Cook Composites and Polymers case

CCP faces three options for addressing its rinse styrene waste stream: (a) Continue with 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).

1. What criteria should Mike Gromacki consider when deciding whether to pursue the waste exchange or the concrete-coating by-product? If you're Mike Gromacki, what would you recommend to management to address its rinse styrene waste stream?

2. 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? Assume that the gel coat production process is operating at capacity.

3.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 (BPS)?

4.What is the environmental impact of implementing BPS? Consider just the impact on carbon-dioxide (CO2) emissions. Note that diverting 1 pound of styrene from cement kiln disposal to reuse in concrete coating increases the kiln's emissions by 1.2 pounds CO2. Producing concrete coating with 1 pound of rinse styrene emits 1.9 fewer pounds CO2 than conventional production of the same amount of concrete coating. Producing one pound of styrene results in 2.5 pounds of CO2 emissions.

Please get free to access the case document named Cook Composites and Polymers Co. from https://hbsp.harvard.edu/coursepacks/1014413

login information are below:

Acc: yiyangdu (a buffalo.edu

Password: Explore1234!