The Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
UL - Underwriters Laboratories - Health Sciences
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Business Systems and Standards Discussion Forums > National and International Business System Standards > Environmental Related Standards
Forum Username

Elsmar Cove Forum Visitor Notice(s)

Wooden Line

ISO 14001 Aspect and Impact Assessment - Direct and Indirect Environmental Impacts


Elsmar XML RSS Feed
Elsmar Cove Forum RSS Feed

Monitor the Elsmar Forum
Sponsor Links




Courtesy Quick Links


Links that Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge:

International Standards Bodies - World Wide Standards Bodies

ASQ - American Society for Quality

International Standards Organization - ISO Standards and Information

Howard's
International Quality Services


Marcelo Antunes'
SQR Consulting, and
Medical Devices Expert Forum


Bob Doering
Bob Doering's Blogs and,
Correct SPC - Precision Machining


Ajit Basrur
Claritas Consulting, LLC


NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook

IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors

SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers

Quality Digest

IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology


Related Topic Tags
iso 14001 - environmental management systems, waste streams, aspects and impacts (environmental), energy use and conservation, air quality and air emissions and air pollution
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 4.50 average. Display Modes
  Post Number #1  
Old 26th March 2002, 06:28 AM
Luke Hannant

 
 
Total Posts: 26
Read This! ISO 14001 Aspect and Impact Assessment - Direct and Indirect Environmental Impacts

I am having trouble with my aspect and impact asessment (Still!!!).

For any given process unit, I have analysed the direct impacts from that unit, waste streams, air emissions, etc.

-------------------This is where i'm getting confused --------------------

lets take a unit that uses a vast amount of energy, there are no direct air emission, from this unit. However due to the energy usage, the unit gives rise to indirect air emissions (transport, energy generation at the power station, etc.)

-------------------------- Now for the questions ---------------------------

So do I specify the indirect air emissions for this aspect, OR do I set up another aspect such as Energy Production, or Transport of the Raw material to the process Unit, and deal with the air emssions there (where they are emitted directly)????


Sponsored Links
  Post Number #2  
Old 26th March 2002, 07:00 AM
Claes Gefvenberg's Avatar
Claes Gefvenberg

 
 
Total Posts: 4,901
Lightbulb Use of energy

In the example given I'd label it as "Use of energy". (No pun intended, energy) But that's just me... Other opinions?

/Claes
Sponsored Links

  Post Number #3  
Old 26th March 2002, 07:37 AM
Luke Hannant

 
 
Total Posts: 26
errr, nice one

With respect to indirect aspects to what detail is it expected under ISO 14001 to assess???? Would we be expected to analyse all indirect impacts to the level the direct impacts were anlysed (see below)????

------------------------- Direct Impacts ---------------------------------

For any given process unit the following DIRECT Impacts have been assessed:

Air Emissions,
Liquid Effluent,
Waste Disposal,
Land Contamination,
Noise or Vibration,
Visual Impact,
Use of Energy,
Resource Use (oils),
Resource Use (water),
Resource Use (chemicals, other raw materials),
Dust and Odour,
Abnormal and Emergency,
Start up and Shutdown

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

so what do you guys think???

  Post Number #4  
Old 26th March 2002, 08:44 AM
Randy Stewart's Avatar
Randy Stewart

 
 
Total Posts: 1,158
Lightbulb

IMO and how we dealt with it was to identify it as an "Indirect" so our plan would be to minimize usage so as to not cause the power station to have a greater "direct" impact - we left it at that. In other words no, they don't have to be analyzed as deeply. If you did what good would it do for your company?
  Post Number #5  
Old 26th March 2002, 09:00 AM
Luke Hannant

 
 
Total Posts: 26
Thanks for your help randy,

So are you saying that once you consider an impact indirect (i.e air emissions from the power station, power station water usage), it can be left as that?? Does it need to be scored for significance??? or is that anlysing things to deeply???

Many thanks for your help, this wall i keep banging up against is getting much thinner...


  Post Number #6  
Old 26th March 2002, 09:11 AM
Randy Stewart's Avatar
Randy Stewart

 
 
Total Posts: 1,158
Cool

All we did was to ID it as indirect, there is no benefit taking it further, unless you get a kickback from the power station!!!!
We took our direct impacts and ranked them using a system similar to FMEA RPN's. Keep in mind, before you beat your head on the wall anymore, that all this has to fit in "YOUR" system. If you can't control it or work on controling it, it probably is outside your system.
  Post Number #7  
Old 26th March 2002, 09:30 AM
Claes Gefvenberg's Avatar
Claes Gefvenberg

 
 
Total Posts: 4,901
Agree

Quote:
We took our direct impacts and ranked them using a system similar to FMEA RPN's. Keep in mind, before you beat your head on the wall anymore, that all this has to fit in "YOUR" system. If you can't control it or work on controling it, it probably is outside your system.
Exactly what we did too. I should have been more specific in my reply, but Randy came to the rescue as usual... Good one Randy...

/Claes
  Post Number #8  
Old 26th March 2002, 10:13 AM
Randy's Avatar
Randy

 
 
Total Posts: 8,440
Too many Randy's here

The other Randy is in the ballpark Luke. You are only required to address those that you can or can be expected to control.

Energy consuption is an aspect that has multiple indirect aspects attached to it. If you want to address it though you can get real creative.

Go to the FORD Environmental page and look at what they have done in some of the facilities. Also the folks in Claes's part of the world are very efficient at reducing energy usage.

Remember significance is determined by the organization. How you do it is your business, and what you do with it is your business too.
Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Business Systems and Standards Discussion Forums > National and International Business System Standards > Environmental Related Standards

Bookmarks



Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors (Members) and 1 Unregistered Guest Visitors)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Forum Search
Display Modes Rate Thread Content
Rate Thread Content:

Forum Posting Settings
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
Identification of Environmental Aspects and Impacts - Aspect and Impact Study ajikkn08 Environmental Related Standards 18 27th February 2013 09:08 PM
New to ISO 14001 - Need example of Environmental Aspect/Impact for a HVAC Contractor tonyjj Environmental Related Standards 3 19th September 2011 02:19 PM
Environmental Issues - Indirect (influence)/ Direct Aspects Grusha Environmental Related Standards 6 10th April 2008 11:12 AM
Practical ISO 14001 Aspect and Impact Assessment Luke Hannant Environmental Related Standards 8 27th August 2007 04:51 PM
ISO 14001 Clause 3.4: Environmental Impacts - What is the definition of an 'Impact'? jmp4429 Environmental Related Standards 10 7th April 2005 04:24 PM



The time now is 06:13 AM. All times are GMT -4.
Your time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.


 
 


NOTE: This forum uses "Cookies" - A Peachfarm Internet Property