Report for Buildings and Constructi on Towards a zero-emissions, effi cient and resilient buildings and constructi on sector Acknowledgements The 2019 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction was prepared by the International Energy Agency (IEA) for the Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction (GlobalABC). The report was co-ordinated by the United Nations Environment Programme and was made possible by the generous support of the governments of Canada, France, Germany and Switzerland. ISBN No: 978-92-807-3768-4 Job No: DTI/2265/PA Cover Images: © Shutterstock Copyright © United Nations Environment Programme, 2019. The United Nations Environment Programme and GlobalABC members acknowledge the IEA’s role in generating the analysis in this report based on IEA data and the data of GlobalABC members. The IEA shall retain ownership of its underlying data and analysis included in this report. This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holders, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. The IEA and the United Nations Environment Programme would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the IEA and the United Nations Environment Programme. The electronic copy of this report can be downloaded at www.iea.org or www.globalabc.org. Citation: Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction, International Energy Agency and the United Nations Environment Programme (2019): 2019 global status report for buildings and construction: Towards a zero-emission, efficient and resilient buildings and construction sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Building” Regulations, Laws, and Standards in Latin America
    buildings Review A Review of “Green Building” Regulations, Laws, and Standards in Latin America Carlos Zepeda-Gil and Sukumar Natarajan * Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7BA, UK; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 17 September 2020; Accepted: 17 October 2020; Published: 21 October 2020 Abstract: Latin America covers 20% of the world’s surface but only produces 12% of global carbon emissions. However, countries such as Brazil and Argentina have seen some of the most aggressive increases in individual country CO2 emissions over the last two decades. Given that 80% of Latin America’s population lives in cities, where we can expect the greatest increases in demand for energy and predicted growth in built floor space, it is necessary to ensure that these do not result in an overall growth in carbon emissions. Hence, we present the first review of the various “green building” rules developed in this region to curtail energy or carbon. This covers nine countries representing 80% of the region’s population. We find that these countries in Latin America have developed 94 different green building rules, though to different extents. Many pertain to domestic buildings that are known to contribute 17% of the overall carbon emissions. Subsidies and tax incentives are most common, whereas innovative carbon market schemes have only been adopted in Mexico and Chile. In Argentina and Chile, regulations are similar to their European cold-climate counterparts but are poorly enforced. Overall, we find considerable progress in Latin America to create new standards and regulations, with enforcement being a major future challenge.
    [Show full text]
  • Bio-Based Chemicals from Renewable Biomass for Integrated Biorefineries
    energies Review Bio-Based Chemicals from Renewable Biomass for Integrated Biorefineries Kirtika Kohli 1 , Ravindra Prajapati 2 and Brajendra K. Sharma 1,* 1 Prairie Research Institute—Illinois Sustainable Technology Center, University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign, IL 61820, USA; [email protected] 2 Conversions & Catalysis Division, CSIR-Indian Institute of Petroleum, Dehradun, Uttarakhand 248005, India; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 10 December 2018; Accepted: 4 January 2019; Published: 13 January 2019 Abstract: The production of chemicals from biomass, a renewable feedstock, is highly desirable in replacing petrochemicals to make biorefineries more economical. The best approach to compete with fossil-based refineries is the upgradation of biomass in integrated biorefineries. The integrated biorefineries employed various biomass feedstocks and conversion technologies to produce biofuels and bio-based chemicals. Bio-based chemicals can help to replace a large fraction of industrial chemicals and materials from fossil resources. Biomass-derived chemicals, such as 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (5-HMF), levulinic acid, furfurals, sugar alcohols, lactic acid, succinic acid, and phenols, are considered platform chemicals. These platform chemicals can be further used for the production of a variety of important chemicals on an industrial scale. However, current industrial production relies on relatively old and inefficient strategies and low production yields, which have decreased their competitiveness with fossil-based alternatives. The aim of the presented review is to provide a survey of past and current strategies used to achieve a sustainable conversion of biomass to platform chemicals. This review provides an overview of the chemicals obtained, based on the major components of lignocellulosic biomass, sugars, and lignin.
    [Show full text]
  • Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway
    sustainability Article Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway Hilde Nykamp 1,2 1 TIK Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo, 0317 Oslo, Norway; Hilde.Nykamp@nofima.no; Tel.: +47-932-85-877 2 Nofima, Osloveien 1, 1430 Ås, Norway Received: 1 November 2019; Accepted: 19 December 2019; Published: 7 January 2020 Abstract: A transition to sustainability is a systemic shift in the way buildings are procured, produced and used, as well as how the built environment connects to the energy and mobility systems. This study focuses on the role of policy and assesses how the policy mix affects transition to green buildings. The case of the Norwegian construction industry is analyzed through a theoretical framework that cuts across policy domains, it includes a mix of policy instruments, as well as rationales for policy. Results show that the instrument mix is relatively consistent and there is a powerful self-reinforcing dynamic among financial, regulative, and information-based instruments. A small fraction of the industry drives innovation, and policy instruments target different segments of the industry accordingly. The synergies between instruments create a dynamic where policy aimed at the elite and policy aimed at lifting the bottom reinforce each other. This policy dynamic supports a transition by allowing the industry to change through cumulative incremental changes. At the same time there is a need for coordination between policy domains and different levels of governance. Conflicts arise from differences in goals and styles of governance in different policy domains. Findings show that inconsistencies and conflicts are inevitable, these aspects can be counterbalanced by consistency in implementation and by credibility and clear communication from policy makers.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Building Objectives & Checklist
    CITY OF SUMMIT ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Green Building Objectives & Checklist for Site Plan Review In accordance with the 2006 Master Plan Re-exam Report to “encourage sustainable building practices, energy conservation, recycling and educational outreach on relevant topics,” Summit’s Action Plan for a Sustainable Summit recommends building practices with the following objectives: • Encourage and promote green building practices, defined as high performance and energy efficient design and construction methods relating to site conditions, water quality, energy use, material selection and indoor environment, which promote the health and well-being of residents and occupants; • Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and energy loss in new homes and other new buildings; • Reduce energy use by increasing energy efficiency and conservation; increase the percentage of energy derived from renewable sources; • Increase use of recycled and renewable materials in new construction and renovation projects; reduce construction waste. As part of the technical review process, the City of Summit Environmental Commission examines site plans submitted to the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Adjustment and makes recommendations to these boards on environmental matters, including elements of environmental sustainability. To expedite this process and to assist developers in understanding criteria the Commission will use to evaluate the project, the Commission has developed the following list of sustainable practices that will be considered during the technical
    [Show full text]
  • Supporting the Implementation of Green Infrastructure (2015)
    Supporting the Implementation of Green Infrastructure Final Report Supporting the Implementation of Green Infrastructure Contract details: European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment ENV.B.2/SER/2014/0012 Service Contract for “Supporting the Implementation of Green Infrastructure” Presented by: In association with: Contact: Trinomics B.V. Westersingel 32A 3014 GS, Rotterdam The Netherlands E: [email protected] T: +31 10 341 45 92 Date: Rotterdam, 31 May 2016 Disclaimer: The views expressed in this report are purely those of the writer and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission. May 2016 2 Supporting the Implementation of Green Infrastructure Table of Contents Table of Contents .............................................................................................. 3 Executive summary ........................................................................................... 6 Task 1: Ensuring a more effective promotion of GI at all levels .......................... 6 Task 2: Capacity building, training, education for GI ......................................... 6 Task 3: Improving information exchange mechanisms for GI ............................. 6 Task 4: Assessing technical standards and innovation possibilities...................... 7 Task 5: Exploratory work on a TEN-G ............................................................. 7 Introduction .....................................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6 - Green Buildings for a Resource Efficient Future
    Shanghai Manual – A Guide for Sustainable Urban Development in the 21st Century CHAPTER 6 - GREEN BUILDINGS FOR A RESOURCE EFFICIENT FUTURE “The Urban Best Practice Area of the Shanghai World Expo not only presented original and valuable practices designed to improve the quality of urban life, but also acted as a platform for cities to share experiences in green urban construction and development” 1 2 1. ISSUES AND CHALLENGES As an urban leader you know that investments in the built infrastructure, whether through new construction or refurbishment, can have some of the most long term impacts on the competitiveness of your city. An upfront investment of only 2 per cent in green building design, on average, can result in life cycle savings of 20 per cent of the total construction costs – more than ten times the initial 3 4 5 investment. In comparison to the average commercial building, the cost benefits of green buildings are appreciable and include 8-9 per cent decreased operating costs, 7.5 per cent increase in building value, 6.6 per cent improvement on return on investment, a 3.5 per cent increase in occupancy ratio, and a 3 per cent increase in rent ratio. Apart from the economic benefits, there is a growing body of evidence that green building occupants are more productive. Improvements in indoor environments are estimated to save $17-48 billion in 6 total health related gains and $20-160 billion in worker performance. So from this perspective, city leaders should strive to build green infrastructure just to obtain the significant productivity benefits.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Building Report for the District of Columbia, 2013
    Green Building Report For the District of Columbia, 2013 DC Consolidated Forensics Lab, Photo Credit: HOK Written by the Department of Energy and Environment Approved by the Green Building Advisory Council Green Building Report 2013 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ……………………………………………..…… 3 II. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………….…... 9 A. Context and Report Intent……………………..………………………… …. 9 B. Sustainable Development in the District of Columbia ….................... 9 III. GREEN BUILDING REPORT ………………………………………...….. 12 A. Green Building Market Overview ………………..…………………………12 B. Public Sector Report …………………………………………………… 18 C. Private Sector Report ………………………………………………….. 19 IV. BENCHMARKING REPORT ……………………………………………... 20 A. Overview ……………………………………………………………………20 B. Major Milestones…………….………………………….……………… 22 C. 2013 Data Analysis……………………………….…..………..……… 24 D. Data Analysis: Change Over Time…………………………………….…..38 .. E. Lessons Learned………………………………………………………. 41 V. CODES, REGULATIONS & LEGISLATION …………………………… 43 A. Green Construction and Energy Conservation Codes………………….43 B. Rulemaking …………..………………………………………………… 44 C. Legislative Amendments ………………………………………………….45 VI. IMPLEMENTATION ………………………………………………………… 46 A. Capacity Building, Training & Education ………………………………46 B. Enforcement & Compliance ……………………………………………. 47 C. Green Building Fund …………………………………………………… 49 D. Green Building Incentives ………………………………………………..51 VII. CONCLUSION …………………………….…..…………………………… 53 GLOSSARY ………………………………………………………………..… 54 LIST OF APPENDICES ……………………………..……………..……… 56 Green
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainability Indicators
    Sustainability Internship Project Report Internship period June 10, 2015 – May 27, 2016 Learning Project Mentors Laura Bloch, M.S., D. Env., Region 9, Sustainability Advisor Elyssa Bairstow, M.A., Region 9, Environmental Management Systems Lead U.S. Environmental Protection Agency CSU Faculty Supervisors Kathleen McAfee, Dr., Professor Burcus Ellis, Dr., Associate Professor, Graduate Coordinator International Relations, San Francisco State University Intern Emiliya Asenova Rasheva International Relations, San Francisco State University August 20, 2016 Sustainability Table of Contents Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 2 1. Background .............................................................................................................................. 3 1.1. Sustainable Development ................................................................................. 3 1.2. Measuring Sustainability ................................................................................ 4 1.3. Education for Sustainability .............................................................................. 5 1.4. The United States Environmental Protection Agency ...................................... 6 1.4.1. Responsibilities and Goals ....................................................................... 6 1.4.2. Sustainability
    [Show full text]
  • Green Remediation: Incorporating Sustainable Environmental Practices Into Remediation of Contaminated Sites
    Green Remediation: Incorporating Sustainable Environmental Practices into Remediation of Contaminated Sites Technology Primer Green Remediation: Incorporating Sustainable Environmental Practices into Remediation of Contaminated Sites U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response April 2008 EPA 542-R-08-002 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Green Remediation: Incorporating Sustainable Environmental Practices into Remediation of Contaminated Sites technology primer was developed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI). The document was prepared in cooperation with EPA’s Brownfields and Land Revitalization Technology Support Center (BTSC) and funded by OSRTI under Contract No. 68-W-03-038 to Environmental Management Support, Inc. The authors gratefully acknowledge the insightful comments and assistance of reviewers within EPA and other federal and state environmental agencies. An electronic version of this primer can be downloaded from OSRTI’s and BTSC’s websites at http://cluin.org/greenremediation or http://www.brownfieldstsc.org. To obtain a copy of the Green Remediation: Incorporating Sustainable Environmental Practices into Remediation of Contaminated Sites technology primer (free of charge), contact: National Service Center for Environmental Publications P.O. Box 42419 Cincinnati, OH 45242-0419 Phone: 1-800-490-9198 Fax: 301-604-3408 www.epa.gov/nscep/ For additional information about this document, contact Carlos Pachon of EPA OSRTI at 703-603-9904 or [email protected]. As a primer, this document provides topical introductory information rather than guidance. EPA recommends that users refer to applicable regulations, policies, and guidance documents regarding selection of cleanup remedies and implementation of cleanup actions; selected references and additional resources are provided herein.
    [Show full text]