Does US Policy Facilitate Sustainability in Manufacturing? An Analysis.
The environment, climate change, and sustainability have increasingly become pressing matters within commerce. Manufacturers – especially small and mid-size manufacturers – are in a particularly challenging position because manufacturing is equipment and labor dependent with very tight overhead operating in a world that offers skim resources to small businesses.
My previous article examined manufacturing’s position within sustainability discourse that shed light on small/mid-sized, domestic manufacturers’ challenges in a global economy. I discussed different studies that show sustainability objectives are undermined by different standards, rules, and reporting practices within the supply chain between multinational corporations (MNC’s) to 3rd tier suppliers.
Researchers found that when faced with penalties, manufacturers were more likely to move production offshore where the big picture of a cleaner environment would be undermined. I concluded that federal and local governments will more effectively achieve clean outcomes by funding resources, such as cleaner equipment and best practices over penalties. I also argued that communities that have higher environmental standards (counties, cities, states) tend to provide more resources, but my following research did not produce enough evidence to support that conclusion.
So what’s this article about?
- I will establish an argument for how and why federal and local governments should increase FUNDING for small and mid-size manufacturers to improve their sustainability impact.
- I will introduce ISO 40001 to be explored in the next article.
- I list sustainability programs for manufacturers and include a description and contact information.
We Are Partnered and Collaborated to Death
When I studied environmental policy in graduate school, decentralization of the EPA’s enforcement through collaborations had become the norm. At first, it appeared that the private sector had an advantage because it was given more discretion to identify the right solutions and partners instead of an overbearing bureaucracy. Over the years, too much decentralization has led to confusion about rules and has resulted in poor sustainability outcomes and penalties for unintentional violations.
I’ve been researching sustainability programs that apply to manufacturers for months now. I’ve spoken with stakeholders and personally contacted government agencies on all levels and can say the government has passed the buck on sustainability and clean production. Note, I’m always open to input from those who know of funds or resources that I and others missed, but I found only a labyrinth of “partnerships,” “collaborations,” “studies,” and “assessments” that offer $0.00 for time or implementation. While intended to provide more autonomy, decentralization has also meant defunding that would help small manufacturers become compliant, if not actual stewards of the environment.
I don’t justify blatant violations of environmental standards and we have to acknowledge that bad actors make everyone’s lives more difficult. However, how many fines have been levied against companies that did not know they were breaking the rules? An example of this reality was described by The Courier Journal in Louisville, KY regarding one company’s fines:
It was found in 2011 by the district to have at least 100 violations of its permits, including failing to install and operate required pollution control equipment. About one-third of its penalties were assessed to make up for money the district said the company saved by not following the rules.
“There was a real lack of attention,” said Matt King, who oversees compliance and enforcement for the air district.
Jim Craig, head of operations for the plant, notes that it had no violations since those that led to the big fines and were first reported by the company to the district in 2010.
“The situation was absolutely unintentional but related to our misinterpretation of some of the requirements inside a complex series of permits which were issued over a span of fourteen years,” Craig said. “We cooperated fully and worked openly with the (air district) throughout the process.”
Sustainability advocates and manufacturers would benefit from coming together and asking, “What do government policies and enforcement aim to achieve?” If the goal is to protect the environment and improve company practices, then funding for improvements and education will do a whole lot more than fines after the damage is done. At the same time, the government has yet to recognize that companies of varying sizes do not have the same resources to investigate the right “collaborative-partnership-assessment-study” to know what they need to do, nor do small companies have the means or personnel to make changes.
Manufacturing is not like office operations! Production cannot just shut down for the day. Every moment, every piece of equipment, and every worker serve to keep the order moving under a deadline, lest we forget that the world isn’t patient when it comes to medicine, housing, food, transit, or technology. So yes, there is a gap in the general understanding of manufacturing operations and what activities/disruptions are feasible.
What Can Be Done About Sustainability?
At the end of this article, I list programs related to manufacturing and sustainability. You will find mostly referrals to local groups/programs that provide assessments. To be fair, I don’t discount assessments because companies should be familiar with best practices. Not only are they more educated about what they can do, but completing assessments with seals/certifications can make a company more competitive with buyers that have sustainability mandates.
It also makes sense that the manufacturing industry shifts sustainability discourse from the politics of climate change or government regulation to government resources and funding that help manufacturers not only understand best practices, but also afford assessment and implementation time as well as capital investments in cleaner tech. This can be achieved when the manufacturing industry engages associations and leaders about small, domestic manufacturing support through better funding and programming.
It’s Green!
ISO 40001
I am only introducing ISO 40001 and will go into it in more detail in the next article. ISO 40001 is a sustainability certification for manufacturers. 40001 opens the door to a comprehensive review and commitment to sustainability thereby bypassing the maze of different organizations and programs one experiences trying to find an energy-efficient light bulb, and undoubtedly increases companies’ competitive edge in the market. ISO 40001 is expensive and requires a longer conversation. More to come!
Programs:
I emphasize that I sifted through a lot of programs. R&D partnerships are not bottom-line funding and guidance for small manufacturers to achieve cleaner operations, but they represent a large bulk of what the government is offering in the world of manufacturing and sustainability. The other sets are assessments and referrals and the last set of programs lead to some funding – in the food processing industry. One would need a manufacturing and environmental expert or ISO 40001 to find a relevant opportunity.
Needless to say, the United States has no system for clean manufacturing and support for small companies to run sustainably due in large part to lack of funding, opportunities, centralized education/structure, and outreach.
Sustainability at the Federal level:
EPA: Economy, Energy & Environment (E3)
Assessment and resource referral
E3 is a process for manufacturers to obtain a free assessment on their sustainability practices. When the assessment is complete, the assessor provides resources and suggestions for the manufacturer. In 2012-2013, Fort George utilized the E3 program and partnered with OMEP, PSU, and PPRC for an assessment. The results are here.
The website does not suggest there is funding to participate in the E3 program or to implement changes, but I encourage readers to contact E3 for a referral to a current partner in the region for assistance. Their contact information is:
US EPA / E3 Program
Brian Clapp
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
WJC East 5326E (MC 7409M)
Washington, DC 20460
202-564-8838
Energy Star Certification
Certification and Access to Resources
“Over 800 manufacturing companies, from large to small, are partners with ENERGY STAR. Companies join the ENERGY STAR industrial partnership to:
- Demonstrate a commitment to energy management
- Strengthen their energy program through coaching and mentoring
- Learn from leading energy managers and their programs
- Gain access to partner events and meetings
- ENERGY STAR partners benefit from a strong network of industrial energy managers who share best practices and practical advice across industries in a non-competitive and no-sell environment.
The ENERGY STAR partnership is open to any manufacturing company with operations in the United States. As a voluntary program, there are no fees, legal commitments, nor reporting requirements for Partners.
To learn more about the ENERGY STAR Industrial Partnership, please contact energystrategy@energystar.gov for more information. Click here to Join the ENERGY STAR Industrial Partnership.”
https://www.energystar.gov/industrial_plants/improve/energy-star-industrial-partnership?s=mega
Funding Opportunities for Manufacturers in Food Processing
Funding and Resources
Here you will find two current funding opportunities and a list of partnerships. Information relevant to Oregon and local agencies is available. I was pleased to see a listing to the Association of Oregon Recyclers on the list.
Energy Storage System Research Program
Partnership for companies in R&D to explore energy storage technologies.
“The goal of the ESS program is to develop advanced energy storage technologies and systems, in collaboration with industry, academia, and government institutions that will increase the reliability, performance, and competitiveness of electricity generation and transmission in the electric grid and in standalone systems.
The DOE Energy Storage Systems program collaborates with industry, academia, and other government institutions to develop advanced energy storage technologies, demonstrate the effectiveness of storage technologies and analyze policy options that will increase the reliability, performance, and competitiveness of electricity generation and transmission in utility-tied and off-grid systems. The program goals include the education and dissemination of information on electrical energy storage systems by increasing the collective knowledge of energy storage systems, their operations, uses, benefits and potential issues.”
https://www.sandia.gov/ess-ssl/about/
Small Business Innovation Research & Technology Transfer:
Partnership for companies in R&D to explore energy storage technologies.
“The SBIR and STTR programs are U. S. Government programs, intended to help certain small businesses conduct R&D. At DOE, funding takes the form of grants. Projects must have the potential for commercialization and meet specific DOE mission-specific R&D needs.”
Turbine Technology R&D
Partnership for companies in R&D to explore energy storage technologies.
“DOE’s Office of Fossil Energy (FE) advances transformative science and innovative technologies that enable the reliable, efficient, affordable, and environmentally sound use of fossil fuels. Fossil energy sources constitute over 80% of the country’s total energy use and are important to the Nation’s security, economic prosperity, and growth.
The Office of Clean Coal and Carbon Management is focused on the following research and development (R&D) activities:
- Transforming Fossil Energy Systems for the Future
- Drive technology solutions for a resilient 21st-century grid
- Managing Carbon with Confidence
- Advance technologies to cost-effectively capture and securely store carbon across the economy
- Reimaging Coal – Advanced Rare Earth Elements, Critical Minerals, and Coal Products Technologies
- Explore developing high-value products as well as sustainable extraction and processing methods
- Accelerate product pathways
- Visit FE’s Division of Minerals Sustainability webpage to learn more
- Creating Opportunities with Analysis and Engagement
- Generate opportunities for advanced coal and carbon management technologies, using expert analysis and strategic engagement
These R&D activities will allow coal to remain a strategic resource for the nation while enhancing environmental protection.”
https://www.energy.gov/fe/science-innovation/office-clean-coal-and-carbon-management
Sustainability at the State Level:
A discussion with stakeholders doesn’t hurt. While it’s over, reviewing the event information in the link below could help a company identify a resource or an elected to discuss needs.
Event: https://www.sustaininfrastructure.org/clean-materials-as-an-emerging-economic-engine
IAC: Oregon State University
Assessment & Recommendations
The USDOE Industrial Assessment Centers (IACs) can help small and medium-sized US manufacturers improve sustainability, save energy, improve productivity, and reduce waste by providing no-cost technical assessments conducted by university-based teams of engineering students and faculty.
https://iac.university/center/OR
Energy Efficiency Center | | Oregon State University
Energy Efficiency Center (EEC) The Energy Efficiency Center houses the OSU Industrial Assessment Center and offers Rural Energy Audits, OSU facility assessments, and other customized assessments.
(Nonprofit Assessment) Green Seal https://greenseal.org/
Sustainability at the Local level:
You get on a list! Green business directory | Portland.gov https://www.portland.gov/sustainabilityatwork/green-business-directory
(Assessment & Resources) City of Portland Sustainability Office: https://www.portland.gov/sustainabilityatwork/about
Conclusion
If you have more information or resources for sustainable manufacturing, feel free to contact me at aimee@metafab.com. Note, I’m looking for government, free or low-cost support so please, no solicitations.