Toxics reduction in processes. Some practical examples

Journal of Cleaner Production

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 277-286

  Verschoor, Atie H ^a   Reijnders, Lucas ^b  

^a Narcislaan 7 6866 DX   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

LAWS AND LEGISLATION; POLLUTION CONTROL; TOXIC MATERIALS;

TOXICS USE REDUCTION (TUR);

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION;

EID: 0035372613     PISSN: 09596526     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0959-6526(00)00072-X     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Hall H.I.et al. Public health consequences of hazardous substance releases. Toxicol. Ind. Health. 12(2):1996;289-291.
2. Toxic Watch. New York: Inform, 1995.
3. Bunge J. et al. Employee participation in pollution reduction: preliminary analyses of the TRI. (Working paper.) Ithaca, NY: Center for Advanced Human Resources Studies, Cornell University, 1995.
4. Verschoor A.H., Reijnders L. Toxics reduction in 10 large companies, why and how. J. Cleaner Prod. 8:2000;69-78.
5. Epstein M.J. Measuring corporate environmental performance. 1996;Institute of Management Accountants, Irwin Professional Publishing, Chicago.
6. ISO 14001, International Organization for Standardization. Environmental Management Systems, 1996.
7. Welch T.E. Moving beyond environmental compliance. 1997;Lewis, Boston.
8. Fresner J. Cleaner production as a means for effective environmental management. J. Cleaner Prod. 6:1998;171-179.
9. Gottlieb R. Reducing toxics. A new approach to policy and industrial decision making. 1995;58-94 Island Press, Washington, DC.
10. EPA Pollution Prevention fact sheet. Washington, 1991.
11. EPA Pollution Prevention. A National Progress Report. Washington: Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 1997.
12. Laden F., Gray G.M. Toxic use reduction: pro and con. Issues Health Safety. Summer:1993;213-234.
13. MA TURA, Toxics Use Reduction Act. Massachusetts, 1989.
14. Antonsson A. Substitution of dangerous chemicals - the solution to problems with chemical health hazards in the work environment? Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 56:1995;394-397.
15. Gray G.M. The chemical substitution tree. Pollut. Prevent. Rev. Spring:1995;7-17.
16. Schmidt A. et al. Health impacts and life cycle assessment. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers. Publications-Nord 9, 1992.
17. Verschoor A.H., Reijnders L. Material safety data sheets, correct and complete? Occupat. Hyg. 4:1998;161-166.
18. Rossi M., Ellenbecker M., Geiser K. Techniques in toxics use reduction. New Solut. Fall:1991;25-33.
19. Hoet H.et al. Epidemic of liver disease caused by hydrofluorocarbons used as ozone sparing substitutes of chlorocarbons. The Lancet. 350:1997;556-559.
20. Goldschmidt G. An analytical approach for reducing workplace health hazards through substitution. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 54:1993;36-43.
21. Burnett M.L. The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990: a policy whose time has come or symbolic legislation? Environ. Manage. 22(2):1998;213-224.
22. Higgins T.E. Pollution prevention handbook. 1995;Lewis, London.
23. Theodore L., Ryan Dupont R.R., Reynolds J. Pollution prevention. 1994;Gordon and Breach, Lausanne.
24. De Nationale MAC-lijst (in Dutch), P 145. Den Haag: Ministry of Social Affairs, SDU, 1996.
25. OTA. Office of Technology Assessment, Green products by design: choices for a cleaner environment, OTA-E-541. US Government Printing Office: Washington (DC), 1992.
26. Verschoor A.H., Reijnders L. The environmental monitoring of large international companies. How and what is monitored and why. J. Cleaner Prod. 9:2000;43-55.