Group #1 - Cook composites
CCP faces three options for addressing its rinse styrene waste stream:
a. Continue business as usual, sending its rinse styrene to cement kilns;
b. Sell its rinse styrene on a waste exchange; or
c. Proceed with developing the concrete coating that uses its rinse styrene (BPS).
4. What criteria should Mike Gromacki consider when deciding whether to pursue the waste exchange or the concrete-coating by-product? If you were Mike, what would you recommend to management to address its rinse styrene waste stream?
5. Compared to business as usual, how would selling rinse styrene to a waste exchange or producing the concrete coating by-product affect the production of gel coats?
6. Compared to business as usual, what are the financial implications of selling rinse styrene to a waste exchange or of producing the concrete coating by-product?
7. Compared to business as usual, how would you evaluate the relative environmental impact of producing the concrete coating by-product? When considering carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, consider the impacts system-wide (that is, not just at CCP’s factory). What tradeoffs are involved? For each pound of rinse styrene diverted from cement kilns to create concrete coatings, by how much do CO2 emissions rise or fall? Assume that CCP’s sales of concrete coatings would substitute for sales by other concrete coating producers (that is, CCP’s sales would not alter the total sales quantity in the concrete coatings market)